Комментарий к Гиттин 6:12

האומר: התקבל – אם רצה לחזור יחזור – for the Jewish bill of divorce is debt that he has towards her (acting in behalf of a person to the latter’s disadvantage), and we do not do something that will do harm to a person without the other’s knowledge (see Mishnah Eruvin, Chapter 7, Mishnah 11 and Mishnah Gittin, Chapter 1, Mishnah 6).

Introduction After a two chapter digression, the Mishnah returns to the main topic of the tractate divorce law. Most of this chapter deals with men and women appointing agents to deliver or to receive the get. As we shall see, a husband can tell the agent to bring the get and a woman may make an agent to receive or bring a get. The difference between the two has to do with when the woman is considered to be divorced and up until what point the husband may change his mind.

לא יחזור – for since she made him equivalent as her agent, behold he is like her hand and and is divorced immediately when he receives from this one [i.e., the husband].

If a man says, “Receive this get on behalf of my wife”, or, “Carry this get to my wife”, if he desires to retract [before the wife receives it] he may do so. A man can appoint an agent to bring a get to his wife, but he cannot appoint an agent to accept the get on behalf of his wife. A agent who is empowered to legally accept the get can only be appointed by the wife, since she is the one who has to receive the get in order for it to be valid. Therefore, it does not matter what language the husband uses, when he sends an agent with a get she is not divorced until she receives the get. Even if he says to the agent, “Receive this get…”, the get is not valid until the agent hands it over to the woman. Therefore, the husband may change his mind and annul the get until she actually receives it.

אף האומרת טול לי גיטי – this is the language of reception. And the Halakha is according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel.

If a woman says, “Receive the get on my behalf”, [and he does so], if [the husband] wants to retract he may not do so. In contrast, a woman has the right to appoint an agent to receive a get on her behalf. Once this agent has received the get, the woman is fully divorced. If after giving it to an agent empowered to receive the get the husband wishes to retract, he may not do so.

Therefore if the husband said to him, “I do not want you to receive it on her behalf, but rather carry it and give it to her”, then if he wishes to retract he may do so. This section teaches that the husband may change the appointment of the agent from one of “receiving” to one of “carrying.” The husband authorizes the agent to bring the get to the woman but not to receive it on her behalf. The woman is divorced only when she receives the get and therefore the husband may retract until that moment.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: even if the wife says “Take for me”, [and he does so] the husband may not retract. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel deals with a woman who says, “Take for me…” instead of “Carry to me…” or “Receive for me…” He rules that “Take for me” is equivalent to “Receive for me” and therefore the woman is divorced as soon as the agent receives the get; after that point the husband may no longer retract.

צריכה – to bring before us two sets of witnesses

Introduction The first part of this mishnah continues to discuss a woman’s appointing an agent to receive her get. The second part deals with the divorce of a betrothed girl who has not yet reached majority age.

שנים שיאמרו בפנינו אמרה – to him [i.e., the husband] to receive it [i.e., the Jewish bill of divorce].

A woman who said [to an agent], “Receive my get for me” requires two sets of witnesses, two to say, “In our presence she told him”, and two to say, “In our presence he received [the get] and tore it”. Even if the first set are the same [witnesses] as the latter set or if there was one in the first set and one in the second, and one joined with them [for both testimonies]. If a woman appointed an agent to receive her get she will need two sets of witnesses to execute her divorce, one to witness her appointment of the agent and the second to witness the agent receive the get. However, there can be full or partial overlap between the two sets.

ושנים שיאמרו בפנינו קבל וקרע – And this was taught during the time of religious persecution, where they decreed against [the observance of] the commandments and they would immediately tear the Jewish bill of divorce, so that they should it should not be seen.

If a young girl is betrothed, both she and her father may receive her get. Rabbi Judah said that two [different] hands cannot take possession as one. Rather her father alone may receive her get. A young girl (defined as being between the ages of 12 and 12 1/2) who is betrothed is in an “in-between” situation. On the one hand, she is neither fully married nor mature and hence her father retains some control over her. However, she is no longer a minor and therefore has some of her own legal rights. Were she being divorced after being married or having reached maturity, she alone would have the legal right to receive her get. However, in this “in-between” situation, the first opinion in the mishnah rules that either she or her father can receive her get. Rabbi Judah disagrees. It would be legally too ambiguous for both to be able to receive the get. Therefore, only her father may receive the get.

One who is not able to keep her get is not capable of being divorced. This section refers to a minor who is not yet capable of receiving her get. At such a young age she cannot be divorced, even if her father were to receive the get. Since she is too young to even know the meaning of being divorced, the husband must wait until she is of majority age to divorce her. [I should note that the husband is not a particularly salutary fellow (to say the least). We should remember that we are dealing with legal rights not with what seems to be ethically acceptable.]

או אחד מן הראשונים ואחד מן האחרונים ואחד – a third [individual] who was made a witness with this group and the other group, who joins with them.

היא ואביה – either she [i.e., the betrothed maiden, between the ages of twelve and twelve-and-one-half] or her father, for she has “a hand,” because she is considered an adult, and her father also has authority to receive it.

אינה מתגרשת – and even with her father receiving it [i.e., the Jewish bill of divorce], as it is written (Deuteronomy 24:1): “…and sends her away from his house,” [which describes] someone who sends her away but she does not return, excluding [a case] where he sends her away but she returns.

במקום אחר פסול – for the husband is strict that it is not his desire that they should cast suspicion upon him there.

Introduction The first part of this mishnah deals with a minor girl’s legal ability to receive a get and to be divorced. The second section deals with instructions that a wife or husband might give to an agent who is to bring or receive the get and the implications that those instructions can have on the validity of the get.

הרי היא במקום פלומי – he [i.e., the husband] is doing nothing more than showing him the place, for there she can be found.

If a young girl says, “Receive my get for me”, it is not a get until the get reaches her hand. Therefore, if [the husband] wishes to retract, he may retract, since a minor cannot appoint an agent. But if her father said to him, “Go and receive a get for my daughter”, the husband may not retract. A minor may be divorced since divorce does not require her consent, consent which she would statutorily lack. However, she cannot appoint an agent since minors do not have such legal authority. Hence, even if she says “Receive my get for me”, the agent is not authorized to receive it on her behalf. She is not divorced until the get reaches her hand. In such a case the husband is able to retract until she receives the get. In contrast, the father has the ability to appoint an agent to act on his daughter’s behalf, as long as she is still a minor and was never fully married. This mishnah refers to a case where she was only betrothed (see yesterday’s mishnah). If the father appoints an agent to receive the get on behalf of his daughter, she is divorced from the moment the agent receives the get. If she had been fully married, the father may no longer receive her get or appoint an agent to do so.

רבי אליעזר מכשיר – for he holds that he [i.e., the husband] is divorcing [her] of his own free will, there is an intimation that you care for a thing to be exactly as you want it, for she is divorced against her will, and she is merely showing him the place. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer.

If a man says, “Give this get to my wife in such-and-such a place” and he gives it to her in another place, [the get is] invalid. [If he says,] “She is in such-and-such a place”, and he gives it to her in another place, [it is] valid. In the following two sections, a husband or a wife appoints an agent and gives the agent instructions as to where to deliver/receive the get. If the husband tells the agent to give his wife the get in a certain place, she is not divorced if the agent gives the get to her in another place. In such a case we can assume that the husband wanted the get delivered specifically in that place. However, if the husband merely tells the agent where to find his wife, the husband does not necessarily care if she is really somewhere else. He was only helping the agent locate her. Therefore the get is valid no matter where the gives it to her.

If a woman says, “Receive my get in such-and-such a place” and he receives it for her in another place, [it is] invalid. Rabbi Elazar says it valid. [If she says,] “Bring me my get from such-and-such a place” and he brings it from somewhere else, [it is] valid. The same is true if the woman tells her agent to receive the get in a certain place. The get is not valid unless he receives it in that place. However, in this case Rabbi Elazar disagrees. He holds that since the woman can be divorced without her consent, even when she said, “Receive it for me in such-and-such a place” she only meant to tell the agent where her husband was. If she appoints an agent to bring her a get and not to receive it on her behalf, she doesn’t care where he gets the document. Even if she tells him to bring it from a certain place and he brings it from somewhere else, she is divorced.

הבא לי גטי אוכלת בתרומה – if she is the wife of a Kohen, until the Jewish bill of divorce reaches her hand.

Introduction This mishnah deals with a woman married to a priest. As long as she is married she may eat terumah. However, once she is divorced she loses this right. The mishnah deals with such a woman who appoints an agent to receive or bring her get.

לאותו מקום – since she said to him (i.e., the agent): you will not be my agent other than “there.”

[If a woman says to an agent], “Bring me my get”, she may eat terumah until the get reaches her hand. Since she appointed the agent to bring her the get, she is not divorced until she actually receives the get. She may continue to eat terumah until this point.

ורבי אליעזר אוסר מיד – from when he separated from her. And Rabbi Eliezer, according to his reasoning, who validates [the Jewish bill of divorce] when it is received in a different placer, for he she is merely showing him the place, and from the time that he [i.e., the agent] receives it, she will be divorced from him. Therefore, from the moment that he separated from her presence, she is prohibited [from consuming the heave-offering/sanctified food of the Kohen] lest the husband find the agent outside the city and he receives it [i.e., the Jewish bill of divorce] from him. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer.

[If she says,] “Receive for me my get”, she is forbidden to eat terumah immediately. [If she says,] “Receive for me my get in such-and-such a place”, she can eat terumah until the get reaches that place. However, if she appoints an agent to receive the get, she must cease eating terumah immediately. Since the agent might receive the get on her behalf at any moment, we must be concerned lest she is divorced immediately and hence she immediately loses her right to eat terumah.

Rabbi Elazar says that she is forbidden immediately. If she tells the agent to receive the get in a certain place, then according to the first opinion she is not divorced unless the agent receives the get at that place. Hence she may estimate how long it will take the agent to arrive at that place and she may continue to eat terumah until that point. However, Rabbi Elazar disagrees. Since, as we learned yesterday, he holds that the agent can validly receive the get anywhere, she can be divorced immediately. Hence he holds that also in this situation she must cease eating terumah immediately.

כתבו אגרת וכו' – For the Jewish bill of divorce is called a “letter” since [the words] “a letter of divorce” in it [i.e., the Jewish bill of divorce].

Introduction This mishnah deals with the specific words that a husband must state to a scribe or other agents in order for them to be empowered to write a get and give it to his wife. As a general rule, the husband must use language that clearly implies that he intends to divorce his wife, and not just write a get which he may or may not want to use. He must instruct his agent to write the get and to give it to her. However, there are extenuating circumstances where instructions to write the get are sufficient to empower the agent to also deliver the get.

פטרוה לא אמר כלום – perhaps the language of “exempt” and “liable” is being said, to lighten from her the obligations that she is liable for.

If a man says, “Write a get and give it to my wife”, [or] “Divorce her”, [or] “Write a letter and give it to her”, then they should write it and give it to her. The language which the husband employs in this section is sufficiently clear and precise that the agents are empowered to write out a get on the husband’s behalf and to give it to the woman.

פרנסוה – the language of performing her needs, such as taking out for [the purposes] of [providing] sustenance etc. Therefore, we do not know if these are the needs of the Jewish bill of divorce, that she will not be dependent upon/tied to leviratical marriage (i.e., she cannot marry otherwise until released from him), or [the document is speaking of] the needs of clothing and covering.

If he said, “Release her”, [or] “Provide for her”, [or] “Do for her as the law dictates”, [or] “Do the proper thing for her”, he has not said anything. The language in this section is too ambiguous and although it may imply that he wishes to divorce his wife, it is not certain that that is his intention. Hence, an agent who hears the husband make one of these statements is not empowered to write a get and deliver it to his wife.

כנימוס – according to law, and we do not know if it is the Jewish law of divorce or the law of [provision of] food and clothing, and similarly as appropriate.

Originally they said that if a man was being led out to execution and said, “Write a get for my wife”, they may write a get and give [it to her]. Later they said, even if he were leaving for a sea voyage or for a caravan journey. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: even if he were dangerously ill. Usually a husband must state that he wishes the get to be written and give to the woman. However, in extenuating circumstances where the husband seems to have been facing immanent death, it is highly unlikely that when he instructed someone to write a get, he wanted the get to be written but not given to his wife. After all, why else would he want a get at this point? Therefore, one who hears the husband says “Write a get for my wife” may write it and also give it to her. At first the category of people facing immanent death included only a person being led out to execution. Later, they expanded the category to include one leaving for a sea voyage or a caravan journey. These men would have wanted to write out a get that would go into effect should they not return, not an unlikely scenario. This would prevent their wives from being left as “agunot” a woman who doesn’t know if her husband is alive or dead and therefore cannot remarry. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri added that an agent who hears such a statement from a dangerously ill person may also write and give the get. This man may want to divorce his wife in order to exempt her from levirate marriage (if he was to do childless and with a brother she would have to undergo yibbum or halitzah). Again, it is very unlikely that a dying man would want to write a get but not give it to his wife, and therefore we are not concerned with such a possibility.

היוצא בקולר – to be killed as per the law of the kingdom.

ואמר כתבו – even though he did not say, “give it” [to my wife].

יכתבו ויתנו – for on account of his fear, he was troubled and did not expound [on his intentions].

המפרש – on the sea

והיוצא בשיירא – to the deserts

המסוכן – the infirm, and Halakha is according to Rabbi Shimon Shezuri

ואמר: כל השומע את קולו – and he mentioned his name and the name of his city

Introduction This mishnah continues to discuss cases in which a man instructed someone to write a get for his wife, but did not specify that he was also to give it to her.

רצה לשחק בה – for since he did not say, “give it”

If a man had been thrown into a pit and cried out, “Whoever hears his voice should write a get for his wife”, those who hear should write a get and give it to her. The man in this case clearly fears that he will die in the pit leaving his wife subject to levirate marriage. As in the cases in yesterday’s mishnah, there is again no reason that he would want to write a get but not have it given to his wife. Therefore, someone who hears him scream out his name and his wife’s name may write out the get and give it to his wife. Note that the person screaming is referring to himself in the third person. This way people hear him state his name.

מעשה בבריא – The Gemara explains that the Mishnah is deficient and this is how it should be explained: And if his end result is evidence of his [thinking at the] beginning, then it is surely a Jewish bill of divorce. And there is a story also about a healthy individual. And the Halakha is according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel.

If a healthy man says, “Write a get for my wife”, his intention is merely to play with her. However, one who hears a healthy man say to write a get but not say to give the get is not allowed to write out the get. The fear is that the husband wants to use the get only to “play with his wife”, which I take to mean mentally cause her pain. He wants to use the get as a threat (alternatively if she wants to be divorced, perhaps it is a tease). Therefore, not only should those who hear these instructions not give her the get, they shouldn’t even write one out. Note that what the mishnah probably wishes to avoid is gittin that are written out but not intended to be given.

It once happened that a man in good health said, “Write a get for my wife”, and then went up on to a roof and fell and died, and Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said that the Sages said: if he had thrown himself down this is a get, but if the wind had blown him over it was not a get. In this case a seemingly healthy person told someone to write out a get. Although the person should not have written the get and given it to his wife, he did so anyway. If afterwards, the husband intentionally commits suicide, this proves that he was sick at the time he instructed someone to write the get. Since he was about to die, he definitely intended to divorce his wife and not “to play with her.” However, if the wind pushed him off the roof it is not suicide, he was not sick and therefore the get is invalid. In such a case this woman is a widow and not a divorcee, and may be subject to levirate marriage.

אמר לשנים תנו גט לאשתי – even though he did not say, “write and give,” they should write [it] on their own, and not tell another scribe that he should write it, nor for witnesses to attest it with their signatures, for the Jewish court did consider that they should command others, but rather [only] on the witnesses, “these are the agents,” “these are the witnesses,.” But if he [i.e., the husband] said to three [individuals]: write and give a Jewish bill of divorce to my wife,” even though they are worthy to serve as a Jewish court, since in public, he said to them, “write,” he did not compare them to a Jewish court, but rather only as witnesses.

Introduction The final mishnah of chapter six teaches that if the husband made his agents into a court (consisting of three), they may appoint a scribe to write the get. However, if he did not constitute a court to take care of the get, then his agents must write the get themselves. Assumedly this would have been difficult, if not nearly impossible since writing divorce documents is complicated and is usually the work of a professional. The final section teaches that sometimes all those who hear the instructions to write a get must sign the get, and sometimes only some must sign the get. It depends on the precise words of the husband.

אמר לג' תנו – but did not say, “write”

If a man said to two people, “Give a get to my wife”, or to three people, “Write a get and give it to my wife”, they must write it and give it. In the first case, the husband’s agents themselves must write the get and give it to his wife, since two people cannot constitute a court. [Note that since he said “Give” and not just “Write” they are at least empowered to write and give the get themselves.] If he instructed three people to write a get and give it to his wife, they must write the get themselves. Even though three people are sufficient to constitute a court, since he specified that they should write the get, they are not empowered to tell someone else to do so.

הרי אלו יאמרו – to other witnesses to write, affix their signatures nad give it, because they were made into a Jewish court.

If he said to three persons, “Give a get to my wife”, they may tell others to write the get because he has made them into a court, the words of Rabbi Meir. And this is the halakhah which Rabbi Hanina a man of Ono brought from prison: “I have received a tradition that if a man says to three persons, ‘Give a get to my wife’, they may tell others to write it, because he has made them into a court. Rabbi Yose said: We said to the messenger, we also have a tradition that even were he to say to the great court in Jerusalem, ‘Give a get to my wife’, they must learn [to write] and write the get and give it. If he told three people to give his wife a get but did not tell them to write the get, he has made them into a court and empowered them to tell a scribe to write the get. This is Rabbi Meir’s opinion. This halakhah of Rabbi Meir is supported by a tradition which Rabbi Hanina a man of Ono (a place) brought from prison. The commentators explain that he received the tradition from Rabbi Akiva who had been imprisoned during the Bar Kokhba revolt. Rabbi Yose disagrees with the tradition brought from the prison and with Rabbi Meir. He says that he too has a tradition that even if one instructs the greatest court that exists, the court that in Jerusalem, to give a get to his wife, the court must write the get themselves. Even if they must learn to write, they may not appoint others in their place. They are empowered to appoint a scribe only if he specifically tells them that they may do so.

בבית האסורים – in the name of Rabbi Akiba who was imprisoned.

If a man says to ten persons, “Write a get”, one writes, and two sign as witnesses. [If he said,] “All of you write”, one writes and all sign. Therefore, if one of them dies, the get is invalid. If a husband tells a group of ten people to write a get (and give it to his wife), it is sufficient for one of them to write the get and two of them to sign. They need not all sign the get. However, if he says to them “All of you write”, they must all participate in the writing of the get, one writing and nine signing. Should one of them die before he signs the get, the group will not be able to execute the get since they will not be able to fulfill the husband’s command.

נומינו לשליח – We said to Rabbi Hanina that we should appoint an agent with regard to this Halakha and to mention it in the Bet Midrash/academy.

ילמדו – if they do not know how to write [a Jewish bill of divorce], they should learn to write until they can write them on their own.