(Beraisa): If a man gave a Get and said 'the Get is yours but the paper is mine', she is not divorced;

If he said 'on condition that you return the paper to me', she is divorced.

Question: What is the difference between the two clauses?

Answer #1 (Rav Chisda): The Beraisa is like R. Shimon ben Gamliel, who says that she may give money in place of the garment. Here also, she can appease him with money in place of returning the Get!

Objection (Abaye): R. Shimon ben Gamliel said only that she may give money in place of the garment when the garment is lost. Here, the Get is around, so we have no source to say that she can give money in its stead!

Answer #2 (Abaye): Rather, the Beraisa is like R. Meir, who says that a Tanai (stipulation) is invalid unless doubled (if this, then...; if not, then...)

The case is, he said only 'you are divorced if you return the Get.' He did not double the Tanai (and say 'you are not divorced if you don't return it'), so the Get works unconditionally.

Objection (Rava): You imply that had he doubled the Tanai, (the condition would be valid and) the Get would be void. We learn about Tanayim from Moshe's Tanai with the Shevatim of Reuven and Gad!

There, the Tanai (if they will fight valorously) precedes the result (they will inherit in Gil'ad). Here, the result (divorce) preceded the Tanai (returning the Get). Even had he doubled it, the Tanai would be invalid!

Answer #3 (Rava): The Get is valid because the result preceded the Tanai.

Objection (Rav Ada bar Ahavah): You imply that had he mentioned the Tanai before the divorce, the Tanai would be valid and) the Get would be void. We learn Tanayim from the Tanai with Bnei Gad and Bnei Reuven!

There, the Tanai (fighting) and the result (inheritance) are unrelated. Here, the Tanai (returning the Get) and the result (the divorce) are contradictory (Tosfos)!

Answer #4 (Rav Ada bar Ahavah): The Get is valid because the Tanai and the result contradict each other.

Answer #5 (Rav Ashi): The Mishnah is like Rebbi, who says that saying 'on condition that' is like saying 'from now' (so there is no contradiction between the Tanai and the result).

Shmuel enacted that a Shechiv Mera who gives a Get should say 'if I do not die (from this illness), the Get is Pasul. If I die, the Get is valid.'

Question: Why not say 'if I die, the Get is valid. If I do not die, the Get is Pasul'?

Answer: One does not begin with something to his detriment.

Question: Why not say 'the Get is Pasul if I do not die?

Answer: The Tanai must precede the result.

Objection (Rava): We learn conditions from the Tanai with the tribes of Reuven and Gad!

There, the positive (if they will fight) precedes the negative (if they will not fight). Every Tanai must be like this;

In Shmuel's text, the negative comes first!

(Rava): Rather, he should say 'if I do not die, the Get is Pasul. If I die, the Get is valid. If I do not die, it is Pasul,'

His initial words (if I do not die) are favorable. The positive Tanai (if I die) precedes the (repetition of) the negative.

(Mishnah): If one said 'this is your Get on condition that you serve my father, or that you nurse my son'...

Question: How long is the period of nursing?

Answer #1: It is two years;

Answer #2 (R. Yehudah): It is 18 months.

If the son or the father dies, the Get is valid.

If he said 'this is your Get on condition that you serve my father for two years', or 'that you nurse my son for two years', if the son dies or the father says that he does not want her to serve him, even if she did nothing to upset him, the Get is Pasul;

R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, such a Get is valid.

The rule is, whenever she does not inhibit fulfillment of the Tanai, the Get is valid.

(Gemara) Question: Must she really nurse for two years?!

Contradiction (Beraisa): If she served the father or nursed for one day, the Get is valid.

Answer #1 (Rav Chisda): Our Mishnah is like R. Shimon ben Gamliel (who said about a Tanai to return a garment that he seeks his own benefit. Here also, he wants her to nurse as long as is needed). The Beraisa is like Chachamim (who say that he intends to pain her, so one day suffices).

Objection: R. Shimon ben Gamliel is mentioned only in the Seifa. This implies that the Reisha is not R. Shimon!

Answer #2: Rather, the Beraisa is like R. Shimon, who is lenient about conditions. Our Mishnah is like Chachamim.

Answer #3 (Rava): In the Mishnah, he did not specify for how long she must nurse. In the Beraisa, he specified one day.

Objection (Rav Ashi): Not specifying is like specifying one day!

(Mishnah): The period of nursing is two years. R. Yehudah says, it is 18 months.

According to Rava, this is how long she must nurse when he did not specify.

Question: According to Rav Ashi, one day should suffice!

Answer: The Mishnah teaches that the day must be within the first two years (or 18 months) of the son's life.

Question (Mishnah): If he divorced 'on condition that you serve my father for two years' or 'that you nurse my son for two years', if the son dies or the father does not want her to serve him, even if she did nothing to upset him, the Get is Pasul.

Granted, according to Rava, in the Reisha he did not specify the time, and in the Seifa he did.

According to Rav Ashi, what is the difference between the clauses? (Rashi - in both, we must say that the son died before she nursed the required time; Tosfos - also in the Reisha, when he did not specify a time, it is as if he specified!)

This is left difficult.