Question (R. Ze'ira): [Rav Nachman said that it is not a Get] when she said 'bring my Get', and he told [her husband] 'receive for me.' If she said 'receive for me, and he told [her husband] 'bring to me' [what is the law]?

Answer: A Beraisa was found that says that in both cases, it is a Get (unlike Rav Nachman), and if [her husband] wanted to retract, he can retract.

(Rav Huna citing Rav): A woman cannot make a Shali'ach to receive her Get from her husband's Shali'ach. (Perhaps her husband is insulted that she does not want to receive it herself, and did not authorize his Shali'ach to give it to her Shali'ach.)

Shmuel heard this from him, and repeated it 40 times.

Question (Beraisa) Question: "V'Nasan b'Yadah" - I would know only that he can put it in her hand. What is the source that he can put it in his Shali'ach's hand, in her Shali'ach's hand, from his Shali'ach to her Shali'ach, or from his Shali'ach to his Shali'ach?

Answer: It says "v'Nasan" and [repeats] "v'Nasan" [to include these].

Note: The Gemara did not answer this. Seemingly, we can say that the Beraisa is Torah law, and Rav forbids mid'Rabanan, lest the husband is adamant. Or, the Beraisa discusses when the husband knows that her Shali'ach will take it from his Shali'ach, like it says at the end of this Halachah. (PF)

Question: Who [is our Tana, who] taught 'I do not want [you to receive it for her. Rather...]'?

Answer: It is Rebbi;

(Tosefta): If she said 'receive my Get for me', and he told [her husband] 'your wife said 'receive my Get for me', and he said 'bring, bring to her, receive for her, or acquire for her', if he wants to retract, he cannot retract. Rebbi says so;

R. Nasan says, [if he said] 'bring to her' or 'give to her', if he wants to retract, he can retract. [If he said] 'receive for her' or 'acquire for her', if he wants to retract, he cannot retract.

Rebbi says, in all of them he cannot retract, unless he said] 'I do not want you to receive it for her. Rather, bring to her.'

Question: It is difficult for Rebbi. 'Holech' [connotes] based on his (her husband's) words (he is a Shali'ach Holachah. Why does Rebbi say that) if he wants to retract, he cannot retract?

Question: It is difficult for R. Nasan. 'Heilach' [connotes] based on her words (he is a Shali'ach Kabalah. Why does he say that) if he wants to retract, he can retract?! (We explained this like SEFER NIR. PNEI MOSHE -R. Nasan did not discuss 'Heilach', but he connotes that he cannot retract only if he said 'receive' or acquire for.')

(Rav Huna): He becomes his Shali'ach and her Shali'ach (when she said 'receive', and her husband said 'Holech'. He is unsure whether 'Holech' is like 'acquire for'.)

(Asi): Whenever we say that he is his Shali'ach and her Shali'ach, [from when the Shali'ach gets the Get until he gives it to her,] she is Safek divorced. (We explained this like PNEI MOSHE.)

Question (R. Chagai, to R. Yosi): Is this argument (of Rebbi and R. Nasan) like the following argument?

(Mishnah - Rebbi Yosi): If a man was talking with a woman about her Get or Kidushin, and gave to her Get or Kidushin money, without specifying [why he gives it], this suffices;

Rebbi Yehudah says, he must specify.

Rebbi holds like R. Yosi (we rely on what was said before), and R. Nasan holds like R. Yehudah (we do not rely on what was said before).

Question (R. Yosi, to R. Chagai): What do you have [to suspect that it is not the same argument]?

Answer (R. Chagai): R. Ze'ira citing R. Chiyah bar Avin, and Ada bar Tachlifa citing R. Hoshayah, said 'when do [R. Yosi and R. Yehudah] argue? It is when they diverted themselves to discuss other matters, but if he engaged [only] in that matter, it is a Get (or Kidushin);

And here (Shelichus), even if they engaged [only] in that matter, it is an argument.

Question (R. Zeira, to R. Mana): Does the same [argument] apply to a gift, if one made a Shali'ach to receive something that is not his?

Answer (R. Mana): There, the Torah said that she acquires her Get, and she makes a Shali'ach to receive something that is hers. Can you say about a gift that one makes a Shali'ach to receive something that is not his?! (RIDVAZ based on KETZOS HA'CHOSHEN, and OHR SOMAYACH Hilchos Gerushin 3:15 - the Torah said that when a man puts a Get in his wife's (or her Shali'ach's) hand, automatically she acquires it. He need not be Mezakeh to her, or her Shali'ach. A gift needs Zechiyah. All agree that if the giver said 'Holech', he did not make the messenger his Shali'ach to acquire for the recipient, so he can retract.)

Further, R. Yosi and R. Yakov bar Zavdi citing R. Avahu citing R. Yochanan said that if one said that he will give a gift to his friend, and he wants to retract, he can retract. (I.e. even in such a case he can retract, so it is not considered at all like Shelichus to receive something that belongs to the recipient - based on ME'OR HA'SIMCHAH.)

Question (R. Yosi, to R. Yakov bar Zavdi): (Why may he retract?) Is his 'Hen' ('yes', i.e. his promise to give) "Hen Tzedek"?! (The Torah commands that we speak truthfully!)

Answer (R. Yakov bar Zavdi): When he said 'Hen' (when he promised), it was "Hen Tzedek" (he intended to fulfill).

If one said bring [this] Get of my wife, [or he said to his father-in-law or brother-in-law, this] Get of your daughter or of your sister, it is not a Get (since he did not say to my wife, he intended that he guard it);

If the Shali'ach demanded, and said 'give a Get to your wife', and he said 'bring [this] Get of my wife, [or he said to his father-in-law or brother-in-law, this] Get of your daughter or of your sister', it is a Get. (Since he said so in response to a request to divorce her, he intended that the Shali'ach give it. We explained this like CHAZON YECHEZKEL on Tosefta 4:2.)

(R. Yosi bei R. Bun and R. Avin citing R. Shamai): This is R. Shimon ben Gamliel's opinion (that even if she said 'take my Get for me', this is an expression of Kabalah), but Chachamim say, [only] if she says [also] 'it should be for me in your hand.'

(R. Chaninah): The Halachah follows R. Shimon ben Gamliel; this is when she says [also] 'it should be for me in your hand. (I.e. they argue about when she says this, unlike R. Shamai said.)

A man sent a Get to his wife. She told [the Shali'ach] 'it will be in your hand.' The case came in front of Rav. He said, if [her husband] wants to retract, he can retract.

Question: Does [Rav] argue [with R. Chaninah, who says that they argue in this case, and the Halachah follows R. Shimon ben Gamliel? We explained this like MEICHAL HA'MAYIM.]

Answer: (He does not argue.) It is different [when she said] 'it will be in your hand.' This is unlike 'it will be for me in your hand.' (In the former case, it is a mere deposit.)

(R. Chizkiyah): I know [the episode] from the beginning to the end. One woman made a Shali'ach to receive a Get from her husband's Shali'ach. The case came in front of Rav. He said, if he wants to retract, he cannot retract;

Question: Rav contradicts himself! There, Rav Huna, citing Rav, said that a woman cannot make a Shali'ach to receive her Get from her husband's Shali'ach. And here he says so?!

Answer: I say that her husband was standing in back of the door and heard her voice (that she made a Shali'ach to receive her Get from her husband's Shali'ach, and he was not adamant. Normally, the husband does not know; then, the Get is Pasul, lest he is adamant.)