Gittin 156

וגט יוצא מארבע אמות שלו לד' אמות שלה

and the Get extends from the four cubit space nearer to him into the four cubit space nearer to her.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., part of it is nearer to him and part nearer to her. ');">¹</span>

והא אגיד גביה אלא רבה ורב יוסף דאמרי תרוייהו הכא בשתי כיתי עדים עסקינן אחת אומרת קרוב לו ואחת אומרת קרוב לה

But then it is still [partly] attached to him?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And it is requisite that the whole should be given to her. ');">²</span>

רבי יוחנן אומר קרוב לה שנינו אפילו מאה אמה וקרוב לו שנינו אפילו מאה אמה

— Therefore Rabbah and R. Joseph [gave a different reply], both saying that we are dealing here with a case where there are two groups of witnesses, one of which says that it was nearer to her and the other that it was nearer to him. R. Johanan said: The words of our text are NEARER TO HER [which can include] even a hundred cubits away, and NEARER TO HIM, [which can include] even a hundred cubits away.

היכי דמי מחצה על מחצה אמר רב שמן בר אבא לדידי מיפרשא לה מיניה דרבי יוחנן הוא יכול לשומרו והיא אינה יכולה לשומרו זהו קרוב לו היא יכולה לשומרו והוא אינו יכול לשומרו זהו קרוב לה שניהם יכולין לשומרו שניהם אין יכולין זהו מחצה על מחצה

How are we to understand MIDWAY? — R. Shaman b. Abba said: It was explained to me by R. Johanan that where he is able to look after it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., to prevent a dog snatching it. ');">³</span>

אמרוה רבנן קמיה דרבי יוחנן משמיה דרבי יונתן הכי אמר ידעין חברין בבלאי לפרושי כי האי טעמא

but she is not able to look after it, this is NEARER TO HIM. Where she is able to look after it, but he is not, this is NEARER TO HER. If both of them are able to look after it, or neither of them is able [separately]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Tosaf., s.v. ');">⁴</span>

תניא נמי הכי רבי אליעזר אומר כל שהוא קרוב לה מלו ובא כלב ונטלו אינה מגורשת אינה מגורשת כל היכי תינטריה ותיזיל

to look after it, this is MIDWAY. The Rabbis repeated this explanation before R. Johanan as having been given by R. Jonathan.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Jonathan was a Babylonian, R. Johanan a Palestinian. ');">⁵</span>

אלא לאו ה"ק כל שקרוב לה מלו ואילו בא כלב ונטלו והוא יכול לשומרו והיא אינה יכולה לשומרו אינה מגורשת

He thereupon remarked: Do our colleagues in Babylon also know how to give this explanation? It has been taught to the same effect: 'R. Eliezer says: Even though it is nearer to her than to him and a dog came and ran off with it, she is not divorced.' She is not divorced, you say? How long is she to go on keeping it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As much as to say, Surely from the moment it comes near her she is divorced. ');">⁶</span>

אמר ליה שמואל לרב יהודה שיננא כדי שתשוח ותטלנו ואת לא תעביד עובדא עד דמטי גיטא לידה

No; what he means to say is this: If it is nearer to her than to him, yet so placed that if a dog came and tried to make off with it he could save it but she could not, she is not divorced. Samuel said to Rab Judah: Shinena,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'sharp one', i.e., scholar with keen sharp mind. For other interpretations v. B.K. (Sonc. ed.) p. 60, n. 2. ');">⁷</span>

אמר ליה רב מרדכי לרב אשי הוה עובדא הכי ואצרכוה חליצה:

it must be so near that she can stoop down and pick it up, but do you not actually [declare it valid] until it comes into her hand.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though it was near to her people might malign her by saying it was far away. ');">⁸</span>

וכן לענין קדושין: אמר ר' אסי אמר ר' יוחנן לגיטין אמרו ולא לדבר אחר

R. Mordecai said to R. Ashi: There was an actual case of this kind,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where it landed nearer to her. ');">⁹</span>

איתיביה רבי אבא לר' אסי וכן לענין קדושין שאני התם דכתיב (דברים כד, ב) ויצאה והיתה

and she was compelled to give <i>halizah</i>.

איתיביה וכן לענין החוב זרוק לי חובי וזרקו לו קרוב למלוה זכה הלוה קרוב ללוה הלוה חייב מחצה על מחצה שניהם יחלוקו

SO TOO IN REGARD TO BETROTHALS. R. Assi said in the name of R. Johanan: This rule<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it is sufficient for the document to land near the person to whom it is thrown. ');">¹⁰</span>

הכא במאי עסקינן דאמר ליה זרוק לי חובי ותיפטר אי הכי מאי למימרא לא צריכא דאמר ליה זרוק לי חובי בתורת גיטין

was made with reference to bills of divorce and not to anything else. R. Abba thereupon pointed out to R. Assi the statement, SO TOO IN REGARD TO BETROTHALS. [He replied]: There is a special reason for that, because it is written, she may go forth and be [another man's wife].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIV, 2. Her 'being another man's wife' is put on the same footing as her 'going forth'. ');">¹¹</span>

ואכתי מאי למימרא מהו דתימא מצי אמר ליה משטה אני בך קמ"ל

He raised an objection: SIMILARLY WITH A DEBT. IF THE LENDER SAYS [TO THE BORROWER], THROW ME MY DEBT, AND HE THROWS IT, IF IT LANDS NEARER TO THE LENDER IT BECOMES THE PROPERTY OF THE LENDER; IF IT LANDS NEARER TO THE BORROWER, HE STILL OWES THE MONEY; IF IT LANDS MIDWAY, THEY DIVIDE? — The case we are dealing with here is when he says, Throw me what you owe me and be quit. If that is all [he rejoined], what need was there to state it? — It is necessary [to state it] when he says, Throw me my debt in the same way as a Get. Still, what need is there to state even this? — You might think that he can say to him, I was only making fun of you; therefore we are told [that this is no plea].

אמר רב חסדא גט בידה ומשיחה בידו אם יכול לנתקו ולהביאו אצלו אינה מגורשת ואם לאו מגורשת

R. Hisda said: If the Get is in her hand and the string<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tied round the Get. ');">¹²</span>

מאי טעמא בעינן כריתות וליכא

in his hand, and he is able to pull it with a jerk to himself, she is not divorced, but if not, she is divorced. What is the reason? We require a 'cutting off', and this is not realised.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. B.M. 7a. ');">¹³</span>

אמר רב יהודה היתה ידה עשויה כקטפרס וזרקו לה אף על פי שהגיע גט לידה אינה מגורשת

Rab Judah said: If she held her hand sloping<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'like a gutter'. [G]. ');">¹⁴</span>

אמאי הא כי נפיל בארבע אמות דידה קא נפיל בדלא נח

and he threw it to her, even if the Get reached her hand she is not divorced. Why so? When it falls to the ground it falls within four cubits of her? — We assume that it does not come to rest there. But should she not be divorced by dint of its having come into the air of the four cubits? [And since this is not so] may we decide from this the question raised by R. Eleazar, whether the four cubits spoken of include the air above them or not? May we decide that they do not include the air? — [No;] we suppose here that she is standing on the brink of a river, so that from the outset it is liable to be lost [if it falls from her hand].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And in such a case the air certainly does not confer possession. ');">¹⁵</span>

ותיגרש מאוירא דארבע אמות תפשוט דבעי רבי אלעזר ארבע אמות שאמרו יש להן אויר או אין להן אויר תפשוט דאין להן אויר

הכא במאי עסקינן בעומדת על גב הנהר דמעיקרא לאיבוד קאי: