Gittin - Daf 24
- When a woman bringing her own get must say בפני נתכב ובפני נחתם
The Mishnah on Daf 23b had taught that a woman may bring her own get but must say בפני נכתב ובפ"נ. The Gemara asks that she was divorced when she received the get in מדינת הים, and בפני נכתב should not be required. After several attempts are rejected, it answers that the husband told her: הוי שליח להולכה עד דמטית התם – Be an agent for delivery until you arrive there at the Beis Din in Eretz Yisroel, וכי מטית התם שוי שליח לקבלה – and when you arrive there, appoint an agent for receiving the get from you (since that is the time of divorce, בפני נכתב is required). The Gemara wonders how to reconcile this interpretation with the opinion that אין האשה עושה שליח לקבל גיטה מיד שליח בעלה – a woman may not appoint a shaliach to receive the get from her husband’s shaliach. It first answers that it is the disgrace to the husband, by refusing to personally receive the get, which causes concern that he might retract the shelichus. In this case, where he instructed her to do so, there is no concern. However, since some explain the above opinion based on a gezeirah, the Gemara instead explains that the husband told her to appoint a שליח להולכה when she arrives and receive her get directly from him. The Gemara adds another similar approach.
- Different cases of a get not considered לשמה
The third Perek begins: כל גט שנכתב שלא לשום אשה פסול – Any get written not for the sake of the woman being divorced is invalid. To illustrate this principle, the Mishnah teaches four cases of increasing novelty. (1) The first is one who overheard scribes dictating a get to be written with particular names, which matched his and his wife’s names. The Gemara clarifies that these are scribes training to write gittin, who did not write for a divorce purpose. (2) The second case is one who wrote a get for his wife, which was written for divorce, and a second man asks to use it for his wife (with the same names). (3) The third case is a man who wrote a get for one of his wives (the גדולה), which was written for this man’s divorce, and he chose to use it for another wife of the same name (the קטנה). (4) The final case is one who told a scribe, "כתוב לאיזו שארצה אגרש" – Write [a get] for whichever I will later decide, and I will divorce with it. Although he intended the get to be לשמה for the wife of his later choice, we cannot rely on ברירה – retroactive determination, as the Gemara will explain.
- The use of a document where two residents share a name
The Gemara infers from the third case of the Mishnah that one may use a get written for one wife, although his other wife has an identical name. The woman for whom the get was originally written (i.e., the גדולה) who produces the get in court will be able to marry, without concern that it was given to the other wife. Rava says: זאת אומרת שני יוסף בן שמעון הדרין בעיר אחת – This proves that two people named Yosef ben Shimon (for example) living in the same city, מוציאין שטר חוב על אחרים - may produce a loan document against others, and the borrower cannot claim that the true lender is the other person with that name (since it is in this man’s possession). Abaye challenged Rava that a similar inference can be made from the second case of the Mishnah, which implies that the first husband who wrote the get can use it for his wife, although it may have been written by the other husband with the same name. This would indicate that one who produces a document to collect from Yosef ben Shimon (analogous to the husband) can do so, yet a Mishnah teaches this is not true (because each can claim that the other is the debtor)! Rather, the entire Mishnah is based on the עדי מסירה – witnesses to delivery, in accordance with Rebbe Elazar’s opinion, and therefore there is no concern that the get was really given to the other woman (i.e., the קטנה) with the same name.
