ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Gitin 22
GITIN 22 (6 Adar) - dedicated by Harav Avi Feldman (of Yerushalayim) and
family in memory of his father, the Tzadik Harav Yisrael Azriel ben Harav
Chaim (Feldman) of Milwaukee, on the day of his Yahrzeit.
(a) One acquires ...
1. ... a flower-pot - by means of Meshichah (because it is considered
(b) Weeding or digging constitutes a Chazakah with regard to seeds.
2. ... seeds growing in a holed flower-pot - by means of Kesef, Sh'tar or
Chazakah (because they are considered Karka.
(c) Assuming the seeds belong to one person and the holed pot to another, it
is therefore obvious that the owner of the seeds will acquire the pot
through Meshichah, and the owner of the pot will acquire the seeds through
Meshichah. If the pot and the seeds belong to one person, one can acquire
them both simultaneously by making a Chazakah on the seeds alone - because
of the Mishnah in Kidushin, which states that Metaltelin can be acquired
together with Karka through Kesef, Sh'tar and Chazakah.
(d) Should he make a Chazakah on the pot alone (i.e. by using it for a
specific purpose) - he will acquire neither the seeds nor even the pot.
(a) According to Abaye, if the hole in the pot is in Eretz Yisrael and the
branch of a tree (which is growing on the other side of the pot, is in Chutz
la'Aretz, we go after the hole - in which case, the fruit that subsequently
grows on the tree is subject to Ma'asros min ha'Torah.
(b) According to Rava - we go after the branch, and the fruit is Patur from
(c) Even Rava will agree that we go after the hole - once the tree has taken
root in the ground via the hole.
(a) According to Rebbi Meir, whatever grows from the wall (of earth) in
between two gardens that exist side by side in two tiers belongs to the
owner of the upper-tier garden. According to Rebbi Yehudah - it belongs to
the owner of the lower-tier garden.
(b) We attempt to prove from Rebbi Yehudah that - there are opinions that go
after the branch, even though the roots are growing in someone else's
property, clashing with what we just learned with regard to the flower-pot
where the tree took root.
(c) In reply, we cite the reason that Rebbi Yehudah himself gives for his
ruling. He says - that the owner of the lower-tier garden has the right to
fill in his garden with earth, depriving his friend of the possibility of
planting anything on the wall of his garden.
(d) Rebbi Meir's reason for declaring the owner of the top-tier as the owner
of the vegetables is - that he has the right to excavate his garden and
remove it completely, thereby depriving his friend of the wall.
(a) Rebbi says that the fruit of a tree that is growing partially in Eretz
Yisrael and partly in Chutz la'Aretz - is all partially Tevel and partially
(b) The ramifications of this ruling are - that one cannot separate Ma'asros
from another source that is Vaday Tevel to cover this batch.
(c) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel says - 'ha'Gadeil be'Chiyuv, Chayav; ha'Gadeil
(d) Based on the assumption that it is the branch that is growing partially
in Eretz Yisrael and partly in Chutz la'Aretz, whilst the roots are growing
entirely in Eretz Yisrael - we attempt to prove from here that we go after
the branch even though the roots are growing elsewhere.
(a) If, as we conclude, the Tana is speaking when it is the roots that are
divided, and not the branches. Nevertheless, Raban Shimon ben Gamliel
divides the sap and the Kedushah into two - because the Beraisa is speaking
when a rock divides them, enabling the sap and the Kedushah in the tree to
remain divided, too.
(b) Rebbi's reason is - because, even though the sap initially enters the
tree in two separate lots, once it reaches ground level, where the two parts
of the tree merge into one, the sap does likewise.
(c) In a case where the roots of a tree grow in Eretz Yisrael, and its
branch grows in Chutz la'Aretz - both Tana'im will agree that we go after
(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Asi Amar Ula lists three kinds of skin (parchment):
Matzah, Cheifah - and Diftera.
(b) Matzah - has not been treated at all, neither with salt, nor with flour
nor with gall-nuts (like regular Matzah, that comprises nothing more than
flour and water, in order to minimize the chances of its becoming Chametz.
(c) We need to know this for the Shiur of carrying on Shabbos, which Abaye
describes as 'Riv'a de'Riv'a de'Pumbedisa' - which in turn, is the smallest
weight in Pumbedisa, which they would cover with 'Matzah'.
(d) Cheifah has been salted but not treated with flour, and also concerns
the Shiur of carrying on Shabos. The minimum Shiur for carrying Cheifah on
Shabbos - is when it is large enough to cover a Kamei'ah with it (which is
why it is called 'Cheifah' [from the word 'Chofeh', to cover]).
(a) 'Diftera' is - skin that has been treated with salt and flour.
(b) We need to know this in connection with the Shiur for carrying out on
Shabbos (like by Matzah and Cheifah) - which is large enough to write a Get
(c) Rebbi Chiya bar Asi Amar Ula holds like - the Chachamim of Rebbi Yehudah
ben Beseirah in our Mishnah, who validate a Get that is written on Diftera.
(a) 'K'laf' - is parchment that has been treated with salt, flour and
(b) Rebbi Chiya bar Asi Amar Ula does not include it in his list - because
K'laf no longer falls under the category of skin.
(a) The Chachamim in our Mishnah who validate a Get that is written on paper
even though it is possible to erase and change its contents - are none other
than Rebbi Elazar (ben Shamua) who holds 'Eidei Mesirah Karsi'.
(b) Witnesses are required min ha'Torah (despite the fact that, according to
Rebbi Elazar, "ve'Kasav Lah" refers to the Kesivah and not to the
Chasimah) - because we learn a 'Gezeirah-Shavah "Davar" "Davar" from Mamon
that 'Ein Davar she'be'Ervah Pachos mi'Shenayim'.
(c) We cannot argue that in the same way as the woman will produce the Eidei
Mesirah who know what was written in the Sht'ar according to Rebbi Elazar,
so too, will she produce the Eidei Chasimah according to Rebbi Meir -
because Rebbi Meir does not require the witnesses who signed to testify,
since any witnesses who recognize the signatures will suffice.
(a) According to Rebbi Elazar (ben P'das), the Chachamim only validate the
Get which had already been written on and erased, 'immediately' - meaning on
(b) The reason for this is - because we suspect that, once the first day has
passed, the witnesses themselves may have forgotten the details that were
written on the Sh'tar, and will no longer be reliable (though we are not
afraid of this when the Sh'tar is above board).
(c) Rebbi Yochanan permits even up to ten days.
(a) Rebbi Elazar also restricts Rebbi Elazar in our Mishnah to Gitin, but
not to other Sh'taros - because by Gitin (which are not intended to claim
with), she can be expected to take the Sh'tar to Beis-Din immediately to
have it substantiated, and to receive permission to remarry. This creates a
Kol, which will later suffice to enable her to marry when the time comes.
But regarding monetary issues (where the purpose of the Sh'tar is to claim
with), the claimant will not normally produce the Sh'tar until it falls due
for payment, by which time we are afraid that the witnesses may have
forgotten the details. As proof, he quotes the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "u'Nesatem
bi'Ch'li Cheres ... ", which teaches us that Sh'taros are expected to last a
(b) Rebbi Yochanan disagrees. According to him, the Pasuk in Yirmiyah - is
merely giving good advice (but not teaching us Halachos).
(a) Our Mishnah states - that a 'Chashu' (Cheresh, Shoteh ve'Katan) may
write a Get.
(b) The problem with someone who does not have Da'as writing a Get is - that
the Get needs to be written Lish'mah (something that someone without Da'as
(c) Rav Huna resolves the problem - by establishing our Mishnah when a Gadol
was supervising them, instructing them to write the Get Lish'mah.
(d) According to Rav Huna - the author of our Mishnah is Rebbi Elazar, who
requires the Kesivah to be Lish'mah.
(a) According to Rav Huna's interpretation of our Mishnah, the Seifa
'she'Ein Kiyum ha'Get Ela be'Chosamav' - comes to give a reason for the
middle case (why the woman may write the Get and her husband the receipt).
(b) It cannot be referring to the Reisha - because if it did, it would be
validating a Get that was written by a Cheresh, Shoteh ve'Katan, obviating
the need for a Gadol to supervise them (and this is not what Rav Huna says).
(c) The Tana refers to the Eidei Mesirah as 'Chosamav' - because in the
majority of cases, it is the Eidei Chasimah who also double as the Eidei