## Gittin Daf 28a

###### Gittin 28a:1
[Gittin 28a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:1)

אוֹ שֶׁמְּצָאוֹ בֵּין כֵּלָיו; אֲפִילּוּ לִזְמַן מְרוּבֶּה – כָּשֵׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**or** in a case **where he found it among his utensils** in his house, then **even** if **a long time** passed, the bill of divorce is **valid.**


###### Gittin 28a:2
[Gittin 28a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:2)

אִיתְּמַר: רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל, הֲלָכָה: שֶׁלֹּא שָׁהָה אָדָם שָׁם. רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַב יִצְחָק בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל, הֲלָכָה: שֶׁלֹּא עָבַר אָדָם שָׁם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was stated** that the *amora’im* disagreed with regard to the *halakha* in this dispute: **Rav Yehuda** says that **Shmuel says:** The ***halakha*** is that the bill of divorce is valid as long **as no person stopped there. Rabba bar bar Ḥana** says that **Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel says:** The ***halakha*** is that the bill of divorce is valid as long **as no** other **person passed there.**


###### Gittin 28a:3
[Gittin 28a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:3)

לֵימָא מָר הֲלָכָה כְּמָר, וּמָר הֲלָכָה כְּמָר! מִשּׁוּם דְּאָפְכִי לְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Why is it necessary to state the actual opinion? **Let** this **Sage,** Rav Yehuda citing Shmuel, **say** that the ***halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of this **Sage,** the opinion cited as: Some say; **and** let this **Sage,** Rabba bar bar Ḥana citing Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel, say that the ***halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of this **Sage,** Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar. The Gemara answers: **Because** there are those **who reverse** the opinions of the *tanna’im*, they needed to state the opinions explicitly so that there would be no mistake with regard to the *halakha*.


###### Gittin 28a:4
[Gittin 28a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:4)

מְצָאוֹ בַּחֲפִיסָה אוֹ בִּדְלוֹסְקָמָא: מַאי ״חֲפִיסָה״? אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה: חֵמֶת קְטַנָּה. מַאי ״דְּלוֹסְקָמָא״? טְלִיקָא דְסָבֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that if one **found** the bill of divorce **in a *ḥafisa* or in a *deluskema*,** then it is valid. The Gemara asks: **What** is the meaning of the word ***ḥafisa*? Rabba bar bar Ḥana says:** It is **a small flask. What** is the meaning of ***deluskema*?** It is **a purse [*telika*] of the elderly.**


###### Gittin 28a:5
[Gittin 28a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:5)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַמֵּבִיא גֵּט, וְהִנִּיחוֹ זָקֵן אוֹ חוֹלֶה – נוֹתֵן לָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהוּא קַיָּים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** In the case of an agent **who brings a bill of divorce** to a woman, **and** when **he had left** the husband was **elderly or sick,** the agent **gives her** the bill of divorce **based on** the **presumption that** the husband **is** still **alive,** and there is no concern that in the meantime he has died, thereby canceling the bill of divorce.


###### Gittin 28a:6
[Gittin 28a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:6)

בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַנְּשׂוּאָה לְכֹהֵן, וְהָלַךְ בַּעְלָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם – אוֹכֶלֶת בִּתְרוּמָה בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהוּא קַיָּים. הַשּׁוֹלֵחַ חַטָּאתוֹ מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם – מַקְרִיבִין אוֹתָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהוּא קַיָּים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Similarly, with regard to **an Israelite woman who is married to a priest** and may therefore partake of *teruma*, **and her husband went to a country overseas, she may** continue to **partake of *teruma* based on** the **presumption that** her husband **is** still **alive.** Similarly, in the case of **one who sends his sin**-**offering from a country overseas,** the priests may **offer it** on the altar **based on** the **presumption that** the one who sent it **is** still **alive.**


###### Gittin 28a:7
[Gittin 28a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:7)

**גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רָבָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא זָקֵן שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ לִגְבוּרוֹת; וְחוֹלֶה – שֶׁרוֹב חוֹלִים לְחַיִּים; אֲבָל זָקֵן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לִגְבוּרוֹת, וְגוֹסֵס – שֶׁרוֹב גּוֹסְסִין לְמִיתָה; לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rava says: They taught** that this presumptive status exists **only** concerning **an elderly man who has not reached** his years of **strength,** i.e., the age of eighty, **and** an ordinary **sick person, as** the **majority of sick** people continue **to live** and recover from their illnesses. **But** if the husband was **an elderly man who had reached** his years of **strength, or** if he was **moribund,** then, **as the majority of moribund** people proceed **to die,** he does **not** have this presumptive status.


###### Gittin 28a:8
[Gittin 28a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:8)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: הַמֵּבִיא גֵּט וְהִנִּיחוֹ זָקֵן – אֲפִילּוּ בֶּן מֵאָה שָׁנָה, נוֹתֵן לָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהוּא קַיָּים! תְּיוּבְתָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye raised an objection to** Rava’s statement from a *baraita*: With regard to an agent **who brings a bill of divorce and left** the husband when he was **old, even one hundred years old, he gives** the bill of divorce **to** the wife, **based on** the **presumption that** her husband **is** still **alive.** The Gemara concludes: This is **a conclusive refutation,** and Rava’s statement is rejected.


###### Gittin 28a:9
[Gittin 28a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:9)

וְאִי בָּעֵית אֵימָא, כֵּיוָן דְּאִיפְּלִיג – אִיפְּלִיג.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **And if you wish, say** that this is not a conclusive refutation. In the case of the *baraita*, **since** it is so **that** the man **reached an exceptionally** old age, one cannot apply the general presumptions to him and must instead apply presumptions that are for one who has **reached an exceptionally** old age. However, in a case where someone has not demonstrated that he is an exception to the rule, once he reaches the age of eighty there is a concern that perhaps he has died in the interim.


###### Gittin 28a:10
[Gittin 28a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:10)

רָמֵי לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי לְרַבָּה, תְּנַן: הַמֵּבִיא גֵּט, וְהִנִּיחוֹ זָקֵן אוֹ חוֹלֶה – נוֹתֵן לָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהוּא קַיָּים. וּרְמִינְהוּ: ״הֲרֵי זֶה גִּיטִּיךְ״ – שָׁעָה אַחַת קוֹדֶם לְמִיתָתוֹ, אֲסוּרָה לֶאֱכוֹל בִּתְרוּמָה מִיָּד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Abaye raises a contradiction before Rabba: We learned** in the mishna that in the case of an agent **who brings a bill of divorce** to a woman **and left** the husband when he was **elderly or sick,** the agent **gives her** the bill of divorce **based on** the **presumption that** the husband **is** still **alive. And** one can **raise a contradiction** from a *baraita* (*Tosefta* 6:11) that states: If one is leaving his place of residence, and in order to preclude a situation where his wife would have the status of a deserted wife he gives her a conditional bill of divorce and stipulates: **This is your bill of divorce** that will take effect **one hour prior to my death, it is immediately prohibited for her to partake of *teruma*,** due to the concern that he may die immediately after an hour has passed. Apparently, there is a concern that one may die at any point.


###### Gittin 28a:11
[Gittin 28a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:11)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: תְּרוּמָה אַגִּיטִּין קָא רָמֵית?! תְּרוּמָה אֶפְשָׁר, גֵּט לָא אֶפְשָׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabba **said to him:** Do **you raise a contradiction** from the *halakhot* of ***teruma* to** the *halakhot* of **bills of divorce?** Concerning ***teruma*,** it is **possible** for the wife to eat only non-sacred produce in order to be stringent due to the possibility that her husband may die. However, concerning **a bill of divorce it is not possible** to take into account the possibility that her husband may die, as there would then be no way for a husband to send a bill of divorce to her with an agent.


###### Gittin 28a:12
[Gittin 28a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:12)

וְרָמֵי תְּרוּמָה אַתְּרוּמָה; תְּנַן: בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַנְּשׂוּאָה לְכֹהֵן, וְהָלַךְ בַּעְלָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם – אוֹכֶלֶת בִּתְרוּמָה בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהוּא קַיָּים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the Gemara **raises a contradiction** from the *halakhot* of ***teruma*** in the mishna **to** the *halakhot* of ***teruma*** in a *baraita*. **We learned** in the mishna: With regard to **an Israelite woman who is married to a priest** and may therefore partake of *teruma*, **and her husband went to a country overseas, she may** continue to **partake of *teruma* based on** the **presumption that** her husband **is** still **alive.**


###### Gittin 28a:13
[Gittin 28a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:13)

וּרְמִינְהוּ: ״הֲרֵי זֶה גִּיטִּיךְ״ – שָׁעָה אַחַת קוֹדֶם מִיתָתוֹ, אֲסוּרָה לֶאֱכוֹל בִּתְרוּמָה מִיָּד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the Gemara **raises a contradiction** from a *baraita*: If one says to his wife: **This is your bill of divorce** that will take effect **one hour prior to my death, it is immediately prohibited for her to partake of *teruma*** due to the concern that he may die immediately after an hour has passed. These two *halakhot* appear to contradict one another.


###### Gittin 28a:14
[Gittin 28a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:14)

אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יִצְחָק: שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, שֶׁהֲרֵי אֲסָרָהּ עָלָיו שָׁעָה אַחַת קוֹדֶם מִיתָתוֹ. מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב פָּפָּא: מִמַּאי דְּאִיהוּ מָיֵית בְּרֵישָׁא? דִּלְמָא אִיהִי מָיְיתָא בְּרֵישָׁא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Adda, son of Rav Yitzḥak, said:** It **is different there, as he rendered her forbidden to himself one hour prior to his death,** meaning that she will definitely be prohibited from partaking of *teruma* at some point. Therefore, it is considered to be an uncertainty immediately. **Rav Pappa objects to this** answer: **From where** is it known **that he will die first** and she will be prohibited from partaking of *teruma*? **Perhaps she will die first,** and the bill of divorce will never take effect.


###### Gittin 28a:15
[Gittin 28a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:15)

אֶלָּא אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר – דְּלָא חָיֵישׁ לְמִיתָה, הָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה – דְּחָיֵישׁ לְמִיתָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Abaye said** that this is **not difficult: This** mishna, which permits the woman to partake of *teruma*, is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, who is not concerned about** potential **death. That** *baraita*, which prohibits the woman from partaking of *teruma*, is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, who is concerned about** potential **death.**


###### Gittin 28a:16
[Gittin 28a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:16)

דִּתְנַן: הַלּוֹקֵחַ יַיִן מִבֵּין הַכּוּתִים, אוֹמֵר: שְׁנֵי לוּגִּין שֶׁאֲנִי עָתִיד לְהַפְרִישׁ – הֲרֵי הֵן תְּרוּמָה; עֲשָׂרָה – מַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן; תִּשְׁעָה – מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי; וּמֵיחֵל וְשׁוֹתֶה מִיָּד – דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As we learned** in a *baraita* in the *Tosefta* (*Demai* 8:7): In the case of **one who purchases wine from among the Samaritans,** about whom it is assumed that they did not separate *teruma* and tithes, and he is not in a position to separate *teruma*, he acts as follows: If there are, for example, one hundred *log* of wine in the barrels, **he says: Two *log* that I will separate in the future are *teruma*,** as the mandated average measure of *teruma* is one-fiftieth; **ten** *log* are **first tithe;** and one-tenth of the remainder, which is approximately **nine** *log*, are **second tithe. And he deconsecrates** the second tithe that he will separate in the future, transferring its sanctity to money, **and** he may **drink** the wine **immediately,** relying on the separation that he will perform later, which will clarify retroactively what he designated for the tithes and for *teruma*. This is **the statement of Rabbi Meir.**


###### Gittin 28a:17
[Gittin 28a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:17)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹסְרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: However, **Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon prohibit** this practice. These Sages, Rabbi Yehuda among them, were concerned that perhaps the wineskin would burst before he would manage to separate the *teruma*, whereas Rabbi Meir is not concerned about this occurring. Similarly, it is said that Rabbi Meir is not concerned about potential death, and Rabbi Yehuda is concerned.


###### Gittin 28a:18
[Gittin 28a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/28a:18)

רָבָא אָמַר:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:**