Commentary for Kiddushin 97:2
והוינן בה ותנא קמא לית ליה מנהג המדינה ואמר רב אשי באתרא דנהיגי בפשוט ועבד ליה מקושר א"נ באתרא דנהיגי במקושר ועבד ליה פשוט כולי עלמא לא פליגי דודאי קפידא
R'Simeon B'Gamaliel said: It all depends on local custom.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If it is customary to write a folded divorce, a plain one is invalid, and vice versa. For when a husband authorizes the scribe to write a divorce, it is tacitly understood that he wants it written in accordance with local custom; for notes v. B.B. 160a.');"><sup>3</sup></span> Now, we pondered thereon: does not the first Tanna agree that local custom [is the determining factor]? To which R'Ashi<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rashal in B.B. ');"><sup>4</sup></span>
Daf Shevui to Kiddushin
R. Ashi explains the disagreement between the first tanna and R. Shimon b. Gamaliel. The first opinion holds that if both types of documents are customary in that particular place and the husband asked to make a particular one and the scribe makes the other kind, the get is invalid. R. Shimon b. Gamaliel says that he does not really care, he was merely “indicating a place.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy