(Beraisa): If Reuven said 'this is your Get on condition that you will marry Ploni', she may not remarry. If she did, she may stay married.

Question: How do we understand this?

Answer #1 (Rav Nachman): She should not marry Ploni, lest people say that Reuven gave his wife to Ploni like a gift. If she married someone else, she remains married.

Objection: Do we make a decree (to discourage such Gitin) that permits a married woman to live with another man?!

Answer #2 (Rav Nachman): Rather, she should not marry Ploni, lest people say that Reuven gave his wife to Ploni like a gift. If she married Ploni, she remains married. We do not force her to leave due to our decree.

Objection (Rava): Is she forbidden only to marry Ploni? She may not marry anyone until she fulfills the Tanai!

Suggestion: You (Rav Nachman) permit her to marry someone else now, get divorced later and then fulfill the Tanai, similar to your argument with Rav Yehudah.

(Rav Yehudah): If one vowed that he will not sleep today if he sleeps tomorrow, he may not sleep today, lest he sleep tomorrow;

(Rav Nachman): He may sleep today. We are not concerned lest he sleep tomorrow.

Rejection: This comparison is faulty! There, one can stop himself from sleeping. He can prick himself with thorns. Here, a woman cannot divorce herself!

Answer #3 (Rava): Rather, she may not marry Ploni, nor anyone else.

She may not marry Ploni, lest people say that Reuven gave his wife to Ploni for a gift;

She may not marry anyone else, lest she not fulfill the Tanai.

If she married Ploni, she remains married. We do not force her to leave due to our decree;

If she married someone else, she must leave. We are concerned lest she not fulfill the Tanai.

Support (Beraisa): She may not marry Ploni, nor anyone else;

If she married Ploni, she remains married. If she married someone else, she must leave.

(Beraisa): If one divorced his wife on condition that she will ascend to Heaven, or descend to the depths, or swallow a reed of four Amos, or bring to him a reed of 100 Amos, or cross the sea on foot, the Get is Pasul;

R. Yehudah ben Teima says, such a Get is valid;

The rule is, if one made a Tanai that cannot be fulfilled, he merely taunts her with words. The Tanai is void, and the Get is valid.

(Rav Nachman): The Halachah follows R. Yehudah (ben Teima).

(Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): A Mishnah is like R. Yehudah:

(Mishnah): If one makes a Tanai that can be fulfilled, the Tanai is valid.

Inference: If the Tanai cannot be fulfilled, it is invalid.

Question: If one said 'this is your Get on condition that you eat pork', what is the law?

Answer #1 (Abaye): Also this is a Tanai that cannot be fulfilled. (The above Tana'im argue about it.)

Answer #2 (Rava): The Tanai can be fulfilled, just (it is forbidden and) she would be lashed for fulfilling it.

Abaye explains that R. Yehudah's rule (any Tanai that cannot be fulfilled is void) includes a Tanai to eat pork.

Rava explains that 'such a Get is valid' excludes the case of eating pork (the Get is valid only if she fulfills the Tanai).

Question (against Rava - Beraisa): If one said 'this is your Get on condition that you have Bi'ah with Ploni', the Get is only valid if the Tanai is fulfilled;

If he said 'on condition that you do not have Bi'ah with my father or your father', we are not concerned that she will (she may remarry).

The Beraisa does not teach 'on condition that you have Bi'ah with my father or your father' (because it is forbidden, it is not a valid Tanai)!

Answer (Rava): I said that a Tanai to eat pork is valid, because she can do this (just she will be lashed for it). A Tanai to have Bi'ah with Ploni is valid, for she can bribe him;

But even if she is willing to sin, she cannot get her father or father-in-law to sin!

Rava explains R. Yehudah's rule (any Tanai that cannot be fulfilled) to include a Tanai to have Bi'ah with her father or father-in-law;

'Such a Get is valid' excludes the case of eating pork.

Abaye explains that the rule includes a Tanai to eat pork;

'Such a Get is valid' excludes a Tanai that she will have Bi'ah with Ploni.

Question (against Abaye - Beraisa): If one said 'this is your Get on condition that you eat pork, eat Terumah (if she is not a Kohenes) or drink wine (if she is a Nezirah)', the Get is valid only if the Tanai is fulfilled.

Answer (Abaye): The Beraisa is like Chachamim who argue with R. Yehudah.

Question: The Tanai should be Pasul because it is contrary to the Torah!

Answer #1 (Rav Ada brei d'Rav Ika): That rule applies only in a case such as Kidushin on condition that the husband has no obligation to supply his wife's needs for food, clothing and Onah (Bi'ah at the proper frequency), for he uproots (his Torah obligation to supply these);

Here, she transgresses to fulfill the Tanai!

Objection (Ravina): She transgresses only to fulfill his Tanai. He caused the Mitzvah to be uprooted!

Answer #2 (Ravina): The rule that a Tanai contrary to the Torah is Pasul applies only in a case such as Kidushin without obligation to supply food, clothing and Onah, for he definitely uproots the Mitzvah;

Here, the Mitzvah need not be uprooted. She need not eat, and the Get will not take effect!

(Mishnah): He takes the Get back...

Question: Like whom is our Tana?

Answer #1 (Chizkiyah): He holds like R. Shimon ben Elazar.

(Beraisa - R. Shimon ben Elazar): (If one told his wife 'take this loan document' and gave a Get to her,) it is valid only if he takes it back and gives it again, and says 'this is your Get.'

Answer #2 (R. Yochanan): Our Mishnah is even like Rebbi (there, who does not require taking it back and giving it again);

The reason is like Rav Kahana taught. Here, the Get (partially) took effect to disqualify her to Kohanim, so she already acquired it. (It does not help to say now that she is permitted to all men, unless he takes it back and gives it again.)

(Mishnah): If he wrote in the Get (that she is not permitted to Ploni, even if this was later erased, the Get is Pasul).

Opinion #1 (Rav Safra): The Mishnah discusses when he wrote the Tanai in the Get.

Question: This is obvious! The Mishnah explicitly says so!

Answer: One might have thought that the Mishnah applies only when the Tanai was written after the Toref (the primary part of the Get), but if the Tanai preceded the Toref, even if the Tanai was not written in the Get, the Get is Pasul;

Rav Safra teaches that this is not so. (Rather, even a Tanai before the Toref does not disqualify the Get if it is not written in the Get. The Toref is 'you are permitted to every man' (Tur), or, if this in not in the Get (Beis Yosef Sof 126 DH v'Harei), similar expressions of Kerisus. A Tanai after the Toref is like a Tanai after the Ma'aseh. We hold like R. Meir, that normally, such a Tanai is invalid.)

Opinion #2 (Rava): The Mishnah is only when he wrote the Tanai after the Toref. If the Tanai precedes the Toref, even if it was not written in the Get, the Get is Pasul.

For this reason, Rava would silence the husband until the Toref was written.

(Beraisa - Rebbi): Any Tanai disqualifies a Get;

Chachamim say, only a Tanai that disqualifies a Get orally, disqualifies it when it is written in it:

'Except for marrying Ploni', disqualifies orally, and it disqualifies also if it is written;

'On condition that you don't marry Ploni' does not disqualify orally, so it does not disqualify if it is written.