Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) STIPULATIONS ON A GET

(a) We understand, according to Rava - the beginning of the Mishnah is when he did not specify the time, the end of the Mishnah is when he did.
(b) Question: According to Rav Ashi, what is the difference between the clauses? (Rashi - in both, we must say that the son died before she nursed the required time; Tosfos - also in the beginning of the Mishnah, when he did not specify a time, it is as if he specified)!

1. This is left difficult.

(c) (Beraisa - R. Meir): 'This is your Get on condition that you serve my father or nurse my son for 2 years' - the Get is valid even if she does not, since he did not double the stipulation (if you do not serve...);

1. Chachamim say, the Get is only valid if she fulfills the stipulation;
2. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, every stipulation in the Torah and prophets is doubled!

i. Some explain, he challenges R. Meir - since we have multiple sources from which to learn the law, we do not learn in general.
ii. Others explain, he challenges Chachamim - we learn from these sources that stipulations must be doubled.

(d) Contradiction (Beraisa - R. Meir): 'This is your Get on condition that you serve my father for 2 years, or that you nurse my son for 2 years' - if the son or father dies, the Get is invalid;

1. Chachamim say, even if the stipulation was not fulfilled, the Get is valid.

i. She can say, I am ready to serve or nurse - give me your father/son!

2. Both R. Meir and Chachamim contradict their positions in the previous Mishnah!

(e) Answer #1: There is no contradiction in R. Meir - in this Beraisa, he doubled the stipulation, so it is binding.
(f) Answer #2: There is no contradiction in Chachamim - in this Beraisa, they hold as R. Shimon ben Gamliel, who says that if she is not the cause that the stipulation is not fulfilled, the Get is valid.
(g) (Beraisa): Reuven told his wife in front of witnesses: 'This is your Get on condition that you serve my father for 2 years'; he later told her in front of witnesses 'This is your Get on condition that you give me 200 Zuz' - the latter stipulation does not cancel the former;

1. If she fulfills either, the Get is valid.

(h) But if he said (in front of witnesses) 'This is your Get on condition that you give me 200 Zuz', and later said (in front of witnesses) 'This is your Get on condition that you give me 300 Zuz' -the latter stipulation cancels the former;

1. We cannot join 1 witness that saw the first stipulation with 1 that saw the second.
2. Question: On which clause does this refer?

i. Suggestion: If it goes on the last clause - the first stipulation was cancelled, of course the witnesses that saw it cannot be used!

3. Answer: Rather, it refers to the first clause.
4. Question: This is obvious!
5. Answer: One might have thought, since she can make her Get valid by fulfilling either stipulation, it is as if they are 1, and witnesses can join - we hear, this is not so.

(a) (Mishnah): Reuven was going from Yehudah to Galil; he told his wife 'This is your Get on condition that I do not return within 30 days'. If he got to Antiferas and returned, the stipulation was not fulfilled (i.e. the Get is invalid);
(b) If he was going abroad and made this stipulation, reached Ako and returned, the stipulation was not fulfilled.
(c) 'This is your Get if I will go 30 days without seeing your face' - if he was constantly leaving and returning, since he was not secluded with her, the Get is proper.
(d) (Gemara) Question: The Mishnah implies that Antiferas is in Galil (the stipulation is void because he reached his destination and did not tarry)!

1. Contradiction (Beraisa): Antiferas is in Yehudah; Kefar Osna'i is in Galil; in between we are in doubt (if he returned after having gone past Antiferas, but before reaching Kefar Osna'i, she has the stringencies of being divorced and not divorced).

(e) Answer (Abaye): The Mishnah also holds that it is in Yehudah; the case is, he made 2 stipulations.

1. 'If I reach Galil, the Get should take effect immediately;
2. Or, if I delay 30 days before returning, the Get should be valid'.
3. Therefore - if he reached Antiferas, which is still part of Yehudah, and returned within 30 days, the stipulation is void.

