(Mishnah): We may testify if the deceased was seen by candlelight or by moonlight. We may testify based on a voice [even if no body was seen].

A case occurred in which a man was on a mountain top. He gave his name and place, and said that he is dying. People went and did not find anyone. They permitted his wife to remarry.

Another case occurred in Tzalmon in which a man gave his name and said that he is dying from a snakebite. They went and did not recognize [the body], and they permitted his wife to remarry.

(Gemara - R. Chanina): R. Yonason taught me that [if there is a shadow, there is no concern lest it is a demon. Therefore,] we may testify only if they saw the shadow of a man.

(R. Acha citing R. Chinena): A Mishnah there teaches that if someone was cast in a pit, and said 'whoever hears my voice, write a Get to my wife', they write a Get and give it to her;

(R. Yonason): This is only if they saw the shadow of a man.

(R. Acha citing R. Chinena citing R. Chanina): This is in the field, but in the city, even if they did not see the shadow of a man.

Question: A Mishnah there teaches that if someone was cast in a pit, and said 'whoever hears my voice, write a Get to my wife', they write a Get and give it to her, and R. Yonason said that this is only if they saw the shadow of a man!

Answer (R. Avun): Mazikin are common in pits (even in the city) just like they are common in fields.

A Mishnah there teaches that Mesis is a Hedyot (commoner) who entices [to serve idolatry], and the one who is enticed is a Hedyot.

Question: [Is a Hedyot killed for this,] but a Chacham is not?!

Answer: Since he is enticed, this is not a Chacham! Since he entices, this is not a Chacham!

Question: How do we scheme [to get him to entice in front of witnesses]?

Answer: We hide two witnesses in the inner room, and we station [the Mesis] in the outer room. We light a lamp over him, so [the witnesses] can see him and hear his voice;

So they did to Ben Setada in Lud. They hid for him Chachamim and brought him to Beis Din, and stoned him.

Question: And here you say so (that witnesses may divorce a woman based on a voice, even though they did not see the man)?!

Answer: There is different, for he said 'I' (and gave his name and city).

Question: Also here [it should suffice to ask the Mesis to say 'I am...' [and gave his name]!

Answer: [We do not do so,] lest he [realize that they intend to testify about him, and] flee, and go and entice others [to serve idolatry] with him.

(Mishnah): One who brings a Get and lost it, if he found it immediately, it is Kosher. If not, it is Pasul.

Question: What is immediately?

Answer #1 (R. Yochanan): It is before anyone passed by there.

Answer #2 (R. Yakov bar Idi citing R. Shimon bar Aba citing R. Yehoshua ben Levi): It is before three people passed by there.

Question: If a Nochri passed by, what is the law? (Even though he cannot be a Shali'ach to give a Get, perhaps he was sent to give it to a Yisrael, who will give it!)

Answer: We learn from the following. Ada bar Rav Chanah brought a Get, and it was lost from him. A Yishmaeli found it. The case came in front of Rabanan, and they were Machshir. This shows that if a Nochri passed by, it is Kosher. (PNEI MOSHE)

Question: Perhaps [they were Machshir] because he had a Siman in [the Get]!

Question: (What is the question?) Was it not taught that a Siman does not help for Gitin!

Answer: [It was taught that a regular Siman does not help for Gitin, e.g.] when he says [that it was written in] two lines. However, here he says that the 'Hei' was [not written properly, and it looks like] dots. (Such a great Siman helps for Gitin.)

Question (R. Ezra, to R. Mana): Here, why is it Pasul (if it was found later)?

Answer (R. Mana): I say that there was [another] man here, and his name was like the name of [the husband who sent the Get that was lost].

Question: Exert yourself [and you will find the answer]! If they checked the entire region, and did not find anyone with the same name [why is it Pasul]?

Answer #1: Is it not due to a stringency of Arayos?! (MESHIV DAVAR 4:84 - we are concerned for a couple with the same names, from another city of the same name, even though we do not know of such a city, like Rav Huna in the Bavli, Gitin 27a.)

Objection: It was taught [in our Mishnah that a man on a mountain top gave his name and place, and said that he is dying, and] they went and did not find anyone, and they permitted his wife to remarry! [And in Tzalmon, a man gave his name and said that he is dying from a snakebite,] and they went and did not recognize the body, and they permitted his wife to remarry! (PNEI MOSHE connotes that in his text of the Mishnah, in Tzalmon, the man said that he is from Ploni (elsewhere).)

