Previous daf

1)

(a) Seeing as it is possible to cancel the Shelichus of a Get, will it make any difference whether he intercepts the Sheli'ach ...

1. ... personally, or whether he sends a Sheli'ach after him to do so?
2. ... or whether he goes directly to his wife and informs her that the Shelichus is canceled?

(b) Will it make any difference whether he informs his wife directly that he has canceled the Shelichus or whether he sends her a Sheli'ach to do so?

(a) All that we just learned applies after Raban Gamliel ha'Zaken's Takanah. What could a man do before the Takanah in addition to all the above?

(b) Why did Raban Gamliel institute such a Takanah? What was he worried about?

(a) Why does the Tana write 've'Higi'a ba'Sheli'ach', intimating that he met him by chance? Why did he not write 've'Higi'o' (meaning that he made a point of catching up with him)?

(b) And why did he find it necessary to add the case ...

1. ... 'O she'Shalach Acharav Sheli'ach'?
2. ... 'Kadam Hu Eitzel Ishto'?
3. ... 'O she'Shalach Etzlah Sheli'ach'?

(c) And why did he need to teach us the Seifa 'Im mi'she'Higi'ah Get le'Yadah, Shuv Eino Yachol Le'vatlah'? Why is this not obvious?

(a) The Tana of the Beraisa differentiates between the Lashon 'Bateil Hu' and 'I Efshi Bo' on the one hand, and 'Pasul Hu' and 'Eino Get' on the other.
Why is the former pair considered a valid cancellation, whereas the latter pair are not?

(b) Rabah bar Avuhah says that if, after receiving a gift, the recipient declares 'Matanah Zu Mevuteles', 'Tibatel' or 'I Efshi Bah', the gift stands.
What is the difference between these cases and 'Beteilah Hi', where the gift is indeed canceled?

(c) In the latter case, seeing as the gift is now in his domain, on what basis is he believed to say that he never received the gift, even if 'Beteilah Hi' does imply the past tense? Why should the recipient not require witnesses?

(d) How does Abaye reconcile this apparent discrepancy? Why is it that by Get 'Bateil Hu' implies the future, whereas by Matanah, it implies the past?

5)

(a) In which regard did Abaye say that a Sheli'ach Matanah is like a Sheli'ach ha'Get?

(b) Ravina found Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak leaning on the door-post, seemingly flummoxed by the She'eilah whether 'Bateil' will be effective without adding 'Hu'.
What is the outcome of this She'eilah?

(c) What is the difference between the Lashon 'Get Zeh Lo Yo'il', 'Lo Yatir' ... 'Lo Yegaresh', 'Yehei Cheres', 'Yehei ke'Cheres' on the one hand, and 'Get Zeh Eino Mo'il', 'Eino Matir' ... 'Eino Megaresh', 'Cheres Hu', 'ke'Cheres Hu'?

(d) Ravina asked Rav Acha Brei de'Rava (or the latter asked Rav Ashi) what the Din will be if he said 'Harei Hu Cheres'.
How did the latter reply with a straightforward proof from Hekdesh? What did he prove from there?

(a) We ask whether, once the husband has canceled the Get, he is permitted to use it at a later stage.
What is the basis of the She'eilah?

(b) Rav Nachman permits him to do so.
What does Rav Sheishes say?

(c) Like whom do we rule?

(a) What does Rebbi Yochanan say about a man who gives a woman money betrothing her after thirty days, and then cancels the Kidushin?

(b) Seeing as we rule like Rebbi Yochanan in this case, and the Kidushin is Bateil, how can we rule like Rebbi Nachman, who maintains that the Get is not Bateil? Why should the Get be any different than the Kidushin?

(a) Before Raban Gamliel's Takanah, it was possible to cancel the Get in front of a Beis-Din. According to Rav Nachman, the Beis-Din may comprise two people.
What does Rav Sheishes say?

(b) If, as Rav Nachman maintains, two people are also considered a Beis-Din, why do we normally require three?

Next daf