Question: If one witness saw that she was secluded in the morning, and one witness saw that she was secluded in the afternoon [what is the law]?

Answer: We learn from the following. If she was secluded with [her ex-husband] in front of two [witnesses], she needs another Get (lest they had Bi'ah l'Shem Kidushin). In front of one, she does not need another Get. In front of one in the morning and in front of one in the afternoon - a case occurred and R. Eliezer ben Tadai asked Chachamim, and they said 'this is not seclusion [to require another Get. Likewise, here it is not seclusion to forbid her until she drinks.]

Question: If he was Mekanei her with (in front of) one [witness] in the morning, and with one in the afternoon [do we say that] since it is the same man [that he warned her about], and the same woman, his Kinuy is valid?

Note: I do not understand why it needed to teach 'and the same woman.' Surely Kinuy of one wife cannot affect a different wife!

Or, it is like it was taught, we accept [testimony] from witnesses only if both of them saw together. R. Yehoshua ben Korchah says, even if they saw one after the other (their testimony joins. The first Tana holds that the Kinuy is invalid, and R. Yehoshua ben Korchah disagrees.)

(R. Yirmeyah citing R. Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak citing Rav): Chachamim agree to R. Yehoshua ben Korchah regarding witnesses of Bechorah (they saw a woman or animal give birth at different times, so both testify that Bechorah does not apply to future children. Or at different times they heard the father say who is his Bechor) and witnesses of Chazakah (two witnesses testify that Reuven used this land for one year, and different pairs testify about the next two years).

(Rava citing R. Yirmeyah): Even regarding witnesses of Simanim (hairs of maturity, Chachamim agree).

The following is obvious. If this [witness] says "I saw two hairs on his back", and this one says "I saw two hairs on his back" [they join];

If one says "I saw one hair on his back", and this one says "I saw one hair on his stomach", it has no effect, and all the more so if both of them say "on her back" (there is only one hair! Perhaps the Gemara switches between discussing a boy and a girl to teach that the same applies to both. Do not say that a girl is different, for men may not look there, so we rely on women. However, the Yerushalmi brings this also in Kesuvos, Sanhedrin and Shevu'os, and there it discusses only a boy. - PF)

If two say "we saw one hair on his back", and two say "we saw one hair on his stomach", R. Yosi bei R. Bun and R. Hoshayah brei d'R. Shamai argue about this - one of them says Pasul (they do not join), and one of them says Kosher;

The one who says Pasul, it is because he is like one who testifies about Chetzi Davar (one lone hair has no significance). The one who says Kosher, it is because [there are two witnesses about two hairs -] do I say that perhaps [the first hair already] fell out [before the second sprouted?! We explained this like MEICHAL HA'MAYIM.]

If one says "[I saw] two hairs on his back", and one says "two on his stomach", R. Chagai says that all (R. Yosi bei R. Bun and R. Hoshayah brei d'R. Shamai) agree that it is Pasul R. Ba says that all agree that it is Kosher, R. Yosi says that they argue about this, and [also] R. Yudan says that they argue about this.

R. Yosi (to R. Chagai): R. Yudan holds like me!

R. Chagai (to R. Yosi): I argue with [R. Yudan's] Rebbi (R. Ba). All the more so I argue with him!

Support (R. Mana): R. Chagai said properly - if there are four signatures on a document, and it was contested, and this [witness] testified about two [signatures], and this one testified about [the other] two, does this [validation] help at all? Doesn't every signature need two witnesses about it?!

And [similarly] here, every Siman needs two witnesses!

R. Chananyah learns from years of Chazakah - if one testified that he ate the first, second and third year, and one testified that he ate the fourth, fifth and sixth, does this help at all?

Doesn't every [year of] Chazakah need two witnesses? And here, every Siman needs two witnesses!