OPINIONS: The Mishnah discusses a case in which a man gives his wife a Get and says to her, "You are permitted to marry everyone except for a certain man." Rebbi Eliezer maintains that she is divorced and may marry any man except the specified individual. The Chachamim argue and maintain that she is not divorced at all. The Mishnah explains that according to the Chachamim, if he gives her such a Get he must take it back and give it to her again and say, "You are permitted to marry everyone."

The Mishnah earlier (78a) teaches that when a man gives a Get, all he needs to say is, "Ha Giteich" -- "Here is your Get." Why does the Mishnah here require that he add, "You are permitted to marry everyone"?

(a) RABEINU KRESKAS writes in the name of his Rebbi that the Chachamim's requirement that the man say, "You are permitted to everyone," when he gives the Get the second time is an essential part of the divorce. Since he originally gave the Get with the condition, "You are permitted to marry everyone except for a certain man," it does not suffice to say, "Ha Giteich," at the second giving of the Get because he must nullify his original condition. The nullification of that condition can be done only by saying, "You are permitted to everyone."

This also seems to be the opinion of the RIF. The RAN infers from the fact that the Rif cites the complete Mishnah that he follows the reasoning of Rabeinu Kreskas.

(b) However, the TOSFOS RID writes that when the Mishnah says that the husband must say, "You are permitted to everyone," it does not mean that he must say this instead of "Ha Giteich." The Mishnah states that he should say, "You are permitted to everyone," simply because, in the first case, he said, "You are permitted to marry everyone except for a certain man." The Mishnah notes that he must exclude the statement of "except for a certain man." However, if he says only "Ha Giteich" the Get is also valid.

The Tosfos Rid writes that although the Mishnah (85a) states, "This is the body of the Get: You are permitted to everyone," it does not mean that a husband must say this when he gives a Get. The Mishnah there refers only to the way the Get must be written.

This is also the opinion of the RAMBAM (Hilchos Gerushin 8:17). The Rambam writes that if the husband originally says, "You are permitted to marry everyone except for a certain man," and then he gives the Get to her a second time and says, "You are permitted to everyone," or "This is your Get," the Get is valid. The Rambam clearly agrees with the Tosfos Rid that "Ha Giteich" is sufficient.

QUESTION: In the Mishnah (82a), Rebbi Eliezer and the Chachamim disagree about a case in which a man gives a Get to his wife and stipulates that she is permitted to marry anyone except for one man. Rebbi Eliezer maintains that the Get is valid, while the Chachamim argue that it is invalid. In the Gemara, Rebbi Yanai explains that Rebbi Eliezer derives his view from the verse, "And she will leave his house and she will be a wife to another man" (Devarim 24:2). This verse teaches that even if the Get permits her to marry one other man, it is still valid. The Chachamim, however, derive from the words "another man" that the Get must permit her to marry all other men.

Rebbi Yochanan gives another explanation for the dispute. He explains that Rebbi Eliezer derives his view from the verse that states that a Kohen may not marry "a woman who was divorced from her husband" (Vayikra 21:7). This verse teaches that even if she was only divorced from her husband (but is still forbidden to marry certain men), she nevertheless is considered a divorcee and may not marry a Kohen. The Chachamim do not accept this argument because they maintain that this type of Get is considered a Get only to make her forbidden to a Kohen (even if her husband later dies before he gives her another Get), but not for the purpose of allowing her to remarry.

TOSFOS (DH Afilu) questions the reason which Rebbi Yochanan gives for Rebbi Eliezer's opinion. It should be clear that "Isur Kehunah Sha'ani" -- that the issue of her prohibition to marry a Kohen is different. It is obvious that even according to Rebbi Eliezer a Get that would divorce her from her husband but would not permit her to marry anyone else would not be considered a Get at all. If her husband died after giving her such a Get, she would certainly be permitted to perform Yibum with her husband's brother. How does Rebbi Eliezer learn from here that a Get which does not permit her to marry certain men is valid?

The MAHARAM SHIF and PNEI YEHOSHUA ask that the basis for Tosfos' question is unclear. Why is it obvious to Tosfos that according to Rebbi Eliezer the woman would be permitted to perform Yibum after receiving such a Get? In fact, RASHI (DH Ela) implies that according to Rebbi Eliezer, the Get is a valid Get which happens to contain a condition that she may not marry certain men. Rashi writes that if the Get states, "You are divorced from me, but you are not permitted to marry anyone else," the Get has a "Rei'ach ha'Get" which forbids her to a Kohen. Rashi explains that Rebbi Eliezer's proof is that since the Get forbids her to a Kohen, the Get must be a valid Get. Why does Tosfos write that it is obvious that even according to Rebbi Eliezer the Get is not valid at all except for its ability to forbid her to a Kohen?

ANSWER: Although the CHASAM SOFER does not address this question directly, he writes that the simple reading of the Gemara implies the understanding of Tosfos. The Gemara says that "even if she is only divorced from her husband" that suffices to render her unfit to marry a Kohen. If the Gemara means that she is similarly forbidden to her Yavam because she has been divorced from her husband, it should say that "even if she was only divorced and not permitted [to marry]" that suffices to render her unfit to a Kohen. This would imply that the emphasis is that she was not free to marry any man she wants. Since the Gemara says only that she is "divorced from her husband" without the additional phrase, "and not permitted [to marry]," it implies that she is divorced from her husband but still requires Yibum or Chalitzah from her Yavam if her husband dies. (D. Bloom, Y. Montrose)