1)

(a)According to Beis Shamai, if a man wrote a Get having in mind to divorce his wife and then changed his mind, should he subsequently die, she is forbidden to marry a Kohen. According to Beis Hillel she is permitted to do so.

(b)When Shmuel was asked what the Din will be in the case of a Kohen about whom a rumor has spread that he divorced his wife, he replied 'Teitzei, v'ha'Davar Tzarich Bedikah'.

(c)When he added 've'ha'Davar Tzarich Bedikah', he cannot have meant that we first see whether it is not possible to stop the rumor because Shmuel was from Neharda'a, where this was not the practice.

(d)What he therefore must have meant was that one needs to ascertain whether in that town, 'Kesivah' incorporated 'Nesinah' or not, because, if it did, then the rumor implies that he did indeed divorced her. Otherwise, it is meaningless.

2)

(a)If in that town, 'Kesivah' does incorporate Nesinah, then in spite of the fact that it certainly refers to Kesivah itself we would nevertheless be stringent, seeing as it might also refer to Nesinah.

(b)In view of Rav Ashi, who maintains that one ignores a Kol that only began after a couple are married, we interpret ...

1. ... Shmuel's ruling 'Teitzei' to mean 'Teitzei' from the second husband (but not from the first).

2. ... the Mishnah in 'ha'Megaresh' which does contend with a Kol by a Kol that began specifically before they were married.

(c)We are not afraid that, by forbidding her to marry the second Kohen, one was in effect, substantiating the Kol, resulting in the stigmatization of any children that she bore to her first husband after the rumor began to spread precisely because she was not forbidden to her first husband (their father).

(d)People will then ascribe the fact that she is forbidden to the second Kohen to her first husband having divorced her shortly before his death.

3)

(a)Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan quoting Rebbi Yehudah strikes a contrast between the early generations and the later ones. 'The early generations' refers to ...

1. ... Beis Shamai in our Mishnah ('Kasav Legaresh Es Ishto') who were stringent with regard to Kedushas Yuchsin; 'the latter ones', to Rebbi Dosa, who says that the wife of a Kohen who was captured may eat Terumah. After all he says, the Nochri did nothing more than 'squeeze her between her breasts' (since there is no evidence that he actually raped her).

2. ... those who used to bring their crops into the house through the front door in order to make the crops subject to Ma'asros; 'the later ones' who used to bring them in via the roofs and enclosures (through the back-door so to speak) in order to exempt them from Ma'asros.

(b)This statement is based on a statement by Rebbi Yanai, who derives this Halachah from the Pasuk "Bi'arti ha'Kodesh min ha'Bayis" implying that the crops must have seen the inside house via the front door.

(c)Rebbi Yochanan learns from the Pasuk "v'Achlu bi'She'arecha v'Save'u" that when the crops enter the Chatzer via the main gate, they are subject to Ma'aser no less than when they enter the house via the front door.

4)

(a)According to Beis Shamai, someone who stays with his ex-wife in a hotel after divorcing her is not obligated to give her a new Get. Beis Hillel disagree because we are afraid that he was intimate with her with the intention of making a fresh Kidushin.

(b)The Mishnah qualifies Beis Hillel's ruling, confining it to when they had previously been married (and are therefore familiar with each other), but not if they had only been betrothed.

5)

(a)Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan establishes the Machlokes when witnesses actually saw them being intimate, and the basis of their Machlokes is whether a person will perform an immoral act (when he can just as well legalize it Beis Shamai), or not (Beis Hillel).

(b)If they were not seen being intimate then even Beis Hillel will agree that the woman does not require a second Get.

(c)We refute this interpretation of our Mishnah from the Seifa which differentiates between whether they had previously been married or just betrothed. Because if the Tana is speaking when they were seen being intimate, what difference will it make whether they had previously been married or not?

(d)We therefore establish ...

1. ... Rebbi Yochanan like Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar, who establishes the Machlokes between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel when the couple were seen being intimate.

2. ... our Mishnah which must be speaking when they were seen making Yichud, but not being intimate (as we just proved), and the basis of their Machlokes is whether (we say 'Hein Hein Eidei Yichud, Hein Hein Eidei Bi'ah' (the witnesses of Yichud are automatically witnesses that there was Bi'ah Beis Hillel), or not (Beis Shamai).

