Study Ketubot folio 21B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
איקלע רבנאי אחוה דרבי חייא בר אבא למזבן שומשמי ואמר: הכי אמר שמואל: עד ודיין מצטרפין. אמר אמימר: כמה מעליא הא שמעתא! אמר ליה רב אשי לאמימר: משום דקלסה אבוה דאמך, את נמי מקלסת לה?! כבר פרכה רבא.
The Talmud relates: Ravnai, brother of R' Ḥiyya bar Abba, happened to come and sell sesame, and he said that this is what Shmuel said: A witness and a judge join together to testify. Ameimar said: How excellent is this halakha. Rav Ashi said to Ameimar: Due to the fact that Rami bar Ḥama, father of your mother, praised it, you also praise [mekallesat] it? Rava already refuted that statement and proved it incorrect.
אמר רב ספרא אמר רבי אבא אמר רב יצחק בר שמואל בר מרתא אמר רב הונא, ואמרי ליה אמר רב הונא אמר רב: שלשה שישבו לקיים את השטר, שנים מכירין חתימות ידי עדים, ואחד אינו מכיר. עד שלא חתמו — מעידין בפניו וחותם. משחתמו — אין מעידין בפניו וחותם.
§ Rav Safra said that R' Abba said that Rav Yitzhak bar Shmuel bar Marta said that Rav Huna said; and some say that Rav Huna said that Rav said: With regard to 3 judges who convened to ratify a document, and two of them recognize the signatures of the witnesses on the document, and one does not recognize them; as long as the two judges did not yet sign to ratify the document, they testify and authenticate the signatures before the third judge, and based on that testimony, the third judge signs the document of ratification together with the first two judges. However, once the two judges signed the ratification, they may not testify before him and have him sign the ratification. The formula of the ratification is: We verified and ratified this document in a forum of 3. Since when the first two judges signed the ratification, they were not a forum of 3, the ratification is invalid.
The Talmud asks: And do we write the ratification of a document before all of the judges verify the signatures of the witnesses? But didn’t Rav Pappi say in the name of Rava: This ratification of judges that was written before the witnesses related testimony about their signatures is invalid, even if the witnesses later authenticate their signatures, as it seems like a lie, since when they drafted the ratification they were not yet aware that they would be able to ratify the document? Here too, when the judges drafted the ratification before the third judge can verify the signatures, it seems like a lie.