Wenn sich einer von seiner Frau scheiden ließ und sie die Nacht mit ihm in einem Gasthaus verbrachte (es gibt Zeugen dafür, dass sie allein zusammen waren, aber nicht, dass sie zusammenlebten), sagt Beth Shammai: Sie braucht keine Sekunde von ihm. Beth Hillel sagt: Sie braucht eine Sekunde von ihm. [Beth Hillel ist der Ansicht, dass Zeugen ihres Zusammenseins (als) Zeugen des Zusammenlebens gelten. Und da ein Mann nicht promisku zusammenlebt (wir nehmen das an), verlobte er sie mit diesem Zusammenleben. Und Beth Shammai ist der Ansicht, dass wir Zeugen ihres Alleinseins nicht als Zeugen des Zusammenlebens betrachten, bis sie sie tatsächlich auf frischer Tat beobachten.] Wann ist das so? Wenn sie von der Ehe geschieden wäre. Sie sind sich einig, dass sie, wenn sie von der Verlobung geschieden wurde, kein zweites Mal von ihm verlangt, da er sie nicht so gut kennt (und vermutlich nicht mit ihr zusammenlebt). Wenn man sie mit einer "Glatze" heiratete, "Sie verlässt dieses und dieses, und alles oben Genannte gilt. [Ein "Glatzkopf" ist einer, dessen Falten zahlreicher sind als seine Zeugen. Die Rabbiner führten ein gefaltetes Get (Get Mekushar) für Cohanim ein, die schnell wütend sind und in der Hitze ihres Zorns möglicherweise ein Get an ihre Frauen schreiben und es später bereuen und sie nicht zurücknehmen können. Sie haben daher ein Get-Mekushar eingeführt, das schwer schnell zu schreiben ist, damit sich ihre Wut in der Zwischenzeit abkühlt. Ein oder zwei Zeilen werden auf den glatten (ungeschriebenen) Teil geschrieben und gefaltet und genäht, und ein Zeuge unterschreibt die Falte außen. Der Vorgang wird ein zweites und drittes Mal wiederholt. Und wenn es eine Falte ohne einen außen unterzeichneten Zeugen gibt, ist dies eine "Glatze", und sie ist nicht gültig. Denn wir gehen davon aus, dass es am Anfang so viele Zeugen gab, wie es Falten gibt, und wir vermuten, dass der Ehemann allen gesagt hat, sie sollen unterschreiben, und dass dies nicht der Fall war. Wenn sie mit einem solchen Get heiratet, verlässt sie beide und alles oben Genannte gilt. Diese Mischna stimmt mit R. Meir überein, der sagt: "Wenn man 'die von den Weisen geprägte Währung' für Gittin ändert, ist das Kind ein Mamzer." Dies ist nicht die Halacha.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
ולנה עמו בפונדקי – and there are witnesses testifying of the privacy between a man and a woman there but there are no witnesses there for the actual sexual act. The School of Hillel holds that the witnesses testifying to the privacy between a man and a woman are the very same individuals who testify about the actual sexual act, for the presumption is that nobody wants to make his intercourse with a woman one of prostitution (but wants to make her his wife thereby –see Talmud Ketubot 73a), for he has betrothed her with his sexual act. And the School of Shammai holds that they don’t say that the witnesses testifying the privacy between a man and a woman are not the very same individuals who testify about the actual sexual act, until she demonstrates that she has engaged in sexual relations.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
Introduction
The first section of the mishnah deals with a man who is suspected of having sexual relations with his divorcee. The second section deals with a “bald get”, one that does not have the proper number of signatures.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
גט קרח – [a Jewish bill of divorce that lacks signatures on each of its folds] – that its folds are greater than its witnesses (see the next Mishnah for this definition), for the Rabbis decreed a folded [bill of divorce] document because of impetuous Kohanim who would suddenly write a Jewish bill of divorce for their wives and then regret it and they would not be able to restore them [as their wives] (since Kohanim are prohibited, according to the Torah, to marry a divorcee), and they (i.e., the Rabbis) decreed for them a folded Jewish bill of divorce, which is not easy to write quickly, lest while it is [being written], he becomes appeased. Hence, they write one or two lines and wrap them on the blank part and sew it/fasten it and one witness affixes his signature on the outside part of the fold, and then he returns and writes two or more lines from inside and folds them on the blank part, and the other witnesses affixes his signature on the outside part of the fold, and similarly [for] the third witness. But if there is a fold that is binding them without the signature of a witness from the back, it is a Jewish bill of divorce lacking signatures on each of its fold and is invalid. For by definition, for the number of folds should be the number of witnesses, ab initio, for we are concerned that perhaps the husband said to them: “you will all affix your signatures,” but one witness did not affix his signature, and if the woman married with this Jewish bill of divorce, she should leave both this one (i.e., her new husband) as well as that one {i.e., her former husband). And all of these foregoing conditions apply to her. And our Mishnah is according to Rabbi Meir who said that whomever changes from the formula that our Sages established (see Talmud Gittin 5b), In Jewish bills of divorce, the offspring are illegitimate. But this is not the Halakha.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
A man divorces his wife and then stays with her over night in an inn: Bet Shammai says: she does not require from him a second get, But Beth Hillel say she does require a second get from him. When is this so? When she was divorced after marriage. And [Beth Hillel] agrees that if she is divorced after betrothal, she does not require a second get from him, because he would not [yet] take liberties with her. If a divorced woman is secluded with her ex-husband, Bet Hillel suspects that they may have had sexual relations and through the sexual act he betrothed her again (we shall learn about how betrothal is performed in the beginning of Kiddushin). Since they may have remarried, she requires another get from him. Bet Shammai is not suspicious that they had sexual relations and therefore does not require another get. Again, this debate may be connected with their debate over the grounds for divorce. Since Bet Shammai holds that divorce can only be a result of adultery (or at least suspected adultery), it is less likely that the couple will again engage in sexual relations. Bet Hillel holds that a man may divorce his wife for almost no reason and therefore there is a greater chance at reconciliation. However, Bet Hillel suspects that the divorced couple may have sex only if they were already married and assumedly had already had sexual relations while married. In this case, their prior intimacy increases the likelihood that when secluded they will again become intimate. If the divorce occurred after their betrothal but before they were ever married, since they had never been intimate before, it is less likely that they will now engage in sex. Therefore, in such a situation she does not require a second get.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
If a man marries a [divorced] woman through a “bald” get, she must leave both husbands and all the above-mentioned consequences apply to her. A “bald get” is a “sewn document”, as described in Bava Batra 10:1-2. There we learned that to protect forgeries people would sew several folds into their documents, having people sign on each fold. A “bald get” is one where there are more folds than signatures. It is “bald” because it is missing signatures and is therefore invalid. Since it is invalid, she was not properly divorced from her first husband when she married her second husband and all of the consequences which were discussed in mishnah five (and mentioned in 6-8) apply to her as well.
