Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) A MESSENGER THAT CHANGES HIS MISSION

(a) Leah asked Shimon to bring her Get; Shimon told Reuven (her husband) that he was asked to receive it. Reuven told him 'Heilach (here you have it), (take it) as she said'.

1. (Rav Nachman): Even when Shimon gives it to Leah, she is not divorced.
2. (Inference): He holds, Reuven relies on what Shimon told him (that he was a messenger to receive; therefore, Reuven did not make Shimon a messenger to give the Get).

i. If he held that Reuven relies on what Leah said - since she asked Shimon to bring the Get, and Reuven told him to do as she said, this would make him a messenger to give her the Get, and she would be divorced when she gets it.

3. Rejection (Rav Ashi): We cannot infer this!
4. Let us suppose that Rav Nachman spoke in the following case: Leah asked Shimon to receive her Get; Shimon told Reuven that he was asked to bring it. Reuven told him 'Heilach (here you have it), (take it) as she said'.

i. If Rav Nachman would say that once Shimon takes it, she is divorced - we could deduce, he holds that Reuven relies on Leah's words;
ii. If Rav Nachman would say that once Shimon gives it to her, she is divorced - we could deduce, he holds that Reuven relies on Shimon's words;

5. But in truth, Rav Nachman gave the case when Shimon was asked to bring the Get, and he said he was asked to receive it - he did not accept to be a messenger to bring it, therefore she is not divorced! (We cannot deduce on whom Reuven relied,)

(b) (Rav Huna bar Chiya - Mishnah): Reuven told Shimon 'Receive this Get for my wife' or 'Take this Get for my wife' (and gave it to him) - Reuven may retract;

1. (Inference): (Even when Reuven said 'Receive'), had Reuven not retracted, the Get would be valid, even though a husband cannot make a messenger to receive a Get!
2. We must say, once he seeks to divorce her, he wants to divorce her in any way possible - here also (when he tells the messenger, 'Heilach as she said'), we should say that that is his intention!

(c) Rejection: You cannot learn from the Mishnah - there, a man knows that he cannot make a messenger to receive, he intended to make Shimon a messenger to give it;

1. Here, he was tricked (and thought that Shimon was a messenger to receive)!

(d) (Rava - Mishnah): A minor girl that said 'Receive my Get for me' - she is not divorced until it reaches her hand.

1. Her husband didn't explicitly authorize the messenger to give the Get - we must say, once he seeks to divorce her, he wants to divorce her in any way possible!
2. The same applies when the messenger lied to him.

(e) Rejection: No - also in Rava's case, the husband knows that a minor cannot make a messenger to receive a Get, therefore he intended to make him a messenger to give it; in our case, the husband errs.
(f) (Beraisa): Leah asked Shimon to bring her Get; Shimon told Reuven that he was asked to receive it; or, Leah asked Shimon to receive her Get; Shimon told Reuven that he was asked to bring it; Reuven told him 'Take it and give it to her', or 'Acquire for her', or 'Receive for her' - he may retract;

1. Once she gets the Get, she is divorced.
2. Suggestion: The case of Reuven saying 'Receive for her' is when the messenger said that he was appointed to receive it for her; the case when Reuven says 'Take it and give it to her', is when that is what the messenger said he was told to do.
3. Rejection: No - Reuven said 'Receive for her' when the messenger said that he was told to bring it; Reuven said 'Take it and give it to her', when the messenger said he was told to receive it.
4. Question: If Reuven said 'Receive for her' when the messenger said that he was told to bring it (and he was really told to receive it), she should be divorced immediately - why does the Beraisa say, when it gets to her hand?
5. Answer: It must be, the husband relies on what the messenger tells him
6. Rejection: That is only true in the case of the Beraisa, when he did not say 'Heilach, as she said' - in Rav Nachman's case, he said this, perhaps he relies on what she said.

(a) (Beraisa): Leah asked Shimon to receive her Get; Shimon told this to Reuven. Reuven told him 'Take it and give it to her', or 'Acquire for her', or 'Receive for her' - he cannot retract;

1. R. Noson says, when he says 'Take it and give it to her', he can retract; when he says 'Acquire for her', or 'Receive for her' - he cannot retract;
2. Rebbi says, in all these cases he cannot retract; but if he said 'I do not want you to receive for her, rather take it and give it to her', he can retract.

(b) Question: Rebbi is as the first Tana!
(c) Answer #1: Rebbi comes to teach the law when Reuven says 'I do not want you to receive for her, rather...'
(d) Answer #2: The end of the Beraisa teaches that the first Tana is Rebbi.
(e) Question: Does R. Noson say that 'Heilach' is as 'Acquire for', or not?
(f) Answer #1 (Mishnah): Reuven told a messenger 'Receive this Get for my wife' or 'Take this Get for my wife' - Reuven may retract;

1. If Leah told a messenger 'Receive this Get for me' (and Reuven gave it to him), Reuven cannot retract.

2. Suggestion: Reuven said 'Heilach'; the Mishnah is as R. Noson.
3. Rejection: No, he said 'Take it', it is as Rebbi.

(g) Answer #2 (Mishnah): Therefore, if Reuven told Levi 'I don't want you to receive it for her, rather Holech (take it) and give it to her' (and he gave it to him), he may retract;

1. (Inference): This is only because Reuven said 'I don't want' - if not, he could not retract!

i. This teaches that saying 'Holech' is as saying 'Receive'!

2. Suggestion: The text of the Mishnah says 'Heilach'; the Mishnah is as R. Noson.
3. Rejection: No, it says 'Holech', it is as Rebbi.

(h) Answer #3 (Beraisa): 'Holech (take) this Get to my wife' - he can retract; 'Hielach (here is) the Get, take it to my wife' - he cannot retract.

1. R. Noson is the Tana that says that he can retract when he says Holech - we see, R. Noson holds that he cannot retract when he says Heilach, for this is as saying 'Acquire for'.

(i) (R. Aba citing Rav): Leah asked Shimon to receive her Get; Shimon told this to Reuven. Reuven told him 'Take it and give it to her' - the messenger is a messenger of the husband and the wife - if the husband died, she must do Chalitzah, she may not do Yibum (since we do not know if the divorce was valid).

1. Question: Here, Rav is unsure whether saying 'Holech' is as saying 'acquire for' - elsewhere, he is sure that it is!

i. (Rav): Reuven said 'Holech this money that I owe to Shimon' - if the money does not reach Shimon, Reuven still owes the money; Reuven cannot tell the messenger 'I retract, return the money to me'.

2. Answer: There also, Rav is unsure; when in doubt by monetary laws, we keep the status quo (Reuven cannot retract); by prohibitions (such as divorce), we are stringent.

(a) (Rav): A woman cannot make a messenger to receive her Get from her husband's messenger.
(b) (R. Chanina ): She can make a messenger for this.
(c) Question: What is Rav's reason?
(d) Answer #1: This is a disgrace to the husband (that she does not take it herself) - we assume, he did not authorize his messenger to give the Get in such a manner.
(e) Answer #2: This is a decree on account of when she acquires a field in which the Get was placed (in which case her husband did not give the Get to her, she took it).

1. According to this, if she made her messenger before the husband made his, there is no decree; according to Answer #1, the Get is invalid in this case, too.

(f) Reuven sent a Get to his wife; the messenger found her kneading. She told the messenger to receive the Get for her.

1. Rav Nachman: If the law was as R. Chanina, I would rule that the Get is valid.
2. Rava: Why? The messenger accepted another mission before finishing his first mission (which is invalid)!
3. They asked R. Ami - he agreed with Rava; R. Chiya bar Aba said that he needs more time to think.
4. R. Chiya bar Aba: I am still in doubt. In doubtful rulings involving forbidden relations, we must be stringent - (if the husband died in the meantime,) she does Chalitzah, not Yibum.
5. A case occurred - R. Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marsa required a Get and Chalitzah.
6. Question: How could both be required - Get only applies if the husband is alive, Chalitzah only applies if he is dead!
7. Answer: The ruling was: if he is alive, she needs a Get to remarry; if he is dead, she needs Chalitzah.

(a) A Get was written for a woman called Nafasa; on the Get they wrote 'Tafasa'.
(b) Opinion #1 (R. Yitzchak bar Shmuel bar Marsa): The witnesses were only appointed to write 1 Get - they cannot write another one without a new appointment.
(c) Objection (Rabah): They were appointed to write a valid Get - they did not do this yet!
(d) Opinion #2 (Rabah): If they wrote a Get and it was lost, they cannot write another one without a new appointment.
(e) Objection (Rav Nachman): They were not appointed to write a Get and hold onto it - their mission was to write and give a Get, they did not do this yet!
(f) Opinion #3 (Rav Nachman): They may write and give even 100 Gitin (until they give a valid Get).
(g) Question (Rava): If witnesses were ask to write a Get and gave it to the husband's messenger, and the messenger lost it - may the witnesses write another Get?

1. Have they fulfilled their mission?
2. Or, was their mission really to divorce his wife, he only suggested giving it to his messenger to make their job easier?

(h) Question (Ravina): (If the answer to the previous question is that they fulfilled their mission) - what if he said 'And take it to her'?

1. This question is unresolved.

(i) (Mishnah): Reuven's wife told a messenger 'Receive my Get for me' (and Reuven gave it to him) - Reuven cannot retract.
(j) (Beraisa): Whether she said 'Take', 'Carry', or 'Let it be my Get in your hands' - all these are languages authorizing the messenger to receive it.