Gittin 22bגיטין כ״ב ב
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save 'Gittin 22b'
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
22bכ״ב ב

ר' אלעזר היא דאמר עדי מסירה כרתי

It is the opinion of the tanna Rabbi Elazar, who says: Witnesses of the transmission of the bill of divorce effect the divorce. Since the witnesses read the bill of divorce before it is transmitted in their presence, they may be relied upon to confirm the contents of the bill of divorce in court. Therefore, even if it was written on erased paper, there is no possibility that it would be forged, as the witnesses read what was written before it is given.

ואמר ר"א לא הכשיר ר"א אלא לאלתר אבל מכאן עד עשרה ימים לא חיישי' דילמא הוה ביה תנאה וזייפתיה

And the amora Rabbi Elazar says: The tanna Rabbi Elazar deemed such a bill of divorce valid only when it was taken to court in order to confirm the contents immediately after it was transferred to the woman. However, if the witnesses testify from now until ten days, i.e., sometime later, he did not deem it valid. Why? We are concerned that perhaps the bill of divorce had a stipulation written on it and she forged it by erasing the stipulation, as this bill of divorce was written on material that enables a person to easily alter what is written. Only if the witnesses testify immediately can the court be sure that they did not forget what is written.

ור' יוחנן אמר אפי' מכאן עד עשרה ימים דאם איתא דהוה ביה תנאי מידכר דכירי

And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Even if they testify from now until ten days it is valid, as, if it is so that it had a stipulation, then the witnesses will remember it, as they would not forget something so obvious. Therefore, if the woman erased the stipulation, the witnesses would not verify the bill of divorce.

ואמר ר"א לא הכשיר ר"א אלא בגיטין אבל בשאר שטרות לא דכתי' (ירמיהו לב, יד) ונתתם בכלי חרש למען יעמדו ימים רבים

And Rabbi Elazar the amora also says: The tanna Rabbi Elazar deemed valid a document that is written on these surfaces only with regard to bills of divorce but not for other documents, as it is written with regard to a deed of purchase: “And put them in an earthen vessel; so that they will remain many days” (Jeremiah 32:14). This indicates that a deed of purchase and other similar documents must be made from a material that will last for a long time without being changed. A document that can be forged may not be relied upon long term.

ורבי יוחנן אמר אפי' בשטרות והכתיב למען יעמדו ימים רבים התם עצה טובה קמ"ל:

And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Rabbi Elazar deemed these surfaces valid even in the case of other documents. The Gemara asks with regard to Rabbi Yoḥanan’s opinion: But isn’t it written: “So that they will remain many days”? The Gemara answers: There the verse teaches us good advice, but it is not a halakhic requirement. It advised that the document be written in such a manner that it can remain for an extended period of time, as it may be needed to prove ownership of the land.

מתני׳ הכל כשרין לכתוב את הגט אפי' חרש שוטה וקטן האשה כותבת את גיטה והאיש כותב את שוברו שאין קיום הגט אלא בחותמיו:

MISHNA: Anyone is qualified to write a bill of divorce, even a deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor. Additionally, a woman may write her own bill of divorce and give it to her husband so that he can present it to her. And a man may write his own receipt, which must be given to him by the woman to confirm that he has paid her the value of her marriage contract. This is because the ratification of a bill of divorce is only through its signatories, and it is irrelevant who wrote it.

גמ׳ והא לאו בני דיעה נינהו אמר רב הונא

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: But how can a deaf-mute, imbecile, or a minor write a bill of divorce? They are not halakhically competent, and they are not capable of writing a bill of divorce with the intent that it be for a particular woman. Rav Huna says: