אבן העזר קמ״בEven HaEzer 142

Se’if 1א׳

שָׁלִיחַ שֶׁהֵבִיא גֵּט מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹם בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, אוֹ מֵאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, אוֹ מִחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל, אִם הָיָה הַשָּׁלִיחַ עוֹמֵד בִּשְׁעַת כְּתִיבַת הַגֵּט וַחֲתִימָתוֹ, הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹמֵר בִּפְנֵי שְׁנַיִם: בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם, וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִתֵּן לָהּ בִּפְנֵיהֶם וְתִתְגָּרֵשׁ בּוֹ; וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין עֵדָיו יְדוּעִים אֶצְלֵנוּ. וַאֲפִלּוּ הָיוּ שְׁמוֹת עֵדָיו כִּשְׁמוֹת הַכּוּתִים, אֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין לָהֶם. וְאִם בָּא הַבַּעַל וְעָמַד וְעִרְעֵר, אֵין מַשְׁגִּיחִין בּוֹ. לְפִיכָךְ, אַף הַנָּשִׁים שֶׁאֵינָן נֶאֱמָנוֹת לוֹמַר: מֵת בַּעְלָהּ, נֶאֱמָנוֹת לְהָבִיא גֵּט זֶה וְלוֹמַר: בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם. וְכֵן שָׁלִיחַ שֶׁהֵבִיא גֵּט בֵאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַר: בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ, אִם יָבֹא הַבַּעַל וִיעַרְעֵר, אֵין מַשְׁגִּיחִין בּוֹ. וְאִם אֵין הַשָּׁלִיחַ עוֹמֵד בִּשְׁעַת כְּתִיבָה וַחֲתִימָה, לֹא יִנָּתֵן לָהּ אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן נִתְקַיֵּם בְּחוֹתְמָיו. וְיֵשׁ לַשָּׁלִיחַ לִהְיוֹת מִכְּלַל הַשְּׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁקִּיְּמוּ אוֹתוֹ; וְאִם לֹא נִתְקַיֵּם, וְנָתַן לָהּ, הֲרֵי זֶה פָּסוּל, עַד שֶׁיִּתְקַיֵּם. וְאִם בָּא הַבַּעַל וְעִרְעֵר, וְלֹא נִתְקַיֵּם, אֵינָהּ מְגֹרֶשֶׁת. אָבַד הַגֵּט, הֲרֵי זוֹ סְפֵק מְגֹרֶשֶׁת. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה הִצְרִיכוּ לוֹמַר: בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם, בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּהְיֶה הָאִשָּׁה צְרִיכָה לְקַיְּמוֹ אִם יָבֹא הַבַּעַל וִיעַרְעֵר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין עֵדִים מְצוּיִים לְקַיְּמוֹ מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹם בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ. וְנִרְאֶה לִי, דְּהָאִדָּנָא, אֲפִלּוּ בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר: בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם. הַגָּה: וּבַזְּמַן הַזֶּה, הַמֵּבִיא גֵּט, אֲפִלּוּ מִבַּיִת לְבַיִת בְּעִיר אַחַת, צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר: בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם (תּוֹסָפוֹת רֵישׁ גִּטִּין). וְעַיֵּן לְעֵיל סִימָן קמ"א סָעִיף נ"ה, דְּאֵין לִתְּנוֹ בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַבַּעַל בָּעִיר. יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּאִם יֵשׁ לַשָּׁלִיחַ הַרְשָׁאָה וְכָתַב בָּהּ מִי הֵם עֵדֵי הַגֵּט, דְּזֶה מִקְּרֵי נִתְקַיֵּם בְּחוֹתְמָיו, וְאִם כֵּן אֵין הַשָּׁלִיחַ צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר: בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם (רַשְׁבָּ"א סִימָן תקס"א וּמָרְדְּכַי רֵישׁ הִתְקַבֵּל). וְיֵשׁ חוֹלְקִים וְאוֹמְרִים דְּהַרְשָׁאָה לֹא מִקְּרֵי קִיּוּם (רִיבָ"שׁ סִימָן שי"ח וּבִסְדָרִים). וְכֵן נוֹהֲגִין דְּשָׁלִיחַ אוֹמֵר: בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם, אַף כְּשֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ הַרְשָׁאָה, וְאֵין לְשַׁנּוֹת:

An agent who brings the get from place to place outside the land of Israel or from the land of Israel to outside the land or from outside the land to the land of Israel if the agent was there when the get was written and signed, behold he must say: It was written and signed in front of me. And then he gives it to her in front of them and she will be divorced with it. And even if the witnesses are not known to them. And even if the witnesses have non-Jewish names we are not concerned. And if the husband comes and protests, we don't listen to him. Therefore, even women who are not trusted to say: My husband died are trusted to bring the get and say: It was written and signed in front of me. And similarly an agent who brings a get in the land of Israel and said: It was written and signed in front of me, even though he doesn't need to do so, if the husband comes and protests, we don't listen to him. And if the agent wasn't there at the time of the writing and signing, it shouldn't be given to her unless its signatures can be confirmed. And the agent can be one of the three to confirm it. But if it has not been upheld and he gave it to her, it is invalid until it is upheld. And if the husband comes and protests and it is not upheld, she is not divorced. If the get is lost, she is doubtfully divorced. And why did they make him say: It was written and signed in front of me, outside the land of Israel, so that the woman wouldn't have to uphold the get if the husband comes and protests, for witnesses are not easily found to uphold it from place to place outside the land. And it seems to me that now even in the land of Israel he must say: It was written and signed in front of me. Hagah: And in these time one who brings a get even from one house to another house in the same city, he must say: It was written in front of me and signed in front of me (Tosafot, the beginning of Gittin). And see above siman 141, seif 55, that he should not give it when the husband is in the city. And there are those who say that if the agent has authority and wrote in it who are the get's witnesses, that this is considered the upholding of the signatures, and if so the agent need not say: It was written and signed in front of me (Rashba siman 561, and Mordecai, beginning of ch. hitkabel). And there are those who disagree and say that authority is not considered upholding (Ribash siman 318 and in the sedarim). And thus we are accustomed to doing, that the agent says: It was written and signed in front of me, even if he has authority and we should not change this custom.

Se’if 2ב׳

בַּעַל שֶׁהֵבִיא רְאָיָה בְּרוּרָה בִּשְׁנֵי עֵדִים שֶׁגֵּט זֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בּוֹ: בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם, מְזֻיָּף הוּא, הֲרֵי זֶה בָּטֵל:

A husband who brings clear proof with two witnesses that this get about which it was said: It was written and signed in front of me, is actually forged, the get is annulled.

Se’if 3ג׳

כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵין צָרִיךְ לְקַיֵּם הַגֵּט כְּשֶׁאוֹמֵר: בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם, כָּךְ אֵין צָרִיךְ לְקַיֵּם עֵדֵי הַשְּׁלִיחוּת, אֶלָּא נֶאֱמָן לוֹמַר שֶׁהַבַּעַל עֲשָׂאוֹ שָׁלִיחַ בְּעֵדִים, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין מַכִּירִין חֲתִימַת עֵדֵי הַשְּׁלִיחוּת, אוֹ אֲפִלּוּ אֵין לוֹ שׁוּם עֵדוּת בַּשְּׁלִיחוּת אֶלָּא שֶׁאָמַר שֶׁהַבַּעַל עֲשָׂאוֹ שָׁלִיחַ כָּרָאוּי, נֶאֱמָן. וְעַיֵּן לְעֵיל סִימָן קמ"א סָעִיף י"א וְסָעִיף כ"ד כֵּיצַד נוֹהֲגִין לְכַתְּחִלָּה:

Just as it is unnecessary to uphold the get when he says: It was written and signed in front of me, so too it is unnecessary to uphold the witness to the agency. Rather he is trusted to say that the husband appointed him to be an agent in front of witnesses, even if they don't recognize the signature of the witnesses to the agency. And even if there is no testimony as to the agency whatsoever but he just said that the husband appointed him an agent in an appropriate manner, he is trusted. And see above siman 141 seif 11, and seif 24 concerning the appropriate manner of acting ab initio.