Gemara Clarity

Gittin 27a

גיטין כ״ז ע״א

Learn Gittin 27a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Gittin 27a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

A lost גט that is later found: when we worry it belongs to another couple with the same names, and how the משנה fits with other sources about found documents.

Overview

The משנה rules that if a שליח loses a גט, he may use it only if he finds it right away, finds it in a container he knows, or recognizes the גט itself. The גמרא raises a contradiction from a משנה in בבא מציעא, which suggests a found גט may be delivered even after a long time if the husband says 'give it.' רבה answers that our משנה is talking about a place where caravans (שיירות) often pass, so another man with the same name might have dropped the גט. The other משנה is talking about a place where caravans are rare. The גמרא adds that even where caravans are common, we only worry if two men with the same name are known to live in one town. It proves this from רבה's own ruling about a גט found in רב הונא's busy court, which he said should be returned. Then it tells of a real ruling רבה gave about a גט found in the flax house in פומבדיתא, and gives two versions of the details. Finally, רבי זירא sets our משנה against a ברייתא about a גט found in the marketplace, where returning it depends only on whether the husband agrees. The inference from that ברייתא and רבי זירא's answer continue on the next amud.

Opening lines

מַתְנִי׳ הַמֵּבִיא גֵּט וְאָבַד הֵימֶנּוּ;

MISHNA: One who brings a bill of divorce, and it was lost from him:

מְצָאוֹ לְאַלְתַּר – כָּשֵׁר,

if he found it immediately, it is valid;

וְאִם לָאו – פָּסוּל.

but if not, it is invalid.

מְצָאוֹ בַּחֲפִיסָה אוֹ בִּדְלוֹסְקָמָא,

If he found it in a pouch or in a box,

The steps (12)

  1. StatementThe משנה: a שליח who loses the גט
  2. ChallengeA contradiction from the משנה about found documents
  3. Resolutionרבה: it depends on whether caravans pass through
  4. ConclusionOnly when two men with the same name are known in town
  5. ProofIf not, רבה would contradict himself: the גט found in רב הונא's court
  6. Proofרבה finds a משנה: court documents are returned
  7. ConclusionSo רבה only worries when two same-name people are known
  8. Statementרבה rules on a גט found in a flax house in פומבדיתא
  9. StatementFirst version: where flax was soaked, so caravans were not common
  10. StatementSecond version: where flax was sold, but no two same-name people were known
  11. Statementרבי זירא introduces a contradiction and quotes the משנה
  12. ChallengeThe ברייתא about a גט found in the marketplace