Question: Also Zuzei he can make Isterei. He makes a calculation of Isterei. If so, this is not a reason to say 600 Zuzim, rather, 600 Isterei, which are larger!

Answer: It is normal to write Zuzim in documents, even though there is a bigger coin, like we find regarding Zuzei Tzuri. Everywhere we say four Zuzi, and we do not make a calculation of Sela'im.

Explanation #1 (R. Chananel): We give to him Isterei. They are smaller than Zuzei, like we say that Istira is a half-Zuz.

Rebuttal: [When the Gemara says] "what will you say...?", this is never sustained (it is always rejected).

Explanation #2 (Rashbam): Since it says "what will you say", this connotes that we should not say so, like "will you say that armed robbers...?" (Kidushin 11a)

Version #2: Some Seforim say "what can you say? Either 600 Isterei and a Zuz, or 600 Zuz and a Zuz. The bearer of a document has the lower hand!"

According to those Seforim, we can properly say that Istira is less than a Zuz, and the Zuzei are Tzuri Zuzei!

Remark: However, R. Chananel's text says "what will you say - 600 Isterei and a Zuz? The bearer of a document has the lower hand!" (Therefore, his Perush is difficult according to his text.)

Citation: R. Tam's text in Sukah (22b) says [regarding a hole in the Sechach, the size of] a Zuz above is like Istira below. He explains a Zuz on top of a mountain, which is big, looks like Istira, which is small, to one who stands below.

Explanation: If he wrote in the feminine, i.e. he wrote Telas and did not write (the masculine) Tilsa. (One can add to Telas to make it Tilsin.)

Question: We should be concerned lest he wrote to give it in Nisan, and he did not give it until Tishrei, and she will fraudulently take from buyers who bought Peros [of her property] from her husband [from Nisan] until Tishrei, according to the opinion that even after he prepared to divorce her (wrote a Get), he eats the Peros until he gives it!

We ask like this in Bava Metzi'a (19a) about one who found Gitei Nashim. It says that when the husband admits [that he gave it to her, the finder] returns it to the woman. It answers that there, we say to her "bring a proof when you received the Get" [and then you may take from buyers].

This is only when it fell, and there is a Rei'usa, we obligate [a proof]. When it did not fall, why are we not concerned for this?

Answer (Ri): A person does not bring punishments upon himself early (he does not write a Get until he is ready to give it). Therefore, only when there is a Rei'usa we are concerned.

Support: We say so in Gitin (18a) that a person does not bring punishments upon himself early, to write a Get before he wants to give it;

Gitin that come from abroad (are dated before they are given). We are not concerned for them, because there is publicity about them. (Buyers know to ask her to prove when she received it.)

Question: We should be concerned lest she wrote to give it in Nisan, and he did not give it until Tishrei, and she sold her Kesuvah for Tovas Hana'ah (the rights to collect it if and when she will be widowed or divorced), and her husband [will show the receipt that proves that he paid her before she sold it] and take from the buyer fraudulently!

We ask so in Bava Metzi'a (20a) about one who found a receipt, and answers that this shows that Shmuel is correct, who said that one who sells a loan document to his friend and pardons it, it is pardoned, for she could even pardon to her husband if she wanted.

Abaye answers that Edav b'Chasumav Zachin Lo (when witnesses sign a document, the recipient acquires immediately, as long as he later receives the document).

Implied question: Why did [the Makshan] abandon our Mishnah and question the Beraisa?

Answer: It is because we can establish our Mishnah to discuss a document with Hakna'ah;

However, there (the Beraisa) taught "if the woman does not admit...", which connotes that she says that she did not yet give [the receipt] to her husband yet. What difference would it make if it was a Hakna'ah document?!

Implied question: We could say that she says that it is forged!

Answer: It connotes that it discusses every case in which she does not admit, whether she says it is forged, or whether she says that she did not yet give it to her husband.

Reference: Also about this, it asks there (Bava Metzi'a 12b) "we should be concerned lest he wrote to borrow [and borrowed only later. If the lender gets it, he will improperly take land from people who bought before the loan!], and establishes it to discuss Hakna'ah documents, and Abaye answers that Edav b'Chasumav Zachin Lo.

Explanation #1 (Rashbam): He intends to permit her to marry improperly.

Question #1: He will give it to her in front of witnesses, and they will read the Get, like we say in Gitin (19b) that [Edei Mesirah] must read the Get, and they will see that this is not the man's name!

Question #2: [Even] without this (concern for permitting a married woman), we should be concerned lest he wrote it for another's wife, since the witnesses do not recognize the woman;

He will write a Get for [the wife of] another man with the same name as himself, and give the Get to the man's wife, and she will collect her Kesuvah from her husband!

Explanation #2: It seems to me that this is the question. The text does not say "and he will divorces her."

Question: Why did he mention the man's name in a Get, and the woman's name in a receipt?

Answer: He was not concerned to explain all of them. Rather, he mentioned the one who authorizes the writing, for the Mishnah taught about them "he must recognize them", for the Mishnah mentioned them. Therefore, Rav mentioned them;

The Mishnah itself discussed these [people] because it already needed to mention them, and surely the same applies to the name of the other, due to another concern.

Question: If they were established (two Yosef ben Shimon's in the city), according to whom [are we concerned]?

If it is according to R. Meir, who says that Edei Mesirah Karsei, there is no concern for anything! The Get is not a Get, since it is not proven from itself that he sent it, like it says in Gitin (24b) that if one wrote a Get to divorce his older wife, he may not use it to divorce his younger wife (with the same name);

The Gemara infers that he may use it to divorce his older wife, and we establish it like R. Elazar, who says that Edei Mesirah Karsei, and unlike R. Meir.

Also, [if it is R. Meir] why does it say that they divorce their wives in front of each other? Even then he may not divorce, unless he writes [more] generations [so no one else in the city has that name]!

And if it asks according to R. Elazar, also according to him it is not a Get, for she must bring Edei Mesirah [who saw] that her husband gave it to her, since Edei Chasimah do not prove that her husband gave it to her;

She needs Edei Mesirah, to bring them in front of us, that her husband gave it to her. She will seek them, and she will not find them. What concern is there?

And if we discuss when they were not established (two Yosef ben Shimon's), now Edei Chasimah properly are Karsei, for in the city we know only her husband [has this name], if so what was the answer "this shows that two Yosef ben Shimon's who live in one city divorce their wives only in front of each other"?

How does this help? It is not known that there are two in the city. Really, this one will divorce her in the name of her husband not in front of him, since they were not established!

Answer (Ri): We discuss when they were established, and we ask according to R. Elazar, for we hold like him;

Even though Edei Mesirah Karsei, and she must bring Edei Mesirah, we should be concerned since they write for him without his wife, they will not divorce in front of them (Maharsha - the witnesses and the scribe);

Perhaps he wrote a Get [not in front of the wife]... and the witnesses who see the Mesirah and recognize that his name is Yosef ben Shimon, like is written in the document, and they recognize also the woman who receives it, that her name is written in the Get...

And they will not think to clarify whether or not there is another Yosef ben Shimon other than this one, and if similarly their wives' names are the same, and this is his colleague's wife;

When she will come to Beis Din, she will bring Edei Mesirah, that she will say that these are witnesses saw my husband Yosef ben Shimon give to me the Get, and they will say yes, like I explained. Afterwards, surely Beis Din will not investigate, to say "perhaps you erred in such a case", like I explained.

It answers that Rav said that two Yosef ben Shimon's living in one city can divorce their wives only in front of each other. Since it was enacted so, Beis Din will surely investigate whether there were two Yosef ben Shimon's there. If there were two there, we are not concerned at all.

Explanation: The way [my] Rebbi explained "we should be concerned for two Yosef ben Shimon's" discusses when they were established there, we must similarly explain the first question "we should be concerned lest he wrote [and will give to another's wife] specifically when they were established;

If they were not established, Rav would not need to say that the same applies to the woman's name.

Remark: Even though Abaye is concerned for two Yosef ben Shimon's in Yevamos (115b) even if they were not established, Rava is not concerned there, and also Rabah is not concerned when they were not established, like is proven in Bava Metzi'a (18b).

Question: According to what I explained, that it is proven in Gitin (24b) that according to R. Meir, two "Yosef ben Shimon"s can divorce their wives only if they write [more] generations...

Since Edei Chasimah Karsei, it is a Get only if the witnesses [signed] in it prove that her husband gave it to her;

This is difficult, for [initially] we establish in Gitin (86b) our Mishnah of two Gitin with identical names specifically like R. Meir, and we reject that it can even be like R. Elazar;

Inference: It can properly be like R. Meir. How is it fine according to R. Meir? It is proven from Gitin (24b) that according to R. Meir, two "Yosef ben Shimon"s can divorce their wives only if they write [more] generations!

Answer: When we establish it like R. Meir, he holds that [the names] are not totally the same. They wrote a third generation or a Siman [to distinguish them]. Now, the witnesses signed in it prove that the Get came to her from her husband, if it is in her hand;

It calls [the names] identical because in the place they were given, no one recognizes the generations (the grandfathers of the two Yosef's).

Question: How does this matter? [A witness] must recognize the woman's name in a Get, and they will not know his wife's name. We cannot say that he will establish a Chazakah [for his wife's name]!

Answer #1: Also his wife comes with him [and establishes her name like the name of the woman for whom the Get will be written].

Answer #2: They recognize his wife through Ploni and Almoni, who said that she is this man's wife, but they do not know his name, that they could say "Plonis is Reuven's wife", for if so, they know that his name is not Yosef ben Shimon.