Study Gittin folio 86B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
And Rav is saying that specifically when the bill of divorce is written in his handwriting and has the signature of one witness, the woman’s child from her second husband is of unflawed lineage. But if it is written in a scribe’s handwriting, even if it includes the signature of one witness, the
And Shmuel says: Even where it is written in a scribe’s handwriting and it has the signature of a witness, the lineage of the child is unflawed, as we learned in a Mishnah (87b): In the case of a bill of divorce in which the scribe’s handwriting is recognizable and there is one witness signed, it i
And Rav would respond: Is that case comparable? There, in that case, the Mishnah indicates that the woman may marry ab initio. Therefore, it must be a case where the scribe also signed as a second witness. But here, in the case of this Mishnah, the bill of divorce is invalid and the woman may not
And Shmuel, who holds that both cases are referring to a bill of divorce that was written by a scribe but not signed by the scribe as one of the witnesses, would respond that the contradiction is not difficult. That Mishnah, where the bill of divorce is rendered valid ab initio, is referring to the
And similarly, R' Yoḥanan says in accordance with the opinion of Rav: We learned that the Mishnah is referring to his handwriting. R' Elazar, assuming that R' Yoḥanan was explaining the middle clause, said to him: Aren’t there signatures of witnesses in the bill of divorce? Why is the husband’s han