R. Yirmeyah bar Aba was signed on a receipt. The woman said that it was not written for her.

R. Yirmeyah bar Aba: It was written for you!

(Abaye): Even though a Chacham normally does not recognize women so well, if he is sure, he is sure!

(Abaye): When a Chacham goes to be Mekadesh a woman, he should take an ignoramus with him, lest they give to him a different woman at the Nisu'in. (The ignoramus would recognize that she is not the same woman.)

(Mishnah): The husband pays the scribe.

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: "V'Chosav... v'Nosan" (the one who writes the Get must be the one who gives it).

Nowadays, the woman pays. Chachamim enacted this, lest the husband delay giving it (because he does not want to pay for it).

(Mishnah): We may write a loan document for a borrower, even in the absence of the lender... (the borrower pays the scribe).

Objection: This is obvious (he benefits from the loan)!

Answer: This is a Chidush regarding an Iska (the lender shares the profits).

(Mishnah): We may write a sale document for a seller, even in the absence of the buyer... (the buyer pays the scribe).

Objection: This is obvious (he benefits from the sale)!

Answer: The Chidush is when the field is sold due to its low quality (the seller benefits).

(Mishnah): We write documents of Kidushin or Nisu'in only with consent of both parties (the Chasan pays the scribe).

Objection: This is obvious (he benefits more)!

Answer: The Chidush is when he is a Chacham. His father-in-law benefits more.

(Mishnah): We write documents of Arisus or rental of land only with consent of both parties (the worker or renter pays the scribe).

Objection: This is obvious!

Answer: The Chidush is when he must leave the field fallow this year (he does not benefit now).

(Mishnah): We write documents of Birurin... only with consent of both parties.

Question: What is a document of Birurin?

Answer #1 (Chachamim of Bavel): It Mevarer (clarifies) the claims.

Answer #2 (R. Yirmeyah bar Aba): It says which judge each party Birer (chose) to hear the case. (The two judges choose the third judge.)

(Mishnah - R. Shimon ben Gamliel): One copy is written for each party.

Suggestion: Chachamim and R. Shimon ben Gamliel argue about whether or not Kofin Al Midas Sedom (we force one to benefit others if he will not lose):

Chachamim say that one (either party) can force the other to share the cost of one document. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says that one cannot.

Rejection: No, all agree that Kofin Al Midas Sedom;

R. Shimon ben Gamliel says that one can refuse to have the claims of both sides written together (Rashbam - lest constantly seeing the other's claims will cause friction).

(Mishnah - R. Yosi): If Reuven paid part of his debt to Shimon, and fixed a date and gave the document to Levi and said 'if I do not pay the rest by this date, give the document to Shimon (who may then collect the full amount)', and Reuven did not pay in time, Levi gives the document to Shimon;

R. Yehudah says, he does not give it.

(Gemara) Question: What do they argue about?

Answer: R. Yosi says that Asmachta (an exaggerated promise) is binding. R. Yehudah holds that it is not.

(Rav Nachman): The Halachah follows (text of Tosfos - does not follow) R. Yosi.

When people would come in front of R. Ami, he would say 'R. Yochanan taught that the Halachah follows R. Yosi. How can I argue?!'

The Halachah does not follow R. Yosi.

(Mishnah): If Ploni's document faded (or was about to fade), he gets witnesses who know (or shows them before it fades) what was written, and comes to Beis Din. Beis Din writes a Kiyum: Ploni's document faded. (It was dated) on this day; the witnesses were Almoni and...

(Gemara - Beraisa): The Kiyum is 'we three judges sat, Reuven and..., Ploni showed us that his document was faded, the date was..., the witnesses were Almoni and...'

If the Kiyum says 'we heard the witnesses' testimony. It was proper', Ploni can collect through the Kiyum. He does not need proof (of the date of the original document). If not, he must bring proof (of the original date).

If a document was torn (by a person), it is invalid. If it became torn by itself, it is valid.

If it was erased or smudged, if the imprint of the writing is still visible, it is valid.

Question: What are the cases of being torn (by a person) and torn by itself?

Answer: 'Torn by a person is when Beis Din tears it. 'Torn by itself' refers to any other tear.

Question: How does Beis Din tear a document?

Answer #1 (Rav Yehudah): They tear the place of the witnesses, the date and the Toref (the crucial information, i.e. the parties, the amount of the loan...).

Answer #2 (Abaye): They tear it lengthwise and widthwise.

Some Yishmaelim came to Pumbadisa. They would forcibly take people's land. The owners brought their documents to Abaye, and asked him to write new ones, in case the originals will be taken.

Abaye: I cannot. Rav Safra taught (169a) that we do not write two documents for one field, lest the field be collected by a creditor of the seller (Reuven), and the buyer (Shimon) will take land from someone who bought from Reuven after Shimon (and give to him one document), then Shimon will take land from someone else who bought from Reuven (and give to him the other document).

The owners were pressuring Abaye. He told his scribe to write documents for them on erased parchment, and the witnesses should sign on clear parchment (such documents are invalid).

Question (Rav Acha bar Minyomi): Perhaps [they will erase the latter writing, and] the imprint of the writing of the first document will still be visible (if it was not erased well). The Beraisa teaches that Beis Din makes a Kiyum in such a case!

Abaye: The scribe will not write over an erased document. Rather, he will write 'Aleph-Beis', erase it, and then write for these people.