Quoting%20commentary for Gittin 149:14

מתקיף לה רב אדא בר אהבה טעמא דמעשה קודם לתנאי הא תנאי קודם למעשה לא הוי גיטא מכדי כל תנאי מהיכא גמרינן להו מתנאי בני גד ובני ראובן מה התם תנאי בדבר אחד ומעשה בדבר אחר אף כל לאפוקי הכא

so in all cases the condition should be mentioned before the act, and that excludes the present case where the act is mentioned before the condition.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [He said first 'this is your Get and then added the condition that 'the paper belongs to me'.] ');">¹⁴</span> No, said Raba: the reason is that the act is mentioned before the condition. R. Ada b. Ahabah strongly objected to this, saying, The reason [according to you] is that the act was mentioned before the condition, so that if the condition were mentioned before the act it would not be a divorce. Let us see now. Whence do we derive the rule of conditions? From that of the sons of Gad and the sons of Reuben. Therefore just as there the condition relates to one thing and the act to another,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The condition to crossing the Jordan, and the act to their taking possession of the land of Sihon and Og. ');">¹⁵</span> so it should be in all cases, to exclude such a one as this

Explore quoting%20commentary for Gittin 149:14. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.