תלמוד על גיטין 2:16

Rebbi Yose said, I questioned before Samuel: But with bills of divorce, thought is not written and his action cannot prove his intention! As we have stated¹³Mishnah Giṭṭin 2:5.: “Everybody is permitted to write a bill of divorce, even an insane person, a deaf-mute, and a minor.” Rebbi Huna said, if a sane person directs him. Rebbi Joḥanan asked, is that (Deut. 24:1,3): “he writes for her”, for her personally¹⁴This is an echo of the very short discussion in Giṭṭin 2:5. Rebbi Joḥanan points out that the divorce document must be written specifically for the woman in question. If two men with identical names are married to two women who have the same name, and both want to divorce them on the same day, the two divorce documents will have identical wording. Nevertheless, if the husbands switch the documents before they are handed to the respective wives, both divorces will be invalid. In both Talmudim, Samuel narrows down the meaning of the Mishnah in that he allows the incompetent only to write the formulaic portion under the direction of a competent person; but the data which make the document valid, date and names of the two persons involved, must be written by a competent person as agent of the husband. The argument here does not consider this restriction, except that R. Yose (Rav Assi of the first generation Amoraïm in Babylonia) is of the opinion that, since a document containing only date and names cannot be signed by witnesses and is not a divorce document, the writing of the incompetent is necessary for the validity of the document and one has to wonder why this is accepted.? Rebbi Yose came back and said, there one person writes¹⁵Writing a valid divorce document and using it for the divorce are two distinct actions; one may be valid without the other. But taking heave is valid only if the taking is intended for heave; the action itself needs thinking; this parallels the action of divorce, not the writing of part of the document. and another person divorces. But here, the same person thinks and takes heave. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, there, if he¹⁶A competent person. Even if he writes all by himself there are two actions. This argument is valid only for R. Eleazar (ben Shamua, the Tanna) who holds that a divorce is validated by handing over the document before two witnesses. But according to R. Meїr who holds that a document is invalid if it has not been signed by two trustworthy witnesses, the writing of the document is not important, only the signing is, and this must be done by two competent persons unrelated to the husband. would write himself and divorce, would that not be a divorce? But here, he thinks and takes heave.

Rebbi Eleazar said, this follows the Elders of Galilea, for the Elders of Galilea say, it is forbidden to hand over food for two meals to a person suspect in matters of Sabbatical¹³⁹This refers to the last part of the Mishnah, where one has to be careful in a Sabbatical year not to buy the edible etrog from a person trading in Sabbatical produce. The Elders of Galilee do not permit to deal with such a person except for the absolute necessities of sustenance.. Rebbi Mattaniah said, explain it as opinion of everybody, in case that etrogim are sold at an elevated price¹⁴⁰In this case there are great incentives to trade in etrogim in the Sabbatical year. The only way not to “put a stone before a blind man”, in this case to prevent the non-observant from trading in etrogim, is to eliminate all considerations of money from the transfer of possession of the etrog.. ¹⁴¹Gittin2:3, Note 68. As the following: The cedrats¹⁴²Persian turung, Farsi תרנגִ toranj, used for all citrus fruits. were scarce there when Rav Naḥman bar Jacob gave an etrog as gift to his son and told him, if you have acquired it and fulfilled its obligation, return it to me¹⁴³This proves that the requirement that the etrog must be the personal property of the user may be satisfied even by a gift given on condition that it be returned; therefore certainly a permanent gift as described in the Mishnah..