6)

(a)According to our Mishnah, if they were actually seen being intimate, then even Beis Shamai will agree that she will require another Get, because 'Hein Hein Eidei Yichud, Hein Hein Eidei Bi'ah'.

(b)This principle only applies however, if they had previously been married and were familiar with each other whereas if they had only been betrothed, it is not applicable.

7)

(a)The Tana of our Mishnah invalidates a Get Kere'ach, adding it to the list in the opening Mishnah of the Perek ('Teitzei mi'Zeh u'mi'Zeh ... '). A 'Get ...

1. ... Mekushar' is a Get which the Sofer folds after each line or two, and a witness signs on the back of each fold.

2. ... Kere'ach' is one with more folds than signatures.

(b)Chazal instituted a Get Mekushar for the sake of Kohanim, who due to a tendency to be short-tempered, would often hastily divorce their wives, with the result that, when their anger abated they were sorry for what they had done, but the damage could not be undone. So Chazal instituted a Get Mekushar, which takes a long time to write (giving their anger time to abate before the Get has been completed).

(c)A Get Kere'ach is Pasul because it looks as if not all the designated witnesses signed.

8)

(a)ben Nanas permits anybody to sign on a Get Kere'ach (in order to fill in the missing signatures) seeing as the Get is really Kosher anyway, and it is only to avoid the suspicion that not all the designated witnesses signed that they need to sign.

(b)Rebbi Akiva qualifies ben Nanas' ruling permitting relatives (who are basically Kosher witnesses) to sign, but not someone who is Pasul l'Edus (e.g. a thief or a slave).

(c)Rebbi Akiva's reason cannot be because ...

1. ... people might think that he is Kosher l'Edus because then, by the same token, he ought to invalidate a relative as well.

2. ... people might declare him Kosher to marry a bas Yisrael because then there would be no reason to forbid a thief to sign, since he is permitted to marry a bas Yisrael.

(d)The reason that Rebbi Akiva validates a relative to sign on a Get Kere'ach, but not a slave or a thief is because whereas in the latter case, the Beis-Din will probably jump to the conclusion that the slave was set free (on the basis of which they will permit him to marry a bas Yisrael and to testify), and that the thief did Teshuvah (and is now eligible to testify), in the former case, a relative is a relative (and permitting him to sign will not lead to any errors).

9)

(a)The ...

1. ... maximum number of knots and witnesses on a Get Kere'ach cited by Rebbi Zeira ... Amar Rav Ada bar Ahavah is seven and six respectively, and is the ...

2. ... minimum is four and three.

(b)ben Nanas ...

1. ... argues with Rebbi Akiva, and permits anybody to sign on a Get Kere'ach as long as at least three Kosher witnesses have signed before him.

2. ... concedes to Rebbi Akiva that only a relative (who is Kosher elsewhere) is eligible to sign on a Get Kere'ach if there are only two Kosher witnesses and he is the third.

(c)Rav Yosef asked Rabah bar Shilo that, seeing as three by a Get Kere'ach is like two by an ordinary Get, why is even this acceptable. The latter's ultimate reply was that it is because the third witness on a Get Kere'ach is only mid'Rabanan.

(d)He discovered this by asking Rav Hamnuna, who in turn, asked Rav Hamnuna (who supplied him with the answer).

10)

(a)A Beraisa which we cite substantiates most of what we just learned.

(b)The Beraisa concludes 'Aval Kesharav Sheloshah, v'Eidav Shenayim, Divre ha'Kol Ein Mashlimin Alav Ela Karov', which Rav Yosef and Rav Papa amend to read 'Ein Mashlimin Alav Ela Kosher'.

11)

(a)Rebbi Yochanan restricts the number of non-Kosher witnesses who sign on a Get Kere'ach to one, because if there were two we are afraid that they might subsequently validate the Get through them plus only one of the Kosher witnesses.

(b)Rav Ashi substantiates this from the Beraisa which we just alluded to which presents a list of Gitin Kerachim from seven witnesses down to three, and in each case, the Tana permitted only one of the signatures to be complemented by a Pasul witness.