Gemara

(Rav Huna bar Mano'ach): The Mishnah says that a woman can bring her own Get and must make a declaration. The case is, her husband told her 'you are divorced only when you come in front of Ploni's Beis Din, put the Get on the ground and take it.''

Objection: That is like when her husband (put the Get on the ground, and) said 'take your Get from the ground'!

(Rava): If one told his wife to take her Get from the ground, she is not divorced.

78a (Mishnah): If she found her Get in back of her husband, and read it and realized that it is her Get, she is not divorced unless he says 'this is your Get.'

Question: How does saying 'this is your Get' help? He did not give it to her! Rava taught that if one told his wife 'take your Get from the ground', she is not divorced.

Answer: Rather, the case is, she removed it from his belt.

Question: Still, he did not give it to her!

Answer: He bent his waist (and she took it).

Rishonim

The Rif (40a, 41a) brings the Gemara on 78a and 78b.

Ran (DH Masnisin): The case is, they were discussing divorce. Had he given it properly, she would be divorced even if he did not say 'this is your Get.' If he gave it in an inferior way, e.g. he merely bent his waist towards her, he must say 'this is your Get', but he need not give it again.

Rambam (Hilchos Gerushin 1:12): If a Get was on the ground and he told her 'take your Get from the ground' and she took it, or if it was tied to his hand or thigh and she removed it, it is not a Get. It says "he will put in her hand", not that she will take it. He or his Shali'ach did not give it. If he leaned his body towards her or tilted his hand until she took it, and he said 'this is your Get', it is a Get.

Rosh (8:5): He bent his waist to bring the Get closer to her. It is as if he moved his hand closer to her and she took it from his hand. If his hand was open and the Get rested on it and she took it, and he did not bring it closer to her, this is not Nesinah and she is not divorced. If he held one end and stretched it towards her and she took the other end, it is a Get, like when she took it from his waist. R. Chananel explains that the Get was tightly crammed into his waist, and he constricted his waist and loosened it, and she took it. It is as if he gave it to her. It seems that R. Chananel must agree that he came closer to her. If not, if his hand were closed on the Get and he opened it and she took it, she would be divorced! According to R. Chananel, if the Get was in his open hand and he brought it closer to her and she took it, she would not be divorced, for he must help her take it and bring it closer.

Poskim

Shulchan Aruch (EH 138:1): If he told her 'take your Get from the ground', this does nothing.

Be'er Heitev (1): Perhaps this suffices to disqualify her from Kehunah.

Shulchan Aruch (ibid.): Even if the Get was on his hand and she was close and took it, it is not a Get, for he did not help her to take it. Even if his hand was closed on the Get and he opened it, to help her to take it, and she took it, she is not divorced because he did not bring it closer to her. If the Get was inserted under his belt against his waist, and he constricted his waist and loosened it, and leaned towards her and she took it, this is called "he will give."

Beis Shmuel (EH 138:1): The Ran holds that if one gave a Get in her hand without any discussion of Gitin, it is not a Get at all. Therefore, we must say that they were discussing her Get. The Rambam holds that a proper Nesinah without any discussion of Gitin is only Pasul, and when the Nesinah was inferior the Get is totally void. If they were discussing her Get, perhaps the Get would be Kosher even with an inferior Nesinah, for discussing her Get is like saying 'this is your Get.' Above (136:1), the Shulchan Aruch ruled like the Rambam.

Shulchan Aruch (ibid.): If he constricted his waist but did not lean towards her, or leaned towards her but did not constrict his waist, this is not a Nesinah. Some say that if the Get was tied to his hand or thigh and he leaned his body towards her or tilted his hand until she took it, and he said 'this is your Get', it is a Get.

Question (Beis Yosef DH veha'Rosh): Why did the Tur say that the Rosh holds like R. Chananel? He brought also the Rambam's Perush, and did not favor either!

Answer (Bach DH v'Ika): The Rosh did not say 'the Rambam explained this way', for he does not cite his opinion! Rather, he explains the words of the Gemara, then adds that the Get was crammed in, like R. Chananel says.

Beis Yosef (DH v'Af): The Tur says that the Rosh holds that even R. Chananel agrees that if he held the Get by one end and extended it towards her and she took the other end, it is a Get. If it were not, he would have taught this, which is a bigger Chidush than when he held the Get in his open hand and brought it close to her! When there is no need to help her take it, it suffices to bring it closer.

Rebuttal (Bach): If so, what is source that the Rambam disagrees? Perhaps he discusses when there is no need to help! Rather, R. Chananel always requires helping and bringing it close.

Beis Shmuel (2): What is the Rosh's source to say that R. Chananel holds that if it was in his open hand and he brought it closer to her, it is not a Get? Perhaps R. Chananel requires to help and bring it closer only when it is difficult to take! It seems that the correct text of the Rosh should say 'if it was in his closed hand.' It is clear that the Rambam argues, for he says that if the Get was tied to his hand, it suffices to bring it closer.

Aruch ha'Shulchan (5): If something must be brought close, it is not as if an action must be done (Zevachim 105b). This implies that bringing close is not an action. R. Chananel concludes that this is not enough to give a Get. The Rambam holds that giving a Get need not entail an action. All agree that merely opening the hand does not suffice, for it does nothing to the Get.

Beis Shmuel (2): If the Get was in his closed hand and he brought it closer and opened his hand, this is a proper giving, even though she took it. It suffices if they were discussing her Get.

Beis Meir (1 DH v'Hinei): Ateres Paz (on Rosh 8:5 DH u'Mah she'Chosav Rabeinu) holds that this is not a proper giving. One should be stringent if there is no problem of Igun. I say that one may be lenient in a situation of Igun, for the Rambam, Tur and Shulchan Aruch connote unlike the Ran.