Gittin 33: Multiple Agents

Rabban Gamliel the Elder said that one must not render a get void through a court located elsewhere for the betterment of the world.  Why?  Is it because we might conceive mamzerim, when women believe that they are divorced but they are not and any future children born of them and other men are thus separated from their Jewish inheritance?  Reish Lakish wonders if he is referring to the betterment of deserted wives, who might wait for their husbands to confirm their gittin our of fear?  The rabbis explain their points of view based on how many people might be necessary as witnesses at the court and whether those people might be found.

The rabbis note that the dissolution of a betrothal/marriage is different, of course, but one of those differences is critical.  The Sages do not recognize betrothal through sexual intercourse as full marriage.  It is considered to be “licentious sexual intercourse’. Thus the husband has no get to void.  There is no need for divorce.  It is rare to learn about the rabbis’ condemnation of men’s sexual behaviour – but very common to hear their critiques of women’s licentiousness.  This is a nice change.

A sticking point is whether the rabbis believe that “testimony that is partially invalidated is entirely invalidated”.  If a man asks a number of men to write and deliver a get, one will write and two will officially witness and sign.  What about the others?  If they were present, they were witnesses. The Rabbis must understand whether or not all witnesses are required to be present when a court is convened to void a get.  There are a number of risks, including a wife getting multiple or incorrect information from agents regarding her status.

We are told that Rabbi Yoshiya from Usha was sitting with five Elders.  When a man approached him, he compelled that man to write a get against his will.  In fact, he told the elders to hide and write the get so that the man would not find them and void the document.  Does this teach us that voiding a get requires the presence of all who witnessed its writing?   Or does it teach us that the rabbis were together for another reason – if they had scattered, they would not be reconvened as may be necessary for voiding a get?

The underlying theme here, again, is that the rabbis are aware of the consequences that face women who are left without a proper get.  They seem to explore every minute angle to ensure that gets are written, that they are delivered properly, and that women are clearly divorced.