## Gittin Daf 82a

###### Gittin 82a:1
[Gittin 82a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:1)

דְּקָא מְדַלֵּג וְתָנֵי חַד חַד; שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**as it teaches** by **skipping one** by **one.** The examples given relate to one witness missing, e.g., seven ties and six witnesses, and so on. They do not include a case in which two witnesses are missing, e.g., seven ties and five witnesses. This indicates that the dispute between Rabbi Akiva and Ben Azzai is only with regard to the signature of one witness. The Gemara affirms: **Conclude from it** that this is so.


###### Gittin 82a:2
[Gittin 82a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:2)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ, הַאי קָרוֹב חָתֵים אִי בָּעֵי – בֵּין בַּתְּחִילָּה, בֵּין בָּאֶמְצַע, בֵּין בַּסּוֹף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said: Learn from it** that **this relative,** who is allowed to sign a folded and tied bill of divorce, can **sign if he wants** to sign, **either at the beginning,** as the first signature, **in the middle, or at the end.**


###### Gittin 82a:3
[Gittin 82a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:3)

מִמַּאי – מִדְּלָא קְבַע לֵיהּ מָקוֹם. וּשְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: מִכֹּל תְּלָתָא מְקַיְּימִינַן, וְלָא בָּעֵינַן רְצוּפִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**From where** does Abaye infer this? **From** the fact that **it did not designate a place for him** to sign. **And learn from it,** as well, that **from any three** of the witnesses who signed on a folded and tied bill of divorce, **we** can **ratify** the bill of divorce, i.e., it can be ratified based on their signatures. **And we do not need** to confirm the signatures specifically of three **consecutive** witnesses.


###### Gittin 82a:4
[Gittin 82a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:4)

דְּאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ בָּעֵינַן רְצוּפִין, לִקְבַּע לֵיהּ מָקוֹם לְהַאי קָרוֹב – בַּתְּחִילָּה אוֹ בָּאֶמְצַע אוֹ בַּסּוֹף; וְלַכְשַׁר בֵּיהּ טוּבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As if it enters your mind** that **we need consecutive** witnesses, then **they should designate a place for this relative** to sign, **in the beginning, or in the middle, or at the end, and they should** then **validate** the use of **many** disqualified witnesses. It could have been instituted that every third witness may be disqualified. Since in any group of three witnesses, two of them would be valid, more than one disqualified witness could be allowed. Since it is possible to ratify a bill of divorce by confirming signatures that are not consecutive, and therefore there is concern that the court will rely on two disqualified witnesses, the Sages consequently allowed the use of only one disqualified witness.


###### Gittin 82a:5
[Gittin 82a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:5)

כִּי אָתוּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: צֵא וְהַשְׁלֵים עָלָיו עֶבֶד מִן הַשּׁוּק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the *halakha* concerning the dispute in the mishna, it is related that **when they came before Rabbi Ami** with a question pertaining to a bare bill of divorce that needed more witnesses, **he said to** the person overseeing: **Go out and complete it** even with **a slave from the** general **public,** in accordance with the opinion of ben Nannas.


###### Gittin 82a:6
[Gittin 82a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:6)

**הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ הַזּוֹרֵק**


###### Gittin 82a:7
[Gittin 82a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:7)

**הַמְגָרֵשׁ** אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְאָמַר לָהּ: ״הֲרֵי אַתְּ מוּתֶּרֶת לְכׇל אָדָם, אֶלָּא לִפְלוֹנִי״. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מַתִּיר, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִים. כֵּיצַד יַעֲשֶׂה? יִטְּלֶנּוּ הֵימֶנָּה וְיַחֲזוֹר וְיִתְּנֶנּוּ לָהּ, וְיֹאמַר לָהּ: ״הֲרֵי אַתְּ מוּתֶּרֶת לְכׇל אָדָם״. כְּתָבוֹ בְּתוֹכוֹ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָזַר וּמְחָקוֹ – פָּסוּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **one who divorces his wife and said to her** while handing her the bill of divorce: **You are hereby permitted to** marry **any man except [*ella*] for so-and-so, Rabbi Eliezer permits** her to remarry based on this divorce. **And the Rabbis prohibit** her from remarrying, as their bond is not entirely severed by this divorce, and she is therefore still considered his wife. **What should he do** so the divorce may take effect? **He should take it from her and hand it to her again, and** he should **say to her: You are hereby permitted to** marry **any man.** If **he wrote** his qualification **inside** the bill of divorce, **even if he then erased it,** the bill **is invalid** since it was not written in a valid manner.


###### Gittin 82a:8
[Gittin 82a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:8)

**גְּמָ׳** אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: הַאי ״אֶלָּא״ – ״חוּץ״ הוּא, אוֹ ״עַל מְנָת״ הוּא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: What is the meaning of **this** word ***ella*** in the husband’s statement? Does **it** mean **except,** i.e., the husband intended to divorce his wife in a manner that would render her permitted to marry only a limited group of men? **Or** does **it** mean: **On the condition,** i.e., the husband intended to grant her full divorce on the condition that she would not marry so-and-so?


