A Signature Dispute
‘Signing… for Tikkun Olam’
(Gittin 34b)
Our Mishna states that witnesses sign a get for tikkun Olam – for the public good. The Gemara (36a) seeks to ascertain whether it is a Rabbinic enactment, or perhaps it is a Scriptural requirement, as stated in the verse (Jeremiah 32:44), “Vechasov ba’sefer ve’chasom – And record it in a document and sign [it]”?
Effecting A Divorce
At the heart of this question is the dispute between R. Meir, who maintains that the signatories to a get, by dint of their signatures, effect the dissolution of the bond between husband and wife, and R. Eleazar, who, on the other hand, is of the opinion that the witnesses who testify that they saw the get handed to the wife make the divorce effective. Thus, according to R. Eleazar, even if the get (or any other legal document) does not bear any signatures, it is nevertheless a valid instrument if it was delivered in the presence of witnesses. Therefore, if a woman is in possession of an unsigned get and wishes to prove her status as a divorcee, she must produce witnesses who saw the delivery of the get.
Avoiding Igun
Rabba explains why Rabban Gamaliel – who maintains, like R. Eleazar, that a get actually does not need any signatures to be valid since the witnesses to its delivery effect the divorce – enacted that a get has to be signed.
His fear was that such witnesses (of the delivery) might travel overseas or die, leaving the woman an agunah, unable to remarry. Thus, he advised [see Tosafos, Gittin 3b, s.v. “R. Eleazar omer,” who note that this is only a suggestion – and indeed one who did not heed Rabban Gamaliel’s rule is still able to effect a divorce even without the signatures] that a get be signed so that the divorcee could remarry based on the signatures without having to produce witnesses who may not be found.
Agreement In Principle
The Rif (ad loc.) interestingly adduces from the Gemara that R. Eleazar requires [to produce] witnesses to the delivery of the get only in the event that the get bears no signatures. He argues that R. Eleazar agrees in principle with R. Meir that the signatories to the get make the divorce effective, and witnesses to the get’s delivery are not required. He reasons that if R. Eleazar required witnesses to the delivery of the get, of what value are the signatures on the document?
A Dissent
Tosafos (supra Gittin 4a s.v. “Ve’chasmu ve’natnu lah – kasher”) disagree with this analogy and argue that R. Eleazar always requires witnesses to the get’s delivery – whether the get is signed or not – because it is the witnesses who make the get effective when they observe the document’s delivery. [Obviously, if a woman produces a get with signatures, she is permitted to remarry because we assume that there were witnesses who saw the get being handed to her. But if the get is unsigned, there is no presumption that the woman is a divorcee – unless she produces witnesses to the delivery of her get.]
