THREE SPECIAL PASUL GITIN (Yerushalmi Perek 9 Halachah 3 Daf 50b)

מתני' שלשה גיטין פסולין ואם נישאת הוולד כשר


(Mishnah): Three kinds of Gitin are Pasul, but if she remarried, the child is Kosher (not a Mamzer):

כתב בכתב ידו ואין עליו עדים


It is written in Kesav Yado (his, i.e. the husband's, own handwriting), but witnesses did not sign it;

יש עליו עדים ואין בו זמן


Witnesses signed it, but there is no date on it;

יש בו זמן ואין עליו אלא עד אחד


It has a date, and only one witness signed it.

אילו שלשה גיטין פסולין ואם נישאת הולד כשר:


If she remarried relying on any of these three Gitin, the children are not Mamzerim.

[דף נא עמוד א] גמ' לית כאן ספק גירושין אלא גירושין ממש.


(Gemara): [Yevamos 3:9 discusses Kidushin and divorce b'Safek. It suggested that our Mishnah gives cases of Safek divorce, and rejects] 'this is not Safek divorce, rather, it is true divorce!'

כיצד ספק קידושין כיי דתנינן תמן זרק לה קידושין ספק קרוב לה ספק קרוב לו זהו ספק קידושין.


Question: How is Safek Kidushin? It is like a Mishnah taught there (Yevamos 3:9) - he threw to her Kidushin. It is a Safek if it was close to her or to him. This is Safek Kidushin;

והכא הוא זרק לה גיטה ספק קרוב לו ספק קרוב לה זהו ספק גירושין.


And here [there is a similar case of Safek divorce]! He threw her Get to her, and we are unsure if it landed closer to him or to her. This is Safek divorce! (We explained this like PNEI MOSHE.)

רבי יוחנן בשם רבי חלפתא דמן הוה וכולן אם ניסית לא תצא שלא להוציא ליזה על בניה.


(R. Yochanan citing R. Chalafta of Havah): All of them ('Safek' divorce in our Mishnah), if she married through [the Get], she need not leave her husband, lest people malign her children [say that they are Mamzerim, for her divorce was invalid. This leniency is only if she has children from her new husband (SEFER NIR, Yevamos 3:9). The coming cases discuss whether we are lenient even if she has no children.)

בתו שניסית לשוק בגט זה לא תצא כדי ליזקוק צרתה לאביה.


If [Ploni's] daughter [was married to his brother], and she remarried a stranger through this [Pasul] Get [and the brother died], she need not leave her husband. [We consider the Get valid] in order to make her Tzarah Zekukah to her father. (If the Get were invalid, her Tzarah would be Tzaras Ervah, and exempt from Chalitzah or Yibum.)


Note: Also in the following cases, Ploni's daughter received such a Pasul Get from his brother, and the brother died.

צרתה שנישאת לשוק בגט זה תצא.


If her Tzarah remarried a stranger through this Get (she thought that it is void, so she is Tzaras Ervah, and exempt from Chalitzah or Yibum, e.g. Ploni was the only surviving brother), she must leave. (Mid'Oraisa the Get was valid, so she is not Tzaras Ervah; she needs Chalitzah or Yibum.)

בתו שנישאת לאחיו [צ"ל בגט זה תצא - רידב"ז]


If [Ploni's] daughter married [another] brother (did Yibum) through this Get (she thought that it is void), she must leave (mid'Oraisa she was divorced, so there is no Yibum; she is Eshes Ach).

[צ"ל צרתה שנישאת לאחיו בגט זה - רידב"ז] אפילו לאביה לא תצא


If the Tzarah married his brother (did Yibum) through this Get, even with his father (i.e. Ploni, for she is not Tzaras Ervah), she need not leave. (We explained this like RIDVAZ.)

תני שלשה שטרות הללו גובה מבני חורין ואינו גובה מן המשועבדין.


(Beraisa): With [one of] these three documents (in our Mishnah, a lender) collects from Bnei Chorin (property that the borrower still owns), but not from Meshubadim (property that he sold).

א"ר בא הדא דתימר בשלא הוחזק שטר ביד המלוה [צ"ל אבל הוחזק השטר ביד המלוה גובה - קרבן העדה]


Explanation #1 (R. Ba): This is when the document was not established in the lender's hand, but if the document was established in the lender's hand (Beis Din validated it), he collects [even from Meshubadim, for Beis Din's Kiyum (validation) is like witnesses].

[צ"ל רבי יוסה בעי אם שלא הוחזק השטר ביד המלוה - קרבן העדה] אפילו מבני חורין אינו גובה.


Objection (R. Yosah): If [the Beraisa discusses] when the document was not established in the lender's hand, he should not collect even from Bnei Chorin!

אלא כן אנן קיימין. בשהוחזק שטר ביד המלוה.


Explanation #2: Rather, [the Beraisa discusses when] the document was established in the lender's hand.

ולמה אינו גובה


Question: Why does he not collect [from Meshubadim]?

רבי ביסנא אמר מפני קינוניא.


Answer #1 (R. Bisna): It is due to scheming. (Perhaps they conspire to enable the lender to collect fraudulently, e.g. they predated it. HA'GAON RAV C. KANIEVSKY, SHLITA (Yevamos 3:9) asks, he should be able to collect from Meshubadim from the date of the Kiyum! Perhaps we decree lest buyers not know this, and they will give back property bought after the date on the document itself. (PF) It seems that there was no question from a document without a date. No buyer would return property without any evidence that the loan preceded his purchase!)

ר' אבינא אמר מפני פסול.


Answer #2 (R. Avina): It is because [any document unlike Chachamim's enactment] is Pasul. He collects from Bnei Chorin, i.e. if the borrower admits that he owes - PNEI MOSHE, Yevamos 3:9.)

התיב רבי אבין עד כדון בשלוה הזקן ושיעבד הזקן לוה הזקן ושיעבד הבן הכא אית לך מימר מפני קינוניא לא מפני שהוא פסול.


Support #1 (R. Avin): [Concern for scheming applies] only when the elder borrowed and the elder (i.e. the same person) sold his property. If the elder borrowed [and died], and his son sold [what he inherited], can you say that he schemes?! (Surely the loan preceded the sale!) Rather, it is because it is Pasul (RIDVAZ Yevamos 3:9; it seems that also the RASHBA (Teshuvah 76 attributed to the Ramban) explains so).

התיב ר' אבין והתני אף בגיטי נשים. אית לך מימר מפני קינוניא לא מפני שהוא פסול והכא מפני שהוא פסול.


Support #2 (R. Avin - Beraisa): The same applies to divorce documents (with such a Get, she collects her Kesuvah from Bnei Chorin, but not from Meshubadim). Can you say that it is due to scheming? (Her lien is from the time of Nisu'in, i.e. the date on her Kesuvah! - HA'GAON RAV C. KANIEVSKY, SHLITA, Yevamos 3:9) Rather, it is because it is Pasul. [Also] here, it is because it is Pasul.

ר' יוחנן בשם ר' ינאי וכולן בכתב (ידים) [נראה שצ"ל ידו]


(R. Yochanan citing R. Yanai): All of these are written in Kesav Yado (his, i.e. the husband's, own handwriting. If not, it is Pasul mid'Oraisa and the child is a Mamzer.)

רבי לעזר שאל עדים יש כאן בכתב (ידים) [נראה שצ"ל ידו] מה אני צריך.


Objection (R. Lazar): [In the middle case] there are witnesses. Why do we need Kesav Yado?!

ר' ירמיה בשם רב וכולהם בכתב ידים חוץ משעדיו עמו.


(R. Yirmeyah citing Rav): All of these are written in Kesav Yado, except for when it has witnesses.

אמר רב המנונא הללו [דף נא עמוד ב] חוביהן על גרמיהון דאינון שקיבלו עליהן לשקר לחתום בגט שאין בו זמן.


Answer (to objection - Rav Hamnuna): These [witnesses] brought guilt upon themselves. They accepted to lie, to sign a Get without a date. (Since they enable the bearer to predate it, it is as if they testify falsely. They are Pasul witnesses, therefore we need Kesav Yado - OHR SOMAYACH Hilchos Gerushin 1:25, Sof.)

ר' בא בר המנונא רב אדא בר אחא בשם רב דרבי מאיר היא.


(R. Ba bar Hamnuna citing Rav Ada bar Achah citing Rav): [Our Mishnah] is [like] R. Meir [who says that Edei Chasimah Karsei (the witnesses who sign a document empower it. Even though R. Meir holds that anyone who deviated from Chachamim's rules of Gitin, if she remarried based on the Get, the child is a Mamzer, here they enacted that the child is not a Mamzer.)

מה חמית מימר כן.


Question: What [need] did you see to say so? (R. Elazar argues in the coming Mishnah. Surely our Mishnah is R. Meir, who argues with R. Elazar! Also, according to R. Elazar, a Get is Kosher through Edei Mesirah even without any witnesses or Kesav Yado! - PNEI MOSHE)

אמר רבי מנא בגין דאמר רב הונא בשם רב כל ההין פרקא דרבי מאיר חוץ משינה שמו ושמה שם עירו ושם עירה


Answer #1 (R. Mana): It is because Rav Huna, citing Rav, said that the entire Perek is like R. Meir (who says that due to any deviation from Chachamim's rules, the child is a Mamzer), except for if [the scribe] changed his or her name, or the name of his or her city. (Then, even Chachamim agree that the child is a Mamzer);

דלא תסבור מימר (קיימיה דר' מאיר היא תננייה) [נראה שצ"ל קמייתא דר' מאיר היא תניינא] דרבנין לפום כן צריך מימר דר' מאיר היא.


You should not say that the first [half of the Perek, i.e. ha'Zorek] is like R. Meir, and the second [half of the Perek, i.e. ha'Megaresh] is Rabanan. Therefore, he needed to say that also our Mishnah is R. Meir.


R. Mana held that ha'Zorek and ha'Megaresh are both one Perek (HAGAHOS R. DINAR, 8:5). Normally, there is one Stam Tana for an entire Perek. One might have thought that here is an exception; it cannot be R. Meir, for the child is not a Mamzer. Alternatively, we deduce that they are separate Perakim, like R. Yosa told him. Even though R. Elazar argues in the coming Mishnah, we could say that the coming Mishnah discusses monetary documents. - PF)

אמר ר' יוסי בגין דרב ושמואל תריהון אמרין הלכה כרבי לעזר דלא תסבור מימר אוף הכא לפום כן צריך מימר דרבי מאיר היא:


Answer #2 (R. Yosi): It is because Rav and Shmuel, both of them said that the Halachah follows R. Lazar. Do not say that also here (our Stam Mishnah is like R. Lazar, and the Halachah follows him. R. Meir holds that without witnesses, the child is a Mamzer!) Therefore, he needed to say that also our Mishnah is R. Meir. (Kesav Yado is like witnesses - PNEI MOSHE.)


A GET WITHOUT WITNESSES (Yerushalmi Perek 9 Halachah 4 Daf 51b)

מתני' רבי אלעזר אומר אף על פי שאין עליו עדים אלא שנתנו לה בפני עדים כשר וגובה מנכסים משועבדים


(Mishnah - R. Elazar): Even if no witnesses signed on it, but it was given in front of witnesses, it is valid, and [this suffices to] collect from Meshubadim (land that was sold).

שאין העדים חותמין על הגט אלא מפני תיקון העולם:


Witnesses sign a Get only due to an enactment for Tikun ha'Olam.

גמ' רב ושמואל תריהון אמרין הלכה כרבי אלעזר.


(Gemara - Rav and Shmuel): The Halachah follows R. Elazar.

