Yerushalmi Gittin 8:10 ירושלמי גיטין ח׳:י׳

MISHNAH: Anybody can supplement a bald document¹⁰⁴I.e., supply the additional signatures needed to make the document valid. following the words of Ben Nanas¹⁰⁵If the first signatures are those of valid witnesses, the remaining slots can be filled by the signatures of people who are inadmissible as witnesses either because they are relatives of one of the parties or because they have been declared untrustworthy by a court decree (Mishnah Sanhedrin 3:3–4).. Rebbi Aqiba says, one supplements the signatures only by relatives who would be able to testify under other circumstances¹⁰⁶He agrees that relatives can sign but he holds that people barred because of disreputable or criminal behavior cannot.. What is a bald document? One whose knots are more than its signatures.

HALAKHAH: “Anybody can supplement a bald document,” etc. ¹⁰⁷A closely related text, but from another editorial tradition, is in Baba batra 10:1. From where that a document can be knotted¹⁰⁸The basic use for “knotted” documents was for real estate transactions, probably to hide the financial data from public knowledge. Such a document was certainly impossible in Egypt, where all real estate transactions had to be filed with the State registrar. Its validity in rabbinic tradition is given a biblical basis. It seems from the discussion in Babli Baba batra 10 that the use of “knotted” documents was a Palestinian peculiarity (such documents have been found in the Judean desert.)? Rebbi Immi said, it is written: “I took the document,¹⁰⁹Jer. 32:11: “I took the document of acquisition, the sealed one, the orders and rules, and the public one.” The verse clearly states that a sealed document is the main object, accompanied by a public document.” etc. “And [the sealed]”, that is the knotted [document]. “And the open,” that is the simple, part of the knotted¹¹⁰The text of the document, whose formulation is identical whether sealed or public.. “And the orders and the rules”; orders and rules differ between these, for one is with two {witnesses], the other with three¹¹¹A public document needs two witnesses, a sealed (knotted) one at least three.; one in it, the other on its back¹¹²A public document is signed by the witnesses on the recto of the sheet, starting exactly one line after the end of the text. A sealed document is signed on the verso, between the folds. {According to Rashbam (Commentary to Baba batra 10:1), the document was written with wide spaces between the lines, was signed by witnesses between the lines, and then was folded and sewn so that the document text was hidden but the signatures appeared on the outside. It seems impossible to accept this explanation for the Yerushalmi text. (Cf. H. Albeck’s commentary to Baba batra 10:1).}. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah, on a simple document, the witnesses sign parallel¹¹³They simply sign on the lines after the body of the document, parallel to the lines used by the scribe., on a knotted one the witnesses sign lengthwise¹¹⁴In this opinion, the witnesses sign in the back at a right angle to the scribe’s text, starting in the back of the last line of the document. Only the text covered by witnesses’ signatures in the back is certified.. Rebbi Idi said, the witnesses sign between any two knots, but it must be on top¹¹⁵He disagrees with the preceding description and requires that the witnesses sign in the back parallel to the text written by the scribe, as described in Note 94.. But should one not be afraid that maybe he falsifies¹¹⁶How can the witnesses be sure that the writer of the document will not falsify the document after they affixed their signatures? For a public document there is no problem since anything following the signatures has to be disregarded. For a sealed document with signatures at a right angle there is no problem since any text not covered by the signatures at the back has to be disregarded. But if the signatures are affixed while the document is being written, where are the guarantees?? Rav Naḥman¹¹⁷In Baba batra: Rav Ḥuna. This seems to be the correct attribution, confirmed in the sequel. wanted to argue that witnesses never sign below unless they first read before them: “I X son of Y accept everything written above.” But should one not be afraid that he erased and changed to falsify? Rav Huna is of the opinion that two times “I accept” makes it invalid¹¹⁸A sealed document containing two different clauses of acceptation is considered fraudulent and not enforceable in court.. But should one not be afraid that he erased and changed to falsify? Does Rav Huna not consider that he might write another text, erase and change to falsify? Rav Huna is of the opinion that an erasure makes invalid even if the correction is certified¹¹⁹An erasure in a sealed document is unacceptable even if confirmed as such by signatures. In the Babli, Baba batra 161b, R. Joḥanan accepts an erasure in a sealed document if it carries a note: “This is a correction”..

Rebbi Joḥanan said: There is no “she shall be divorced”. Rebbi Immi said, several boxes of cases came before Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish and they said, go and complete following Rebbi Aqiba¹²⁰They disagree with the last statement in Mishnah 11 and permit the belated signing by relatives who otherwise are in good standing..

Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Mishnah applies if one witness is missing, but only if there are three or more¹²¹This disagreement between ben Nanas and R. Aqiba about the required qualifications of the witnesses refers to the case that only one additional signature is required in addition to the three statutory ones.. Two or three¹²²Any number of irregular witnesses at the beginning is invalid for everybody. at the beginning is invalid, one below the three is valid. Rebbi Mana asked: That is, if they are continuous. If they are with interruptions¹²³If the three statutory witnesses did not sign together but each one signed for a separate knot, with space in between.? As one says, they are considered like testimony at a distance, they only serve to certify the testimony. And so it is here¹²⁴Cf. Chapter 1, Note 117.. If there were nine, can he untie two and have two sign? Or are two witnesses on a knotted document nothing¹²⁵The text is difficult to understand since a document with 9 knots needs an additional 6 signatures. One must assume that some additional signatures already are on the document and the question is directed against R. Joḥanan: Why should it not be possible to let two unqualified witnesses sign since the validation of a knotted document needs three witnesses in any case (Mishnah Baba batra 10:3).? If there were five, it is obvious that he unties one and has it signed¹²⁶In fact, there must be two knots untied and confirmed on the verso by two different signatures; only one of them was accepted by R. Joḥanan.. It turns out that his untying permits it following Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Gamliel, for Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Gamliel says, the essential part is what validates¹²⁷Cf. Chapter 3, Note 68. If the text which contains the identities of the parties and their obligations is certified by signatures on the verso for knotted contracts or at the end for open contracts, the contracts are valid. If prepared forms are not certified for sealed contracts it does not impinge on the validity of the contract for R. Ḥananiah ben Gamliel., even if he ties and signs after that. That is, if he ties all knots and after that the first three [witnesses] did sign. But if he tied the first three¹²⁸Which contain the essential data and are certified by three witnesses as required for sealed contracts according to all sources. and had them signed, even if he makes many ties and lets many¹²⁹Unqualified relatives. sign it is valid. Practice is that a knotted document is first knotted and then signed. If he made the first knots and had them signed right away, it is obvious that the first two did not sign the knotted document¹³⁰Since a “knotted” sealed document is validated only by three witnesses, the first two do not combine for validation..

Where do we hold¹³¹This paragraph is out of context here; it refers to Mishnah Baba batra 10:1 where R. Ḥananiah ben Gamliel states that a knotted document can be converted into a simple one if its witnesses sign on the document side.? If he knotted and signed it inside, everybody agrees that it can be made simple¹³²If the document was signed before it was sewn, it is a regular open document. The rules of sealed documents do not apply.. If he knotted and signed it outside, everybody agrees that it cannot be made simple¹³³If the signatures are on the back of the document, the text itself is left without witnesses; as an open document is would be worthless.. But we must deal with the case that he knotted it from the inside and then signed it on the outside¹³⁴As the text stands, it is unintelligible. Mishnah Baba batra 10:1 implies that “knotted from the inside” means “had it signed on the inside and then sewed it and had it signed again on the outside”, where R. Ḥanania ben Gamliel holds that it can be used either way; but the opposing faction holds that once three validating signatures were on the back, the document can only be unsealed in court to be enforced.; in that case Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Gamliel said that it can be made simple but the rabbis say, it cannot be made simple. ¹³⁵The text in braces is a first, incomplete version of the following, which the scribe forgot to delete.{Rebbi objected to the statement of Ḥananiah ben Gamliel: “The body of the document.” If he knotted and signed it outside, everybody agrees that it cannot be made simple. But we must deal with the case that he knotted it from the inside and then signed it on the outside; in that case Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Gamliel said that it can be made simple, but the rabbis say, it cannot be made simple.) Rebbi objected to the statement of Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Gamliel: The body¹³⁶In the Babli, Baba batra 164a/b, Rebbi is stating that the methods of computation of regnal years in open and sealed documents are different. Since sealed documents were not used in Babylonia, this argument seems irrelevant. of the document shows whether it is simple or not simple. What is the body of the document? Rebbi Abba said, as Rav Huna said, witnesses never sign below unless they first read before them: “I X son of Y accept everything written above.¹³⁷Since on a sealed document the witnesses start signing once there is space for three signatures, it follows that at the top of the document one has the identification of the person to whom the document refers together with any obligation incurred by that person. In an open document, the main point has to be repeated at the end of the text to make clear what the witnesses certify. In a sealed document, the place of the signatures on the verso of the main part is the certification.” But did we not state: “That is the formula of a document”?¹³⁸Rav Huna’s text is required for all documents, whether open or sealed. Rebbi Mana said, that is the formula of a knotted document. Rebbi Abin said, even if you say it is the same for knotted and simple, for a knotted document it is a necessity, for a simple one it is not a necessity¹³⁹It is possible to write both sealed and open documents following the same formula. However, a sealed document whose three certifying signatures are not in the back of the text containing the name of the debtor and the exact nature of his obligation is invalid; an open document is valid if only it contains all the necessary information and two signatures. If a sealed document also contains two signatures inside, there is no reason not to follow R. Ḥananiah ben Gamliel.. Rebbi Aḥa said, if one adds to practice¹⁴⁰A sealed document minimally valid cannot be turned into an open document. However, at places where the common practice requires more than the minimum, there may be reason to permit turning the sealed into an open document.. A simple document [is witnessed] by two persons. If common usage is to have three, one makes it with three. A knotted document is signed on its back. If common usage is to sign it inside and out, one signs it inside and out.

The condition of validity is stated here and was stated there¹⁴¹Both in Giṭṭin 8:12 and in Baba batra 10:1 one finds rules about sealed documents. These rules do not overlap. The rules about the bald document are not found in Baba batra, the requirement of three witnesses is not in Giṭṭin. One would have expected an argument why the rules of one tractate, dealing with divorce documents, also apply to the other, dealing with deeds of real estate and mortgages. For some reason, this seemed obvious to the editors of the Yerushalmi.. It was necessary to state it there. If it had been stated here but not there, we would have said that here it is invalid because of the restrictions connected with adultery but there, since no restrictions connected with adultery are involved, it would be valid. Or if it had been stated there but not here, we would have said that there it is invalid since one comes to collect money based on that document but here, where one does not collect money, it would be valid. Therefore, it was necessary both to state it here and to state it there.