Mishnah.org Logo

Mishnayos Gittin Perek 8 Mishnah 9

גיטין פרק ח׳ משנה ט׳

9

With regard to one who divorces his wife, and afterward she spent the night with him at an inn [befundaki], Beit Shammai say: She does not require a second bill of divorce from him, and Beit Hillel say: She requires a second bill of divorce from him, since they may have engaged in sexual intercourse at the inn and thereby betrothed her once again. When did they say this halakha? When she was divorced following the state of marriage. Beit Hillel concede that when she was divorced following the state of betrothal, she does not require a second bill of divorce from him, due to the fact that he is not accustomed to her. Therefore, there is no concern that they engaged in sexual intercourse, even though they spent the night together at the inn. If a woman was married by her second husband on the basis of receiving a bare bill of divorce, i.e., a folded and tied bill of divorce that is missing signatures, she must leave both this, the first husband, and that, the second husband. And all of those previously mentioned ways of penalizing a woman who remarried based on the bills of divorce detailed in the earlier mishna (79b) apply to her in this case as well.

הַמְגָרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְלָנָה עִמּוֹ בְּפֻנְדְּקִי, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָהּ הֵימֶנּוּ גֵט שֵׁנִי. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, צְרִיכָה הֵימֶנּוּ גֵט שֵׁנִי. אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁנִּתְגָּרְשָׁה מִן הַנִּשּׂוּאִין. וּמוֹדִים בְּנִתְגָּרְשָׁה מִן הָאֵרוּסִין שֶׁאֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה הֵימֶנּוּ גֵט שֵׁנִי, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין לִבּוֹ גַס בָּהּ. כְּנָסָהּ בְּגֵט קֵרֵחַ, תֵּצֵא מִזֶּה וּמִזֶּה, וְכָל הַדְּרָכִים הָאֵלּוּ בָהּ:

ט׳
Bartenura

ולנה עמו בפונדקי – and there are witnesses testifying of the privacy between a man and a woman there but there are no witnesses there for the actual sexual act. The School of Hillel holds that the witnesses testifying to the privacy between a man and a woman are the very same individuals who testify about the actual sexual act, for the presumption is that nobody wants to make his intercourse with a woman one of prostitution (but wants to make her his wife thereby –see Talmud Ketubot 73a), for he has betrothed her with his sexual act. And the School of Shammai holds that they don’t say that the witnesses testifying the privacy between a man and a woman are not the very same individuals who testify about the actual sexual act, until she demonstrates that she has engaged in sexual relations.

גט קרח – [a Jewish bill of divorce that lacks signatures on each of its folds] – that its folds are greater than its witnesses (see the next Mishnah for this definition), for the Rabbis decreed a folded [bill of divorce] document because of impetuous Kohanim who would suddenly write a Jewish bill of divorce for their wives and then regret it and they would not be able to restore them [as their wives] (since Kohanim are prohibited, according to the Torah, to marry a divorcee), and they (i.e., the Rabbis) decreed for them a folded Jewish bill of divorce, which is not easy to write quickly, lest while it is [being written], he becomes appeased. Hence, they write one or two lines and wrap them on the blank part and sew it/fasten it and one witness affixes his signature on the outside part of the fold, and then he returns and writes two or more lines from inside and folds them on the blank part, and the other witnesses affixes his signature on the outside part of the fold, and similarly [for] the third witness. But if there is a fold that is binding them without the signature of a witness from the back, it is a Jewish bill of divorce lacking signatures on each of its fold and is invalid. For by definition, for the number of folds should be the number of witnesses, ab initio, for we are concerned that perhaps the husband said to them: “you will all affix your signatures,” but one witness did not affix his signature, and if the woman married with this Jewish bill of divorce, she should leave both this one (i.e., her new husband) as well as that one {i.e., her former husband). And all of these foregoing conditions apply to her. And our Mishnah is according to Rabbi Meir who said that whomever changes from the formula that our Sages established (see Talmud Gittin 5b), In Jewish bills of divorce, the offspring are illegitimate. But this is not the Halakha.

ולנה עמו בפונדקי. ויש שם עדי יחוד ואין שם עדי ביאה. בית הלל סברי הן הן עדי יחוד הן הן עדי ביאה, ואין אדם עושה בעילתו בעילת זנות והרי קידשה בביאה. וב״ש סברי לא אמרינן הן הן עדי יחוד הן הן עדי ביאה עד שיראוה שנבעלה:

גט קרח. שקשריו מרובין מעדיו. דתקון רבנן גט מקושר משום כהנים קפדנים שהיו כותבים גט פתאום לנשותיהם ומתחרטים ולא היו יכולים להחזירן, ותקנו להם גט מקושר שאינו נוח ליכתב מהרה, שמא בתוך כך יתפייס. וכותב שטה אחת או שתים וכורכן על החלק ותופר ועד אחד חותם על הכרך מבחוץ, וחוזר וכותב שני שיטין או יותר מבפנים וכורכן על החלק וחותם עד שני על הכרך מבחוץ, וכן עד שלישי. ואם יש קשר כרוך ואין עד חתום מאחוריו, זהו קרח ופסול. דמסתמא למנין קשריו היו עדיו מתחלה, וחיישינן דלמא הבעל אמר להו כולכם חתומו, והרי אחד שלא חתם. ואם נשאת אשה בגט זה, תצא מזה ומזה, וכל הדרכים האלו בה. ומתניתין רבי מאיר היא, דאמר כל המשנה ממטבע שטבעו חכמים בגטין הולד ממזר. ואינה הלכה: