Gittin, Daf Yod Gimmel, Part 4

 

Introduction

Today s sugya is a continuation of yesterday s sugya, where R. Papa and R. Zevid disputed whether the mishnah refers to a gift given by a healthy person or one given by a dying person.

 

רַב פָּפָּא מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אָמַר כְּרַב זְבִיד קָסָבַר רַב פָּפָּא כִּי אָמַר רַב לָא שְׁנָא בְּמִלְוֶה וְלָא שְׁנָא בְּפִקָּדוֹן

 

And why didn t Rav Papa say like R. Zevid?

Rav Papa holds that Rav s statement was about both a loan and a deposit.

 

R. Zevid said that the mishnah refers to a gift given by a healthy person. As long as the gift is given in the presence of all three parties, the gift is valid even before the recipient picks it up.

But Rav Papa holds that if all three parties are around, the transfer works even with a loan, money that is not physically present. If so, there is no reason for the money to have to be sitting in the corner. Therefore, Rav s statement at the beginning of the sugya that the money must be present cannot be referring to a gift given by a healthy person.

 

רַב זְבִיד מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אָמַר כְּרַב פָּפָּא לָא מִיתּוֹקְמָא מַתְנִיתִין בִּשְׁכִיב מְרַע מִמַּאי מִדְּקָתָנֵי הָאוֹמֵר תְּנוּ גֵּט זֶה לְאִשְׁתִּי וּשְׁטַר שִׁחְרוּר זֶה לְעַבְדִּי וּמֵת לֹא יִתְּנוּ לְאַחַר מִיתָה טַעְמָא דְּמֵת הָא מֵחַיִּים נוֹתְנִין טַעְמָא דְּאָמַר תְּנוּ הָא לֹא אָמַר תְּנוּ אֵין נוֹתְנִין וּשְׁכִיב מְרַע אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא אָמַר תְּנוּ נוֹתְנִין

 

R. Zevid, why does he not say like Rav Papa?

The mishnah does not refer to a dying person. How do we know this? From the fact that it teaches: Give this get to my wife or this writ of emancipation to my slave , and dies [before they are given], they do not give [the documents] after his death. If he dies they don t give it, but if he is alive they do give it. Why? Because he said, Give. But if he does not say, Give they do not give it. But when it comes to a dying person, even though he does not say, Give they give it.

 

R. Zevid does not think that the mishnah refers to a dying person. He derives this from the mishnah s first clause, concerning giving a get to a wife. According to the mishnah, if the husband dies his agent don t give the get to his wife. By implication, if the husband is still alive, then they do give the get. But this is because he said, Give. If a man says, Write a get for my wife his agents may write the get, but they may not give the get. However, with a dying person, even if he does not say, Give they write the get. Therefore, the mishnah must be referring to a person who is not dying. Otherwise, the word Give would not have been necessary.

 

דִּתְנַן בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים הַיּוֹצֵא בְּקוֹלָר וְאָמַר כִּתְבוּ גֵּט לְאִשְׁתִּי הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יִכְתְּבוּ וְיִתְּנוּ חָזְרוּ לוֹמַר אַף הַמְפָרֵשׁ וְהַיּוֹצֵא בִּשְׁיָירָא הרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שֵׁזוּרִי אוֹמֵר אַף הַמְסוּכָּן

 

As it was taught: Originally they said that if a man was being led out to execution and said, Write a get for my wife , they may write a get and give [it to her.]

Later they said, even if he were leaving for a sea voyage or for a caravan journey.

Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: even if he were dangerously ill.

 

This is Mishnah Gittin 6:5. According to R. Shimon Shezuri, if a dying man says, Write a get for my wife they write and give it to her, even though he did not say, Give. This is R. Zevid s proof that our mishnah, which does include the word give does not refer to a dying person.

 

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב אָשֵׁי וּמַאן נֵימָא לַן דְּמַתְנִיתִין רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שֵׁזוּרִי הִיא דִּלְמָא רַבָּנַן הִיא

 

Rav Ashi raised a difficulty: Who can tell us that our mishnah accords with R. Shimon Shezuri, perhaps it follows the rabbis.

 

The problem for R. Zevid is that he must assume that the mishnah accords with R. Shimon Shezuri, according to whom if a dying person says, Write a get they give the get. But our mishnah here might accord with the other rabbis, who do not seem to think that such is the case for a dying person. And if so, our mishnah might refer to a dying person, even though it says, Give. This would pull the rug out of why R. Zevid does not explain like R. Papa.