Question (R. Chaggai to R. Yosi): Is Rebbi's opinion like R. Yosi (of our Mishnah - in Bechoros 57(d)) and R. Nassan's opinion like R. Yehuda (ibid.)? As the Mishnah teaches in Maseches Gitin...

(Mishnah): (If a woman sent an agent to accept her Get, but when he came to the husband, the husband said), "I do not wish you to accept it for her (but rather, take it back to her (as my agent) and she should accept it from you)'', if the husband wishes to retract before it arrived in her hand, he may retract.

That Mishnah follows Rebbi, as the Tosefta taught - If a wife asked a messenger to bring her a Get and he went told the husband, "Your wife told me to accept her Get''; if the husband gave him the Get and told him, "Take it to her'', "Give it to her'', "Acquire for her'' or "Accept for her''; if the husband wishes to retract, he may not do so. These are the words of Rebbi.

(R. Nasan): If he told him, "Take it to her'' or "Give it to her'', he may retract. But if he said, "Acquire for her'' or "Accept for her'', he may not retract.

(Rebbi): (Explaining his own opinion) In all of these cases he may not retract, unless he told the messenger, "I cannot have you accept it for her. Rather, take it to her (for her to accept)''.

(Question about Rebbi): When he tells the agent, "Take it'', why do we say that he cannot retract? (It must be because Rebbi agrees with R. Yosi, that if they were discussing the same matter and he gave her the Get without specifying, it is sufficient. Rebbi therefore says that since the agent had said that he was sent to receive the Get on her behalf, as long as the husband doesn't contradict this, he is assumed to follow the intent of the agent and he cannot retract.)

(Question about R. Nasan): Why does "Holech'' mean take it? Perhaps it means "Take for yourself'' i.e. accept it now for her, so that he can no longer retract?! (This shows that R. Nassan doesn't consider what was said by the agent, but rather, he focuses on the wording of the husband, and Holech means take it.

(Rav Huna): In the case of the Tosefta, where Rebbi and R. Nasan disagreed, the Halacha remains unclear whether the agent is his or hers.

(Issa): (Explaining Rav Huna) In all cases where it is unclear whether the agent is his or hers, she is doubtfully divorced until the Get reaches her hand.

(R. Yosi to R. Chaggai): How could you suggest that R. Yosi and R. Yehuda disagree as you said? (What about the teaching of R. Zeira etc. ...)?

(R. Zeira/ Chiya bar Bun/ Abba bar Tachlifa citing R. Hoshiya): Over what is the dispute (in our Mishnah between R. Yosi and R. Yehuda)? It's when they began discussing other matters, but if it was the same matter, it is a valid Get. But here (in the dispute between Rebbi and R. Nassan), even if they were still discussing the same matter, there is still the same dispute.

Question (R. Ezra to R. Mana): Does the same apply to sending a gift through an agent? Can a person appoint an agent to receive something that's not his?

Answer (R. Mana to R. Ezra): In the case of a Get, the Torah gave her the right to appoint an agent to receive it (in order to enable her to remarry). Would you say the same for a gift?

Proof #2 (R. Yosi/ R. Yaakov bar Zavdi/ R. Abahu citing R. Yochanan): If a person ordered an agent to give someone a gift and he decides to retract, he may do so (and certainly we wouldn't say that 'Take it' is like saying 'Acquire it').

Question (R. Yosi to R. Yaakov bar Zavdi): How can he retract? Doesn't the Torah require (in Vayikra 19:36) 'Hin Tzedek', that your agreement to do something should be true (i.e. you must say what you mean)?

Answer (R. Yaakov bar Zavdi to R. Yosi): When he said it, he meant it (but he later changed his mind).