Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer Siman 124

Siman 124

Presented here for study, not as a practical ruling. The Shulchan Aruch rules by Sephardi custom, the Rema's glosses by Ashkenazi custom, and the Kitzur follows Ashkenazi custom. For a practical question, ask your rabbi.

א גֵּט שֶׁכְּתָבוֹ עַל אִסוּרֵי הֲנָאָה, כָּשֵׁר. מִיהוּ, בְּדָבָר שֶׁצָּרִיךְ בִּעוּר מִן הָעוֹלָם וְצָרִיךְ שְׂרֵפָה, אִם כָּתַב עָלָיו הַגֵּט, בָּטֵל (הָרַ"ן פֶּרֶק בָּתְרָא דְּגִטִּין):
1 A divorce document that is written on something that it is prohibited to get benefit from is valid. Rema: However, if it is something that requires being removed from the world and needs to be burned, and he wrote the divorce document on it, the document is nullified. (Ran Gittin)
ב כּוֹתְבִין הַגֵּט עַל דָּבָר שֶׁיָּכוֹל לְהִזְדַּיֵּף, וְהוּא שֶׁיִּתְּנֶנּוּ לָהּ בְּעֵידֵי מְסִירָה. כֵּיצַד, כּוֹתֵב עַל הַנְּיָר הַמָּחוּק וְעַל הַדִּפְתְּרָא וְעַל הַחֶרֶס וְעַל הֶעָלִין וְעַל יַד הָעֶבֶד וְעַל קֶרֶן הַפָּרָה, וּמוֹסֵר לָהּ הָעֶבֶד וְהַפָּרָה אוֹ שְׁאָר דְּבָרִים בִּפְנֵי עֵדִים. אֲבָל לֹא יַחְתֹּךְ יַד הָעֶבֶד וְקֶרֶן הַפָּרָה וְיִתֵּן לָהּ, וְאִם כָּתַב [וְחָתַךְ] וְנָתַן לָהּ, אֵינוֹ גֵּט, מִשּׁוּם דְּבָעֵינָן שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא קְצִיצָה בֵּין כְּתִיבָה לִנְתִינָה. הַגָּה: וְכוֹתְבִין עַל כָּל דָּבָר תָּלוּשׁ (טוּר) וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דַּוְקָא בְּדָבָר שֶׁהוּא שֶׁל קְיָמָא, אֲבָל אִם כָּתַב בְּעָלֶה שֶׁל בְּצָלִים אוֹ יְרָקוֹת וְכַדּוֹמֶה לָזֶה, פָּסוּל (הָרַ"ן פֶּרֶק שֵׁנִי). וּלְכַתְּחִלָּה יֵשׁ לְכָתְבוֹ עַל קְלָף מְתֻקָּן לְסֵפֶר תּוֹרָה תְּפִלִּין וּמְזוּזוֹת, אֲבָל לֹא בָּעִינָן מְעֻבָּד לִשְׁמוֹ; אֲבָל אֵין עִכּוּב בְּדָבָר זֶה (מ"כ בְּסֵדֶר גִּטִּין) וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם נִכְתַּב עַל נְיָר שֶׁקּוֹרִין פַּפִּי"ר, בְּכָל כְּתָב, כָּשֵׁר (גַּם זֶה שָׁם). וְעַיֵּן לְקַמָּן רֵישׁ סִימָן קכ"ו:
2 Gets [bills of divorce] are written on objects which can be falsified [as long as] it is given with those who witness its delivery. For example, he writes it on paper which has been previously erased, and on animal hide, and on ceramic, and on leaves, and on the hand of a slave, and on the horn of a cow -- and he delivers to her the slave or the cow or other objects in the presence of witnesses. But he should not cut off the slave's hand or the cow's horn and give it to her. And if he wrote it [on the hand or horn] and cut it off [to deliver] to her, it is not a valid bill of divorce, because it is a requirement that the object is not cut between the time of writing and the time of giving it. Rema: it can be written on any object which is separated from the ground, and there are those who say, only on an object which will endure. But if he wrote it on the leaf of an onion or vegetables or similar items, it is invalid (Ran, Chapter 2). The optimal way is to write it on parchment [from animal hide] which is prepared [in the same manner as] a Sefer Torah [Torah Scroll], Tefillin [Phylacteries], and Mezuzot [Doorway Scrolls] -- however it is not required that [the parchment] be processed specifically with the intent for use for a Get. However [not using this type of parchment] does not prevent the Get's [validity], even if it is written on the type of paper called "paper" [i.e. paper from wood pulp], [it can be written with] any type of writing, and is kosher [valid]. Also, refer ahead to at the beginning of Siman 126.
ג טוֹב לַחְתֹּךְ הַנְּיָר לְמִדַּת הַגֵּט, שֶׁלֹּא יִצְטָרֵךְ לַחְתֹּךְ מִמֶּנּוּ אַחַר כְּתִיבָה. וְאִם טָעָה הַסוֹפֵר לְאַחַר שֶׁכָּתַב קְצָתוֹ וְרוֹצֶה לְהַתְחִיל בְּאוֹתוֹ נְיָר עַצְמוֹ, יַחְתֹּךְ תְּחִלָּה הַמּוּעָט שֶׁכָּתַב. הַגָּה: אִם כְּתָבוֹ עַל נְיָר גָּדוֹל, וַחֲתָכוֹ לְאַחַר הַכְּתִיבָה קֹדֶם הַנְּתִינָה, פָּסוּל. אֲבָל אִם חָתַךְ מִמֶּנּוּ מְעָט, כְּדֵי לְיַפּוֹתוֹ, לָא מִקְּרֵי קְצִיצָה (טוּר בְּשֵׁם הָרֹא"שׁ). וְכָל שֶׁלֹּא חָתַךְ מִמֶּנּוּ הַרְבֵּה יוֹתֵר מִכְּתִיבַת הַגֵּט, הָוֵי כִּלְיַפּוֹתוֹ (כֵּן מַשְׁמַע בְּסה"ת). אֲבָל לְכַתְּחִלָּה חוֹתְכִין מִמֶּנּוּ הַכֹּל קֹדֶם הַכְּתִיבָה, אֲפִלּוּ הַנְּקָבִים שֶׁעוֹשִׂין כְּדֵי לְשַׂרְטֵט עַל יָדָן, וּשְׁאָר הַדְּבָרִים, יַחְתֹּךְ הַכֹּל קֹדֶם הַשִּׂרְטוּט, דְּהַשִּׂרְטוּט צֹרֶךְ כְּתִיבָה הוּא (סֵדֶר גִּטִּין). כְּתָבוֹ עַל סֵפֶר, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ עִנְיָנִים אֲחֵרִים, וְנָתַן לָהּ הַכֹּל, כָּשֵׁר (טוּר בְּשֵׁם הָעִטּוּר):
3 It is good to cut the paper to the measure of the get, so that he will not need to cut it after writing, and if the scribe erred after he wrote a little bit of it and wants to start on that paper itself, he should first cut the little bit that he wrote. Rema: If he wrote it on a large paper, and cut it after writing and before it was given, it is invalid. But if he cut a little from it, in order to beautify it, it is not called cutting (Tur in the name of the Rosh). And as long as he has not cut from it much more than the [space used in] writing the get, it is considered beautifying it (thus is implied in the case of a Torah scroll). But preferably they do all cutting from it before the writing, even the indentations they make in order to score it, and the other things, and he should do all the cut before the scoring, for the scoring is needed for writing (Seder Gittin). If he wrote it in a book, even though there are other matters in it, and gave it all to her, it is valid (Tur in the name of the Itur).
ד אֵין כּוֹתְבִין גֵּט בִּמְחֻבָּר, אֲפִלּוּ יִתֵּן לָהּ הַמְחֻבָּר כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא, דְּבָעִינָן "וְנָתַן בְּיָדָהּ" (דְּבָרִים כד, א). וַאֲפִלּוּ חָתְמוּ הָעֵדִים אַחַר שֶׁתְּלָשׁוֹ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נְתָנוֹ לָהּ, אֵינוֹ גֵּט. וְאִם כְּתָבוֹ עַל הֶעָלֶה הַזָּרוּעַ בְּעָצִיץ (פֵּרוּשׁ, כְּעֵין חֲצִי קְדֵרָה שֶׁל חֶרֶס שֶׁזּוֹרְעִין בָּהּ) נָקוּב, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנָּתַן לָהּ הֶעָצִיץ כֻּלּוֹ, פָּסוּל, שֶׁמָּא יִקְטֹם. אֲבָל כּוֹתֵב הוּא עַל חַרְסוֹ שֶׁל עָצִיץ וְנוֹתֵן לָהּ, וְהוּא שֶׁיִּהְיוּ עֵדֵי מְסִירָה לְפָנֵינוּ, שֶׁחֶרֶס דָּבָר הַמִּזְדַּיֵּף הוּא: הַגָּה: וְהוּא הַדִּין בְּעָצִיץ שֶׁאֵינוֹ נָקוּב; וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דִּבְשֶׁאֵינוֹ נָקוּב לֹא גָּזְרִינָן שֶׁמָּא יִקְטֹם (תִּמְצָא מְבֹאָר שְׁתֵּי הַסְבָרוֹת בַּבֵּית יוֹסֵף):
4 We don't write a divorce document on [something] attached, even if he gives to her the attached thing as it is, since we need "and he puts it in her hand" (Deuteronomy 24:1). And even if the witnesses signed after it was detached, and then he gives it to her, it's not a [valid] divorce document. And if he wrote it on a leaf that was planted in a flowerpot (explanation: like a half potter pot that you plant in it) that was holed, even though he gave her the entire flowerpot, it's invalid, lest it be cut off. But he [can] write it on the pottery of a flowerpot and give it to her, and provided there are witnesses of the exchange in front of us, since pottery is something that can be forged. Ram"a: The same law applies to a flowerpot that is not holed; and some say that when it's not holed we don't decree perhaps it will be cut off (you will find the two opinions explained in the Beit Yosef).
ה אֵין כּוֹתְבִין בִּמְחֻבָּר, אֲפִלּוּ טֹפֶס. כָּתַב הַטֹּפֶס בִּמְחֻבָּר, וּתְלָשׁוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ כָּתַב הַתֹּרֶף וְחָתְמוּ וּנְתָנוֹ לָהּ, כָּשֵׁר:
5 We do not write [a get] on plants that are still attached to the earth, even the "tofes" (the text of the document, other than the names, place, and date. In modern Hebrew, tofes means a form). If he wrote the tofes while it was still attached, detached it, and then wrote the toref (the names, place, and date), the witnesses signed, and he gave her the get, it is valid.
ו הָיָה הַגֵּט חָקוּק עַל יָדוֹ שֶׁל עֶבֶד בִּכְתוֹבֶת קַעֲקַע וְהָיָה יוֹצֵא מִתַּחַת יָדָהּ וְהָיוּ הָעֵדִים חֲקוּקִים עַל יָדוֹ, הֲרֵי זוֹ מְגֹרֶשֶׁת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין שָׁם עֵידֵי מְסִירָה, שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהִזְדַּיֵּף. וְאִם הָיוּ מֻחְזָקִים בָּעֶבֶד שֶׁהוּא שֶׁלּוֹ, וְגֵט חָקוּק עַל יָדוֹ וְהוּא יוֹצֵא מִתַּחַת יָדָהּ, וְהִיא אוֹמֶרֶת: בְּעֵדִים נִמְסַר לִי, הֲרֵי זוֹ סָפֵק מְגֹרֶשֶׁת, שֶׁמָּא מֵעַצְמוֹ נִכְנַס לָהּ, שֶׁהַגּוֹדְרוֹת (פֵּרוּשׁ, כָּל דָּבָר שְׁמְהַלֵּךְ בַּדְּרָכִים וּבַשְּׁוָקִים, שֶׁיִּתָּכֵן לוֹמַר מֵעַצְמוֹ נִכְנַס) אֵין לָהֶם חֲזָקָה. הַגָּה: וְדַוְקָא בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם חֲזָקָה, אֲבָל בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם חֲזָקָה, מְגֹרֶשֶׁת (בֵּית יוֹסֵף). וְעַיֵּן בְּחשֶׁן הַמִּשְׁפָּט בְּדִינֵי חֲזָקוֹת:
6 If the get was tattooed on the hand of a [Canaanite] slave and she had possession of the slave (lit. goes out from under her hand), and the witnesses' names are likewise tattooed on the hand, she is divorced even though there were no witnesses to the delivery [of the slave with the tattooed get], for the text is not subject to counterfeiting. If we have previous knowledge that the slave belonged to the husband, yet the slave with the tattooed get is in her possession, and she says, "It was delivered to me before witnesses," she is doubtfully divorced, for maybe the slave just came to her of his own accord. For the "godrot" (explanation: anything which walks on paths and in markets, for it is reasonable to say that it came of its own accord) do not have a presumption of possession. Rema: This rule applies only in circumstances where there is no presumption of possession, but in circumstances that there is a presumption of possession (e.g. the slave was in her possession for 3 years, see Beit Shmuel) she is divorced (Beit Yosef). See further in Choshen Mishpat regarding the laws of presumption of possession.
ז הָיָה הַגֵּט חָקוּק עַל הַטַּבְלָא, וְהָעֵדִים עָלָיו, וְהוּא יוֹצֵא מִתַּחַת יָדָהּ, וְאוֹמֶרֶת שֶׁנְּתָנַתּוּ לוֹ וְחָזַר וּנְתָנוֹ לָהּ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵם מֻחְזָקִים בַּטַּבְלָא שֶׁהִיא שֶׁלָּהּ, הֲרֵי זוֹ מְגֹרֶשֶׁת, שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה עַצְמָהּ כּוֹתֶבֶת אֶת גִּטָּהּ:
7 If the get was inscribed on a tablet, with signed witnesses, and it is in her possession, and she says that she gave it to him (her husband), and he handed it back to her, even if they (the court) are aware of a presumption that the tablet had belonged to her, she is divorced, for a woman may write her own get.
ח חָקַק הַגֵּט עַל טַס שֶׁל זָהָב וּנְתָנוֹ לָהּ וְאָמַר לָהּ: הֲרֵי זֶה גִּטֵּךְ וּכְתֻבָּתֵיךְ, הֲרֵי זוֹ מְגֹרֶשֶׁת וְנִתְקַבְּלָה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ בִּכְדֵי שֹׁוִי הַטַּס. הַגָּה: אֲבָל נָתַן לָהּ סְתָם, הֲרֵי הַכֹּל שֶׁלָּהּ מִכֹּחַ נְתִינַת הַגֵּט, וְצָרִיךְ לִתֵּן לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ מֻשְׁלָם (כֵּן מַשְׁמָע בַּגְּמָרָא וְכֵן כָּתַב הָרַ"ן):
8 If he etched the get on a plate of gold and told her, "Here is your get and your ketuba," she is divorced, and her ketuba money has been received up to the value of the [gold] plate. Rema: But if he gave it to her per se (without qualification),the entire plate is hers by force of the giving of the get (i.e. the plate is considered as a piece of paper with a get, which has no value), and he also needs to pay the entire ketuba (so implied in the Gemara, and so wrote the Ran).
ט לֹא יִתְּנֶנּוּ לָהּ עַד שֶׁתִּתְיַבֵּשׁ הַכְּתִיבָה וְהַחֲתִימָה יָפֶה, פֶּן יְהֵא קָרוּי כְּתָב שֶׁיָּכוֹל לְהִזְדַּיֵּף:
9 He should not give her the get until the writing and signatures have dried well, lest we consider it as writing which is liable to be counterfeited [and therefore invalid].
Previous ChapterNext Chapter