וְהִלְכְתָא כְּנַחְמָנִי And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Naḥmani, i.e., Abaye, that disclosure of intent with regard to bills of divorce is disregarded.
מַתְנִי׳ בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיָה מְשַׁנֶּה שְׁמוֹ וּשְׁמָהּ שֵׁם עִירוֹ וְשֵׁם עִירָהּ הִתְקִין רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הַזָּקֵן שֶׁיְּהֵא כּוֹתֵב אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי וְכׇל שׁוּם שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ אִשָּׁה פְּלוֹנִית וְכׇל שׁוּם שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם MISHNA: Initially, the husband would change his name and her name, from the names by which they were known where they formerly lived to the names by which they were known where the bill of divorce was written, and write the name of his city and the name of her city. One was not required to list all of the names by which the husband and the wife were known, but only the names in the place where the bill of divorce was being written. Rabban Gamliel the Elder instituted that the scribe should write in the bill of divorce: The man so-and-so, and any other name that he has, and: The woman so-and-so, and any other name that she has. The reason for this ordinance was for the betterment of the world, as perhaps the people of a different city would not recognize the name written in the bill of divorce, and would claim that this bill of divorce does not belong to her.
גְּמָ׳ אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל שְׁלַחוּ לֵיהּ בְּנֵי מְדִינַת הַיָּם לְרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל בְּנֵי אָדָם הַבָּאִים מִשָּׁם לְכָאן שְׁמוֹ יוֹסֵף וְקוֹרְאִין לוֹ יוֹחָנָן יוֹחָנָן וְקוֹרְאִין לוֹ יוֹסֵף הֵיאַךְ מְגָרְשִׁין נְשׁוֹתֵיהֶן עָמַד רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְהִתְקִין שֶׁיְּהוּ כּוֹתְבִין אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי וְכׇל שׁוּם שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ אִשָּׁה פְּלוֹנִית וְכׇל שׁוּם שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי וְהוּא דְּאִתַּחְזַק בִּתְרֵי שְׁמֵי אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי אַבָּא לְרַב אָשֵׁי רַבִּי מָרִי וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר קָיְימִי כְּווֹתָךְ GEMARA: Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The residents of a country overseas sent an inquiry to Rabban Gamliel: With regard to people who come from there, Eretz Yisrael, to here, for example, someone whose name is Yosef but here they call him Yoḥanan, or someone whose name is Yoḥanan, but here they call him Yosef, how do they write bills of divorce to effectively divorce their wives? Rabban Gamliel arose and instituted that they should write: The man so-and-so, and any other name that he has, the woman so-and-so, and any other name that she has, for the betterment of the world. Rav Ashi said: And this applies only when he is known by two names. Rabbi Abba said to Rav Ashi: Rabbi Mari and Rabbi Elazar hold in accordance with your opinion.
תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַב אָשֵׁי הָיוּ לוֹ שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים אַחַת בִּיהוּדָה וְאַחַת בַּגָּלִיל וְלוֹ שְׁנֵי שֵׁמוֹת אֶחָד בִּיהוּדָה וְאֶחָד בַּגָּלִיל וְגֵרַשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁבִּיהוּדָה בִּשְׁמוֹ שֶׁבִּיהוּדָה וְאֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁבַּגָּלִיל בִּשְׁמוֹ שֶׁבַּגָּלִיל אֵינָהּ מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת עַד שֶׁיְּגָרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁבִּיהוּדָה בִּשְׁמוֹ שֶׁבִּיהוּדָה וְשֵׁם דְּגָלִיל עִמּוֹ וְאֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁבַּגָּלִיל בִּשְׁמוֹ שֶׁבַּגָּלִיל וְשֵׁם דִּיהוּדָה עִמּוֹ יָצָא לְמָקוֹם אַחֵר וְגֵרַשׁ בְּאֶחָד מֵהֶן מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת The Gemara adds: It is taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rav Ashi: If a husband has two wives, one in Judea and one in the Galilee; and he has two names, one that he is known by in Judea and one that he is known by in the Galilee; and he divorces his wife who is in Judea with a bill of divorce listing the name that he is known by in Judea, and he divorces his other wife who is in the Galilee with a bill of divorce listing the name that he is known by in the Galilee, then neither of his wives is divorced until he divorces his wife who is in Judea with a bill of divorce listing the name that he is known by in Judea and the name used by the people of the Galilee appended to it, and he also divorces his wife who is in the Galilee with the name that he is known by in the Galilee and the name used by the people of Judea appended to it. If he leaves to a different place, and divorces his wife with a bill of divorce listing one of these names, then she is divorced.