(f) (Mishnah): 'This is your Get on condition that I do not return within 30 days'...
(g) Question: The Mishnah implies that Ako is in Chutz La'aretz!

1. Question: But Rav Safra taught, when Chachamim of Bavel would return to Bavel, Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael would accompany them until Ako, for it is forbidden to leave Eretz Yisrael.

(h) Answer (Abaye): The Mishnah also holds that Ako is in Chutz La'aretz; the case is, he made 2 stipulations.

1. 'If I reach Chutz La'aretz, the Get should take effect immediately;
2. Or, if I delay 30 days before returning, the Get should be valid'.
3. Therefore - if he reached Ako, which is still part of Eretz Yisrael, and returned within 30 days, the stipulation is void.

(i) ''This is your Get if I will go 30 days without seeing your face'...(since they were not secluded, the Get is proper).
(j) Question: But he did see her within 30 days (just they were not secluded)!
(k) Answer #1 (Rav Huna): 'Seeing your face' is a euphemism for relations.
(l) Answer #2 (R. Yochanan): He literally meant seeing her face; the Mishnah does not say that the Get takes effect, rather that it is proper, i.e. it is not an old Get (a Get by which he had relations with her between the writing and the giving);

1. If he later fulfills the stipulation, the Get will take effect.
2. Support (Beraisa): 'This is your Get if I will go 30 days without seeing your face' - if he was constantly leaving and returning, since he was not secluded with her, the Get is proper; we are not concerned for an old Get.
3. [Version #1 - Question: We should be concerned that he appeased her (Rashi - and was secluded with her; Tosfos - and cancelled the Get)!
4. Answer: (Rabah bar Rav Huna): The case is, he trusted her to say that he did not appease her.]

(m) [Version #2 - Mishnah: 'This is your Get from now if I don't come within 12 months', and he died within this time - the Get is valid.

1. Question: We should be concerned that he appeased her!
2. Answer (Rabah bar Rav Huna): The case is, he trusted her to say that he did not come.]

(n) Version #2 says that in the case of the Mishnah, when we do not know that he returned, Rabah bar Rav Huna says that had he not trusted her, we would be concerned for appeasement - all the more so in the Beraisa, when we know that he returned!
(o) According to Version #1, in the case of the Beraisa, when we know that he returned, had he not trusted her, we would be concerned for appeasement - but in the case of the Mishnah, when we do not know that he returned, even if he didn't trust her, we are not concerned.

(a) Mishnah: 'This is your Get if I don't come within 12 months', and he died within this time - the Get is void;
(b) 'This is your Get from now if I don't come within 12 months', and he died within this time - the Get is valid;
(c) 'Write and give a Get to my wife if I don't come within 12 months'; the agents wrote the Get within 12 months and gave it after 12 months - the Get is void;

1. R. Yosi says, such a case is a valid Get;

(d) If they wrote and gave the Get after 12 months, and the husband died - if the Get was given before he died, it is valid; if not, it is invalid;

1. If we do not know, this is the case of (having the stringencies of) being divorced and not divorced.

(e) (Gemara - Beraisa): (In the first case, when he did not say 'from now') our Rabbis permitted her to remarry.

1. Question: Who are these Rabbis?
2. Answer (Rav Yehudah): the Beis Din that permitted the oil of Nochrim; they hold as R. Yosi, that the date on a document proves that that is the day it should take effect.
3. (R. Aba): R. Yehudah Nesiah ruled thusly; his colleagues never consented.

(f) Question (R. Elazar): Did they permit her to remarry immediately, or after 12 months.

1. She should be permitted immediately - since he died, he cannot come, the stipulation will definitely be fulfilled!
2. Or - perhaps she must wait 12 months, until the stipulation was actually fulfilled.
3. Question: Why didn't R. Elazar ask regarding the second clause of our Mishnah, ('This is your Get from now if I don't come within 12 months', and he died), from when she may remarry?
4. Answer: He could have asked on the Mishnah - since he was asking an elder that was part of the Beis Din that permitted in the case of the Beraisa, he asked regarding the Beraisa.