## Gittin Daf 73b

###### Gittin 73b:1
[Gittin 73b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:1)

כְּאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ לְכׇל דְּבָרֶיהָ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת וְאֵינָהּ מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**like a married woman with regard to all of her matters,** and she remains forbidden to other men. **Rabbi Yosei says:** It is uncertain whether **she is divorced or** whether **she is not divorced.**


###### Gittin 73b:2
[Gittin 73b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:2)

**גְּמָ׳** תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: רָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּתְיַיחֲדָה עִמּוֹ בַּאֲפֵילָה, אוֹ שֶׁיָּשְׁנָה עִמּוֹ תַּחַת מַרְגְּלוֹת הַמִּטָּה – אֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין שֶׁמָּא נִתְעַסְּקוּ בְּדָבָר אַחֵר; וְחוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם זְנוּת וְאֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם קִדּוּשִׁין. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם קִידּוּשִׁין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **The Sages taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta* 7:4): If, after the giving of this bill of divorce witnesses **saw that she secluded herself with** her husband **in the dark, or that she slept with him under the foot of the bed, one is not concerned** that **perhaps they were engaged in another matter,** i.e., sexual intercourse. **And one is concerned due to** their action of **licentiousness but one is not concerned** that **due to** their actions they performed **a betrothal. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: One is also concerned** that **due to** their actions they performed **a betrothal.**


###### Gittin 73b:3
[Gittin 73b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:3)

מַאי קָאָמַר? אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ, הָכִי קָאָמַר: רָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה – חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם קִידּוּשִׁין. נָתַן לָהּ כְּסָפִים – חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם זְנוּת, דְּאָמְרִינַן: בְּאֶתְנַנָּהּ נָתַן לָהּ; וְאֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם קִידּוּשִׁין. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף בְּזוֹ חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם קִידּוּשִׁין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** is the *baraita* **saying? Rav Naḥman said** that **Rabba bar Avuh said: This is what** the *baraita* **is saying:** If **they saw that she engaged in sexual intercourse** with her husband, then **there one is concerned** that **due to** their actions there was **a betrothal** and perhaps through this act he intended to remarry her. If **he gave her money** immediately following the sexual intercourse **one is concerned due to licentiousness, wherein we say: He gave** this money **as hire for a prostitute, but one is not concerned** that **due to** their actions they performed **a betrothal. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: Even in this** case **one is concerned** that **due to** their actions they performed **a betrothal,** i.e., one is concerned that he gave her the money as betrothal.


###### Gittin 73b:4
[Gittin 73b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:4)

כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מַחֲלוֹקֶת – כְּשֶׁרָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה, אֲבָל לֹא רָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה – דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל אֵין צְרִיכָה הֵימֶנּוּ גֵּט שֵׁנִי? כְּמַאן –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Based on this explanation of the *baraita*, **in accordance with whose** opinion **is that which Rabba bar bar Ḥana says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says,** that **the dispute** between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel (81a) is relevant only **when they saw that she engaged in sexual intercourse** with her husband, but if **they did not see that she engaged in sexual intercourse** with him, **everyone agrees that she does not require a second bill of divorce from him?** In the case of a divorced woman who was secluded with her husband after the divorce, Beit Shammai are of the opinion that she does not require a second bill of divorce, while Beit Hillel are of the opinion that she does. **In accordance with whose** opinion mentioned in the *baraita* is this?


###### Gittin 73b:5
[Gittin 73b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:5)

כְּדִבְרֵי הַכֹּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: It is **in accordance with everyone.** It is in accordance with the opinion of both the first *tanna* and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, who hold that when they did not see that she engaged in sexual intercourse one is not concerned that they are betrothed, and she does not need a second bill of divorce.


###### Gittin 73b:6
[Gittin 73b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:6)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ אַבָּיֵי: מִידֵּי כְּסָפִים קָתָנֵי?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye objects to this** understanding of the *baraita*, according to which the first *tanna* and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, disagree about a case where he gave her money after they engaged in sexual intercourse: **Is anything** with regard to **money taught** in the *baraita*?


###### Gittin 73b:7
[Gittin 73b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:7)

אֶלָּא אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, הָכִי קָאָמַר: רָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה – חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם זְנוּת, וְאֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם קִידּוּשִׁין. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם קִידּוּשִׁין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Abaye said: This is** what the *baraita* **is saying:** If **they saw that she engaged in sexual intercourse one is concerned due to licentiousness, but one is not concerned** that **due to** their actions there was **a betrothal. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: One is also concerned** that **due to** their actions there was **a betrothal.**


###### Gittin 73b:8
[Gittin 73b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:8)

כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מַחֲלוֹקֶת – כְּשֶׁרָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה, אֲבָל לֹא רָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה – דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל אֵין צְרִיכָה הֵימֶנּוּ גֵּט שֵׁנִי? כְּמַאן –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If so, **in accordance with whose** opinion **is that which Rabba bar bar Ḥana says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The dispute** between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel applies only **when they saw that she engaged in sexual intercourse** with him. **But** if **they did not see that she engaged in sexual intercourse** with him then **everyone agrees that she does not require a second bill of divorce from him.** In accordance **with whose** opinion is this statement?


###### Gittin 73b:9
[Gittin 73b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:9)

כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda,** as he holds in accordance with Beit Hillel, that if they saw that she engaged in sexual intercourse one is concerned that she may be betrothed to him and she requires a second bill of divorce. By contrast, according to the first *tanna*, even when they saw that she engaged in sexual intercourse one is not concerned that she may be betrothed.


###### Gittin 73b:10
[Gittin 73b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:10)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רָבָא: אִם כֵּן, מַאי ״אַף״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava objects to this: If so, what** is the meaning of the expression used by Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda: There is **also** concern that due to their actions they performed a betrothal? If there is concern about betrothal there should be no concern with regard to licentiousness.


###### Gittin 73b:11
[Gittin 73b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:11)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: הָכִי קָאָמַר, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף לֹא רָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה – חוֹשְׁשִׁין מִשּׁוּם קִידּוּשִׁין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rava said** that **this is** what the *baraita* **is saying: Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: Even** if **they did not see that she engaged in sexual intercourse, one is concerned** that **due to** their actions they performed **a betrothal.**


###### Gittin 73b:12
[Gittin 73b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:12)

כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מַחֲלוֹקֶת – כְּשֶׁרָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה, אֲבָל לֹא רָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה – דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה הֵימֶנּוּ גֵּט? כְּמַאן –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
And if so, **in accordance with whose** opinion **is that which Rabba bar bar Ḥana says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The dispute** between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel applies only **where they saw that she engaged in sexual intercourse** with him. **But** if **they did not see that she engaged in intercourse** with him, then **everyone agrees that she does not require** a second **bill of divorce from him.** In accordance **with whose** opinion is this statement?


###### Gittin 73b:13
[Gittin 73b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:13)

דְּלָא כְּחַד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This is **not in accordance with** any **one** of the *tanna’im*, for according to Rava the first *tanna* is not concerned about betrothal even when they saw that she engaged in sexual intercourse, and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, is concerned even when they did not witness that she engaged in sexual intercourse.


###### Gittin 73b:14
[Gittin 73b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:14)

מָה הִיא בְּאוֹתָן הַיָּמִים? רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כְּאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ לְכׇל דְּבָרֶיהָ, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת וְאֵינָהּ מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **What is** her status **during these days? Rabbi Yehuda says:** She is **like a married woman with regard to all of her matters. Rabbi Yosei says:** It is uncertain whether **she is divorced or** whether **she is not divorced.**


###### Gittin 73b:15
[Gittin 73b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:15)

תָּנָא: וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיָּמוּת. וּלְכִי מָיֵית הָוֵי גִּיטָּא?! וְהָא קַיְימָא לַן דְּאֵין גֵּט לְאַחַר מִיתָה! אָמַר רַבָּה: בְּאוֹמֵר ״מֵעֵת שֶׁאֲנִי בָּעוֹלָם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sages **taught** in reference to the opinions of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei stated in the *baraita*: Their dispute with regard to her status in the interim is stated **provided that he dies.** The Gemara clarifies: **And when he dies, is** this a valid **bill of divorce?** Do they hold that the bill of divorce takes effect after the husband’s death? **But don’t we maintain that there is no bill of divorce after death? Rabba says** that this is referring to a case **where** the husband **says:** This should be a valid bill of divorce **from** the last **moment that I am in the world,** meaning that it should take effect a moment before he dies.


###### Gittin 73b:16
[Gittin 73b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/73b:16)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: יָמִים שֶׁבֵּינָתַיִם – בַּעְלָהּ זַכַּאי בִּמְצִיאָתָהּ, וּבְמַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ, וּבַהֲפָרַת נְדָרֶיהָ; וְיוֹרְשָׁהּ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Sages taught** (*Tosefta* 7:4): In a case where the husband said: This is your bill of divorce from now if I die from this illness, **during the days between,** before he dies, **her husband is entitled to** anything that **she finds,** i.e., any lost item that cannot be returned to its owner, in accordance with the rabbinic principle that any lost item found by a wife belongs to her husband. **And** he is entitled to the profits from **her earnings, and** he is entitled to **annul her vows** (see Numbers 30:7–9), **and he inherits** from **her** if she predeceases him,