רבי יוחנן בשם רבי ינאי דברי חכמים פסול.


(R. Yochanan citing R. Yanai): Chachamim disqualify.

אתא עובדא קומי ר' יוחנן בכוהנת ובעא למיעבד כהדא דרבי ינאי


A case came in front of R. Yochanan of a Kohenes [divorced with such a Get]. He wanted to rule like R. Yanai's teaching [that she is permitted to her husband].

כד שמעון דרב ושמואל פליגין אתא קומוי אפילו ישראל (ושמע) [צ"ל ושרע - קרבן העדה] מינה.


When he heard that Rav and Shmuel argue, [afterwards,] even a [wife of a] Yisrael, he evaded [ruling about] it.

רבי יהושע בן לוי אמר דברי הכל כשר.


(R. Yehoshua ben Levi): According to everyone it is Kosher.

והא רבי אלעזר אמר כשר. ורבנן אמרין פסול.


Question: R. Elazar says that it is Kosher, and Chachamim disqualify!

מה ביניהו ר' אלעזר אמר כשר וגובה מנכסין משועבדין. ורבנין אמרין פסול וגובה מנכסין בני חורין:


Answer: (All agree that it is Kosher to collect from Bnei Chorin.) R. Elazar says that it is [fully] Kosher and we collect [even] from Meshubad property. Rabanan say that it is Pasul (for Meshubadim), and we collect [only] from Bnei Chorin.


GITIN THAT DEPEND ON BREIRAH (Yerushalmi Perek 9 Halachah 5 Daf 51b)

מתני' שנים ששילחו שני גיטין שוין ונתערבו נותן שניהן לזו ושניהן לזו


(Mishnah): If two men sent identical Gitin (all names are the same), and they got mixed up, [the Shali'ach] gives both Gitin to this [wife], and both to this.

לפיכך אם אבד אחד מהן הרי השני בטל:


Therefore, if one Get was lost, the other is Batel.

גמ' רבי אליעזר בי רבי יוסי בעא קומי רבי יוסי כמה דאת אמר גט אחד פסול בשתי נשים. ודכוותה והוא שני גיטין פסולין (בשתי נשים) [צ"ל באשה אחת - קרבן העדה]


(Gemara) Question (R. Eliezer bei R. Yosi, to R. Yosi): Just like you say that one Get is Pasul if it was written for [one of] two women (and he did not decide until later - above, 3:1), similarly two Gitin written for one woman (and he will choose one of them later, they should be Pesulim, for it was not clarified which will be used)!

אמר ליה וכיני.


Answer (R. Yosi): Correct!

אמר ליה והא תנינן שנים ששילחו שני גיטין שוין ונתערבו נותן שניהן לזו ושניהן לזו.


Question (R. Eliezer bei R. Yosi, to R. Yosi - Mishnah): If two men sent identical Gitin, and they got mixed up, he gives both Gitin to this, and both to this.

תמן זו כרות לשמה וזו כרות לשמה תערובת היא שגרמה.


Answer (R. Yosi): There, this [Get] was clearly [written] Lishmah (for this woman) and this was clearly Lishmah (for the other woman, just) the mixture caused [that now we do not know which is which. We say that each is divorced through the Get that was written for her];

[דף נב עמוד א] ברם הכא לא זה כרות לשמה ולא זה כרות לשמה


However, here [at the time he wrote it,] it was not clearly Lishmah (l'Shem this woman) and not clearly Lishmah (for the other woman. We explained this like OHR SOMAYACH, Hilchos Gerushin 3:4.)

מכיון שנתנו לה יעשה כמי שכרות לשמה משעה ראשונה:


Question: [When a Get was written for one of two women, since in the end he gave to her, it should be as if it were [written] clearly Lishmah from the beginning! (MEICHAL HA'MAYIM - our Sugya relies on the Gemara above (3:1), which answered that this depends on Bereirah, and the Tana of that Mishnah holds that Ein Bereirah.)