In honor of Rabbi Ben David Shalita
With regard to the issue of the definition of special witness laws regarding the signing of witnesses' hands on bills, once again it seems to me that there is clear evidence for this in the case of a signature, no special witness law is stated regarding them signing together. This and what is explained there are the remaining sealed notes, and a special testimony in Gitin Dina as the laws of soul and soul, and as I mentioned then when we were talking from Ktsvah C. L. S. K. H. (and ref. 'Let them say as one and see as one that Man Dait Lia is a special testimony Damkshi' Haggadah for evidence from the Sanhedrin to the OT, and yet all that was consumed in the marriage is only to be in front of each other as explained in Gm' there is a decree on behalf of all of you, but a joint signature of 124 Lika Clal, And I'm another end of the 8th there of the Skat and the innovations of the Garach 22 Kassa 1a.
And it is true that the BH at the end of C.L. brought a contradiction as to whether Makhmari' is a special testimony in Gitin or not and he took to lighten it up because of the fact that the laws of souls are really not Makhmari'.
And if so, according to the BH, there is absolutely no evidence from the GM there because there is no special testimony in Gitin.
And it is true that Yaoi' in Camp Ephraim 28 of the 18th century divorce that brought the words of Rambam the late Rambam who grants a divorce to his wife A.T. that she should give him two hundred zoz, etc., a witness and there is no witness A from the first and A from the last join the same, And he wrote a leaf, ps.
Wila Daha gave a special testimony in Gitin Makhmari' Datalia in Ashli Rebarbi as above, but on the part of Daha Lia special testimony in the alleged deed is hardened from the aforementioned Gitin.
However, there is a place to reconcile the Dagm' Shem Atia as a special testimony in Gitin is invalid and the 33 Dagm' Shem means Demeiri' to the Pom Halkata, and urges to say that there is no Nafkam to the Halacha if it is prohibited because of a decree or because of a special testimony, the decree means that it is to the Pom Halkata They were consumed by cutting and also a peshita dish, whether the prohibition is on the part of cutting or not.
And if he is trustworthy in law, there is no special testimony in Gitin, and therefore special testimony in the Gitin deed is not invalid. And afi' in Mammoni because it is a special testimony invalid, it is found that this deed is not in front of the other in the bills, which is explained in Gitin, where he is Milta Datlia in the Philogta in the Sanhedrin there, and in Shlama, if he is a special witness in the deed, and as above at the beginning of the words, Niha.
It is true that the grammarian will see that the words of the camp Ephraim there are said only in the manner spoken there in Dish 2 of the kinds of oral witnesses, and that there is no connection between the 2 witnesses, such as the signature of the 14th century, but only the fact that the first and last oral witnesses do not join at all, and simply and "To.
מק"ט התשובה הוא: 3813 והקישור הישיר של התשובה הוא: shchiche.com/3813