###### Gittin 82a:9
[Gittin 82a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:9)

״חוּץ״ הוּא – וּבְ״חוּץ״ הוּא דִּפְלִיגִי רַבָּנַן עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, דְּהָא שַׁיַּיר לַהּ בְּגֵט; אֲבָל בְּ״עַל מְנָת״ – מוֹדוּ לֵיהּ, מִידֵּי דְּהָוֵה אַכֹּל תְּנָאֵי דְּעָלְמָא;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates on how this dilemma affects the understanding of the dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis: Does *ella* mean **except, and** therefore **it is** specifically **with regard to** the **exception** of a certain man from the intended divorce **that the Rabbis disagree with Rabbi Eliezer** and hold that the divorce is invalid? This would be **because** in a case where the husband noted an exception, it is as if he **left out** part **of her bill of divorce;** since she is not permitted to remarry anyone she wishes it does not entirely sever the bond between them. **But with regard to** divorce **on the condition** that she will not marry a certain man the Rabbis **agree with** Rabbi Eliezer that it is valid, **just as is** the case **with regard to any typical condition** which the husband attaches to the divorce of his wife.


###### Gittin 82a:10
[Gittin 82a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:10)

אוֹ דִלְמָא ״עַל מְנָת״ הוּא – וּבְ״עַל מְנָת״ הוּא דִּפְלִיג רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אַדְּרַבָּנַן; אֲבָל בְּ״חוּץ״ מוֹדֶה – דְּהָא שַׁיַּיר לַהּ בְּגֵט.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Or perhaps** this **is** the meaning of *ella*: **On the condition?** Accordingly, **it is** specifically **with regard to** divorce **on the condition** that the wife will not marry a certain man **that Rabbi Eliezer disagrees with the Rabbis** and allows her to remarry based on this divorce; **but with regard to** the **exception** of a certain man from the woman’s right to remarry **he concedes** that the divorce is invalid **as** the husband **left out** part **of her bill of divorce.**


###### Gittin 82a:11
[Gittin 82a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:11)

אָמַר רָבִינָא, תָּא שְׁמַע: כׇּל הַבָּתִּים מִטַּמְּאִין בִּנְגָעִים, אֶלָּא שֶׁל גּוֹיִם. אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא ״חוּץ״ הוּא – שַׁפִּיר; אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ ״עַל מְנָת״ הוּא – עַל מְנָת דְּלָא מִיטַּמּוּ בָּתֵּי גוֹיִם הוּא דְּמִיטַּמּוּ בָּתֵּי יִשְׂרָאֵל, הָא מִיטַּמּוּ בָּתֵּי גוֹיִם – לָא מִטַּמְּאִי בָּתֵּי יִשְׂרָאֵל?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ravina said: Come** and **hear** a solution to this dilemma from the following mishna (*Nega’im* 12:1): **All houses become ritually impure through leprous sores** of the house **except [*ella*] for** those **belonging to gentiles. Granted, if you say** that the meaning of the word *ella* **is except,** this mishna is **well** understood. **But if you say** that its meaning **is on the condition,** the resulting interpretation of this mishna is that the **houses of Jews become impure only on the condition that** the **houses of gentiles do not become impure; consequently,** if the **houses of gentiles become impure,** the **houses of Jews do not become impure.** Does this interpretation make any sense?


###### Gittin 82a:12
[Gittin 82a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:12)

וְעוֹד, בָּתֵּי גוֹיִם מִי מִטַּמְּאִי?! וְהָתַנְיָא: ״וְנָתַתִּי נֶגַע צָרַעַת בְּבֵית אֶרֶץ אֲחוּזַּתְכֶם״ – אֶרֶץ אֲחוּזַּתְכֶם מִטַּמְּאָה בִּנְגָעִים, וְאֵין בָּתֵּי גוֹיִם מִטַּמְּאִין בִּנְגָעִים! אֶלָּא שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ ״חוּץ״ הוּא; שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Moreover,** an objection against this interpretation may be raised as follows: **Do** the **houses of gentiles become ritually impure** at all? **But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita* that from the verse: **“And I put the plague of leprosy in a house of the land of your possession”** (Leviticus 14:34), it is derived that only **the land of your possession,** i.e., the houses of Jews, **becomes impure through leprous sores** of the house, **but** the **houses of gentiles do not become impure through leprosy? Rather, conclude from** the mishna that the meaning of *ella* **is except.** The Gemara concludes: **Conclude from it** that *ella* means except.


###### Gittin 82a:13
[Gittin 82a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/82a:13)

מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כִּי הַאי תַּנָּא – דְּתַנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה: לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר וַחֲכָמִים עַל הַמְגָרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְאָמַר לָהּ: ״הֲרֵי אַתְּ מוּתֶּרֶת לְכׇל אָדָם, חוּץ מִפְּלוֹנִי״ – שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת. עַל מָה נֶחְלְקוּ? עַל הַמְגָרֵשׁ אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְאָמַר לָהּ: ״הֲרֵי אַתְּ מוּתֶּרֶת לְכׇל אָדָם, עַל מְנָת שֶׁלֹּא תִּנָּשְׂאִי לִפְלוֹנִי״ –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
According to this conclusion, **our mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **this *tanna*, as it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, said: Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis did not disagree with regard to one who divorces his wife and said to her** while handing her the bill of divorce: **You are hereby permitted to** marry **any man except for so-and-so;** rather, they were in agreement **that** in that case **she is not divorced. With regard to what** case **did they disagree?** It was **with regard to one who divorces his wife and said to her: You are hereby permitted to** marry **any man on the condition that you will not marry so-and-so,**