Study Gittin folio 29B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
שקול מינה חפץ והדר הב לה גיטא; ואזל איהו ויהב לה גיטא, והדר שקל מינה חפץ. רבי יוחנן פוסל בו, וכל שכן בשלוחו, וריש לקיש מכשיר בשלוחו, וכל שכן בו.
Take an item from her and then give her the bill of divorce, and he went and gave her the bill of divorce and then took the item from her. R' Yoḥanan invalidates the bill of divorce even when given by the first agent, as he deviated from the husband’s instructions, and his agency is canceled, and all the more so does R' Yoḥanan invalidate the bill of divorce when delivered by the first agent’s agent. And Reish Lakish deems the bill of divorce valid when it is delivered by the first agent’s agent, and all the more so when it is delivered by the first agent himself.
מתני׳ המביא גט ממדינת הים, וחלה – עושה שליח בבית דין ומשלחו, ואומר לפניהם: ״בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם״; ואין שליח אחרון צריך שיאמר ״בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם״, אלא אומר: שליח בית דין אני.
Mishnah: With regard to an agent who is bringing a bill of divorce from a country overseas, who must attest to the fact that he witnessed the writing and signing of the bill of divorce, and he became sick and cannot complete his agency, he appoints another agent in court and sends him. And the first agent says before the court: It was written in my presence and it was signed in my presence, and on the basis of this the court deems the bill of divorce to be valid. And the final agent does not need to say: It was written in my presence and it was signed in my presence. Rather, it is sufficient that he says: I am an agent of the court.
גמ׳ אמרו ליה רבנן לאבימי בריה דרבי אבהו: בעי מיניה מרבי אבהו, שליח דשליח משוי שליח, או לא? אמר להו: הא לא תיבעי לכו, מדקתני ״אין השליח האחרון״, מכלל דמשוי שליח;
Talmud: The rabbis said to Avimei, son of R' Abbahu: Raise the following dilemma before your father, R' Abbahu: Can an agent of the first agent also appoint another agent, or not? He said to them: You should not raise this dilemma. From the fact that the Mishnah teaches: The final agent does not need to say, as opposed to: The second agent does not need to say, it can be seen by inference that the second agent can appoint an agent, resulting in the existence of a final agent, not just a second agent.