Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Gitin, 22

22b

QUESTIONS: The Tana Kama of the Mishnah (21b) states that one may not write a Get on erasable paper ("Neyar Machuk," or paper from which words have already been erased), or on other items from which the writing may easily be erased without leaving evidence to any erasure. The Chachamim argue and permit such a Get. The Gemara explains that the Machlokes in the Mishnah is the familiar Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Elazar regarding which set of witnesses on a Get is the primary set, the set which makes the Get effective. The Tana Kama holds like Rebbi Meir who says that it is the Edei Chasimah, the witnesses who sign the Get, who make the Get effective, and therefore a Get written on erasable paper is Pasul. The Chachamim, who permit such a Get, hold like Rebbi Elazar who says that the main witnesses are the Edei Mesirah, those who see the Get being given over.

How, though, does this Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Elazar apply to the Halachah of the Mishnah?

RASHI explains that according to Rebbi Elazar, every Get must have Edei Mesirah, and any woman who wants to get remarried based on a Get that she received from her previous husband must bring the Edei Mesirah to prove that it is a valid Get. Since the Edei Mesirah read the Get at the time it was given, the woman will not be able to change what was written in it without them noticing the change. In contrast, according to Rebbi Meir, when a woman want to remarry, she validates her Get through authenticating the signatures of the Edei Chasimah (either by comparing the signatures with the same signatures on other documents, or by bringing witnesses who recognize the signatures, without necessarily bringing the signatories themselves). Hence, according to Rebbi Meir, a Get written on erasable paper is not acceptable because the woman might erase a conditional clause in the Get, leaving the signatures of the Edei Chasimah.

Rashi's explanation is difficult to understand for a number of reasons.

(a) How can Rashi write that, according to Rebbi Elazar, a woman may not remarry unless she brings the Edei Mesirah? The Mishnah (86a), cited by the Gemara earlier (3b), writes that it is clear that according to Rebbi Elazar witnesses sign the Get "because of Tikun ha'Olam." The Gemara (36a) explains that this means that the Rabanan instituted that Edei Chasimah sign a Get so that in case the Edei Mesirah die or move abroad and are unavailable, the woman will be able to get married based on the Edei Chasimah. Hence, we see that it *is* permitted for a woman to be Mekayem the Get through the Edei Chasimah, even according to Rebbi Elazar!

TOSFOS (22a, DH Man) explains that Rashi must mean that when a Get is written on a paper that is erasable and is able to be forged, Rebbi Elazar will require Edei Mesirah (because she must bring people who actually saw the Get to prove that she did not erase anything in it), but not in the case of a normal Get.

However, this does not seem to be what Rashi is saying. First, why does Rashi say that, "according to the opinion who holds Edei Mesirah," when the woman wants to remarry [with such a Get] she must bring the Edei Mesirah? The same should be true according to the opinion that says Edei Chasimah Karti -- she should not be able to get married without bringing the Edei Mesirah (if there were any) or the actual Edei Chasimah who saw the Get! Second, why should Rebbi Meir prohibit such a Get more than Rebbi Elazar? Just like Rebbi Elazar permits it by requiring personal testimony about the contents of the Get, Rebbi Meir can permit it by requiring personal testimony about the contents of the Get, by bringing the Edei Chasimah themselves! (TIFERES YAKOV, TORAS GITIN EH 124:2, DIBROS MOSHE)

It therefore seems that Rashi is saying that Rebbi Elazar *always* requires the woman to bring Edei Mesirah in order to remarry. It is assumed that a Get written on erasable paper will be treated like any other Get, and thus Rebbi Elazar is not concerned that the woman will erase something (since she must bring Edei Mesirah). Rebbi Meir, though, invalidates the Get, lest the Beis Din accept the normal manner of Kiyum for the Get -- *without* the testimony of the Edei Chasimah themselves. However, as we mentioned, this seems to contradict the Mishnah (86a) which says that Rebbi Elazar permits the Kiyum of the Get through the Edei Chasimah!

(b) Rashi explains that the reason why such a Get is Pasul according to Rebbi Meir is because the woman might erase a conditional clause (a Tenai) that was written in the Get. Rashi says the same thing elsewhere as well (such as on the Mishnah, 21b, DH Neyar Machuk, and on 20b, DH l'Hizdayef, regarding a Get written on the hand of an Eved, which is also an erasable item).

Why is Rashi concerned only that the woman will erase a clause in the Get? Perhaps a woman or her husband will lose a Get, and another woman will find it and erase all of the details in it and write in her own details instead (see the Gemara on 24b where the Gemara presents such a concern when two couples in the same city have the same names)!

In fact, if the Rabanan would permit a Get written on erasable paper, how would we know that the witnesses who signed it actually signed a Get in the first place? Perhaps they signed on another type of Shtar, such as a Shtar Milveh (loan) or a Shtar Mechirah (sale), which someone gave to this woman, and she erased the entire Shtar and wrote a Get in its place! Rashi should say that Rebbi Meir prohibits a Get written on erasable paper because the woman might erase an entire Shtar, and not just because she might erase a single clause in the Get! (In fact, when the BARTENURA explains the Mishnah, he says that she might erase the Get "and write what she wants," i.e. she may rewrite the Get with the names she wishes.)

(c) The Mishnah (2a) teaches that when a woman presents a Get in Eretz Yisrael, we do not doubt the authenticity of the Get unless the husband challenges it. (See Tosfos 2a, beginning of DH v'Im Yesh, who writes that this was a Takanah d'Rabanan enacted because of Agunos.) It is clear that this Halachah applies even according to Rebbi Elazar (since Rebbi Elazar also requires b'Fanai Nichtav everywhere but in Eretz Yisrael).

How, then, can Rebbi Elazar permit a Get written on erasable paper? Perhaps the woman will erase a clause in the Get and then remarry based on the Get *without* bringing Edei Mesirah, because her husband did not contest the Get (since he did not know that she altered it)!

ANSWERS:

(a) The DIBROS MOSHE explains that Rashi maintains that, according to Rebbi Elazar, even after the Takanah was enacted that witnesses sign the Get, we still require, l'Chatchilah, the Edei Mesirah themselves to be Mekayem the Get. It is only after the Edei Mesirah have died (or are unavailable for other reasons) that we accept the Edei Chasimah to be Mekayem the Get.

Still, though, how can Rebbi Elazar accept a Get written on erasable paper? Perhaps the woman will wait for the Edei Mesirah to die, and then erase a clause in the Get, and the Beis Din will be Mekayem the Get through recognition of the signatures without bringing in the Edei Chasimah themselves to testify!

Perhaps under such circumstances, when the Edei Mesirah die, Beis Din will not accept a Get written on erasable paper (without witnesses who saw the original Get). This might be what Tosfos means when he says that Rashi only requires the testimony of the Edei Mesirah when the Get is written on erasable paper; in the case of a normal Get, the Edei Chasimah are used to validate the Get if the Edei Mesirah have died. According to Rebbi Meir, we do not rely on forcing the woman to bring the Edei Mesirah or Edei Chasimah themselves to validate a Get written on erasable paper, since Rebbi Meir *never* requires bringing the witnesses themselves in the case of a normal Get, and we might confuse this Get with a normal Get. According to Rebbi Elazar, though, a normal Get requires bringing the Edei Mesirah themselves, just like a Get written on erasable paper. The only difference between the two is when the Edei Mesirah have died; since that is a relatively unusual case, Rebbi Elazar holds that there is no Gezeirah that we might confuse a Get written on erasable paper where the Edei Mesirah died with a normal Get. (M. Kornfeld)

(b) Perhaps we are not afraid that a Get written on erasable paper was once a Shtar Milveh or a Shtar Mechirah Shtar that was erased and rewritten, because a normal Shtar may not be written on erasable paper. As such, there could be no Shtar written on erasable paper with the signatures of witnesses other than a Get. (Even though TOSFOS on 22a, DH Lo, and other Rishonim cite the Gemara in Bava Basra (164a) which permits collecting money with a Shtar written on erasable paper since there is a noticeable difference between paper that has been erased once and paper that has been erased twice, nevertheless Rashi here clearly argues. Rashi writes that if the woman erases a clause it will not be recognizable that anything was erased. Perhaps Rashi learns that the "Neyar Machuk" of the Mishnah is a different type of erasable paper, on which it cannot be discerned whether or not the contents have been erased an extra time (for example, the writing on the paper was erased already multiple times, such that one cannot tell a difference between the third and fourth times). On such a paper, one may not write any Shtar, other than a Get. As the Acharonim point out, Rashi might have explained the way he did in order to avoid the questions REBBI AKIVA EIGER (in the Mishnayos) raises on Tosfos' explanation)

The reason we are not afraid that the Get was written for somebody else, lost, and then found by this woman who erased it and wrote what she wanted, might be because it was written on paper that was clearly her husband's (such as his stationery), similar to the erasable Get written on the hand of the husband's Eved (on 20b), which clearly came from the husband. (If he has more than one wife, she would have to bring testimony that this document was indeed given to her and not to her co-wife.)

Therefore, the only concern is that although the Get was given to this wife, perhaps she erased a clause that was written in it.

(c) Even though the woman does not have to bring Edei Mesirah to validate the Get before the husband challenges its authenticity, we are not concerned that she will erase a clause in the Get and get married before the husband challenges the Get, because she will be afraid that the husband will later challenge the Get and successfully invalidate it, making her Asur to both men and making her children from the second marriage into Mamzerim. (M. Kornfeld)