Si l'on apporte un get de l'étranger et dit: "Avant moi, c'était écrit, mais ce n'était pas signé avant moi"; «Avant moi, c'était signé, mais ce n'était pas écrit avant moi»; «Avant moi, tout était écrit, et avant moi, la moitié était signée» [c'est-à-dire que l'un des témoins a signé]; "Avant moi, la moitié était écrite, et avant moi, tout était signé"—il est invalide. [Ceci, si seulement la dernière moitié (était écrite); mais (s'il disait :) «Avant moi, la première moitié (contenant les noms de l'homme et de la femme et la date) était écrite», c'est valable. Et pour la première moitié aussi, il n'est pas nécessaire qu'il soit témoin de l'écriture elle-même; mais s'il a entendu le son de la plume sur le papier au moment de l'écriture, c'est suffisant.] Si l'un dit: «Avant moi, c'était écrit», et l'autre: «Avant moi, c'était signé», il est invalide. [Ceci, lorsque le get est apporté par l'un d'eux. Car les rabbins demandaient au messager d'apporter les deux. Mais si le get a été apporté par les deux, il est valide, deux qui apportent un get n'étant pas tenus de dire: "Avant moi, c'était écrit et avant moi c'était signé." Si deux disent: «Avant nous, c'était écrit», et l'un dit: «Avant moi, c'était signé», c'est invalide. [Ceci, lorsque le get est apporté par l'un d'eux; mais si elle est apportée par les deux, elle est valide.] Et R. Yehudah la juge valide [même si elle est apportée par l'un d'eux. La halakha n'est pas conforme à R. Yehudah.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
המביא – נחתם חציו – one of the witnesses signed in my presence.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
Introduction
This mishnah returns to discussing one who delivers a get from abroad and is obligated to say, “In my presence it was written and in my presence it was signed.” Today’s mishnah deals with one who can only recite part of the formula.
I should note that the Talmud provides a very complicated explanation for this mishnah. I have tried to explain according to the words of the mishnah without the Talmudic explanation.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
נכתב חציו וכו' פסול – and specifically the final half. But [if the agent said}: “in my presence, the first-half was written, which is the [the section containing the] name of the man and [the name of] the woman and the time (i.e. date), it is valid. And [regarding] the first half as well, it is not necessary for him [the agent] to see the writing itself, but if he heard the sound of the reed/writing pen alone passing over the paper at the time of the writing [of the Jewish bill of divorce], nothing further is necessary.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
If one brings a get from abroad and declares: “It was written in my presence” but not, “It was signed in my presence”; “It was signed in my presence” but not “It was written in my presence”; “All of it was written in my presence and in my presence but only one of the witnesses signed in my presence”; “Half was written in my presence but both witnesses signed in my presence”; [in all these cases] the get is invalid. In all of these cases one person brings the get, and he cannot recite the full formula. Even if he can recite nearly the whole formula but cannot honestly say that the entire get was written and fully signed by two witnesses in his presence, the get is invalid. As we learned above in 1:3, that this get is invalid means that in order for the woman to use this get to remarry, the witnesses themselves must verify their signatures or two witnesses must testify that they recognize both signatures. The testimony of the one who brought the get is not sufficient in and of itself.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
אחד אומר בפני נכתב ואחד אומר בפני נחתם פסול – at the time when the Jewish bill of divorce leaves from under the hand of one of them (i.e., the agents), and since the Rabbis required for the agent who brings the Jewish bill of divorce to say both [things] (i.e. that the Get was written in my presence and that the Get was signed in my presence), but if the Jewish bill of divorce leaves the hands of both of them (i.e., the agents), it is considered valid. For two [individuals] who brought a Jewish bill of divorce, they do not need to say, “in our presence it was written and in our presence it was signed.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
If one says “It was written in my presence” and another says, “It was signed in my presence”, the get is invalid. In this case, one messenger testifies that the get was written in his presence but cannot say that it was signed in his presence, and the other person with him says that the get was signed in his presence but cannot say that the get was also written in his presence. Since there is no complete declaration made by any one messenger, the get is not valid. Again, this means that it remains invalid until its signatures are validated.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
שנים אומרים בפנינו נכתב ואחד אומר בפני נחתם פסול – At the time when the Jewish bill of divorce leaves under the hand of one of them, but if it leaves the hand of both of them, it is valid.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
If two say, “It was written in our presence” and another says, “It was signed in my presence”, it is invalid. Rabbi Judah declares it valid. In this case two people bring the get and both can testify that the get was written in their presence, but neither can say that it was signed in their presence. A third person says that it was signed in his presence. The first opinion states that the get is still invalid, and still needs to be upheld by validating the signatures. Rabbi Judah holds that the get is already valid since there is full testimony by two witnesses on the writing. To Rabbi Judah, the writing is the essential part of the making of the get and if two testify that the writing was done properly, the get is valid. This is not through their being deliverers of the get, but rather through their being witnesses. However, one person saying that the writing was done properly is not valid, because one person is not full testimony in Jewish law.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
ור' יהודה מכשיר – And even if the Jewish bill of divorce leaves the hand of one of them, and the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
If one says, “It was written in my presence” and two say, “It was signed in our presence”, it is valid. In this case two testify that they saw the get signed. This is essentially upholding the signatures on the get and it always makes the get valid. Again, these two function as witnesses.
