POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Gitin 20
GITIN 19 & 20 - have been anonymously dedicated by a very special
Marbitz Torah and student of the Daf from Ramat Beit Shemesh,
1) REQUIREMENTS OF A GET
2) WHAT IS CONSIDERED WRITING
1. Suggestion: Perhaps we should be concerned that the
language of divorce in the Torah can serve as a Get.
(b) Question: If so, the law is obvious - what did Rav Yosef
come to teach?
2. Rejection: A Get must be written with intention to
divorce that particular woman - the Sefer Torah was
not written with this intent.
3. Suggestion: Perhaps we should be concerned that the
husband bribed the scribe from the beginning to
write that part of the Torah with intent to divorce
4. Rejection: A Get must contain the names of the
husband and wife and their cities - the Sefer Torah
(c) Answer: That water in which gallnuts were soaked is not
valid writing on parchment treated with gallnuts.
(d) (Rav Chisda): A Get was not written for the sake of the
wife. If the scribe traces over the letters, intending to
make the Get valid for her - R. Yehudah and Chachamim
argue whether this works.
1. (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): A scribe was writing a Sefer
Torah; the next word to write was Hash-m's name. He
thought he needs to write 'Yehudah'; he mistakenly
omitted the 'Daled' (so the letters of Hash-m's name
were written, but without the required intent for
Hash-m's name). He may trace the quill over the
letters, to sanctify the name;
(e) Rejection (Rav Acha bar Yakov): Perhaps Chachamim only
said that regarding a Sefer Torah, for one should
beautify Mitzvos; but they would admit, that one can fix
2. Chachamim say, this is not an ideal writing of
(f) Rav Chisda: I can show that all Gitin are invalid.
(g) Question (Rava): Why?
1. Suggestion: If because The Torah says "He will
write", and (the practice is that) she pays the
scribe - perhaps Chachamim enacted that the money
she pays belongs to the husband (so the scribe is
(h) Answer: Rather, because the Torah says "He will give",
and Gitin lack even minimal monetary value (a Perutah) to
be considered giving.
(i) Question: Perhaps the Torah only requires giving a Get,
not something of value!
1. Support (Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael): A Get written
on something forbidden to benefit from - it is
(j) (Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael): A Get written on something
forbidden to benefit from - it is valid.
(k) (Rav Ashi): We may derive this from a Mishnah - 'One may
write a Get on an olive leaf'.
(l) Rejection: That is no proof - although an olive leaf is
not worth a Perutah, many leaves together are worth a
1. But something forbidden to benefit from has no value
(m) (Beraisa - Rebbi): A Get written on something forbidden
to benefit from - it is valid.
1. Levi taught this law in Rebbi's name - the audience
was unreceptive. Levi taught this law in the name of
Chachamim - the audience was receptive.
i. This shows, this is the correct law.
(a) (Beraisa): "He will write" - and not carve out.
(b) Question: May we deduce that carving is not considered
1. Contradiction (Beraisa): A slave with a Get of
freedom written on a &tablet or & - he is free;
(c) Answer (R. Elazar): If he carves out the letters
themselves (the shapes normally written), it is
considered writing, but not if he carves out the (shapes
of the) insides (and surrounding area) of the letters
(leaving the shapes of the letters raised).
2. He does not go free if the text of a Get of freedom
is embroidered on a cap or &.
(d) Question: Is carving out the insides of the letters
really not considered writing?!
1. Contradiction (Beraisa): The writing (of the
headplate of the Kohen Gadol) was not sunken in,
rather raised, as gold Dinarim (coins).
(e) Answer: The writing is as gold Dinarimin in 1 respect,
unlike it in another
i. The writing on gold Dinarim is made by
compressing the insides of the letters!
1. It is as gold Dinarim in that the writing was
raised; but the letters are written on the
headplate, whereas the insides are compressed on
(f) Question (Ravina): A die for stamping coins - does it
only compress the background of the writing, or does it
also cause the writing to rise?
(g) Answer (Rav Ashi): It only compresses.
(h) Question (Beraisa): The writing was not sunken in, rather
raised, as gold Dinarim.
1. You cannot say that coins are stamped by compressing
- the letters (of the headplate) must be written!
(i) Answer: The writing is as gold Dinarim in 1 respect,
unlike it in another
3) GIVING THE GET
1. It is as gold Dinarim in that the writing was
raised; but the letters are engraved on the
headplate by pounding from the other side, whereas
by coins, the area around the writing is compressed.
(a) Question (Rava): A husband wrote a Get on a gold plate.
He told his wife, 'Take your Get, it is also payment of
your Kesuvah' - what is the law?
(b) Answer (Rav Nachman): It is considered payment of the
(c) Question (Beraisa): 'Receive your Get, and the rest (the
part not under the letters of the Get) should count
towards payment of the Kesuvah' - his words are
1. This is only because the Get contains more than just
the area under the letters - if not, the Get would
not count towards the Kesuvah!
(d) (Beraisa): 'This is your Get, but the paper is mine' -
she is not divorced; 'This is your Get, on condition that
you return the paper to me' - she is divorced.
2. Answer: No - even if the Get only contains what is
under the letters, the Get does not count towards
i. The Beraisa teaches, even when there is excess,
it only counts towards paying the Kesuvah when
the husband stipulates.
ii. Question: Why is this?
iii. Answer: The excess is the margin of the Get
(and would normally be considered as part of
(e) Question: (Rav Papa): What if the husband says that he is
keeping the margin between the lines, or between the
1. This question is unresolved.
(f) Question (Rami bar Chama): A slave was established to
belong to Reuven. A Get is written on the slave, and he
is now by Reuven's wife.
2. Question: This should be invalid, for it is as if he
gives her separate strips, but a single Get must be
3. Answer: The case is, the letters reach from 1 line
(or word) to the next, i.e. what she keeps is
1. Do we say that Reuven gave the slave to his wife -
or, did the slave himself flee to this wife?
(g) Question: What is the answer to Rami bar Chama's
2. Question (Rava): In any case, it should be invalid -
the writing can be erased, and hence forged!
i. Question: How does Rava understand our Mishnah,
which says that a Get may be written on a
3. Answer: The Get was tattooed on the slave's hand.
ii. Answer: Our Mishnah is as R. Elazar; witnesses
that see the Get given, they make it a valid
Get, even though it is forgable.
iii. Culmination of question: Rami bar Chama's
question only applies when we do not have
witnesses that saw him give her the slave - how
will he answer Rava's question?
i. This answer may also be used by Rava to explain
(h) Answer: Reish Lakish taught, having animals in one's
possession is not a proof of ownership (since they may
have walked away from their real owner; here, also,
perhaps the slave came to her on his own)!
(i) Question (Rami bar Chama): A woman was known to own a
tablet; her Get is now written on it, and she is holding
it. Do we say that she knew to let her husband acquire it
when he wrote the Get, or not?
(j) Answer #1 (Abaye - Mishnah - R. Yehudah ben Bava): There
was a village near Yerushalayim, in which an elder used
to lend everyone; he would write the documents himself,
and witnesses would sign. Chachamim permitted this.
1. Question: The document must belong to the one who
gives or mortgages his property (i.e. the borrower)!
(k) Objection (Rava): That is no proof - an elder knows the
law, perhaps a woman does not!
2. Answer: We assume, he knew to acquire the document
to the borrower (and similarly, a wife knows to
acquire the tablet to her husband).
(l) Answer #2 (Rava - Mishnah): A cosigner that signed
underneath the witnesses - the lender may collect from
the cosigner's unmortgaged property, but not from his
mortgaged property. (We assume, the lender knows to
acquire the document to him when he signs)!
(m) Objection (Rav Ashi): That is no proof - perhaps a man
knows to acquire the document, but a woman does not!
(n) Answer #3 (Rav Ashi): A woman can write her Get herself,
and a man can write the receipt for paying the Kesuvah
himself, because only signatures validate a document