Gittin 1

הַמֵּבִיא גֵט מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם, צָרִיךְ שֶׁיֹּאמַר, בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתָּם. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, אַף הַמֵּבִיא מִן הָרֶקֶם וּמִן הַחֶגֶר. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ מִכְּפַר לוּדִים לְלוֹד. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ שֶׁיֹּאמַר בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתָּם, אֶלָּא הַמֵּבִיא מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם וְהַמּוֹלִיךְ. וְהַמֵּבִיא מִמְּדִינָה לִמְדִינָה בִמְדִינַת הַיָּם, צָרִיךְ שֶׁיֹּאמַר בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתָּם. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ מֵהֶגְמוֹנְיָא לְהֶגְמוֹנְיָא:

If one brings a get from medinath hayam (lit., "the land of the sea," i.e., abroad), he must say: "Before me, it was written, and before me it was signed." [Anything outside of Eretz Yisrael is called "medinath hayam." ("He must say: 'Before me, it was written, etc.'":) Some say, because those living abroad are not learned in Torah, and they do not know that a get must be written lishmah (i.e., for the specific instance). Therefore, the messenger says: "Before me, it was written, and before me it was signed," and, as a matter of course, he is asked if it were written lishmah, and he replies that it was. Others say it is because caravans are infrequent between there and here (Eretz Yisrael) so that if the husband protested that he did not write it, witnesses could not be found to corroborate the signatures of the witnesses, for which reason the rabbis believed the messenger as two, and the protest of the husband no longer availed.] R. Gamliel says: Even one who brings it from Rekem and from Cheger (which are close to Eretz Yisrael, must say: "Before me, etc.") [The Targum for (Genesis 16:14): "between Kadesh and Bared" is "between Rekam and Chagra."] R. Eliezer says: Even from Kfar Ludim [which is outside Eretz Yisrael] to Lud [which is near it, and part of Eretz Yisrael.] And the sages say: Only one who brings a get from abroad and one who takes (a get from Eretz Yisrael abroad) must say: "Before me it was written, and before me, it was signed." And one who brings it from one province to another in medinath hayam must say: "Before me, it was written, and before me, it was signed." R. Shimon b. Gamliel says: Even from one hegemony to another [with distinct jurisdiction].

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מֵרֶקֶם לַמִּזְרָח, וְרֶקֶם כַּמִּזְרָח. מֵאַשְׁקְלוֹן לַדָּרוֹם, וְאַשְׁקְלוֹן כַּדָּרוֹם. מֵעַכּוֹ לַצָּפוֹן, וְעַכּוֹ כַּצָּפוֹן. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, עַכּוֹ כְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל לַגִּטִּין:

R. Yehudah says: From Rekem until [the end of the world] eastward [is considered outside of Eretz Yisrael], and Rekem [itself is considered] as the east [of the world, and not as Eretz Yisrael]. From Ashkelon southward, and Ashkelon as the south. From Acco northwards, and Acco as the north. R. Meir says: Acco is as Eretz Yisrael in respect to gittin.

הַמֵּבִיא גֵט בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל, אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ שֶׁיֹּאמַר בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתָּם. אִם יֵשׁ עָלָיו עוֹרְרִים, יִתְקַיֵּם בְּחוֹתְמָיו. הַמֵּבִיא גֵט מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם וְאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לוֹמַר בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתָּם, אִם יֵשׁ עָלָיו עֵדִים, יִתְקַיֵּם בְּחוֹתְמָיו:

If one brings a get in Eretz Yisrael, he need not say: "Before me, it was written, and before me it was signed." If there are "protestors" against it, [the husband protesting that it is forged], it is confirmed through its signatures. [If witnesses testify to (the authenticity of) their signatures, or if other witnesses recognize their signatures, it is valid. And nowadays, if one brings a get, whether in Eretz Yisrael or abroad, he must give it to her in the presence of two witnesses and say: "Before me, it was written, and before me it was signed."] If one brings a get from abroad, he cannot say: "Before me, it was written, and before me it was signed" [(as when he gave it to her when he could speak, and he did not get to say: "Before me, it was written, and before me it was signed" before he became mute)]. If there are witnesses signed on it, it is confirmed through their signatures.

אֶחָד גִּטֵּי נָשִׁים וְאֶחָד שִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים, שָׁווּ לַמּוֹלִיךְ וְלַמֵּבִיא. וְזוֹ אַחַד מִן הַדְּרָכִים שֶׁשָּׁווּ גִטֵּי נָשִׁים לְשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים:

Both the gittin of women and the manumissions of bondsmen are alike in respect to taking and bringing, [vis-à-vis the saying of: "Before me, it was written, and before me it was signed"]. And this is one of the ways in which the gittin of women are similar to the manumissions of bondsmen.

כָּל גֵּט שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו עֵד כּוּתִי, פָּסוּל, חוּץ מִגִּטֵּי נָשִׁים וְשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים. מַעֲשֶׂה, שֶׁהֵבִיאוּ לִפְנֵי רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לִכְפַר עוֹתְנַאי גֵּט אִשָּׁה וְהָיוּ עֵדָיו עֵדֵי כוּתִים, וְהִכְשִׁיר. כָּל הַשְּׁטָרוֹת הָעוֹלִים בְּעַרְכָּאוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחוֹתְמֵיהֶם גּוֹיִם, כְּשֵׁרִים, חוּץ מִגִּטֵּי נָשִׁים וְשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אַף אֵלּוּ כְשֵׁרִין, לֹא הֻזְכְּרוּ אֶלָּא בִזְמַן שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ בְהֶדְיוֹט:

Every bill on which a Cuthite witness is signed is invalid, except the gittin of women and the manumissions of bondsmen, [which are valid if one of the witnesses is a Cuthite. But if both are Cuthites, the first tanna invalidates it, even with the gittin of women.] The get of a woman on which Cuthite witnesses were signed was once brought before R. Gamliel in Kfar Otnai, and he validated it. [R. Gamliel validated it even where both were Cuthites. And today, after the decree that Cuthites be considered like gentiles in all respects, the gittin of women are not different from other writs; even one Cuthite witness renders a writ invalid.] All writs which are adjudicated in gentile courts, [the witnesses having testified before the judge in their place of judgment], even if they are signed by gentiles, are valid. [This, where we know the judge and the witnesses not to take bribes], except for the gittin of women and the manumissions of bondsmen. [(The validity obtains) only in respect to writs of loans and sales, where the witnesses beheld the transfer of money. But writs of indebtedness and the gittin of women, and all things which are enactments of beth-din — all such things are invalid in their courts.] R. Shimon says: These, too, are valid. They were not mentioned [in the house of study as being invalid] except where they were enacted by [gentiles who were] laymen, [not judges. The halachah is not in accordance with R. Shimon.]

הָאוֹמֵר, תֵּן גֵּט זֶה לְאִשְׁתִּי וּשְׁטָר שִׁחְרוּר זֶה לְעַבְדִּי, אִם רָצָה לַחֲזֹר בִּשְׁנֵיהֶן, יַחֲזֹר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, בְּגִטֵּי נָשִׁים, אֲבָל לֹא בְשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים, לְפִי שֶׁזָּכִין לָאָדָם שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו וְאֵין חָבִין לוֹ אֶלָּא בְּפָנָיו. שֶׁאִם יִרְצֶה שֶׁלֹּא לָזוּן אֶת עַבְדּוֹ, רַשַּׁאי. וְשֶׁלֹּא לָזוּן אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ, אֵינוֹ רַשָּׁאי. אָמַר לָהֶם, וַהֲרֵי הוּא פוֹסֵל אֶת עַבְדּוֹ מִן הַתְּרוּמָה כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהוּא פוֹסֵל אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא קִנְיָנוֹ. הָאוֹמֵר, תְּנוּ גֵט זֶה לְאִשְׁתִּי, וּשְׁטָר שִׁחְרוּר זֶה לְעַבְדִּי, וּמֵת, לֹא יִתְּנוּ לְאַחַר מִיתָה. תְּנוּ מָנֶה לְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי, וּמֵת, יִתְּנוּ לְאַחַר מִיתָה:

If one says: Give this get to my wife, or this writ of manumission to my bondsman, if he wishes to retract with both, [before they reach the hand of the woman or of the bondsman], he may do so [and the messenger may not acquire the writ on their behalf; for it is a liability to them in that it deprives them of their sustenance.] These are the words of R. Meir. The sages say: [He may retract] with the gittin of women, but not with the manumissions of bondsmen. [And the halachah is in accordance with the sages.] For a man is accorded benefit even not in his presence, but liability is imposed upon him only in his presence. For if he wished not to feed his bondsman, he could do so, [so that when he frees him he does not cause him to lose his sustenance]; but he is not permitted not to feed his wife, [so that when he divorces her, he causes her to lose her sustenance.] He (R. Meir) said to them: But he disqualifies his bondsman from terumah, just as he disqualifies his wife! They answered: That is because he is his acquisition. [That is, the reason the bondsman of a Cohein eats terumah is that he is his acquisition — just as the beast of a Cohein eats terumah vetch, and there is no ascendancy in this. Therefore, if he frees him, even though he disqualifies him from eating terumah, this is no liability to the bondsman.] If one says: Give this get to my wife, or (give) this writ of manumission to my bondsman, and he died, they are not to be given after his death. [For it is not a get until it reaches her hand, and when it reaches her hand, he is dead; and there is no get after death. And with the writ of manumission, too, when it reaches his (the bondsman's) hand, he (the owner) is dead and has no authority over him.] (If one says:) Give a manah to this and this man, and he dies, it is to be given after his death [even if he did not say: "this manah," for the words of a shechiv mera (one at the point of death) are as "written and given"].