GITIN 24 - Two weeks of study material have been dedicated by Mrs. Estanne Abraham Fawer to honor the Yahrzeit of her father, Rav Mordechai ben Eliezer Zvi (Rabbi Morton Weiner) Z'L, who passed away on 18 Teves 5760. May the merit of supporting and advancing Dafyomi study -- which was so important to him -- during the weeks of his Yahrzeit serve as an Iluy for his Neshamah.
 

12th CYCLE DEDICATION
GITIN 24 (3 Av) - dedicated l'Iluy Nishmos Reb Aharon Dovid ben Elimelech Shmuel Kornfeld (Muncasz/Israel/New York), who passed away on 3 Av 5761, and Mrs. Lily (Leah bas Pinchas) Kornfeld who passed away on 8 Av 5765, by their daughter Shifra, and family.

1)

A WOMAN MAY BRING HER OWN GET

(a)

Question: Will Rav Yosef say that the previous Mishnah discusses a Get from Chutz La'aretz, and also the end of our Mishnah, but the Reisha discusses a Get within Eretz Yisrael?!

(b)

Answer: Yes. It says (in the Reisha) 'the written Get proves that she is not lying.' It does not say 'the Get and her declaration prove.'

(c)

(Mishnah): A woman can bring her own Get...

(d)

Question: She is already divorced once she receives the Get! (Why is a declaration needed?)

(e)

Answer #1 (Rav Huna): Her husband told her 'you are divorced only when you come in front of Ploni's Beis Din.'

(f)

Objection: Still, once she gets there, she is divorced from her initial reception of the Get. She is not a Shali'ach. Why is a declaration needed?

(g)

Answer #2 (Rav Huna bar Mano'ach): He told her 'when you get there, put the Get on the ground and take it.'

(h)

Objection: That is like (a standard case of) telling her to take her Get from the ground (i.e. when the husband put it on the ground);

1.

(Rava): If one said 'take your Get from the ground', she is not divorced.

(i)

Answer #3: He told her to be a Shali'ach to give the Get. When she gets there, she should become a Shali'ach to receive the Get, and take it.

(j)

Objection: She cannot fulfill her mission (as deliverer of the Get) until she receives the get on her own behalf. Such an appointment is invalid!

(k)

Answer #4: Rather, he told her to be a Shali'ach to give the Get. When she gets there, she should appoint a Shali'ach to receive the Get.

(l)

Question: This is like the opinion that a woman can appoint a Shali'ach to receive her Get from the Shali'ach of her husband;

1.

According to the opinion that she cannot appoint a Shali'ach to receive her Get from her husband's Shali'ach, how can we answer?

(m)

Answer: The reason she cannot appoint is because (presumably) the husband considers this to be a disgrace, and did not authorize his Shali'ach to give the Get to her Shali'ach. Here, he said this is what he wants her to do!

(n)

Question: This is like the opinion that the reason she cannot appoint is because the husband considers this to be a disgrace;

1.

Question: According to the opinion that Chachamim decreed to invalidate it, because it resembles purchasing a Chatzer into which the husband (only) placed the Get (which is invalid), how can we answer?

(o)

Answer #5: Rather, he told her to be a Shali'ach to give the Get. When she gets there, she should appoint a Shali'ach to give the Get back to her.

(p)

Answer #6: He told her to be a Shali'ach to give the Get. When she gets there, she should make the declaration, and appoint Beis Din to be a Shali'ach to give the Get back to her.

PEREK KOL HA'GET
2)

A GET THAT IS NOT LISHMAH

(a)

(Mishnah): Any Get that was not written for a particular woman is Pasul.

(b)

If a man overheard scribes dictating the words of a Get as they wrote it, and the names on the Get were the same as his and his wife's names, this is Pasul (for him to use).

(c)

Even further, if Reuven wrote a Get for his wife, then decided not to divorce her, and found another man in his city with the same name, and their wives had the same names, the latter man may not use it.

24b----------------------------------------24b

(d)

Even further, if Reuven had two wives with the same name, and wrote a Get for the older wife, he cannot use it to divorce the younger wife.

(e)

Even further, if Reuven told a scribe to write a Get for one of his wives, and later he will decide which one , he cannot use it to divorce either wife.

(f)

(Gemara) Question: In the second case, he wrote a Get for his wife, then decided not to divorce her. How does this differ from the first case?

(g)

Answer (Rav Papa): The first case discusses scribes who often write for practice.

(h)

Support (Rav Ashi): The Mishnah says that scribes were dictating (i.e. to apprentices). It does not say that they read the words (each one , what he was writing).

(i)

Question: Why is the second case a bigger Chidush?

(j)

Answer (Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): In the first case, the Get was not written for divorce. In the second case, the Get was written for divorce. Even so, it is Pasul.

1.

The third case disqualifies even when the Get was written for that man to divorce his wife.

2.

The fourth case teaches that even when the Get was written to divorce this wife (just he did not specify which one at the time of writing), it is Pasul.

(k)

Question: What is the source to disqualify all of these?

(l)

Answer: Had the Torah written only 'he will give a Sefer Kerisus in her hand', one might have thought that only the first case is Pasul, since it was not written to cut; but if one wrote it to divorce his wife, another man with the same name could use it. "He will write (a Sefer Kerisus)" teaches that this is not so;

1.

Had the Torah written only this, one might have thought that the second case is Pasul, since that man did not write it, but if a man wrote it to divorce one wife, he could use it to divorce another wife! "For her" teaches that it must be written for her sake.

2.

Question: What does the last case teach?

3.

Answer: There is no Breirah. (One cannot specify later for whom the Get was written.)

(m)

(Mishnah): If a man wrote it to divorce his older wife, he cannot use it to divorce the younger one .

(n)

Inference: It is Pasul only to divorce the younger wife, but it can be used to divorce the older wife.

(o)

(Rava): This teaches that if two men in the same city have identical names, either may present a loan document and force the borrower to pay him. (The borrower cannot claim 'perhaps I owe your namesake.')

(p)

Objection (Abaye): If this is a valid inference, from the Reisha (if he found another man in his city with his name... the second man cannot use it) we should infer that the second man cannot use it, but the first man can. (This would teach that if two men in the same city have identical names, a lender can present a loan document against one of them to pay him.)

1.

However, we hold that if two men in the same city have identical names, no one may present a loan document to force one of them to pay him! (The 'borrower' can claim, I do not owe you, the other man with my name owes you)!

2.

You must say that in the Mishnah, there are witnesses who saw the Get given (and know which man gave it), and the Mishnah is like R. Elazar;

i.

Also in the third case, witnesses saw the Get given (and know which wife it was given for), and the Mishnah is like R. Elazar!

3)

IF SUCH A GET WAS GIVEN

(a)

(Rav): If any of the Gitin in the Mishnah was given, she becomes forbidden to Kohanim, except for the first case.

(b)

(Shmuel): Even if the first case, she is disqualified from Kehunah.

(c)

This is consistent with another teaching of Shmuel.

1.

(Shmuel): Wherever Chachamim called a Get 'Pasul', it does not permit her to remarry, but it disqualifies her from Kehunah;

2.

Wherever Chachamim called a Chalitzah 'Pasul', it does not permit her to remarry, but it disqualifies her from doing Yibum.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF