POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Gitin 71
GITIN 71 (26 Nissan)- has been dedicated by Mr. Avi Berger (of Queens, N.Y.)
in memory of his mother, Leah bas Michel Mordechai on the day of her
1) THE GET OF A DEAF OR DUMB MAN
(a) (Rav Kahana): A deaf person that can communicate by
writing - we write and give a Get to his wife if he
2) WHICH DEAF MEN MAY DIVORCE
(b) Question (Rav Yosef): Why must Rav Kahana teach this - we
know this from our Mishnah!
1. (Mishnah): A man became unable to speak. Others
asked him - should we write a Get for your wife? He
nodded his head. We test him 3 times - if he answers
properly no and yes, we write and give the Get.
(c) Answer (R. Zeira): That is a case of a mute person, he is
not as a (totally) deaf person (for the latter lacks
1. (Beraisa): One who can speak but not hear - he is a
Cheresh (deaf person); one who can hear but not
speak - he is a mute;
(d) Question (R. Zeira - Beraisa): "If he will not tell
(testify)" - this excludes a mute, for he cannot testify.
i. Both of these have understanding (regarding all
1. We should say, he can testify by writing!
(e) Answer (Abaye): Regarding testimony, the Torah decreed
"Through their mouths", not through their writing.
(f) Question (Beraisa): Just as we test (one who went dumb to
see if he is alert enough and able) to give a Get, we
also test him regarding sales and gifts, for testimony,
and for inheritances.
1. We see, he can give testimony, even though he cannot
(g) Answer (Rav Yosef bar Minyomi): The Beraisa refers to
testimony that a man died (to permit his wife to remarry)
- Chachamim were lenient to allow him to testify in that
(h) Question: The Beraisa says, for inheritances (we see, he
(i) Answer (R. Avahu): It means, regarding the inheritance of
his own firstborn son (which is not a matter of
(j) Suggestion: The Beraisa says, for sales and gifts - this
means, to testify about other people's transactions!
(k) Rejection: No, to sell and give his own property.
(l) Question (Beraisa): By a deaf person, we only rely on his
gestures, facial expressions and what he writes regarding
Metaltelim, but not for Gitin.
(m) Answer: Tana'im argue whether we rely on what he writes
(a) (Beraisa - R. Shimon ben Gamliel): This only applies to
one deaf from birth - but a hearing man that went deaf,
he writes and witnesses sign the Get.
(b) Question: If he was deaf from birth, why can't he divorce
his wife - just as he got married through gesturing, he
can divorce through gesturing (the whole marriage is only
(c) Answer: That is true regarding a woman he married
himself; the Beraisa says, he cannot divorce a woman he
married through Yibum.
(d) Question: From what kind of marriage did she fall to
1. Suggestion: If her first husband was also deaf -
just as her initial marriage was through gesturing,
also she can be divorced through gesturing!
(e) Answer #1: Rather, her first husband was healthy.
(f) Answer #2: We can say, her first husband was also deaf -
we decree on account of the case when her first husband
(g) Question: If we make such decrees - also, we should not
allow him to divorce a woman he married himself, on
account of his Yevamah!
(h) Answer: People can confuse Yevamos (that fell from
different types of husbands), they will not confuse a
woman he married himself with his Yevamah.
(i) Objection: Do we really decree the case of a deaf husband
on account of a healthy one?!
3) THE COMMAND TO WRITE A GET
1. (Mishnah): Two brothers were married to 2 sisters;
both brothers or both sisters (or all of them) were
deaf. If 1 brother dies, his wife is exempt from
Chalitzah and Yibum.
(j) (R. Yochanan): The Tana that precedes R. Shimon ben
Gamliel in the Beraisa argues (and says that a man that
married when he was healthy and later went deaf, he
cannot divorce, even if he can write).
2. If the wives were unrelated, they may do Yibum; the
Yavam can later divorce the Yevamah if he wants to
(this shows, there is no decree)!
i. Answer #2 is refuted; we must give the first
(k) (Abaye): We can prove this from (another part of) the
1. (Mishnah): If she went insane - he may not divorce
her; if he went deaf or insane - he may never
(l) Rejection (Rav Papa): If not for R. Yochanan, one could
have said that R. Shimon ben Gamliel explains the first
2. Question: Why does it say he may never divorce her?
i. Suggestion: It means, even if he can
communicate through writing!
1. When the Mishnah says never - it means, even if we
see that he is very sharp.
2. Alternatively, it hints at R. Yitzchak's law (that
divorce applies to an insane woman - mid'Oraisa).
i. (R. Yitzchak): mid'Oraisa, an insane woman may
be divorced, just as a sane woman is divorced
ii. Chachamim enacted that she may not be divorced,
so men will not freely have relations with her.
(a) (Mishnah): A man was asked if a Get should be written for
his wife - he said, 'Write it'. The ones who asked him
appointed a scribe to write it and witnesses to sign it -
even though they gave him the Get, and he gave it to his
wife, it is invalid, because he must personally tell the
scribe to write and the witnesses to sign.
(b) (Gemara) Inference: The Get is only invalid because he
said only 'Write' - had he said 'Write and give', it
would be valid!
1. This is as R. Meir, who says that Mili may be
transferred to another agent.
(c) Contradiction: The end of the Mishnah says, it is
invalid, because he must personally tell the scribe to
write and the witnesses to sign - this is as R. Yosi, who
says that Mili may not be transferred to another agent!
(d) Answer #1: Indeed, the beginning of the Mishnah is as R.
Meir, the end is as R. Yosi!
(e) Answer #2 (Abaye): The whole Mishnah is as R. Meir; the
case is, he did not say 'Give'.
(f) Objection: If so, it should say, it is invalid because he
did not say 'Give'!
(g) Answer #3 (Abaye): Rather, the case is, he did not
command 3 people.
(h) Objection: If so, it should say, it is invalid, because
he did not command 3 people!
(i) Answer #4 (Abaye): Rather, the whole Mishnah is as R.
Yosi; the case is, he did not tell them to appoint a
scribe and witnesses.
(j) Question #1: If so, it should say, it is invalid, because
he did not tell them to appoint a scribe and witnesses!
(k) Question #2: Does R. Yosi really agree that Mili may be
transferred when he says 'Tell'?
1. (Mishnah): A scribe wrote a Get; 1 witness signed it
- it is valid.
(l) Answer #5 (Rav Ashi): The whole Mishnah is as R. Yosi.
2. (R. Yirmeyah): The text of the Mishnah says that the
scribe (also) signed the Get.
3. (Rav Chisda): The Mishnah is as R. Yosi, who says
that Mili may not be transferred to another agent.
4. (Summation of question): If R. Yosi agrees that Mili
can be transferred when the agent was told to do
this - disaster may result!
5. A man might ask 2 people to ask a certain scribe to
write a Get, and to ask 2 particular witnesses to
sign it - the witnesses will be concerned for the
disgrace of the scribe, and ask him to be 1 of the
witnesses, but the husband did not authorize this!
6. Rather, we must say that the beginning of the
Mishnah is R. Meir, and the end of the Mishnah is as
1. The Mishnah teaches: not only when he did not say
'give' - but even when he said 'give', the Get is
(m) A Beraisa supports Rav Ashi.
2. And not only when he did not tell 3 people - but
when he told 3 people, it is invalid;
3. And not only when he did not say 'tell (a scribe and
witnesses)' - but when he said 'tell', it is
1. (Beraisa): A scribe wrote a Get Lishmah, witnesses
signed it Lishmah, they gave it to the husband and
he gave it to his wife - it is void, unless the
scribe and witnesses heard the husband's voice
i. 'They will hear (the husband's voice)' - this
shows, it is not enough that he instructs
agents to command them;
ii. 'The husband's voice' - this shows, he must be
able to speak, unlike Rav Kahana (71A 1:b).