משנה: הַמֵּבִיא גֵט מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם וְחָלָה עוֹשֶׂה בֵית דִּין וּמְשַׁלְּחוֹ וְאוֹמֵר לִפְנֵיהֶם בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם. וְאֵין הַשָּׁלִיחַ הָאַחֲרוֹן צָרִיךְ שֶׁיֹּאמַר בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם אֶלָּא אוֹמֵר שָׁלִיחַ בֵּית דִּין אֲנִי. MISHNAH: If somebody transports a bill of divorce overseas and falls sick, he assembles a court to send it and declares before them: “it was written and signed before me.” The later messenger does not have to say: “it was written and signed before me,” but he says: “I am an agent of the court.116This implies that if the original bill of divorce was certified by a court, no messenger has to say that it was written and signed before him but that he is a court appointee, or, in modern terms, that a bill of divorce certified by a competent court can even be sent by mail to the court which has jurisdiction over the wife.
הלכה: הַמֵּבִיא גֵט מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם וְחָלָה כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. לָכֵן צְרִיכָה. וְהוּא שֶׁבָּא לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. שֶׁלֹּא תֹאמַר. הוֹאִיל וּבָא לְאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל יֵעָשֶׂה כְגִיטֵּי אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. וְגִיטֵּי אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר. בְּפָנַיי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַיי נֶחְתַּם. HALAKHAH: If somebody transports a bill of divorce overseas and falls sick,” etc. Rebbi Mana said, this117His problem is, if the second messenger is an agent of the court, why does he have to declare anything (in front of two witnesses at the moment he hands over the bill of divorce)? is only necessary if he already has arrived in the Land of Israel. Lest you say, since he arrived in the Land of Israel it should be treated as a bill of divorce from the Land of Israel118Since it had been certified by a court in the Land of Israel., and for bills of divorce from the Land of Israel one does not have to say: “it was written and signed before me.119Nor does he have to say: I am an agent of the court.”
חָלָה הַשָּׁלִיח. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָה. בְּרֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי אַבָּא הֲוָה לֵיהּ עוֹבְדָא וְשָׁאַל וְשָׁלַח לְרִבִּי חִייָה וּלְרִבִּי יָסָא וּלְרִבִּי אִימִּי וְהוֹרוֹן לֵיהּ. אֵין הַשָּׁלִיח הָרִאשׁוֹן צָרִיךְ שֶׁיֹּאמַר. בְּפָנַיי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַיי נֶחְתַּם. אֶלָּא אוֹמֵר. שָׁלִיחַ בֵּית דִּין אֲנִי. If the messenger120The one appointed by the dying first messenger. fell sick. Rebbi Ḥanina said, a case came before the son of Rebbi Abba and he sent to ask Rebbi Ḥiyya, Rebbi Yasa and Rebbi Immi121The three successors of R. Joḥanan.. They instructed him that the first messenger122He is called “first” because he appoints a new messenger but really he is a second or later messenger to whom the bill was entrusted. The problem is that the Mishnah only empowers the original messenger to appoint a new one; nothing is said about successive later messengers. does not have to say: “it was written and signed before me123Since he is a substitute, he could not say that.,” but he says, “I am an agent of the court.124He can say that and appoint a new messenger by the local court. The Babli, 29b, reads the expression in the Mishnah: “the later messenger” as “any latter messenger”, to the effect that the appointment of successive messengers is explicitly authorized by the Mishnah. There, the main actor is the son of R. Abbahu.”
צָרִיךְ לִמְסוֹר לוֹ כָּל־שְׁלִיחוּתוֹ. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה אָמַר. צָרִיךְ לִמְסוֹר לוֹ כָּל־שְׁלִיחוּתוֹ. רִבִּי אָבִין בַּר כַּהֲנָא אָמַר. אֵין צָרִיךְ לִמְסוֹר לוֹ כָּל־שְׁלִיחֻתוֹ. מַייתֵי לָהּ דְּרִבִּי אָבִין בַּר כַּהֲנָא מִן הָדָא. אֵין הַשָּׁלִיחַ הָאַחֲרוֹן צָרִיךְ שֶׁיֹּאמַר. בְּפָנַיי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַיי נֶחְתַּם. אֶלָּא אוֹמֵר. שָׁלִיחַ בֵּית דִּין אֲנִי. אָמַר רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. חָזַר בֵּיהּ רִבִּי אָבִין בַּר כַּהֲנָא מִן הָדָא. אֵין הַשָּׁלִיחַ הָאַחֲרוֹן צָרִיךְ שֶׁיֹּאמַר. בְּפָנַיי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַיי נֶחְתַּם. אֶלָּא אוֹמֵר. שָׁלִיחַ בֵּית דִּין אֲנִי. Does he have to deliver the entire agency to him125If the husband had entrusted the first messenger not only with the bill of divorce but charged him with additional messages, is the transfer of agency valid if only the delivery of the bill is given to a subsequent messenger or is the agency one and indivisible? This is a new question since its protagonist, R. Jeremiah, was a student of R. Ḥiyya (bar Abba)’s student R. Ze‘ira.? Rebbi Jeremiah said, he has to deliver the entire agency to him. Rebbi Abin bar Cahana said, he need not deliver the entire agency to him. Rebbi Abin bar Cahana brought it from this: “The later messenger does not have to say: ‘it was written and signed before me,’ but he says: ‘I am an agent of the court.’126He reads the Mishnah as stating that the later messenger has only to identify himself as an agent of the court for the delivery of the bill without further comment.” Rebbi Jeremiah said, Rebbi Abin bar Cahana retracted this, because of: “The later messenger does not have to say: ‘it was written and signed before me,’ but he says: ‘I am an agent of the court.’127The same Mishnah can be read in the opposite sense: Since obviously no substitute messenger can say that the bill was written and signed before him, the mention of writing and signing for a later messenger can only mean that he stands for the first in all respects.”