Yerushalmi Gittin 1:2 ירושלמי גיטין א׳:ב׳

MISHNAH: Rebbi Jehudah says, from Reqam²Two places “Reqam” are mentioned as border towns in Transjordan in the description of the borders of the Land of Israel; cf. Ševi‘it 6:1, Notes 47, 51. to the East and Reqam belongs to the East, from Ascalon to the South and Ascalon belongs to the South, from Acco to the North and Acco belongs to the North⁷⁶The list in this Mishnah mentions border towns from where the messenger has to affirm that the document was written and signed in his presence. The basic reference is the Baraita on the borders of the Land of Israel, Sevi'it 6:1, Notes 32-51.. Rebbi Meïr says, Acco belongs to the Land of Israel in matters of bills of divorce⁷⁷He agrees that in matters of ritual purity and Sabbatical laws, most of Acco is outside the Land..

HALAKHAH: “Rebbi Jehudah says, from Reqam to the East,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan told the people of Sepphoris: You say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan⁷⁸This name is obviously incorrect; it is impossible to determine what was in its place or whether the name should simply be deleted., even a person who brings a bill of divorce from Babylonia does not have to say “it was written and signed before me.” But I am saying that it is necessary, for there is a Mishnah: “Rebbi Jehudah says, from Reqam to the East and Reqam belongs to the East.” And even if you say that they disagree with Rebbi Jehudah and say that Reqam does not belong to the East, what about from Babylonia to here⁷⁹In the Babli, 6a, the argument is attributed to R. Jeremiah.? Rav said, we consider ourselves as in the Land of Israel in the matter of bills of divorce. But Samuel said, even from one city quarter to another⁸⁰In the Babli, 6a, Rav is quoted as he is here; Samuel says that Babylonia is like any other place outside the Land, Rav Sheshet requires confirmation from one city quarter to another and Rav Ḥisda requires an attestation in all cases in which the witnesses are unknown to the court in whose district the bill is delivered.. He asked before him to change his opinion⁸¹Samuel convinced Rav that he should change his opinion., when Cahana told him, what would we do with the earlier cases of women who remarried⁸²Cahana pointed out that if Rav changed his practice, he would attach a presumption of illegitimacy to any children of women who had remarried according to his previous standard.? He said to him, what do you have in your hand? For he was of Rebbi’s opinion as it was stated: If somebody brings a bill of divorce from overseas which was neither written nor signed in his presence, she has to leave under the thirteen penalties⁸³All the disabilities enumerated in Mishnaiot 8:5 about a woman remarrying after an invalid divorce, and Yebamot 10:1 regarding a woman who remarried thinking that her husband was dead when he was alive and later returned., the words of Rebbi. But the Sages did not agree in this matter⁸⁴Since the absence of the provision about writing and signing does not invalidate the bill, cf. Notes 32 ff..

Everybody agrees that if [the husband] comes and protests, his protest is invalid^9,In the Babli, 3a, this is an anonymous (unanimous) opinion. As explained in the sequel, if the husband could come later and claim the the bill of divorce was fake, no woman could ever remarry on a bill of divorce written far away for fear that her children from a second husband could retroactively be declared to be bastards; cf. Mishnah Yebamot 10:1.¹²Since there was a witness who was cross-examined about the validity of the bill, the husband cannot be admitted to testify since when he claims to be still the husband of his divorcee he declares himself a relative by marriage who is barred from acting as a witness for or against his wife.. That is, if he protested after she remarried. If he protested before she remarried and then she remarried⁸⁵Should one require that she not remarry before the matter has been decided by the local court?? Let us hear from the following⁸⁶The same story is in the Babli, 6b.: It happened that somebody brought a bill of divorce before Rebbi Ismael. He asked him, from where are you? He answered, from Kefar Simai⁸⁷Probably Kafr Sumeïa on the road from Acco to Safed, in the border region described in Ševi‘it 6:1. In the Tosephta, 1:3, the place is mentioned as ססי or סאסאי. in the region of Acco. He said to him, then you have to say, “it was written and signed in my presence;” you do not need witnesses⁸⁸The signatures on the bill do not have to be notarized by the court, which would have been difficult in the court of R. Ismael in the far South on the border of Idumea.. After [that person] left, Rebbi Ilai said to him, my teacher, is not Kefar Simai in the Land of Israel, closer to Sepphoris than to Acco? He answered, since the matter was resolved in a permissive way; it stands. What means “since the matter was resolved in a permissive way; it stands”? Rebbi Ze‘ira said, that if [the husband] came and protested, his protest would be invalid. But does a person who brings a bill of divorce from the Land of Israel for delivery in the Land of Israel have to say, “it was written and signed in my presence”? Therefore, there cannot be any difference whether he protested after she remarried or before she remarried and then she remarried⁸⁹It does not depend on the declaration by the messenger; no bill of divorce delivered under the supervision of a court can be attacked..

Rebbi Jacob bar Ada, Bar Athlay in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Practice follows Rebbi Meïr in matters of bills of divorce⁹⁰This opinion is not mentioned in the Babli.. Rebbi Ze‘ira was looking at him⁹¹Disapproving.. He asked him, why do you look at me? Was it not said that practice follows the lenient opinion in rabbinic matters? They thought, that is a single opinion against a single opinion, but not a single opinion against the Sages, and here even a single opinion against the Sages⁹²They hold that Acco is split in matters of divorce as it is split in matters of impurity, as explained later in the Halakhah..

Rebbi Ḥiyya [bar] Abba said: If one sold a slave into Acco, the latter was set free⁹³In the Babli, 8a, he is quoted pointing out that R. Meïr declares all of Acco to be of the Land only for bills of divorce; therefore not for the laws of slaves. It is forbidden to sell slaves from the Land to places outside the land; any such sale frees the slave.. Rebbi Ismael, the father of Rebbi Yudan, asked: Even from Acco to Acco? ⁹⁴From here to the end of the Halakhah, the text is from Ševi‘it 6:1, explained there in Notes 23–30. Variant readings from there are noted ש. All indications are that the text in Sevi‘it is the original. This follows what Rebbi Aḥa bar Jacob said in the name of Rebbi Immi: From two actions of Rebbi we learn that Acco is partly of the Land of Israel and partly outside the Land. Rebbi was in Acco when he saw them eating clean bread; he asked them, how did you knead [the dough]? They said to him, a student came here and instructed us that egg water does not prepare. We are boiling eggs and use their water to knead. They thought he was talking about cooking water of eggs when he spoke only of the eggs themselves. Rebbi Jacob bar Idi said, at that moment they decreed that a student may not render decisions. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Ḥuna: If a student gives instructions even according to practice, his instructions are no instructions.

It was stated: A student who gave instructions about practice in front of his teacher has committed a deadly sin. It was stated in the name of Rebbi Eliezer: Nadab and Abihu died only because they determined practice in the presence of their teacher Moses. It happened that a student gave instructions about practice in front of his teacher Rebbi Eliezer. The latter said to his wife Imma Shalom: That one will not live out his week. The week was not completed when he died. His students said to him: Rebbi, you are a prophet. He said to them (Amos 7:14) “I am neither a prophet nor the disciple of a prophet” but I have received a tradition that any student who gives instructions about practice in front of his teacher has committed a deadly sin. It was stated: A student is forbidden to give instructions about practice during the lifetime of his teacher unless he be at a distance of at least 12 mil from him, [the breadth of] the camp of Israel. What is the reason? (Num. 33:49) “They encamped along the Jordan from Bet Hayyešimot to Abel Haššiṭṭim in the plains of Moab”; how far is this? Twelve mil. Like this: Rebbi Tanḥum ben Jeremiah was in Ḥefer; they asked him and he gave instructions about practice. They said to him, did the Rabbi not teach us that a student may not give instructions about practice during the lifetime of his teacher unless he be at a distance of at least 12 mil from him, [the breadth of] the camp of Israel; and your teacher Rebbi Ḥana sits at Sepphoris! He said to them, so it should come over me that I did not know! From that moment on he did no longer give instructions.

Rebbi was in Acco when he saw a man on the rock. He said to him, “are you not the son of the Cohen X, was your father not a Cohen?” He said to him, “the eyes of my father were high, but he married a woman unfit for him and profaned this man.”

The villages in the territory of Sepphoris close to Acco, the villages in the territory of Acco close to Sepphoris, what do you do with them? Like Acco, like Sepphoris⁹⁵If practice follows R. Meïr, it does not make any difference in the rules of bills of divorce. Therefore, no answer is needed.?