Answer #2 (Rav Yosef): It softens even a peg in the wall.

Answer #3 (Rav Acha bar Yakov): It softens even a reed woven into a wicker basket.

(Mishnah): If Reuven appointed Shimon to give a Get to Reuven's wife, and Reuven found Shimon and told him that the Get is void, or Reuven sent Ploni to tell this to Shimon, the Get is void;

If Reuven told his wife, himself or via a Shali'ach, that the Get is void, it is void.

If she already received the Get, Reuven cannot invalidate it.

At first, a man who wanted to invalidate a Get would assemble a Beis Din and tell them that it is void. R. Gamliel enacted not to do so, for Tikun ha'Olam (for the betterment of the world).

(Gemara): The Mishnah does not say that Reuven caught up to Shimon, rather, he chanced upon him. Still, we say that the Get is Pasul; Reuven did not say this merely to pain his wife.

Question: Why must the Mishnah also teach about when Reuven sent Ploni to tell Shimon that the Get is void?

Answer: One might have thought that the second Shali'ach (to invalidate the Get) is no stronger than the first Shali'ach, and the Get remains valid. We hear, this is not so.

Question: Why must the Mishnah teach about when Reuven told his wife before she received it?

Answer: One might have thought that only when he tells Shimon, then we say that the Get is truly void, but when he tells his wife, surely he intends only to pain her, not to invalidate it;

We hear, this is not so (in either case it is void).

Question: Why must the Mishnah teach about when Reuven sent a Shali'ach tell his wife?

Answer: One might have thought that Reuven himself would not toil to find his wife and tell her, just to pain her; but he is not concerned for the exertion of a Shali'ach, and would send a Shali'ach just to pain her;

The Mishnah teaches that this is not so. (In either case it is void.)

(Mishnah): If she already received the Get, Reuven cannot invalidate it.

Question: This is obvious!

Answer: The case is, we know that he was pursuing Shimon to invalidate it.

One might have thought that this reveals that retroactively, the Get is void. The Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

(Beraisa): If Reuven said 'it is Batel (void)' or 'I do not want it', his words take effect (he invalidates it). If he said 'it is Pasul (invalid)' or 'it is not a Get', his words have no effect. (This connotes it was already Pasul; this is false.)

Inference: 'It is Batel' means that he invalidates it.

Question: Rabah bar Avuha taught that if one received a gift and then said 'the gift is Mevuteles (voided)' or 'it should be void' or 'I do not want it', his words do not take effect. If he said 'it is Beteilah (void)' or 'it is not a gift', his words take effect!

This shows that 'Batel' implies that it was void from the beginning!

Answer (Abaye): 'Batel' can connote from the beginning, or it should be void.

Regarding a Get, he means the latter, for this works (to stop the divorce). Regarding a gift, he means the former, for that works (to undo the gift).

(Abaye): A Shali'ach to give a gift is like a Shali'ach to give a Get.

This teaches that if the sender says 'Holech (bring)', he does not mean that the Shali'ach should acquire on behalf of the recipient.

Question (Ravina): If the husband says only 'Batel' (without 'it is'), what is the law?

This question is unresolved.

(Rav Sheshes, or a Beraisa): If one said 'this Get will not work', or 'it will not permit/abandon/send/or divorce', or 'it should be a shard' or 'like a shard (i.e. worthless)', he words take effect;

If he said 'this Get does not work', 'it does not permit/abandon/send/or divorce', or 'it is a shard/like a shard', his words do not take effect.

Question: If he said 'behold, it is a shard', what is the law?

Answer (Ravina): This is like 'behold, this is Hekdesh or Hefker' (now he makes it Hefker or Hekdesh. Similarly, now he makes the Get like a shard, and this takes effect.)

Question: If Reuven appointed Shimon to give a Get, and cancelled it, can Reuven later use the Get?

Answer #1 (Rav Nachman): Yes, he can.

Answer #2 (Rav Sheshes): He cannot.

The Halachah follows Rav Nachman.

Question: R. Yochanan said that if a woman accepted Kidushin to take effect after 30 days, she can retract. The Halachah follows R. Yochanan! (Here also, the Get should become void!)

Answer: There, her initial acceptance was mere words, so her latter words nullify her initial words;

Here, the husband nullifies the appointment of the Shali'ach. A Get itself (which is more than mere words) does not become void!

(Mishnah): At first, a man would assemble a Beis Din (to nullify a Get).

Question: In front of how many men must he nullify it?

Answer #1 (Rav Nachman): It must be in front of (at least) two.

Answer #2 (Rav Sheshes): It must be in front of three.

Rav Sheshes says three, because the Mishnah says that he would assemble a Beis Din.

Rav Nachman holds that two people are also considered a Beis Din.

Support (Rav Nachman - Mishnah): 'I hand over (my loans) to you judges, Ploni and Ploni (the judges on a Beis Din for Pruzbul) '.