וְהָאָמְרַתְּ שֵׁם דְּגָלִיל עִמּוֹ אֶלָּא שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ הָא דְּאִתַּחְזַק הָא דְּלָא אֶתַּחְזַק שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ The Gemara asks: But didn’t you say that even in Judea his name used by people of the Galilee must be appended to it? Why then is he not required to list all of the names that he is known by? Rather, learn from it that there is a difference between the two cases: This former case is one where he is known to have several names, for example when those in Judea are aware that the husband is known by a different name in the Galilee. And this latter case is one where he is not known to have two names, as he traveled to a place where he was not known. Therefore, he is required to write only the name that he is known by in that place. The Gemara determines: Conclude from it that one must list all of the names that he is known by only if it is known that he has several names.
הָהִיא דַּהֲווֹ קָרוּ לַהּ מִרְיָם וּפוּרְתָּא שָׂרָה אָמְרִי נְהַרְדָּעֵי מִרְיָם וְכֹל שׁוּם שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ וְלָא שָׂרָה וְכֹל שׁוּם שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ The Gemara relates: There was a certain woman who many people called Miriam, and a few people called her Sara; the Sages of Neharde’a said: In her bill of divorce, one must write: Miriam, and any other name that she has, and one should not write: Sara, and any other name that she has, as one must use the name that she is primarily known by.
מַתְנִי׳ אֵין אַלְמָנָה נִפְרַעַת מִנִּכְסֵי יְתוֹמִים אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבוּעָה נִמְנְעוּ מִלְּהַשְׁבִּיעָהּ הִתְקִין רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הַזָּקֵן שֶׁתְּהֵא נוֹדֶרֶת לַיְּתוֹמִים כֹּל מַה שֶּׁיִּרְצוּ וְגוֹבָה כְּתוּבָּתָהּ MISHNA: A widow can collect payment of her marriage contract from the property of orphans only by means of an oath that she did not receive any part of the payment of the marriage contract during her husband’s lifetime. The mishna relates: The courts refrained from administering an oath to her, leaving the widow unable to collect payment of her marriage contract. Rabban Gamliel the Elder instituted that she should take, for the benefit of the orphans, any vow that the orphans wished to administer to her, e.g., that all produce will become prohibited to her if she received any payment of her marriage contract, and after stating this vow, she collects payment of her marriage contract.
הָעֵדִים חוֹתְמִין עַל הַגֵּט מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם וְהִלֵּל הִתְקִין פְּרוֹזְבּוּל מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם The mishna lists additional ordinances that were instituted for the betterment of the world: The witnesses sign their names on the bill of divorce, even though the bill of divorce is valid without their signatures, for the betterment of the world, as the Gemara will explain. And Hillel instituted a document that prevents the Sabbatical Year from abrogating an outstanding debt [prosbol] for the betterment of the world, as the Gemara will explain.
גְּמָ׳ מַאי אִירְיָא אַלְמָנָה אֲפִילּוּ כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא נָמֵי דְּהָא קַיְימָא לַן הַבָּא לִיפָּרַע מִנִּכְסֵי יְתוֹמִין לֹא יִפָּרַע אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבוּעָה אַלְמָנָה אִצְטְרִיכָא לֵיהּ סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא GEMARA: The Gemara asks: Why discuss specifically a widow? This halakha should apply to everyone, as we maintain that anyone who comes to collect payment from the property of orphans can collect only by means of an oath. The Gemara answers: It was necessary for the mishna to mention a widow, as it might enter your mind to say: