003 - הִלְכוֹת גֵּרוּשִׁין פֵּרֶק ג

Laws of Divorce, Chapter 3

1. Any get that is written not for the sake of the man who is divorcing and the woman who is being divorced is not a valid get. How so? If a scribe wrote a get for the purpose of teaching or learning, and a husband came and found that the name written in this get matched his own, and the name of the woman matched his wife's, and the name of the city matched his city, and he took it and used it to divorce her—it is not a valid get.

2. Even more than this: If a man wrote a get to divorce his wife, and a fellow townsman found it and said to him, "My name is the same as yours, and my wife's name is the same as your wife's," and he took it from him and used it to divorce his wife—it is not a valid get, even though it was written for the sake of divorce.

3. Even more than this: If someone has two wives with the same name, and he wrote a get to divorce the older one, but then changed his mind and used it to divorce the younger one—it is not a valid get. Even though it was written for the sake of the man divorcing, it was not written for the sake of the woman who was actually divorced with it.

4. Even more than this: If he said to the scribe, "Write it, and whichever one I choose I will divorce with it," and the scribe wrote it with this intention, and he used it to divorce one of them—this is a case of doubtful divorce. And any get that was written not for her sake—even if he retraced the letters with his pen for her sake—it is not a valid get.

5. If someone wrote a get to divorce his wife, but then changed his mind and did not divorce her, and then secluded himself with her after it was written for her—he should not use that same get to divorce her at a later time when he wishes to divorce her. But if he did divorce her with that old get, she is divorced, and she may remarry with it from the outset, since it was written for her sake, and now he is giving it to her in the presence of witnesses as required by Halachah. Why should he not use it from the outset? It is a decree, lest people say her get preceded the birth of her child.

6. If he said to the scribe, "Write a get for so-and-so, and keep it with me, so that when I marry her I will divorce her with it," and it was written, and he married her and then divorced her with it—it is not a valid get, because she was not eligible to be divorced from him when this get was written, and it turns out it was written not for the sake of divorce. But if he said, "Write it for my betrothed, so that when I marry her I will divorce her with it," and he married her and divorced her with it—it is valid. If he wrote it for his yevamah (his brother's widow awaiting levirate marriage), and after performing yibum (levirate marriage) he divorced her with it—this is a case of doubtful divorce, since she was not a fully married woman when it was written.

7. Because of the scribe's needs, the Sages permitted a scribe to write standard forms of gittin, leaving blank the place for the man's name, the woman's name, the date, and the phrase "behold you are permitted to any man," until he writes them for the sake of the man who is divorcing and the woman who is being divorced. Similarly, the witnesses should sign for her sake and for his sake.

8. If a scribe wrote the get for her sake and for his sake as required, but the witnesses signed not for her sake—since it was delivered to her in the presence of witnesses, it is invalid, because the witnesses do not sign the get except for the sake of maintaining social order. There are those who say that if the witnesses signed not for her sake—since it is considered as if it is forged from within, the get is nullified; and likewise, if one of its witnesses was invalid, or if it had only one valid witness—even though it was delivered in the presence of witnesses, it is nullified. But this does not seem correct to me; rather, it is as if it is forged, but not certainly forged, and since it was delivered in the presence of valid witnesses, it is invalid by rabbinic decree.

9. If someone brings a get and loses it, and then finds it—if he lost it in a place where caravans are not common, even if he found it after a long time, it is presumed that the get he lost is the one he found, and she may be divorced with it. If he lost it in a place where caravans are common—if he found it immediately, and no one else has yet passed by, or if he found it in the container where he left it, and he can recognize the length and width of the get when it is rolled up—it remains in its presumed status, and she may be divorced with it.

Laws of Divorce, Chapter 3

10. If, in that place, another man is known whose name is the same as the one written in the get, we are concerned that this get which was found might belong to that other man, since a person passed through there, even if he did not stay. If she was divorced with it, she is considered doubtfully divorced. But if no one passed through there, it remains in his possession, even if there are two people there with the same name.

11. If the witnesses on the get have a distinguishing sign—such as if they say, "There is a hole next to a certain letter," or they say, "We have never signed another get with these same names"—then it remains in his possession, and she may be divorced with it, even if it was found after a long time, in a place where caravans are common, and even if there are two people there with the same name.

12. If two men sent two gittin and they became mixed up, both gittin are given to each woman, in the presence of the witnesses of delivery. Therefore, if one of them is lost, the other is nullified.

13. If a man has two names, and likewise a woman who has two names, when divorcing, he writes the name and she writes the name by which they are most commonly and publicly known, and says, "So-and-so, and any name he has, divorces so-and-so, and any name she has." If he wrote his nickname and her nickname, it is valid.

14. If he wrote the name by which they are not most commonly known, and wrote "and any name he has," this is a doubtful divorce. If he changed his name or her name, or the name of his city or her city, even if he wrote "and any name he has" and "and any name she has," it is not a valid get.

15. All are valid to write a get except for five: a non-Jew, a slave, a deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor. Even the woman herself may write her own get. A Jew who has converted to idolatry, or who publicly desecrates Shabbos, is like a non-Jew in all respects.

16. Why do these five not write a get? Because the one who writes must write it for the sake of the man divorcing and for the sake of the woman being divorced. A non-Jew writes according to his own intent; a deaf-mute, imbecile, and minor lack legal competence; and a slave is not included in the laws of divorce and marriage, and therefore is invalid like a non-Jew in all respects. If one of these five wrote the get, it is not a get, even if valid witnesses signed it and it was delivered to her in the presence of valid witnesses.

17. If one of the five wrote the standard text of the get and left blank the essential parts—the place of the man, the place of the woman, the date, and the phrase "behold you are permitted to any man"—and these were written by a competent adult Jew for her sake, it is a valid get.

18. It is permitted, even initially, to allow a deaf-mute, imbecile, or minor to write the standard text of the get, provided that an adult supervises them. But a non-Jew or a slave may not write the standard text even initially, even if a Jew supervises them, for it is not permitted to write the standard text of gittin not for her sake except because of the scribe's ordinance, as we have explained.

19. If someone wrote a get on Shabbos or Yom Kippur unintentionally, and gave it to her, she is divorced. If it was written and signed on Yom Tov intentionally, and given to her, she is not divorced, for the witnesses are invalid by Torah law. If it was written on Yom Tov intentionally, and delivered to her in the presence of valid witnesses on Yom Tov, it is a get that is invalid.