An agent who is appointed by a woman to receive her get from her husband is called a receiving agent (sh'liach kabbalah). When the get reaches this agent's hand, the divorce is completed,1 as if it has reached the hands of the woman herself.

[The agent] must be appointed in the presence of two witnesses, and two witnesses must be present when the get is conveyed to the agent. Even if the second pair of witnesses is the same as the first pair, or one of them is from the first pair, they are acceptable as witnesses.


הַשָׁלִיחַ שֶׁעוֹשָׂה הָאִשָּׁה לְקַבֵּל לָהּ גִּטָּהּ מִיַּד בַּעְלָהּ הוּא הַנִּקְרָא שְׁלִיחַ קַבָּלָה. וּמִשֶּׁיַגִּיעַ הַגֵּט לְיַד שְׁלוּחָהּ תִּתְגָּרֵשׁ כְּאִלּוּ הִגִּיעַ לְיָדָהּ. וּצְרִיכָה לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ בִּשְׁנֵי עֵדִים. וּצְרִיכָה שְׁנֵי עֵדִים שֶׁיָּעִידוּ שֶׁהִגִּיעַ הַגֵּט לְיַד שְׁלוּחָהּ. וַאֲפִלּוּ הֵם הָרִאשׁוֹנִים אוֹ אֶחָד מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנִים הֲרֵי זוֹ עֵדוּת גְּמוּרָה:


When does the above2 apply? When the get is lost or torn. If, however, the get is in the possession of the sh'liach kabbalah, there is no need for witnesses. This applies whether the get was given by the husband in private, or it was given in the presence of witnesses. The presence of the get in the possession of the agent is equivalent to its presence in the possession of the woman.3 Nevertheless, a priori, the get should be given only in the presence of witnesses who observe its transfer, as is the case with regard to [a get given to] the woman herself.4


בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁאָבַד הַגֵּט אוֹ נִקְרַע. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה הַגֵּט יוֹצֵא מִתַּחַת יְדֵי שְׁלִיחַ קַבָּלָה אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ עֵדִים. בֵּין שֶׁנְּתָנוֹ לוֹ הַבַּעַל בֵּינוֹ לְבֵינוֹ בֵּין שֶׁנִּמְסַר לוֹ בְּעֵדִים. יְצִיאָתוֹ מִתַּחַת יָדוֹ כִּיצִיאָתוֹ מִתַּחַת יְדֵי הָאִשָּׁה. וְאַף עַל פִּי כֵן לֹא יִתֵּן לוֹ הַגֵּט לְכַתְּחִלָּה אֶלָּא בְּעֵדֵי מְסִירָה כְּמוֹ הָאִשָּׁה עַצְמָהּ:


A husband may not appoint an agent to receive a get for his wife.5 He may, however, appoint an agent to deliver a get to his wife. Such an agent is referred to as a delivery agent (sh'liach holachah).


הַבַּעַל אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲשׂוֹת שָׁלִיחַ לְקַבֵּל גֵּט לְאִשְׁתּוֹ. אֲבָל יָכוֹל לַעֲשׂוֹת שָׁלִיחַ לְהוֹלִיךְ הַגֵּט לְאִשְׁתּוֹ וְזֶה הוּא הַנִּקְרָא שְׁלִיחַ הוֹלָכָה:


Similarly, a woman may appoint an agent to fetch her get for her from her husband. Such an agent is referred to as an agent who fetches (sh'liach hava'ah). Neither a sh'liach holachah nor a sh'liach hava'ah need [be appointed in the presence of] witnesses.6


וְכֵן הָאִשָּׁה שׁוֹלַחַת שָׁלִיחַ לְהָבִיא לָהּ גֵּט מִיַּד בַּעְלָהּ וְזֶה הוּא הַנִּקְרָא שְׁלִיחַ הֲבָאָה. וְאֵין שְׁלִיחַ הוֹלָכָה וַהֲבָאָה צָרִיךְ עֵדִים:


A woman is not divorced through the medium of a get sent by her husband or brought by a sh'liach hava'ah [whom she appointed] until the get reaches her hand.

Whenever the term agent is used with regard to a get without any further explanation, the intent is a sh'liach holachah or a sh'liach hava'ah.


וְאֵין הָאִשָּׁה מִתְגָּרֶשֶׁת בְּגֵט שֶׁשָּׁלַח הַבַּעַל אוֹ שֶׁהֵבִיא לָהּ שְׁלִיחַ הֲבָאָה עַד שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ גֵּט לְיָדָהּ. וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּעִנְיַן גִּטִּין שָׁלִיחַ סְתָם הוּא שְׁלִיחַ הוֹלָכָה אוֹ שְׁלִיחַ הֲבָאָה:

Mishneh Torah (Moznaim)

Featuring a modern English translation and a commentary that presents a digest of the centuries of Torah scholarship which have been devoted to the study of the Mishneh Torah by Maimonides.


Anyone is acceptable to act as an agent with regard to a divorce, whether as a sh'liach kabbalah, a sh'liach holachah or a sh'liach hava'ah,7 with the exception of five individuals: a gentile, a servant, a deaf mute, a mentally incompetent individual and a minor.8 If one of these individuals brings or receives [a get], the divorce is not effective.


הַכּל כְּשֵׁרִין לִשְׁלִיחוּת הַגֵּט בֵּין לִשְׁלִיחַ קַבָּלָה בֵּין לִשְׁלִיחַ הוֹלָכָה וַהֲבָאָה חוּץ מִן הַחֲמִשָּׁה. הָעַכּוּ״‎ם וְהָעֶבֶד וְהַחֵרֵשׁ וְהַשּׁוֹטֶה וְהַקָּטָן. וְאִם קִבֵּל אוֹ הֵבִיא אֶחָד מֵהֶן אֵינוֹ גֵּט:


Even women, relatives9 and individuals who are disqualified [from serving as witnesses] because of the violation of Rabbinic law are acceptable to serve as agents for a divorce.10 Individuals who are disqualified because of the violation of Scriptural law, by contrast, are not acceptable [to serve as agents] to deliver a get. If they bring it, the divorce is unacceptable.

When does the above11 apply? When the signatures on the get have been verified.12 If, however, we must rely only on the words of an individual who is disqualified because of the violation of Scriptural law, the divorce is void entirely.13


אֲבָל הַנָּשִׁים וְהַקְּרוֹבִים כְּשֵׁרִים. וַאֲפִלּוּ הַפְּסוּלִין מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים בַּעֲבֵרָה כְּשֵׁרִין לִשְׁלִיחוּת גֵּט. אֲבָל הַפְּסוּלִין בַּעֲבֵרָה מִדִּבְרֵי תּוֹרָה פְּסוּלִין לַהֲבָאַת הַגֵּט. וְאִם הֵבִיאוּ הֲרֵי זֶה פָּסוּל. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁנִּתְקַיֵּם הַגֵּט בְּחוֹתְמָיו אֲבָל אִם לֹא נִסְמֹךְ בּוֹ אֶלָּא עַל דִּבְרֵי פָּסוּל בַּעֲבֵרָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה אֵינוֹ גֵּט:


If the agent was a minor when he was given the get, and he attained majority when he brought it [to the woman], [or he was a] deaf mute and gained the ability to hear and speak, [or he was] mentally incompetent and gained competence, [or he was] a gentile and converted, or a servant and was freed, the divorce is void.14

If, however, the husband gives [an agent] a get while [the agent] is able to hear and speak, [or the agent then] becomes a deaf mute and afterwards regains his ability to hear and speak, or [the agent] was mentally competent, he lost his competence and then regained it when he brought it to the woman, the get is acceptable, for at the outset and at the conclusion, [the agent] was of sound mind.15


הָיָה הַשָּׁלִיחַ קָטָן כְּשֶׁנָּתַן לוֹ הַגֵּט וְגָדַל כְּשֶׁהֱבִיאוֹ. חֵרֵשׁ וְנִתְפַּקֵּחַ. שׁוֹטֶה וְנִשְׁתַּפָּה. עַכּוּ״‎ם וְנִתְגַּיֵּר. עֶבֶד וְנִשְׁתַּחְרֵר. הֲרֵי זֶה בָּטֵל. אֲבָל אִם נָתַן לוֹ הַגֵּט וְהוּא פִּקֵּחַ וְנִתְחָרֵשׁ וְחָזַר וְנִתְפַּקֵּחַ. הָיָה שָׁפוּי כְּשֶׁנָּתַן לוֹ הַגֵּט וְנִשְׁתַּטָּה וְחָזַר וְנִשְׁתַּפָּה כְּשֶׁהֵבִיא הַגֵּט לְיַד הָאִשָּׁה הֲרֵי זֶה גֵּט כָּשֵׁר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁתְּחִלָּתוֹ וְסוֹפוֹ בְּדַעַת:


When a woman appoints an agent in the presence of witnesses and tells him: "Take my get and keep it for me in your possession," the person is a sh'liach kabbalah. It is as if she told him: "Receive my get for me."

A woman may appoint a sh'liach kabbalah to receive her get for her from an agent appointed by her husband.16

A girl below the age of majority may not appoint a sh'liach kabbalah. Although she may acquire property by virtue of her courtyard in the same manner as an adult woman17 [she does not have the privilege of appointing an agent]. The rationale is that [the appointment of] a sh'liach kabbalah requires witnesses, and witnesses may not testify with regard to a minor, because she is not of complete mental competence.18


הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁעָשְׂתָה שָׁלִיחַ בְּעֵדִים וְאָמְרָה לוֹ טֹל לִי גִּטִּי וִיהֵא לִי בְּיָדְךָ הֲרֵי זֶה שָׁלִיחַ לְקַבָּלָה וּכְאִלּוּ אָמְרָה לוֹ הִתְקַבֵּל לִי גִּטִּי. וְיֵשׁ לָאִשָּׁה לַעֲשׂוֹת שְׁלִיחַ קַבָּלָה לְקַבֵּל לָהּ גִּטָּהּ מִיַּד שְׁלוּחוֹ שֶׁל בַּעְלָהּ. וּקְטַנָּה אֵינָהּ עוֹשָׂה שָׁלִיחַ לְקַבָּלָה. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחֲצֵרָהּ קוֹנָה לָהּ גִּטָּהּ כִּגְדוֹלָה. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשְּׁלִיחַ קַבָּלָה צָרִיךְ עֵדִים וְאֵין מְעִידִין עַל הַקָּטָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ בֶּן דֵּעָה גְּמוּרָה:


[The following laws apply] when a woman has appointed a sh'liach kabbalah and her husband told him: "I do not want you to receive the get for her. Instead, here is her get. Bring it to her." The husband has this prerogative, and the person becomes a sh'liach holachah, rather than a sh'liach kabbalah.19

If, however, the husband tells [the woman's agent]: "Receive the get for her," "Here it is," or "Acquire it for her," he has not revoked the agency [with which] the sh'liach kabbalah [was charged]. But if [the husband] tells [the agent]: "Bring it to her," he has revoked the agency [with which] the sh'liach kabbalah [was charged] and has made him the agent of the husband.20 Similarly, if the husband said: "Bring it and give it to her," he has revoked the agency [with which] the sh'liach kabbalah [was charged].21


הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁעָשְׂתָה שָׁלִיחַ לְקַבָּלָה וְאָמַר לוֹ הַבַּעַל אֵין רְצוֹנִי שֶׁתְּקַבֵּל לָהּ גִּטָּהּ אֶלָּא הֲרֵי זֶה גִּטָּהּ הוֹלֵךְ אוֹתוֹ לָהּ. הָרְשׁוּת בְּיַד הַבַּעַל וְנַעֲשָׂה זֶה שָׁלִיחַ לְהוֹלָכָה וְלֹא שָׁלִיחַ לְקַבָּלָה. אֲבָל אִם אָמַר לוֹ הִתְקַבֵּל לָהּ גִּטָּהּ [אוֹ הֵא לְךָ] אוֹ זְכֵה לָהּ לֹא עָקַר שְׁלִיחוּת הַקַּבָּלָה. אֲבָל אִם אָמַר לוֹ הוֹלֵךְ לָהּ עָקַר שְׁלִיחוּת הַקַּבָּלָה וְנַעֲשָׂה שְׁלִיחַ הַבַּעַל. וְכֵן אִם אָמַר לוֹ הוֹלֵךְ וְתֵן לָהּ עִקַּר שְׁלִיחוּת הַקַּבָּלָה:


[In the following situation, although the get reaches the woman's hand, the divorce is not effective because of the confusion in the delegation of agency.] An agent appointed by a woman came to receive her get from her husband. The agent told the husband: "I am a sh'liach kabbalah."

The husband responded: "Bring the get [in the capacity] in which she appointed you"22 - i.e., he did not revoke his agency. Instead, it is as if he had said: "Whether she appointed you to be a sh'liach kabbalah or a sh'liach hava'ah, you remain in that capacity."

The agent brought [the woman] the get, but she told him: "I did not appoint you to be a sh'liach kabbalah, but rather to be a sh'liach hava'ah." Even if the agent gives her the get, the divorce is not effective, for in speaking to the husband, the agent revoked the agency that he was granted. It is as if he had told him: "I was never appointed a sh'liach hava'ah on her behalf."


שְׁלִיחַ הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁבָּא לְקַבֵּל גֵּט מִן הַבַּעַל וְאָמַר לוֹ שְׁלִיחַ קַבָּלָה אָנִי וְאוֹמֵר לוֹ הַבַּעַל הוֹלֵךְ גֵּט זֶה כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמְרָה כְּלוֹמַר אֵינִי עוֹקֵר שְׁלִיחוּתְךָ אֶלָּא בֵּין שֶׁעָשְׂתָה אוֹתְךָ שְׁלִיחַ קַבָּלָה אוֹ שְׁלִיחַ הֲבָאָה הֲרֵי אַתָּה כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמְרָה. וְהֵבִיא אֶת הַגֵּט. וְאָמְרָה לוֹ לֹא [שָׁלִיחַ לְקַבָּלָה] שַׂמְתִּיךָ אֶלָּא שְׁלִיחַ הֲבָאָה אֲפִלּוּ הִגִּיעַ לְיָדָהּ אֵינָהּ מְגֹרֶשֶׁת. שֶׁהֲרֵי עָקַר הַשָּׁלִיחַ שְׁלִיחוּת שֶׁאָמְרָה הִיא וְאָמַר לַבַּעַל מֵעוֹלָם לֹא נַעֲשֵׂיתִי שְׁלִיחַ הֲבָאָה לָהּ:


[A different ruling applies in the following instance.] The agent told the husband, "I am a sh'liach hava'ah," and the husband told him, "Bring [the get in the capacity] in which she appointed you."

The agent brought [the woman] the get, but she told him: "I appointed you to be a sh'liach kabbalah." When the get is delivered to the woman, the divorce is effective, for he did not revoke the agency that he was granted. He merely reduced [her dependence on him]. For she appointed him [as an agent] to receive [the get], and he said: "I will merely bring it."23


אָמַר שָׁלִיחַ לַבַּעַל שְׁלִיחַ הֲבָאָה אֲנִי וְאָמַר לוֹ הַבַּעַל הוֹלֵךְ כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמְרָה. וְהֵבִיא אֶת הַגֵּט. וְאָמְרָה לוֹ שָׁלִיחַ לְקַבָּלָה שַׂמְתִּיךָ. כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ גֵּט לְיָדָהּ מְגֹרֶשֶׁת שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא עָקַר שְׁלִיחוּת שֶׁאָמְרָה אֶלָּא גָּרַע אוֹתָהּ שֶׁהֲרֵי הִיא אוֹמֶרֶת לְקַבָּלָה וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לַבַּעַל לַהֲבָאָה בִּלְבַד:


[The following rules apply when] a husband sends a get to his wife, and when the agent attempts to give it to her, she refuses to take it and tells him in the presence of witnesses, "Hold the get in safekeeping,"24 or "You are an agent to receive it for me." Until the get is given to the woman, the status of the divorce is in doubt.25 Once it reaches her possession, the divorce is definitely binding.


הַבַּעַל שֶׁשָּׁלַח גֵּט לְאִשְׁתּוֹ. בָּא שָׁלִיחַ לִתְּנוֹ לָהּ וְלֹא נְטַלְתּוֹ. אֶלָּא אָמְרָה לוֹ בִּפְנֵי עֵדִים יִהְיֶה (לִי) גֵּט זֶה פִּקָּדוֹן אֶצְלְךָ. אוֹ שֶׁאָמְרָה לוֹ הֲרֵי אַתְּ שָׁלִיחַ לְקַבְּלוֹ לִי. הֲרֵי זוֹ מְגֹרֶשֶׁת בְּסָפֵק עַד שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ גֵּט לְיָדָהּ. וּמִשֶּׁיַגִּיעַ הַגֵּט לְיָדָהּ תִּתְגָּרֵשׁ וַדַּאי:


When an agent brings a get, he must give it to the woman in the presence of two [witnesses].26 These two [witnesses] must read [the get] and then have it given in their presence.27 For the laws applying to the exchange between the agent and the woman are the same as those applying to her exchange with her husband, for the agent is taking his place.

Accordingly, if the agent gave [the get] to her without having it read by the witnesses who observed its transfer, and the woman took it and threw it into the ocean, the status of the divorce is in doubt.28


שָׁלִיחַ שֶׁהֵבִיא גֵּט כְּשֶׁהוּא נוֹתְנוֹ לָהּ נוֹתְנוֹ לָהּ בִּפְנֵי שְׁנַיִם וְאוֹתָן הַשְּׁנַיִם צְרִיכִין לִקְרוֹתוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִנָּתֵן לָהּ בִּפְנֵיהֶם. שֶׁדִּין הַשָּׁלִיחַ עִם הָאִשָּׁה כְּדִין הַבַּעַל עִמָּהּ שֶׁתַּחְתָּיו הוּא קָם. לְפִיכָךְ אִם נְתָנוֹ הַשָּׁלִיחַ לָהּ וְלֹא קְרָאוּהוּ עֵדֵי מְסִירָה וּנְטַלְתּוֹ וּזְרַקְתּוֹ לַיָּם הֲרֵי זוֹ סָפֵק מְגֹרֶשֶׁת:


When an agent transgresses and gives [a woman her] get in private, he should take it back from her and give it to her in the presence of two [witnesses].29 If he dies [and thus this is no longer possible], and the signatures of the witnesses on the get that the woman possesses have been verified, the divorce is acceptable.


עָבַר הַשָּׁלִיחַ וְנָתַן הַגֵּט בֵּינוֹ לְבֵינָהּ יִטְּלֶנּוּ מִמֶּנָּה וְיַחֲזֹר וְיִתְּנוֹ לָהּ בִּפְנֵי שְׁנַיִם. וְאִם מֵת הוֹאִיל וְהַגֵּט יוֹצֵא מִתַּחַת יָדָהּ מְקֻיָּם בְּחוֹתְמָיו הֲרֵי זֶה גֵּט כָּשֵׁר:


Even when a get is delivered to the woman [for whom it is intended], it can be nullified [in the following instances]: The agent took the get, but the husband changed his mind before it reached the woman and told him or her: "The get that I sent you is void," he sent another agent to nullify [the get], or he told others, "The get that I sent to my wife is void."30

When [a husband] nullifies the get in the presence of other people,31 there must be at least two people present.32 If the get has already been delivered to the woman or to a sh'liach kabbalah, the husband can no longer nullify it.33 [This applies] even if he nullifies the get within a very brief time34 [after appointing the agent];35 since [the get] was nullified after being delivered to the woman, to [her] sh'liach kabbalah or to her courtyard, it is not void, and the divorce is effective.


שָׁלִיחַ שֶׁנָּטַל הַגֵּט וְקֹדֶם שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ לְיַד הָאִשָּׁה חָזַר הַבַּעַל וְאָמַר לוֹ גֵּט שֶׁשָּׁלַחְתִּי עִמְּךָ בָּטֵל הוּא. אוֹ שֶׁקָּדַם וְאָמַר לָאִשָּׁה גֵּט שֶׁשָּׁלַחְתִּי לִיךְ בָּטֵל הוּא. אוֹ שֶׁשָּׁלַח שָׁלִיחַ אַחֵר לְבַטְּלוֹ. אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר לַאֲחֵרִים גֵּט שֶׁשָּׁלַחְתִּי לְאִשְׁתִּי בָּטֵל הוּא. הֲרֵי זֶה בָּטֵל וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִגִּיעַ גֵּט לְיָדָהּ. וְכָל הַמְבַטֵּל בִּפְנֵי אֲחֵרִים צָרִיךְ שֶׁיְּבַטֵּל בִּפְנֵי שְׁנַיִם. וְאִם אַחַר שֶׁהִגִּיעַ גֵּט לְיָדָהּ אוֹ לְיַד שְׁלִיחַ קַבָּלָה אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְבַטְּלוֹ וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָזַר בְּתוֹךְ כְּדֵי דִּבּוּר וּבִטְּלוֹ הוֹאִיל וְאַחַר שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לְיָדָהּ אוֹ לְיַד שְׁלִיחַ קַבָּלָה אוֹ לַחֲצֵרָהּ בִּטְּלוֹ אֵינוֹ בָּטֵל וַהֲרֵי זֶה גֵּט כָּשֵׁר:


Although [a husband] was seeking to appoint an agent to nullify [a get], or he was seeking two individuals so that he could nullify [the get] in their presence, and during the time he was searching for these individuals the get reached the woman's hand, and afterwards he nullified it, it is not void.36 Despite the fact that he was trying to nullify it before it reached her hand [the divorce is effective].


הָיָה מְחַזֵּר וּמְבַקֵּשׁ שָׁלִיחַ כְּדֵי לְבַטְּלוֹ. אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מְבַקֵּשׁ שְׁנַיִם שֶׁיְּבַטְּלֶנּוּ בִּפְנֵיהֶם וּבֵין שֶׁהוּא מְחַזֵּר וְרוֹדֵף הִגִּיעַ גֵּט לְיָדָהּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ בִּטְּלוֹ אֵינוֹ בָּטֵל. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהָיָה מְחַזֵּר לְבַטְּלוֹ קֹדֶם שֶׁהִגִּיעַ הַגֵּט לְיָדָהּ:


If [the husband] told ten men: "Write a get and give it to my wife,"37 he may nullify [the get] in the presence of one of the ten, although the others are not present. And he may nullify it in the presence of two other people [who were not involved originally].

If he sent the get via two [agents], he may negate one of the agents although the other is not present. Even when there are ten agents, when he negates [the agency] in the presence of one of them, the get is void.38


אָמַר לַעֲשָׂרָה כִּתְבוּ גֵּט וּתְנוּ לְאִשְׁתִּי יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל לָזֶה שֶׁלֹּא בִּפְנֵי זֶה וַאֲפִלּוּ בִּפְנֵי שְׁנַיִם אֲחֵרִים. שָׁלַח הַגֵּט בְּיַד שְׁנַיִם הֲרֵי זֶה יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל זֶה שֶׁלֹּא בִּפְנֵי זֶה. וַאֲפִלּוּ הָיוּ עֲשָׂרָה מִשֶּׁבִּטְּלוֹ בִּפְנֵי אֶחָד מֵהֶם בָּטֵל הַגֵּט:


Similarly, when a person tells two [witnesses],39 "The get that I [am intending to] write for my wife is nullified," although he has a get written afterwards and gives it to her in the presence of two other [witnesses], the divorce is void. This is referred to as lodging an objection with regard to a get.40

Similarly, if [the husband] were to tell two [witnesses]: "Any get that so and so will write for me is nullified," "Any get that I will have written in the court of so and so is nullified," or "Any get that I will have written in the next twenty years is nullified," the get is nullified.

Similarly, if he told two [witnesses]: "Any get that I write for so and so, my wife, is nullified. And any statements that I make to nullify this objection are nullified," the get is void, although he had it written and given to her, despite the fact that he nullified his objection before having the get written.


וְכֵן מִי שֶׁאָמַר לִשְׁנַיִם גֵּט שֶׁאֲנִי כּוֹתֵב לְאִשְׁתִּי בָּטֵל הוּא וְכָתַב אַחַר כָּךְ גֵּט וּנְתָנוֹ לָהּ בִּפְנֵי שְׁנַיִם אֲחֵרִים הֲרֵי זֶה בָּטֵל. וְזוֹ הִיא מְסִירַת הַמּוֹדָעָא עַל הַגֵּט. וְכֵן אִם אָמַר לָהֶם כָּל גֵּט שֶׁיִּכְתֹּב לִי פְּלוֹנִי בָּטֵל. אוֹ כָּל גֵּט שֶׁאֶכְתֹּב בְּבֵית דִּינוֹ שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי הֲרֵי זֶה גֵּט בָּטֵל. אוֹ כָּל גֵּט שֶׁאֶכְתֹּב מִכָּאן וְעַד עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה בָּטֵל. הֲרֵי גֵּט בָּטֵל. וְכֵן אִם אָמַר בִּפְנֵי שְׁנַיִם כָּל גֵּט שֶׁאֶכְתֹּב לִפְלוֹנִית אִשְׁתִּי בָּטֵל הוּא וְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁאֲבַטֵּל בּוֹ מוֹדָעָא זֹאת הֲרֵי הוּא בָּטֵל וְכָתַב אַחַר כָּךְ גֵּט וּנְתָנוֹ לָהּ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁבִּטֵּל הַמּוֹדָעָא קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּכְתֹּב הַגֵּט הֲרֵי הַגֵּט בָּטֵל:


How can the latter situation be corrected?41 The witnesses should tell [the husband] before the composition of the get: "Affirm in our presence that any statements that you have made that when verified would cause [this] get to be nullified, are themselves nullified."42 [The husband] must answer "Yes."

Afterwards, he should instruct them to write the get, sign it and give it to his wife. We do not let [the husband] leave until the get is delivered [to his wife], lest he go out and nullify [the get].43

Neither a person who lodges an objection [to a get], nor one who seeks to nullify such an objection needs [to have his statements affirmed by] an act of contract.


אִם כֵּן מַהוּ תַּקָּנַת דָּבָר זֶה. שֶׁיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ הָעֵדִים קֹדֶם כְּתִיבַת הַגֵּט אֱמֹר בְּפָנֵינוּ שֶׁכָּל הַדְּבָרִים שֶׁמָּסַרְתָּ שֶׁגּוֹרְמִין כְּשֶׁיִּתְקַיְּמוּ אוֹתָן הַדְּבָרִים לְבַטֵּל גֵּט הֲרֵי הֵן בְּטֵלִים וְהוּא אוֹמֵר הֵן. וְאַחַר כָּךְ אוֹמֵר לָהֶם לִכְתֹּב וְלַחְתֹּם וְלִתֵּן לָהּ וְלֹא יְנִיחוּהוּ לֵילֵךְ עַד שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ הַגֵּט לְיָדָהּ כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יֵצֵא וִיבַטְּלוֹ. וְאֵין הַמּוֹסֵר מוֹדָעָא וְלֹא הַמְבַטֵּל מוֹדָעָא צָרִיךְ קִנְיָן:


When a person has sent a get via an agent and [later] nullifies [the giving of] the get, he may divorce the woman with [this get] whenever he desires. He did not nullify the get as a get; he merely nullified the agency.

Therefore, if the get was in the possession of the husband and he nullified it - e.g., he said: "This get is nullified" - he may never use it for a divorce. It is like a broken shard, and if it is used for a divorce, the divorce is not effective.44

Similarly, if the get was entrusted to the agent, but the husband made an explicit statement, saying: "The get that I sent is nullified [and may not] serve as a get," he may never use it to effect a divorce.


הַשּׁוֹלֵחַ גֵּט בְּיַד הַשָּׁלִיחַ וּבִטֵּל הַגֵּט הֲרֵי חוֹזֵר וּמְגָרֵשׁ בּוֹ כְּשֶׁיִּרְצֶה. שֶׁלֹּא בִּטְּלוֹ מִתּוֹרַת גֵּט אֶלָּא מִתּוֹרַת שְׁלִיחוּת. לְפִיכָךְ אִם הָיָה הַגֵּט בְּיַד הַבַּעַל וּבִטְּלוֹ כְּגוֹן שֶׁאָמַר גֵּט זֶה בָּטֵל הוּא אֵינוֹ מְגָרֵשׁ בּוֹ לְעוֹלָם וַהֲרֵי הוּא כְּחֶרֶס הַנִּשְׁבָּר. וְאִם גֵּרֵשׁ בּוֹ אֵינָהּ מְגֹרֶשֶׁת. וְכֵן אִם פֵּרֵשׁ בְּעֵת שֶׁבִּטְּלוֹ וְהוּא בְּיַד הַשָּׁלִיחַ וְאָמַר גֵּט שֶׁשָּׁלַחְתִּי הֲרֵי הוּא בָּטֵל מִלִּהְיוֹת גֵּט אֵין מְגָרֵשׁ בּוֹ לְעוֹלָם:


Which wording can be used to nullify a get? [The husband] says: "It is nullified," "I cannot abide by it," "May this get not be effective," "[May it] not permit [her]," "[May it] not release [her], "[May it] not send [her] forth," "[May it] not divorce [her]," "May it be a shard," "May it be like a shard," or "Behold it is like a shard" - If he used any of these expressions or a similar one, he has negated it.45


בְּאֵי זֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹת מְבַטֵּל הַגֵּט. אָמַר בָּטֵל הוּא. אִי אֶפְשִׁי בּוֹ. גֵּט זֶה לֹא יוֹעִיל. לֹא יַתִּיר. וְלֹא יַעֲזֹב. וְלֹא יְשַׁלֵּחַ. וְלֹא יְגָרֵשׁ. יְהֵא כְּחֶרֶס. יְהִי חֶרֶס. הֲרֵי הוּא כְּחֶרֶס. וְאִם אָמַר אֶחָד מֵאֵלּוּ וְכָל הַדּוֹמֶה לָהֶן הֲרֵי זֶה בִּטְּלוֹ:


If, however, [the husband] says: "This get is not a get," "It is unacceptable," "It is not effective," "It does not permit [her]," "It does not release [her], "It does not send [her] forth," "It does not divorce [her]," "It is a shard," his statements are not effective. This wording does not [indicate his desire to] nullify [the get]. Instead, they are statements of fact, and in this instance, statements of incorrect fact.46 It is as if someone said that a forbidden entity were permitted or that an impure object were pure.


אֲבָל אִם אָמַר גֵּט זֶה אֵינוֹ. גֵּט פָּסוּל הוּא. אֵינוֹ מוֹעִיל. אֵינוֹ מַתִּיר. אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּחַ. אֵינוֹ מְגָרֵשׁ. חֶרֶס הוּא. לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. שֶׁאֵין זֶה לָשׁוֹן מְבַטֵּל אֶלָּא לְשׁוֹן מוֹדִיעַ אֲמִתַּת הַדָּבָר וַהֲרֵי הוֹדִיעַ לָנוּ דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ כֵּן. כְּמִי שֶׁאוֹמֵר עַל דָּבָר אָסוּר שֶׁהוּא מֻתָּר אוֹ עַל דָּבָר הַטָּמֵא שֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר:


If he says, "This get is nullified," [it is possible that] the implication is the use of the past tense, as in the phrase [Song of Songs 5:6]: "He turned away and was gone." Thus, there is a question concerning the matter.47 Therefore, if [a woman] has been divorced with this get [after such statements were made], the status of the divorce is in doubt.


אָמַר גֵּט זֶה בָּטַל שֶׁמַּשְׁמָעוֹ פֹּעַל שֶׁעָבַר כְּגוֹן (שיר השירים ה ו) “‎חָמַק עָבַר״‎ הֲרֵי זֶה סָפֵק. לְפִיכָךְ אִם נִתְגָּרְשָׁה בְּגֵט זֶה הֲרֵי סָפֵק מְגֹרֶשֶׁת:


[As reflected in the following instance, an explicit statement must be made to nullify the get: A man] sent a get to his wife [via an agent]. The agent returned to him and said: "I could not find her," or "She did not want to receive it." Although the husband answered: "Blessed be He who is good and does good," or made other statements that imply that he no longer wants to divorce her, and that he is happy that the get was not delivered, the get is not nullified. Instead, he may give it to her and the divorce will be effective. [For the get to be nullified,] he must explicitly say "Do not give it to her," or he should explicitly nullify it [using one of the above expressions].


מִי שֶׁשָּׁלַח גֵּט לְאִשְׁתּוֹ וּבָא שָׁלִיחַ וְאָמַר לוֹ לֹא מְצָאתִיהָ אוֹ לֹא רָצְתָה לִקַּח. וְאָמַר הַבַּעַל בָּרוּךְ הַטּוֹב וְהַמֵּיטִיב אוֹ כַּיּוֹצֵא בִּדְבָרִים אֵלּוּ שֶׁמַּשְׁמִיעִין שֶׁאֵין בְּדַעְתּוֹ לְגָרְשָׁהּ שֶׁהֲרֵי שָׂמֵחַ בְּעִכּוּב הַגֵּט. לֹא בָּטֵל הַגֵּט אֶלָּא יִתֵּן וְתִהְיֶה מְגֹרֶשֶׁת. עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר לוֹ בְּפֵרוּשׁ לֹא תִּתֵּן לָהּ אוֹ יְבַטֵּל בְּפֵרוּשׁ:


A person who sent a get to his wife [via an agent] and then nullified [the get] in the presence of two other people,48 and similarly, a person who issued an objection [nullifying] a get, should be given stripes for rebelliousness, because he makes it possible for illegitimate children to be conceived.

Since a get reached [the woman], [it is possible that] she will marry on this basis. [Only] afterwards, when the witnesses in whose presence the husband nullified the get or issued an objection before the get was written appear [will she realize the difficulty]. Thus, a child [conceived in her second marriage] will be illegitimate.


מִי שֶׁשָּׁלַח גֵּט לְאִשְׁתּוֹ וְחָזַר וּבִטְּלוֹ בִּפְנֵי שְׁנַיִם אֲחֵרִים. וְכֵן מִי שֶׁמָּסַר מוֹדָעָא עַל הַגֵּט מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁגּוֹרֵם לִהְיוֹת מַמְזֵרִים. שֶׁהֲרֵי יַגִּיעַ גֵּט לְיָדָהּ וְתִנָּשֵׂא בּוֹ וְאַחַר זְמַן יֵצְאוּ עֵדִים שֶׁבִּטֵּל בִּפְנֵיהֶם אוֹ שֶׁמָּסַר מוֹדָעָא בִּפְנֵיהֶם קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּכְתֹּב הַגֵּט וְנִמְצָא הַוָּלָד מַמְזֵר:


When an agent brings a get and gives it to a woman, we do not suspect that the husband nullified it. Instead, he should give it to the woman under the presumption that it is acceptable, and the woman may marry on this basis. If it is discovered afterwards that [the husband] negated it, [the woman] must leave [her second husband], and any children conceived are illegitimate.

Similarly, when [a husband] has a get written and gives it to his wife, we do not suspect that perhaps he lodged an objection regarding this get. Instead, we operate under the conception that the get is acceptable, and the woman is allowed to marry on this basis.


שָׁלִיחַ שֶׁהֵבִיא גֵּט וּנְתָנוֹ לָאִשָּׁה אֵין אוֹמְרִין שֶׁמָּא בִּטְּלוֹ הַבַּעַל אֶלָּא נוֹתְנִין אוֹתוֹ לָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהוּא כָּשֵׁר וְתִנָּשֵׂא בּוֹ. וְאִם נִמְצָא אַחַר כֵּן שֶׁבִּטְּלוֹ תֵּצֵא וְהַוָּלָד מַמְזֵר. וְכֵן הַכּוֹתֵב גֵּט וּנְתָנוֹ לְאִשְׁתּוֹ אֵין אוֹמְרִין שֶׁמָּא מָסַר מוֹדָעָא עַל גֵּט זֶה אֶלָּא הֲרֵי הוּא בְּחֶזְקַת כַּשְׁרוּת וְתִנָּשֵׂא בּוֹ:


Similarly, when an agent brings a get [that was sent by] a man who was sick or elderly, he may give it to the woman under the presumption that the husband is still alive. If, however, the husband was in his death throes when [the agent left], even when he gives the get to the woman the status of the divorce is in doubt. For the majority of those in their death throes will die, and a get given after death is not effective.49

Similarly, when a city is surrounded by an army50 and held under siege, a ship is in distress at sea,51 or a person is taken out to be judged [with regard to a capital case],52 we presume that any person in such a situation is alive. If a person in such a situation has sent a get [to his wife] via an agent, he may give it to her, and the presumption will be that the divorce is effective.


וְכֵן הַמֵּבִיא גֵּט וְהִנִּיחַ הַבַּעַל חוֹלֶה אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה זָקֵן נוֹתְנוֹ לָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהוּא קַיָּם. אֲבָל אִם הִנִּיחוֹ גּוֹסֵס שֶׁרֹב גּוֹסְסִין לְמִיתָה וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנְּתָנוֹ לָהּ הֲרֵי זֶה סְפֵק גֵּרוּשִׁין שֶׁאֵין גֵּט לְאַחַר מִיתָה. וְכֵן עִיר שֶׁהִקִּיפָהּ הַחַיִל וְהִיא בְּמָצוֹר וּסְפִינָה הַמּוּטְרֶפֶת בַּיָּם וְהַיּוֹצֵא לָדוּן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ בְּחֶזְקַת חַיִּים. וְאִם הָיָה גֵּט אֶחָד מֵהֶן בְּיַד הַשָּׁלִיחַ נוֹתְנוֹ לְאִשְׁתּוֹ וְתִהְיֶה בְּחֶזְקַת מְגֹרֶשֶׁת:


When, by contrast, a city has been conquered by an attacking army and [its wall] broken, a ship is lost at sea,53 a person is being taken out to be executed by a gentile court,54 or he is being dragged by a beast of prey, swept away by a river or an avalanche has fallen upon him, the stringencies applying to both the living and the dead, are followed.

If [a person in one of these situations gave] a get to an agent, the agent should not give it to the husband's wife.55 If, however, he gives it to her, the status of the divorce is in doubt.56 If it is known that the husband died before the get reached his wife, the divorce is void.


אֲבָל עִיר שֶׁכְּבָשָׁהּ הַגַּיִס וְהֻבְקְעָה וּסְפִינָה שֶׁאָבְדָה בַּיָּם וְהַיּוֹצֵא לֵהָרֵג מִבֵּית דִּין שֶׁל עַכּוּ״‎ם. וּמִי שֶׁגְּרָרַתּוּ חַיָּה אוֹ שְׁטָפוֹ נָהָר אוֹ נָפְלָה עָלָיו מַפּלֶת נוֹתְנִים עֲלֵיהֶם חֻמְרֵי חַיִּים וְחֻמְרֵי מֵתִים. וְאִם הָיָה גֵּט אֶחָד מֵהֶן בְּיַד הַשָּׁלִיחַ אֵינוֹ נוֹתְנוֹ לְאִשְׁתּוֹ וְאִם נְתָנוֹ לָהּ הֲרֵי זוֹ סְפֵק מְגֹרֶשֶׁת. וְאִם נוֹדַע שֶׁמֵּת הַבַּעַל קֹדֶם שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ הַגֵּט לְיָדָהּ אֵינוֹ גֵּט:


When a husband sends his wife a get, he is obligated to provide her with support and fulfill the other stipulations of the marriage contract, until the get reaches [his wife] or a sh'liach kabbalah she has appointed.57


הַבַּעַל שֶׁשָּׁלַח גֵּט לְאִשְׁתּוֹ הֲרֵי הוּא חַיָּב בִּמְזוֹנוֹתֶיהָ וּבְכָל תְּנָאֵי כְּתֻבָּה עַד שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ הַגֵּט לְיָדָהּ אוֹ לְיַד שְׁלִיחַ קַבָּלָה: