(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Gitin 78

GITIN 77-79 - Dedicated by an admirer of the work of the Dafyomi Advancement Forum, l'Iluy Nishmas Mrs. Gisela Turkel, Golda bas Reb Chaim Yitzchak Ozer, A"H.


(a) We learned in our Mishnah that even if the man threw a Get to his wife in the bed that they were sharing, she would not be divorced. Rava restricts this to a bed that belongs to him, but should it belong to her, she would be divorced, and this is substantiated by Rebbi Eliezer in a Beraisa.
What is the problem with this ruling?

(b) We answer that Rava is speaking about a bed that is higher than ten Tefachim.
What is the significance of a bed that is higher than ten Tefachim?

(c) How do we resolve the problem with the feet of the bed, that are nevertheless below ten Tefachim?

(a) We also learned in our Mishnah that if the man threw a Get into his wife's basket, she is divorced. Here too, we ask the same Kashya that we asked previously (that this would mean that the vessels belonging to the purchaser can acquire in the domain belonging to the seller).
What is wrong with that?

(b) Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel and Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Oshaya therefore establish the Mishnah when her basket is hanging from her.
What does ...

  1. ... Resh Lakish mean when he says 'Keshurah Af-al-Pi she'Einah Teluyah'?
    What do the previous Amora'im hold?
  2. ... Rav Ada bar Ahavah mean when he establishes our Mishnah when the basket is hanging from between her thighs?
  3. ... Rav Mesharshaya b'Rav Dimi mean when he establishes our Mishnah by a man who is a basket salesman?
(c) How does Rava explain Rebbi Yochanan, who answers 'Makom Cheikah Kanuy Lah, Makom K'lasah Kanuy Lah'?

(d) The Beraisa supports this explanation. We prove this from the fact that it includes all things that are like a basket.
What specifically does this come to include? How do we prove Rav's explanation from there?

(a) What does the Tana of our Mishnah say in the case of a man who hands his wife a Get instructing her to accept a Sh'tar Chov, or if she found it behind him, and upon reading it, she discovered that it was a Get?

(b) What must he say for the Get to be valid? When does he say it?

(c) What will be the Din if he placed it in her hand whilst she was asleep, and then, when she awoke, she read it and discovered that it was a Get?

(a) What problem do we have with the second case in our Mishnah (when the woman picked up the Get from behind her husband after he said 'Hey Gitech')?
What did Rava say about such a case?

(b) We amend this to mean that the Get was actually stuck in his belt behind him and she took it from there. Seeing as her husband did still not hand her the Get, why is this any better than picking it up from the ground? Either way, he has not fulfilled the Pasuk "ve'Nasan be'Yadah"?

(c) Our Mishnah is the opinion of Rebbi in a Beraisa. Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar is more stringent.
According to him, in all the cases in our Mishnah what must the husband do for the Get to be valid?

(d) Rebbi and Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar repeat the same Machlokes regarding the case when he placed the Get in her hand when she was asleep.
Seeing as they argue in the case ...

  1. ... 'Kinsi Sh'tar Chov Zeh' (and 'Shalfaso me'Achorav'), why do they also need to argue in the case of 'Nasnah be'Yadah ve'Hi Yesheinah'?
  2. ... 'Nasnah be'Yadah ve'Hi Yesheinah', why do they also need to argue in the case of 'Kinsi Sh'tar Chov Zeh ... '?
(a) Rava says that if a man writes a Get and gives it to his wife's slave whilst he is awake, she is not divorced.
Why is that?

(b) We object to the other half of his statement 'that if he places it in the slave's hand whilst he is asleep, she is divorced', on the grounds that a slave is a walking Chatzer.
What did Rava say that prevents us from answering that as long as he is asleep, he cannot walk?

(c) So in which case did Rava say that the Get is valid?

(a) What does the Tana of our Mishnah say about a case where a man throws his wife a Get and it lands ...
  1. ... closer to him?
  2. ... closer to her?
  3. ... Mechtzah al Mechtzah?
(b) The same will apply to a Sh'tar Kidushin that a man throws to a woman and to the money that the debtor throws to the creditor (at his request) into the Reshus ha'Rabim.
What are the ramifications of the latter case should it fall close(r) to ...
  1. ... the creditor?
  2. ... the debtor?
  3. ... Mechtzah al Mechtzah?
(a) Rav explains 'close to her' to mean within her four Amos and 'close to him', within his four Amos. Rav Shmuel bar Yitzchak explains 'Mechtzah al Mechtzah' to mean that they were both standing in the same four Amos, and the Get landed in between them.
What do we mean when we ask 'Let's see who got there first'?

(b) What problem do we have with the suggestion that they both arrived simultaneously?

(c) So Rav Kahana tries to establish the case when there were exactly eight Amos between them.
Where did the Get land?

(d) What problem do we have with this answer?

8) So how do Rabah and Rav Yosef finally establish 'Mechtzah al Mechtzah', according to Rav's explanation of our Mishnah?

Answers to questions



(a) How does ...
  1. ... Rebbi Yochanan interpret 'Karov Lo' and 'Karov Lah'?
  2. ... How does Rav Sh'man bar Aba elaborate on this to incorporate 'Mechtzah al Mechtzah'?
(b) What did Rebbi Yochanan comment when they informed him that Rebbi Yonasan (who lived in Eretz Yisrael) explained the Mishnah in the same way?

(c) Why did he refer to him as 'Bavla'i'?

(a) Rebbi Yochanan's explanation has the support of a Beraisa.
How do we initially explain the statement there 'Kol she'Karov Lah mi'Lo u'Ba Kelev ve'Natlo, Einah Megureshes'?

(b) What is the problem with this interpretation? What does the Beraisa really mean to say?

(c) Shmuel's explanation of our Mishnah is the most radical of all.
What did he add, after telling Rav Yehudah that, by 'Karov Lah', the Tana means that she can bend down and pick it up without having to move from where she is standing?

(d) Rav Mordechai told Rav Ashi that such a case occurred (where the Get fell close to her).
What did the Beis-Din rule there?

(a) With reference to our Mishnah, Rebbi Asi Amar Rebbi Yochanan restricts the Din of 'Karov Lah' to Gitin.
Why should Get be different than any other case?

(b) How will Rebbi Asi then explain our Mishnah, which adds ...

  1. ... 've'Chein le'Inyan Kidushin'?
  2. ... 've'Chein le'Inyan ha'Chov ... ' (bearing in mind that to establish our Mishnah by 'Z'rok Li Chovi ve'Hipater' would be too obvious for the Tana to insert)?
(c) Even if he said 'Z'rok Li Chovi be'Toras Gitin', it seems obvious.
What is the Chidush?
(a) What does Rav Chisda rule in a case where the woman is holding the Get, but the man still has the string to which it is attached in his hand?

(b) Why is she not divorced if he is able to pull the Get out of her hands?

(a) Rav Yehudah states that if a husband places a Get into his wife's sloping hand, she is not divorced.
Why not, seeing that the Get will fall within her four Amos, anyway?

(b) What She'eilah did Rebbi Elazar ask about the air that is within a person's four Amos?

(c) How do we ...

  1. ... try to resolve his She'eilah from Rav Chisda's ruling?
  2. ... establish Rav Chisda in order to refute the proof?
Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,