Answer #2 (R. Mana): So said R. Shmuel bar Acha - this man had two Gitin in his hand - one Kosher and one Pasul. He lost the Kosher one, and discarded the Pasul one. When he found a Get, I say that he found the Pasul one. (CHASAM SOFER - the Shali'ach would be believed to say that he had only one Get. Rather, we are concerned lest the first Get written was Pasul, and they discarded it and wrote another.)

Note: CHASAM SOFER connotes that we are concerned even if the Shali'ach does not know that there was a previous Pasul Get. If he brought a Get from or in Chutz la'Aretz, he must be present while it is written. With difficulty, we can say that a potential Shali'ach was present when they wrote the first Get, and after they discarded it, they chose a different Shali'ach to be present when writing the second Get, and to give it (PF).

(Mishnah - R. Akiva): When I went to Neharde'a to make a leap year, I encountered Nechemyah Ish Badla.

Nechemyah: I heard that in Eretz Yisrael, only Yehudah ben Bava permits a woman based on one witness.

R. Akiva: That is correct.

Nechemyah: Tell them in my name that the roads are perilous because of soldiers; I received from R. Gamliel the Elder that a woman may remarry based on one witness.

R. Akiva: When I told this to R. Gamliel (the grandson of R. Gamliel the Elder), he rejoiced.

R. Gamliel: We have found a colleague (support) for Yehudah ben Bava!

Amidst this, R. Gamliel recalled that men were killed in Tel Arza, and R. Gamliel [the Elder] permitted their wives based on one witness. It became established to remarry based on Ed mi'Pi Ed (second hand testimony), and based on a woman or female slave.

(Gemara): If it was found written in a document 'Ploni died' or 'Ploni was killed', R. Yirmeyah says, we permit his wife to remarry;

(R. Bun bar Kahana): We do not permit his wife to remarry.

A Beraisa supports this one, and a Beraisa supports this one.

Support (for R. Yirmeyah - Beraisa #1): "Al Pi Shnayim Edim", but not through what [witnesses] wrote, and not through a translator (who translates the witnesses' words to a language that Beis Din understands), and not Ed mi'Pi Ed;

Nowadays, do we not permit [his wife to remarry based on] Ed mi'Pi Ed?! Similarly, we permit to remarry through what they wrote, and through a translator. (PNEI MOSHE)

Support (for R. Bun bar Kahana - Beraisa #2): Witness have greater power than a document, and a document has greater power than witnesses;

If witnesses say 'Ploni died' or 'Ploni was killed', we permit his wife to remarry If it was found written in a document 'Ploni died' or 'Ploni was killed', we do not permit his wife to remarry;

A document has greater power than witnesses - one who lends to his colleague in front of witnesses, he collects [only] from Bnei Chorin (property that the borrower still owns. One who lends) with a document, he collects [even] from Meshubadim (land that the borrower sold).

(Mishnah - R. Eliezer and R. Yehoshua): We do not permit a woman to remarry based on one witness;

R. Akiva says, she may not remarry based on a woman or relatives.

(Gemara) Question: [The previous] Mishnah taught that it became established to remarry based on Ed mi'Pi Ed, and based on a woman or male or female slave or relatives, and you say so?!

Answer: Our Mishnah is like Mishnah Rishonah (before R. Akiva encountered Nechemyah Ish Badla).

(Mishnah): They told [R. Akiva] about a case in which Leviyim went to Tzo'ar, the city of dates. One got sick, and they left him at an inn. When they returned, they said to the innkeeper (a Nochris) 'where is our friend?' The innkeeper said that he died, and she buried him. They permitted his wife to remarry.

They told him, a Kohenes (this just means a Kosher woman) should be believed no less than an innkeeper! (Also this is like Mishnah Rishonah, that a woman was not believed.)

R. Akiva: In a case like that of the innkeeper, she is believed! The innkeeper showed to them the man's staff, shoe, bag and Sefer Torah that was with him.

(Gemara - Mishnah): The innkeeper showed to them the man's staff, shoe, bag and Sefer Torah that was with him.

(R. Acha citing R. Chanina): They made [the innkeeper] like a midwife, who is believed immediately [about which twin was born first].

(R. Shmuel bar Susarta): They made her like a Nochri speaking l'Fi Tumo (unaware of the consequences of his words).

Question (a caterer, to R. Mana): Does this not argue with Reish Lakish? Reish Lakish said, any case in which they ask him and he answers [is called intent, and a Nochri is not believed]!

Answer (R. Mana): It is unlike R. Shmuel bar Susarta (who said that they made her like a Nochri speaking l'Fi Tumo). It is like R. Chanina said, that they made her like a midwife, who is believed immediately.