Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Commentary for Gittin 8:3

דתנא קמא סבר לא גזרינן מוליך אטו מביא

The objection here raised is also stated in the following form: I infer that the bearer of a Get from one province to another in the Land of Israel is not required to make the declaration. This is in conformity [is it not] with the view of Rabbah but conflicts with that of Raba? — You must not infer that [if it is taken] from one province to another in the Land of Israel the declaration is not required. The proper inference to draw is that it is not required from the bearer from one part to another of the same country in foreign parts. What then? From the bearer from one province to another in the Land of Israel it is required? Then it would be sufficient for the Mishnah to say, 'The bearer of a Get from one province to another' [without mentioning 'foreign parts']? — The fact is that it is not necessary for the bearer from one province to another in the Land of Israel either,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And yet this does not conflict with the view of Raba. ');"><sup>1</sup></span>

Tosafot on Gittin

"We learned in the mishna: One who brings a bill of divorce from one region to another region within a country overseas" - And from the first part of the Mishna "One who brings a bill of divorce from a country overseas" implies specifically from a country overseas to the land of Israel. It is not possible to apply [this rule (of saying it was written and signed before me)] that really in the same country overseas one also needs [to say it was written and signed before me]. This [example (of one who brings a bill of divorce from a country overseas)] was taken to exclude Rekem and Heger [from the rule of saying it was written and signed before me].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse