Gittin 67

יתומין שבאו לחלוק בנכסי אביהן בית דין מעמידין להן אפוטרופוס ובוררים להן חלק יפה הגדילו יכולין למחות ורב נחמן דידיה אמר הגדילו אין יכולין למחות דאם כן מה כח בית דין יפה

'If orphans [under age] desire to divide the property left to them by their father, the <i>Beth din</i> appoints for each of them a guardian who sees that he obtains a fair share. When they grow up, however, they are able to object,' and did not R. Nahman, speaking in his own name, hold that they are not at liberty to object, because if they are, what becomes of the authority of the <i>Beth din</i>? — The question there was one of money, here it is one of a forbidden act.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., of allowing a married woman to marry again, and where this was involved the Rabbis disregarded the authority of the Beth din. ');">¹</span>

התם ממונא הכא איסורא

Giddal b. Re'ilai sent a Get to his wife. The bearer went and found her weaving. He said to her, Here is your Get. She said to him: Go away now at any rate and come again tomorrow. He went back to him and told him, whereupon he exclaimed, Blessed be He who is good and does good!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In giving him a chance to change his mind. ');">²</span>

גידול בר רעילאי שדר לה גיטא לדביתהו אזל שליחא אשכחה דהוה יתבה ונוולה אמר לה הא גיטיך אמרה ליה זיל השתא מיהא ותא למחר אזל לגביה וא"ל פתח ואמר ברוך הטוב והמטיב

Abaye said, 'Blessed is He who is good and does good,' and the Get itself is not cancelled,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But can still be used to divorce the woman. ');">³</span>

אביי אמר ברוך הטוב והמטיב ולא בטל גיטא רבא אמר ברוך הטוב והמטיב ובטל גיטא

and Raba said, 'Blessed is He who is good and does good,' and the Get is cancelled. What is the point at issue between them? — The point at issue is the revealing of intention in respect of a Get. Abaye holds that the revealing of intention in respect of a Get makes a difference, and Raba held that it makes no difference. Said Raba: What makes me take this view? Because R. Shesheth compelled a man to consent to give a Get, and the man said afterwards [to the witnesses], I heard R. Shesheth say to you, 'Let the Get be cancelled,' and R. Shesheth forced him to give another Get.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because he had made it clear that he did not desire the Get to be given. ');">⁴</span>

במאי קמיפלגי בגלוי דעתא בגיטא קמיפלגי דאביי סבר גלוי דעתא בגיטא לאו מלתא היא ורבא סבר גלוי דעתא בגיטא מילתא היא

And did R. Shesheth then, asked Abaye, cancel other men's bills of divorce? In fact the man himself cancelled it, and the reason why he used these words<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., why he mentioned R. Shesheth. ');">⁵</span>

אמר רבא מנא אמינא לה דרב ששת אשקליה גיטא לההוא גברא בעל כרחיה ואמר להו לסהדי הכי אמר לכו רב ששת לבטל גיטא ואצרכיה רב ששת גיטא אחרינא

was on account of his [R. Shesheth's] beadles.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who beat him and asked him why he had cancelled it. Thus according to Abaye there was here not a mere revealing of intention but an actual annulment. ');">⁶</span>

ואביי אטו רב ששת מבטל גיטא דאינשי הוה איהו בטלה והאי דקאמר להו הכי משום דפנוי

Said Abaye: What makes me take my view? Because Rab Judah once forced the son-in-law of R. Jeremiah Bira'ah to give his wife a Get, and he cancelled it, whereupon he forced him again. He cancelled it again and he again forced him to give it, and he said to the witnesses, stuff grass<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'pumpkins'. ');">⁷</span>

ואמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דרב יהודה אשקליה גיטא לחתניה דר' ירמיה ביראה ובטליה תנא אשקליה ובטליה הדר תנא ואשקליה על כרחיה ואמר להו לסהדי אותיבו קרי באוניכו וכתובו ליה ואי סלקא דעתך גלוי דעתא בגיטא מילתא היא הא חזו ליה דקא רהיט בתרייהו

into your ears and write it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That you may not hear the annulment. ');">⁸</span>

ורבא האי דקא רהיט בתרייהו דאמר להו אשור הבו לה הייא כי היכא דמשלם צערא דההוא גברא

Now if you assume that the revealing of intention makes a difference in a Get, do they not see him running after them? And Raba? — [He will reply that they may think] the reason why he ran after them was to tell them to make sure to give it to her so that he could put an end to his troubles.

ואמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דההוא דאמר להו אי לא אתינא עד תלתין יומין ליהוי גיטא אתא ופסקיה מברא אמר להו חזו דאתאי חזו דאתאי ואמר שמואל לא שמיה מתיא

Said Abaye further: What makes me take this view? Because there was a man who said to the witnesses, If I do not come within thirty days, this shall be a Get. He came on the thirtieth day, but could not get across the river,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the ferry prevented him', as there was no ferry available for him to cross. ');">⁹</span>

ורבא אטו התם לבטולי גיטא בעי התם לקיומי תנאיה קא בעי והא לא איקיים תנאיה

and he called to them, 'See that I have come, see that I have come,' and Samuel said that this was no coming.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This proves that his revealing of his intention to annul the Get made no difference. ');">¹⁰</span>

ההוא דאמר להו אי לא נסיבנא עד תלתין יומין ליהוי גיטא כי מטו תלתין יומין אמר להו הא טרחנא

And Raba? — [He can rejoin,] In that case did he want to annul the Get? What he wanted was but to fulfil his condition, and his condition was not fulfilled.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By calling 'See, I have come' he 'did not mean to annul the Get, but simply to announce that he had endeavoured to fulfil the condition which should invalidate the Get. ');">¹¹</span>

למאי ניחוש לה אי משום אונסא אין אונס בגיטין אי משום גלויי דעתא בגיטא פלוגתא דאביי ורבא הוא

A certain man said [on writing a Get for his betrothed], If I do not marry her within thirty days, this shall be a Get. When the thirtieth day came, he said, See, I am busy making the preparations. Now why should we have any doubts [about the validity of the Get]? If because the man was forcibly prevented [from marrying], force majeure is no plea in regard to a Get. If again because he revealed his intention [of annulling it], on this point there is a difference of opinion between Abaye and Raba.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to Abaye, the revealing of his intention makes no difference, according to Raba he reveals his intention not to annul the Get but to fulfil his condition. Both, however, agree that the Get is valid. ');">¹²</span>

ההוא דאמר להו אי לא נסיבנא לריש ירחא דאדר ליהוי גיטא כי מטא ריש ירחא דאדר אמר להו אנא לריש ירחא דניסן אמרי למאי ניחוש לה אי משום אונס אין אונס בגיטין אי משום גלויי דעתא פלוגתא דאביי ורבא

A certain man said [on writing a Get for his betrothed]. If I do not marry by the first day of Adar, this will be a Get. When the first of Adar came he said, I meant the first of Sivan. Now should we have any doubts about the validity of the Get? If because he was forcibly prevented, force majeure does not invalidate a Get. If because he revealed his intention, on this point there is a difference of opinion between Abaye and Raba.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. preceding note. ');">¹³</span>

והלכתא כנחמן והלכתא כנחמן

The law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the Get can be annulled in the presence of two. ');">¹⁴</span> follows Nahman, and the law follows Nahman,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who said that the halachah is according to Rabbi in both points in dispute. ');">¹⁵</span> and the law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In regard to the revealing of intention. ');">¹⁶</span>