Gittin

A divorce that was delivered without witnesses of delivery, does the divorce apply??? It doesn't matter if Dr. A. delivered the document, I thought it was simply not, but rather to the Lord of May?

In general, in this whole issue, I understood that there are no witnesses of delivery, but then how does the divorce apply?

According to the R”M, of course it is. This also applies to the R”A, according to the R”F and the Rambam (according to their opinion, the R”A also believes that the witnesses of the Kereti transmission).

They fixed a time because of his sister's daughter, and Rashi interpreted it, and she is his wife, and perhaps she commits adultery in his place, and he spares her and writes her a divorce without a time, and when they are discussing her in court, she brings out a Gita and says, "I was divorced at that time, then."
And so the witnesses who signed the get remember when they signed and see that they signed after the date on which the witnesses testify that she committed adultery??!
And it is possible that they do not remember, so it is possible that the witnesses of the delivery do not remember when the delivery took place! And so again, in Rabina's problem, it is possible that there were witnesses of the delivery. I currently do not see any difference whether there were (and do not remember) or there were not at all, but still...

Another question for you.
We said that they fixed a time because of his sister's daughter, but even if they fixed a time, can the husband write an incorrect date on the get to cover up for his sister's daughter?

I have already answered this. The witnesses who sign the get do so at the time of writing and not at the time of delivery. Therefore, the husband has a get with a date and can give it to the wife whenever he wishes. See the Rabbi who wrote that according to the Rif in the opinion of the Rabbi, the witnesses of the signature constitute witnesses to the delivery, because if you see a get signed by the wife with witnesses, this proves that the get was delivered. They say that the signature is made at the time of writing.
If the husband writes an incorrect date, then the witnesses will not sign or the witnesses of the delivery will not confirm.

You didn't answer my question. I'm asking why the time correction is even needed, because when the witnesses sign, they remember what date they signed, and if later other witnesses testify in court that she committed fornication on that date, and she issues a warrant, the judges can call the witnesses who signed and tell them the date of the signing, and consider the date of the signing to be earlier or later than the date of the act of fornication!

Why do you assume that witnesses remember the time? Not only is it not necessary, it is downright unlikely. Who would remember the exact date of an event a week or a month or a year later?

Moreover, even if we understand that we fixed time because of his sister's daughter, but what does his sister's daughter have to do with an early divorce? Why would an early divorce be invalid because of his sister's daughter? If he wanted to cover for her, wouldn't he write her a strictly kosher divorce?!

I didn't understand how he could cover it with a kosher get. After all, a kosher get has the correct date written on it.

You have to understand the case. It's about his sister's daughter who committed adultery and informed him that she committed adultery but was spared and therefore he writes her a divorce without time, that's why they ruled that it should be written over time. This is story A. But how do we continue with story B of an early divorce with his sister's daughter?? Imagine something like this happened: his sister's daughter committed adultery and informed him but was spared and therefore he writes her an early divorce. There's a problem here, if he wants to cover up for her after she informed him, he will write her a strictly kosher divorce with writing and signing on the same day! So I didn't understand at all the connection between an early divorce and his sister's daughter.

Be precise and you will find that on page 17. Rashi explained the rule of time according to the story of his niece, but on page 17: Rashi (d.h. May Te'ma Dr. Sh. Sha's) explained the invalidity of an early divorce and that the deceased had a time of day on that day and was still the wife of a man whose time was not signed, she was not given anything to eat, etc. And it is very difficult for Dahri, if he really wants to cover up for his wife, he will write her a kosher and not early divorce! This is the first. And secondly, let us remember that he explained the invalidity of a get without time in a completely different way from the invalidity of an early divorce!

I am only showering you with what is *really* difficult for me in this matter, maybe we will talk on the phone this week to clarify this point and more

He writes her a divorce decree with a date and the signatures of witnesses and keeps it in his pocket. She commits adultery after a while, and he takes out that divorce decree and gives it to her.
And even if it is a kosher divorce decree written that day, the witnesses can still say what time it was signed (and after all, it happened after she committed adultery, since only after the adultery did he wake up to write the divorce decree and sign it). But with an early divorce decree, the witnesses have already signed it long ago, and therefore will be of no use.