Bava Batra 167b — the Talmud in English

A document of debt

of debt

is written for the borrower,

so that the document may be ready in his hand, to give it to the lender when he lends him money,

even though the lender is not with him.

But one does not write

a document of debt

for the lender until the borrower is with him.

For the document is to the borrower’s disadvantage. Therefore, it may not be written without his consent.

And the borrower gives

the

fee

of the scribe, because he is the one who benefits from the loan.

A document of acquisition

of acquisition

is written for the seller, even though the

the

purchaser is not with him.

But one does not write

a document of acquisition

for the purchaser until the

the

seller is with him.

For the document is to the seller’s disadvantage.

And the purchaser gives

the

fee

of the scribe, because he is the one who benefits from the transaction.

One does not write betrothal documents,

stating how much the father of the son will give his son and how much the father of the daughter will give his daughter for their marriages. And likewise one does not write a document

of marriage,

the ketuba document,

except with the knowledge of both of them.

That is, with the knowledge of the father of the groom and the father of the bride in betrothal documents, since there is an obligation in it for both of them, and with the knowledge of the groom and bride regarding the ketuba, since the groom undertakes an obligation to the woman in the ketuba, and the bride too must agree to the ketuba, so that she can be certain that he did not write for her less than what is due to her.

And the groom gives

the

fee

of the scribe of these documents, because he is the one who acquires the woman.

One does not write a sharecropping document,

a document of agreement between one who receives a field from his fellow to work it and to divide with the owner the produce that it will yield, according to the proportion agreed between them.

And

a document

of leaseholding,

a document of agreement between one who leases the field from its owners in exchange for a fixed payment of such-and-such produce per year,

except with the knowledge of both of them,

with the knowledge of the owner of the field and the sharecropper, or the owner of the field and the lessee, since the consent of both is necessary: this one through his undertaking regarding the work of the field, and that one through his transfer of the field to the sharecropper and the lessee.

And the one who receives

the field

gives

the

fee

of the scribe, because he is the one who profits from the transaction.

One does not write documents of designation,

documents in which the claims of the two litigants are written, or in which the names of the judges are written when each litigant selected for himself that they judge their matter,

or any act of the court,

such as a “document of authorization,” which the court writes for a lender when the borrower does not repay his debt, stating that he is permitted to descend upon the borrower’s assets and take them for his debt,

except with the knowledge of both of them,

the two parties.

In documents of designation, because the claims of both are written there, or the judges whom both selected. Whereas in a document of authorization, this must first be made known to the borrower, so that he hastens to pay his debt before they write for the lender the document of collection from his assets.

And both of them give

the

fee

of the scribe, in documents of designation.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: For both of them,

for the two litigants

two are written,

two documents of designation,

one for this one separately and one for that one separately

so that each will have a separate document for himself, and each will pay his own scribe his fee.

Gemara:

The Gemara discusses:

What is “‘

provided that he recognizes them,’”

which is stated in our Mishna regarding a woman’s get and a release?

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav:

this is what he says:

provided that the scribe [and the signing witnesses]

the scribe [and the signing witnesses

recognize

the

name of the man in the get.

They must know that this is the name of the man for whom they write the get, for otherwise perhaps he writes the get for the wife of another man whose name is the same, so that she can use it to claim her ketuba from him, since the law is that a woman can claim her ketuba through the get alone.

And

likewise the scribe and the witnesses must recognize the

name

of the woman, in a release,

so that they know that this is indeed her name, for otherwise there is concern that perhaps she intends to write the release for another man who divorced a wife called by this name, thereby causing her to lose her ketuba.

Rav Safra, Rav Aha bar Huna, and Rav Huna bar Hinena were sitting, and Abaye was sitting with them, and they sat and raised the following question:

They asked about Rav’s words, for it follows from them that only the

name of the man in a get—yes,

the witnesses and scribe indeed must recognize, whereas the

name of the woman—not,

they need not recognize it. And likewise, only the

name of the woman in a release—yes,

they indeed must recognize, whereas the

name of the man—not.

And they wondered about this:

But let us be concerned:

For although we recognize the name of the man in the get, since we do not recognize the woman’s name, we must be concerned

perhaps he writes a get,

perhaps he will indeed write his own name in the get, but he will not write his wife’s name in it, rather the name of another woman whose husband’s name is the same as his,

and he goes and brings it to the wife of that other,

and gives it to the wife of the other man, whose name is the same as his, so that she will collect her ketuba with it?

And

likewise regarding a release, let us be concerned: although we know that this is the name of the woman requesting that a release be written, since we do not know the husband’s name,

and sometimes a woman goes and writes a release,

perhaps she will write in the release the name of another man whose wife’s name is the same as hers,

and gives it to a man who is not hers,

and hands it to that other man, who is not her husband, in order to cause his wife to lose her ketuba?!

Abaye said to them: This is what Rav said:

one must recognize the

name of the man in a get, and the same law applies to the woman’s name.

The scribe and witnesses must also know that this is indeed the name of the wife of this husband who writes the get, so that he cannot hand the get to another woman.

And one must likewise recognize the

name of the woman in a release, and the same law applies to the man’s name.

That too must be recognized as the name of her husband, so that she cannot hand the release to another man.

But they still found difficulty in the very words of the Mishna’s tanna: What benefit is there if the names of the man and woman in the get are recognized? In any event,

let us be concerned for two “

Yosef ben Shimon”

who reside in one city,

perhaps there is another man in the city whose name is the same as that of the husband who divorces, and the names of their wives are also the same, and

perhaps he writes a get,

and he will indeed write his name and his wife’s name in the get, but

he goes and brings it to the wife of that other,

he will give it to the wife of that man, he and his wife being called by these names?!

Rav Aha bar Huna said to them: This is what Rav said: “

Yosef ben Shimon”

who reside in one city may divorce their wives only in the presence of one another!

The second husband must also be present when this one gives the get to his wife. Through this we avoid the concern that perhaps he will give the get to another man’s wife. And they still found difficulty in the words of the Mishna: How can one write a get for any person at all, even if we know that his name is “Yosef ben Shimon,” as written in the get? For

perhaps he goes to another city,

perhaps he came here from another city, and his true name is “Reuven ben Yaakov

and he presents his name here as

“Yosef ben Shimon,”

and writes a get.

And here he called himself by the name “Yosef ben Yaakov” with the purpose of writing a get under that name, and afterward,

he goes and brings it to the wife of that other,

he will take the get and return to his city, in which a man named Yosef ben Shimon lived, and give it there to his wife!?

Rav Huna bar Hinena said to them: This is what Rav said: Anyone whose name has been established in the city for thirty days,

for he has already been called here by this name for thirty days,

we are not concerned regarding him

lest this not be his true name, for he would not have dared to change his name for so long a time, out of fear lest the matter become known.

And the Gemara discusses:

If it has not been established, what [is the law]?

What do they do with a new person in the city, whose name has not yet been established for thirty days? How do they write a get for him?

Abaye said: They call him, and he answers.

There is a method: to test him by suddenly calling him by his name, and if he answers, this is a sign that this is his true name.

Rav Zevid said:

This is not proof, because

a deceiver—

in his deception he is careful!

The deceiver knows to be careful and to answer immediately when he is called by his fabricated name. Therefore, there is no method except to wait until his name has been established for thirty days.

And the Gemara brings an incident that occurred concerning a receipt for a ketuba: There was an incident involving

a certain receipt,

a receipt for a ketuba,

upon which was signed

for he was signed upon it by

Rav Yirmeya bar Abba.

That certain woman came before him,

after some time, that woman in whose name the receipt was written came to him to claim her ketuba from her husband.

She said to him

to Rav Yirmeya bar Abba:

It was not I!

I am not the one who had you sign a receipt stating that my ketuba had been paid; rather, perhaps another woman, whose name is like my name and whose husband's name is like my husband's name, was the one who had you sign this receipt and gave it to my husband, whereas I have still not received payment of my ketuba.

He said

to her, Rav Yirmeya bar Abba:

I too said to them: It is not she!

I too have now said to the other witnesses who signed the receipt together with me that I do not remember you as that woman for whom we signed her receipt, and the truth is with you.

But

they said to me,

they replied to me that indeed you are that woman for whom we signed the receipt, but

she has aged, and her voice has become coarse,

she has aged, her voice has changed and become deeper, and therefore you do not recognize her.