Gittin, Daf Bet, Part 5

 

וּלְרַבָּה דְּאָמַר לְפִי שֶׁאֵין בְּקִיאִין לִשְׁמָהּ לִיבְעֵי תְּרֵי מִידֵּי דְּהָוֵה אַכֹּל עֵדֻיוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה

עֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן בְּאִיסּוּרִין

 

To Rabbah who said that [outside of Israel] they are not experts in [writing a get] for her sake, he should require two [messengers] just as there are for all testimony in the Torah.

One witness is believed with regard to prohibitions.

 

Rabbah should require two messengers why should we believe one? In all other cases we do require two witnesses and if the messengers are testifying, then there need to be two.

The Talmud answers that one witness is sufficient for issues involving prohibitions. The requirement for two is only for court cases loans, damages, criminal activity, debts, etc.

 

אֵימוֹר דְּאָמְרִינַן עֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן בְּאִיסּוּרִין כְּגוֹן חֲתִיכָה סָפֵק שֶׁל חֵלֶב סָפֵק שֶׁל שׁוּמָּן דְּלָא אִיתַּחְזַק אִיסּוּרָא אֲבָל הָכָא דְּאִיתַּחְזַק אִיסּוּרָא דְּאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ הָוֵי דָּבָר שֶׁבָּעֶרְוָה וְאֵין דָּבָר שֶׁבְּעֶרְוָה פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁנַיִם

Say that we say that one witness is sufficient in prohibitions in cases such a piece of meat and it is doubtful whether it is forbidden fat or permitted fat, where it has not yet been presumed to be prohibited. But here, where she was presumed to be prohibited as a married woman, this is an issue of sexual prohibitions, and matters of sexual prohibitions require two witnesses.

 

The problem is that determining whether she was divorced or not is not just a case of prohibitions. A simple case of prohibitions is a case of a piece of fat t that we do not whether if it is kosher or not. If one person says its kosher, then it is considered kosher and a Jew can eat it. But this woman was known to be married. To have sufficient proof that she is no longer married, we would need two witnesses. So again, Rabbah s explanation of the mishnah is difficult.

 

רוֹב בְּקִיאִין הֵן וַאֲפִילּוּ לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר דְּחָיֵישׁ לְמִיעוּטָא סְתָם סָפְרֵי דְּדַיָּינֵי מִיגְמָר גְּמִירִי וְרַבָּנַן הוּא דְּאַצְרוּךְ וְהָכָא מִשּׁוּם עִיגּוּנָא אַקִּילוּ בַּהּ רַבָּנַן

 

Most people are experts. And even to R. Meir who takes a minority into consideration, ordinary scribes of judges are learned. And it is only the rabbis who required [the messenger to make such a declaration] and in this case, due to the fear of her being an agunah (woman who cannot remarry) the rabbis were lenient.

 

The Talmud answers that most people know how to write gittin properly. Therefore, we can accept one witness. And even if, like R. Meir, we were concerned about the minority who do not know these laws, in this case, most scribes who work for judges are even more learned. The rabbis required the messenger to make this statement just in case the scribe did not know the proper laws. But they were not so strict as to require two messengers because that might lead to agunot women who cannot remarry because they were not divorced properly. Thus, even though the messenger is essentially in the place of witnesses, the rabbis required only one.