(Mishnah): If one brought a Get from Chutz La'aretz and cannot say 'it was written and signed in front of me', if it has witnesses, we are Mekayem it through the signatures.

Question: What does it mean 'he cannot say 'it was written and signed in front of me'?

Suggestion: The Shali'ach is a deaf-mute.

Rejection: A deaf-mute cannot bring a Get!

(Mishnah): Anyone can bring a Get, except for a deaf-mute, lunatic or minor.

Answer (Rav Yosef): The Shali'ach gave the Get when he was healthy. Before he said 'it was written...' he became deaf.

This is like Rava. Since he cannot make the declaration, we are Mekayem the Get through the signatures.

Question: According to Rabah, even with Kiyum, we should be concerned lest it is not Lishmah!

Answer: The Beraisa is after people in Chutz La'aretz learned the law of Lishmah (so this is no longer a concern).

Question: If so, even if the Shali'ach can make the declaration, why must he?

Answer: We decreed that Sheluchim still say it, lest people in Chutz La'aretz forget the law again.

Question: If so, why does Kiyum suffice when the Shali'ach was healthy and became deaf?

Answer: That is an unusual case. Chachamim did not decree in unusual cases.

Question: It is unusual for a wife to be a Shali'ach for her own Get, yet a decree was made!

(Mishnah): A woman can bring her own Get, but she must say 'it was written and signed in front of me.'

Answer: We require her to say it, to make the law of Sheluchim uniform.

Question: If so, a husband should also need to say it, but we learned that he need not!

(Beraisa): If the husband brings the Get, he need not say 'it was written and signed in front of me,'

Answer: The whole reason for the declaration is due to concern lest the husband claim that the Get is Pasul. Since he brought it himself, he will not say that it is Pasul!

Question (Shmuel): If two Sheluchim bring a Get from abroad, must they make the declaration?

Answer (Rav Huna): No. If they would say that they saw the divorce, they would be believed!

Question: This is like Rava. The husband cannot claim that the Get is a forgery (i.e. he did not authorize it), since both Sheluchim will contradict him, so there is no concern.

According to Rabah, we should be concerned lest it is not Lishmah!

Answer: This is after people in Chutz La'aretz learned the law of Lishmah.

Question: If so, even one Shali'ach should not need to make a declaration!

Answer: We decreed that a Shali'ach should make the declaration, lest people in Chutz La'aretz forget the law again.

Question: If so, even two Sheluchim should need to say it!

Answer: That is an unusual case. Chachamim did not decree in unusual cases.

Question: It is unusual for a wife to be a Shali'ach for her own Get, and a decree was made!

(Mishnah): A woman can bring her own Get, but she must say...

Answer: We require her to say it, to make the law of Sheluchim uniform.

Question: If so, a husband should also need to say it, but we learned that he need not!

(Beraisa): If the husband brings the Get, he need not say 'it was written and signed in front of me,'

Answer: The whole reason for the declaration is due to concern lest the husband claim that the Get is Pasul. Since he brought it himself, he will not say that it is Pasul!

(Beraisa): If a man brought a Get from abroad and did not say 'it was written...,' if it was Mekuyam, the Get is valid. If not, it is not;

The enactment was made to be lenient on the wife, not stringent.

Question: This is like Rava. Once the Get is Mekuyam, there is no other concern.

According to Rabah, we should be concerned lest it is not Lishmah!

Answer: The Beraisa is after people in Chutz La'aretz learned the law of Lishmah.

Question: We said that we decreed that a Shali'ach still say it, lest people in Chutz La'aretz forget the law again!

Answer: The case is, she already remarried.

Question: If so, why does the Beraisa say that the enactment was made to be lenient on the wife, not stringent? The reason we do not disqualify the Get is because she already remarried!

Answer: The Beraisa dispels the following suggestion:

Suggestion: We should be stringent and say that she must leave her husband!

Rejection: The enactment was made to be lenient on the wife, not stringent;

The enactment was made due to concern lest the husband claim that the Get is Pasul. If he does not contest the Get, should we contest it?! (Tosfos - this is Rejection #2. Rashi - it is the culmination of the rejection.)

One of R. Yochanan and R. Yehoshua ben Levi holds like Rabah, and the other holds like Rava.

Suggestion: R. Yehoshua ben Levi must hold like Rabah:

R. Shimon bar Aba brought a Get, and asked R. Yehoshua ben Levi whether or not he must make a declaration.

R. Yehoshua ben Levi: You need not. Only previous generations, which were not proficient in Lishmah, needed to make a declaration.

Question #1: We concluded that Rabah is also concerned lest witnesses not be available for Kiyum!

Question #2: We concluded that Rabah holds that there is a decree to make the declaration even today, lest people forget the law again!

Answer to both questions: There was another Shali'ach with R. Shimon. Out of honor for R. Shimon, the other Shali'ach was not mentioned.

Question: In front of how many witnesses must the Get be given?

Answer #1 (R. Yochanan or R. Chanina): It must be given in front of two.

Answer #2 (the other of R. Yochanan and R. Chanina): It must be given in front of three.

We can prove that R. Yochanan holds that it may be given in front of two.

Ravin bar Rav Chisda brought a Get (from abroad) in front of R. Yochanan. R. Yochanan told him to give it in front of two witnesses and to make the declaration.

Suggestion: The opinion that allows in front of two is concerned for Lishmah. The opinion that requires three is concerned for Kiyum. (The declaration is Mekayem the Get, so a Beis Din is required.)

Objection #1: R. Yehoshua ben Levi is concerned for Lishmah, so R. Yochanan must be concerned for Kiyum, and he allows giving in front of two!

Objection #2: Rabah agrees to Rava. (All are concerned for Kiyum!)

Answer #1: R. Yochanan and R. Chanina argue about whether or not a Shali'ach can become a witness, and the witness can become a judge:

The opinion that allows in front of two holds that a Shali'ach can become a witness, and the witness can become a judge. (The Shali'ach helps to comprise a Beis Din of three judges.)

The opinion that requires three holds that a Shali'ach can become a witness, but a witness cannot become a judge.

Objection: We hold that for mid'Rabanan laws, a witness can become a judge!

Answer #2: Rather, the opinion that requires three holds that since a woman may be a Shali'ach, we are concerned lest they rely on her to be one of the three judges for the Beis Din;

The other opinion says that people know that a woman cannot be a judge, so we are not concerned for such a mistake.

Support (for R. Yochanan - Beraisa - R. Meir): If a Shali'ach brought a Get from abroad and gave it, but did not say 'it was written and signed in front of me', and she remarried, she must leave her husband. If she had children, they are Mamzerim;

Chachamim say, the children are not Mamzerim.

The Shali'ach should take back the Get, give it again in front of two, and make the declaration.

Question: Does R. Meir really hold that because the Shali'ach did not say this, she must leave her husband, and her children are Mamzerim?!

Answer: Yes! This is like another teaching of R. Meir:

(Rav Hamnuna): R. Meir holds that if a Get is unlike the rules that Chachamim fixed for Gitin, (if she remarried) she must leave her husband, and her children are Mamzerim.

Bar Hedya wanted to bring a Get. He came in front of R. Achai, who was appointed over Gitin.

R. Achai: You must see every letter written (so you will be able to say 'it was written and signed in front of me').

He came in front of R. Ami and R. Asi.

R. Ami and R. Asi: This is unnecessary. Further, you should not do so, lest people doubt the validity of previous Gitin, for which this was not done.

Rabah bar bar Chanah brought a Get; only half of it was written in front of him.

(R. Elazar): Even if (you saw) only the first line written Lishmah, that is enough.

(Rav Ashi): It suffices to hear the pen scratching on the paper.