Study Gittin folio 64A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
or if there is one witness from the first pair of witnesses and one witness from the latter pair, and one additional witness joins with them as the second witness in both testimonies.
Talmud: It was stated that there is an amoraic dispute in a case where a husband says that he handed the bill of divorce to another as a deposit for safekeeping and not to deliver it to his wife, and that consequently she is not divorced, and the third party [shalish], to whom the husband gave the
The Talmud elaborates: Rav Huna said that the husband is deemed credible, as, if it is so that he gave it to the third party for the purpose of divorce, he would have given the bill of divorce directly to her. Both husband and wife are in the same city. Why did he give it to a third party? Apparent
R' Abba raises an objection to the opinion of Rav Huna from a baraita in the Tosefta (Bava Metzia 1:10): The legal status of the admission of a litigant is similar to that of the testimony of 100 witnesses, and the statement of a third party is deemed more credible than the statements of both of the
The Talmud rejects that objection: A monetary debt is different, as it can be forgiven. Since one can forgive a monetary debt outright, he can also accept upon himself to abide by the statement of a third party as to the sum of the debt. Therefore, even if the third party deviates from the truth, b