OPINIONS: The Mishnah teaches that, originally, when a man had two different names in two different places of residence, a Get he gave would include only the name he was called in the city in which the Get was written. Raban Gamliel ha'Zaken instituted that a man writes in the Get his name "and every other name that he has" ("Ish Ploni v'Chol Shum she'Yesh Lo").

In practice, how are any extra names of the husband or wife supposed to be included in a Get?

(a) The BEHAG cited by Tosfos (DH v'Chol Shum) writes that the Takanah was to write in every single Get the man's (or woman's) name and then write the words, "and every other name that he (she) has" -- even when the man or woman is not known to have any other names. (When the Gemara says that the requirement of the Mishnah applies only when we know that the husband has other names, it means that the Get is invalid when this line is omitted only when we know that the husband has other names. However, l'Chatchilah, we always must include this line. (MAHARSHA))

How does this solve the problem of multiple names? The Mishnah's concern is that we will not be able to identify the husband -- based on the name written in the Get -- in a city in which he is called by a different name. If every Get includes the words "and every other name that he has," the concern remains; we still will not be able to identify the husband. (CHASAM SOFER)

The Acharonim explain that since these words point toward the possibility that the husband might have other names, people will consider that possibility more seriously and investigate the matter and identify the husband.

(b) RABEINU TAM rejects the view of the Behag. If every Get includes the words "and every other name that he has," then when the husband does not have any other names it will look like the Get is not his since it describes a man who does have other names. Rabeinu Tam therefore concludes that the other names of the husband are mentioned in the Get only when it is known that he has other names. Since those names are known, the actual names (and not just the words "and every other name that he has") are written in the Get. He cites support for this from the Gemara later (35a) which discusses a Get in which the two names of the husband were written explicitly in the Get.

TOSFOS (DH v'Hu) and the RASHBA, however, conclude that Raban Gamliel ha'Zaken required that all of the names of the husband be written in the Get only when the husband is called by one name in the place where the Get is written and by a different name in the place where the Get is given to the woman. The Takanah did not apply to a man who is called by a second name in the same city in which his first name is used. The Rashba writes that in such a case, the second name need not be included in the Get, even l'Chatchilah.

The Yerushalmi, however, cited by Tosfos, states that l'Chatchilah the second name must be included in the Get even if it is used in the same city as the first name. Tosfos suggests a compromise: if the two names are similar to each other, then only one name needs to be written l'Chatchilah. However, if the two names are not similar, both names must be written l'Chatchilah.

(c) RASHI (DH v'Hu d'Ischazek, DH Megureshes, and DH Miryam) seems to make a compromise between the opinions of Rabeinu Tam and the Behag. If a man has two names which are equally well known, both names must be written in the Get, as the Gemara (35a) implies.

However, the wording of the Mishnah and the Gemara imply that in certain cases it suffices to write "and every other name that he has." In fact, this is implicit in the Gemara's original assumption, that even if we do not know that the husband has another name, we must mention in the Get the possibility of other names; since we do not know the other names, the Gemara obviously assumes that it suffices to write "and every other name that he has" (see Rashba).

Rashi therefore maintains that if one name is more popular than the other (in the place in which the Get is written), the less popular name does not need to be written explicitly but can be written simply as "and every other name that he has." This is also the opinion of the RAMAH.

In a similar vein, the ROSH writes that if a person is known to the non-Jews in his neighborhood by a secularized version of his Hebrew name which sounds similar to his Hebrew name, the secular name does not need to be written in the Get explicitly. It suffices to write "and every other name that he has."