פירוש על גיטין 2:1

המביא – נחתם חציו – one of the witnesses signed in my presence.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.