Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) A GET ON CONDITION

(a) (Mishnah): 'This is your Get on condition that you give me 200 Zuz' - she is divorced, and she gives;

1. 'On condition that you give me within 30 days' - she is only divorced if she gave within 30 days.
2. R. Shimon ben Gamliel: There was a case in Tzidon - a man gave a Get on condition that she return his garment. She lost the garment - Chachamim ruled, it suffices that she return its value.

(b) (Gemara) Question: What does the Mishnah mean when it says 'and she gives'?
(c) Answer #1 (Rav Huna): (She is divorced immediately), provided that she eventually gives;
(d) Answer #2 (Rav Yehudah): She is divorced when she gives.
(e) Question: What difference does it make when the divorce takes effect?
(f) Answer: If the Get was torn or lost in between.

1. According to Rav Huna, the Get works; according to Rav Yehudah, she needs another Get.

(g) Rav Huna and Rav Yehudah argued similarly regarding engagement.

1. (Mishnah): Reuven: 'Your are engaged to me on condition that I give you 200 Zuz' - she is engaged, and he gives;
2. Question: What does the Mishnah mean when it says 'and he gives'?
3. Answer #1 (Rav Huna): (She is engaged immediately), provided that he eventually gives;
4. Answer #2 (Rav Yehudah): She is engaged when he gives.
5. Question: What difference does it make when the engagement takes effect?
6. Answer: If another man engaged her in between.

i. According to Rav Huna, she is engaged to Reuven - he must merely fulfill his condition;
ii. According to Rav Yehudah, she is not engaged to Reuven until he gives.

(h) It was necessary for Rav Huna and Rav Yehudah to argue both by divorce and engagement.

1. If they would only argue by engagement - one might have thought, only there Rav Huna says that he is engaged immediately, for he is coming close to her;

i. But by divorce, he is separating from her, Rav Huna would admit, she is not divorced until she gives the money.

2. If they would only argue by divorce - one might have thought, only there Rav Huna says that she is divorced immediately, for he is not ashamed to ask her for the money;

i. But by engagement, she is ashamed to ask him for the money, Rav Huna would admit, she is not engaged until he gives the money.

3. Also: if they would only argue by divorce - one might have thought, only there Rav Yehudah says that she is not divorced until she gives the money, for he is separating from her;

i. But by engagement, he is coming close to her, Rav Yehudah would admit, she is engaged immediately.

4. If they would only argue by engagement - one might have thought, only there Rav Yehudah says that she is not engaged until he pays, for she is ashamed to ask him for the money;

i. But by divorce, he is not ashamed to ask her for the money, Rav Yehudah would admit, she is not divorced until she gives the money.
ii. Therefore, they had to argue in both cases.

(i) Question #1 (against Rav Yehudah - Beraisa): ''This is your Get on condition that you give me 200 Zuz' - even if the Get was torn or lost, she is divorced;

1. She may not remarry until she pays.

(j) Question #2 (against Rav Yehudah - Beraisa): Reuven: ''This is your Get on condition that you give me 200 Zuz', and he died (without children) - if she gave him, she is (divorced and) exempt from Yibum and Chalitzah; if not, she must do Yibum or Chalitzah;

1. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, she may give his father, brother or another relative (to exempt herself from Yibum and Chalitzah).
2. They only argue whether '(you give) me' also connotes 'or (you give) my heirs' or not - but all agree that she is divorced immediately, on condition that she give the money.

i. This refutes Rav Yehudah.

(k) Answer (Rav Yehudah): That is as Rebbi; I hold as Chachamim, who argue.

1. (Rav Huna citing Rebbi): Saying 'on condition' is as saying 'from now'.

(l) (R. Zeira): In Bavel, we used to say that Chachamim argue on Rebbi by 'on condition'; in Eretz Yisrael, R. Asi cited R. Yochanan to say that they only argue by 'from today and after death'.

1. (Beraisa): 'From today and after death' - she is divorced and not divorced;
2. Rebbi says, this is a Get.

(m) Question: According to Rav Yehudah, they argue even by 'on condition' - the Beraisa should rather teach that case!
(n) Answer: They argue by 'from today and after death', to show that Rebbi says it works even in that case.
(o) Question: Rather, they should argue by 'on condition', to show that Chachamim say it does not work (immediately) even there!
(p) Answer: It is better to teach how lenient Rebbi is.

(a) (Mishnah): 'On condition that you give me within 30 days' - she is only divorced if she gave within 30 days.
(b) Question: This is obvious!
(c) Answer: One might have thought, he really is not insistent that she pay within 30 days, he just said it in order to get her to pay quickly - we hear, this is not so.
(d) (Mishnah): R. Shimon ben Gamliel: There was a case in Tzidon...
(e) Question: The case does not illustrate a law of the Mishnah!
(f) Answer: The Mishnah is abbreviated; it should read thusly: If he said to her, 'on condition that you return my garment', and she lost the garment - since he specifically wanted the garment, she cannot fulfill the condition;

1. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, it suffices that she return its value;
2. R. Shimon ben Gamliel: There was a case in Tzidon - a man gave a Get on condition that she return his garment. She lost the garment - Chachamim ruled, it suffices that she return its value.

(g) Question (R. Asi): 'This is your Get on condition that you give me 200 Zuz', and then he pardoned her from having to pay - what is the law?

1. This question may be asked according to Chachamim and according to R. Shimon ben Gamliel.
2. Chachamim only said that she cannot fulfill the condition with money because he did not pardon her - but here, he pardoned her!
3. R. Shimon ben Gamliel only said that she can give its value, for she appeases him with the money - but here, she did nothing!

(h) Answer (R. Yochanan): She is not divorced.
(i) Question (Mishnah - R. Meir): Reuven told Shimon: 'My property is forbidden as a sacrifice for you to benefit from, unless you give my son a Kor of wheat and 2 barrels of wine' - he is forbidden until he gives;

1. Chachamim say, Reuven can permit this vow himself, by saying 'I consider it as if I received'.

(j) Answer: Here is different, he stipulated in order to pain his wife, the Get cannot work until she pays; there, Reuven stipulated for his own benefit - he may decide, he does not need it.
(k) A man told his sharecropper: other sharecroppers irrigate the grain 3 times a year and receive a quarter of the yield - if you irrigate 4 times, I will give you one third.

1. Rain came, and there was no need for the extra irrigation.
2. Rav Yosef: He did no extra work, he only receives the usual quarter.
3. Rabah: It was not needed (he did not detract from his contract) - he gets the full third.

i. Suggestion: Rav Yosef holds as Chachamim, and Rabah holds as R. Shimon ben Gamliel (just as money works in place of the garment, rain is in place of irrigation).
ii. Rejection: This cannot be - the law is as Rabah, and the law in our Mishnah is not as R. Shimon ben Gamliel!

4. Rather: True, Rav Yosef holds as Chachamim - but Rabah (who could hold as R. Shimon ben Gamliel) can also hold as Chachamim.

i. Chachamim only said that money may not replace the garment, by divorce, where he intended to pain her - here, Reuven intends for his own profit, and he does not need the extra irrigation!

(a) (Mishnah): At first, one who bought a house in a walled city would hide on the day which completed 1 year after buying it (so the seller would be unable to redeem it, and the buyer would be able to keep it forever).

1. Hillel enacted that the seller may deposit the redemption money in a chamber and forcibly enter the house; the buyer can take his money when he wants.

(b) [Version #1 (Rava): From Hillel's enactment, we learn: if a man says 'This is your Get on condition that you give me 200 Zuz' - the Get is only valid if he willingly takes the money.

1. Since Hillel had to enact that the seller may give the money against the buyer's will - it must be, without the enactment, giving against his will does not work.

(c) Objection (Rav Papa): Perhaps Hillel had to enact for when the buyer is not around - but when he is around, whether or not he consents to accept the money, the redemption works!]
(d) [Version #2 (Rava): From Hillel's enactment, we learn: if a man says 'This is your Get on condition that you give me 200 Zuz' - the Get is valid whether or not he takes the money willingly.

1. Hillel only had to enact for when the buyer is not around - but when he is around, whether or not he consents to accept the money, the redemption works!

(e) Objection (Rav Papa): Perhaps the Get is only valid when he consents to accept the money;

1. It was sufficient for Hillel to enact that the money be put in the chamber not in front of the buyer.]

(f) (Rabah bar bar Chanah): Whenever R. Shimon ben Gamliel appears in a Mishnah, the law is as him, except for 3 places: the Mishnah of the cosigner, the Get in Tzidon (our Mishnah), and a party in a case that finds a proof after the allotted time.