(Mishnah): If he left over part of the Get and wrote it in a second column and the witnesses signed below, it is valid.

If witnesses signed at the top of the page, or on the side, or on the other side of a normal Get, it is Pasul.

If [two Gitin are written on one page,] and the head of this Get is next to the head of this Get (they are written in opposite directions) and the witnesses are in between, both are Pasul;

If the head of this [Get] is next to the bottom of this one (they are written in opposite directions) and the witnesses are below, the Get that the witness' [signatures] are read at the end of it, [only] it is Kosher.

If a Get was written in Ivris (Leshon ha'Kodesh) and the witness are Yevanim (they signed in Yevanis), or it was written in Yevanis and the witnesses are Ivrim, or one witness is Ivri and one witness in Yevanis, it is Kosher;

If the Get is in a scribe's handwriting and one witness signed, it is Kosher.

[If one signed] 'Ben Ish Ploni Ed', it is a Kosher [signature]. 'Ish Ploni' or 'Ben Ish Ploni', [even if] he did not write 'Ed', it is Kosher.

If he wrote his Chanichah (family name) and her Chanichah, it is Kosher. So Nekiyei ha'Da'as (people who spoke concisely) of Yerushalayim would write.

(Gemara) Question: What did he leave over?

Answer (R. Yosi bei R. Bun): It is even if he left over [the very end, e.g.] 'lasting and clear.'

A tied Get that is like a Pashut (the witnesses signed on the front) is Kosher, as long as [they sign also] on back.

(Rav): Judges sign even if they do not know how to read, but witnesses may sign only if they know how to read.

Rav: [Punishments] should come on me if I ever did so [signed as one of the judges of Kiyum on a document that he could not read, e.g. it was written in Yevani].

R. Chagai: A document written in Yevani never came in front of Rav and he validated it through its signatures.

Question (against Rav - Mishnah): If a Get was written in Hebrew and the signatures are in Yevanis, or vice-versa, or one witness signed in Hebrew and the other in Yevanis, it is Kosher;

Answer: This is when [the witnesses] know how to read [the document], but they did not know how to sign [in that language, therefore they signed in the other language]. Alternatively, they knew both [languages], and signed in whichever one they wanted.

Our Mishnah means that if a scribe wrote a Get and one witness signed, it is Kosher. 'Ish Ploni', is Kosher. 'Ben Ish Ploni' is Kosher. 'Ish Ploni Ben Ish Ploni', and did not write 'Ed', is Kosher.

(R. Elazar): Our Mishnah [holds that one who signs 'Ish Ploni' or 'Ben 'Ish Ploni' must write also 'Ed'. It] is like everyone (even like Rabanan of R. Yehudah, who do not require writing 'v'Dein' to clarify that he divorces her through this Get.

(R. Yochanan): It is [only] like R. Yehudah.

(R. Yosi): You need not say that R. Yochanan argues [with R. Elazar in practice, and holds that Rabanan are Machshir 'Ish Ploni' or 'Ben 'Ish Ploni' even without 'Ed'.] Rather, he answered [R. Elazar] according to his opinion (if v'Dein and the need to write 'Ed' are comparable, our Mishnah is only like R. Yehudah. However, they are different. Even without v'Dein, there are proofs from the Get that he divorces her through this Get. However, if one does not write 'Ed', there is no proof that he signs to be a witness, unless he wrote his name and his father's name);

Is this not what my Rebbi (R. Yirmeyah) said in the name of R. Ze'ira - since Zivug (the scribe wrote names in the Get, and at the same time, a man of this name said that he wants that scribe to a Get for his wife with that name) is not common, even if Zivug occurred, it is as if Ziveg did not occur (the Get is Pasul. Also here, if one did not write 'Ed' (and not his father's name together with his name), even if he intended to be a witness, since it is not common, it is as if he did not intend, and he is not a witness. We explained this like MEICHAL HA'MAYIM.)

If he wrote his Chanichah and her Chanichah, it is Kosher.

(R. Avahu citing R. Yochanan): Even if it is not letters, it is Kosher. (We explained this like R. MEIR SIMCHAH.)

R. Avahu wrote [only the first letter of his name, i.e.] Aleph. Rav Chisda wrote Samech. Shmuel drew a date branch.

(Mishnah): If (a Beis Din of) Yisre'elim forced a man to divorce his wife, it is valid. If Nochrim forced him, it is Pasul;

[If Beis Din of Yisrael cannot coerce him,] the Nochrim beat him and tell him to do like Chachmei Yisrael say [and it is Kosher].

(Gemara - Shmuel): [If Nochrim forced him,] it is Pasul and disqualifies to Kehunah.

(Shmuel): We coerce only for forbidden marriages.

(Shmuel): We coerce only for a widow to a Kohen Gadol, divorcee or Chalutzah to a Kohen Hedyot.

Question (Mishnah): Sheniyos (marriages forbidden mid'Rabanan, we force him to divorce her)!

Answer: Shmuel did not [come to exclude] this. (Rather, he excludes a marriage that was initially permitted, e.g. one who married a woman and still has no children after 10 years.)

Question (Mishnah): If one forbade his wife [from benefiting from him] via a vow, up to 30 days, he set up a Parnes (a Shali'ach to feed her). More than this, he divorces her and gives a Kesuvah.

Answer: We hear [from this Mishnah that he must divorce her]. Do we hear that we force?!

(R. Yirmeyah citing Rav): If Yisraelim coerced to carry out Nochrim's ruling [that he must divorce], it is Pasul, [even if] he said 'I will not feed and clothe her' (in which case he must divorce her).

(R. Chiyah): If Nochrim coerced to carry out Yisrael's ruling [that he must divorce], it is Kosher. [Even if] he said 'I will not feed and clothe her' (it is Kosher through Nochrim only when they enforce the ruling of Yisrael. We explained this like PNEI MOSHE.)

Support (R. Yosi - Mishnah): The Nochrim beat him, telling him to do like Chachmei Yisrael say [and it is Kosher].

(R. Chiya bar Ashi citing Isi): If one says 'I will not feed and clothe her', we force him to divorce.

Question (R. Yirmeyah, to R. Avahu): Do we force him?!

Answer (R. Avahu): Do you still need [to hear the answer]? Due to a [man's] bad odor, we force him to divorce. All the more so, for life sustenance [we force him]!

(R. Chizkiyah citing R. Yakov bar Acha citing R. Yosa citing R. Yochanan): If one says 'I will not feed and I will not clothe', we tell him 'either feed and clothe, or divorce!'

Note: If we leave the text 'Oh Parnes', perhaps the Yerushalmi explains that Mefarnes is to feed through a Shali'ach. We explained it to mean 'to clothe', like the Rishonim explain the Bavli. (PF)