1.77a (Mishnah): If one threw a Get to his wife when she was in her house or courtyard, it is valid.

2.Question: A man acquires his wife's property. It is like his yard!

3.Answer #1 (R. Yanai): The case is, he wrote to her during Eirusin (before Nisu'in) 'I have no claims to your property.'

4.Objection (Rava): Even when he puts the Get in her hand, why does it work? Also her hand belongs to him!

5.Answer #2 (Rava): The moment the Get is put in her hand, she is divorced and receives Reshus over her hand. Likewise, the moment the Get enters her yard, she is divorced and the yard is hers.

6.Question (Ravina): Why did Rava ask about a Get put in her hand? Granted, her husband owns the productivity of her hands, but he does not own her hands!

7.Answer (Rav Ashi): Rava challenged the opinion that a slave can himself receive a Get of freedom from his master. A slave's hand is like his master's hand! Rava answered that a slave simultaneously goes free and gets the ability to acquire for himself. This can also explain how a woman can receive a Get in her yard!

8.A dying man wrote a Get to his wife shortly before Shabbos. He was not able to give it before Shabbos. He did not expect to survive until after Shabbos.

9.Rava: He should give to her, for a gift, the place where the Get is resting. She should close the door there (on Shabbos) to acquire it through Chazakah.

10.Rav Ilish: How will it help her to acquire the area? What a wife acquires belongs to her husband!

11.Rava was embarrassed. Later, it was found that she was only an Arusah. (A husband does not acquire property of his wife until Nisu'in.)

12.Retraction (Rava): Even if she was Nesu'ah, my suggestion works. She acquires the area at the moment of divorce!

13.A man threw a Get to his wife in the yard. It was valid, because he had lent to her a place in his yard to acquire the Get.

14.78a (Rava, and Beraisa): If he threw the Get into her bed, she is divorced.

15.Question: This is like Kelim of the buyer in the domain of the seller! Does this show that a buyer can acquire through his Kelim in the domain of the seller!

16.Answer: No. The case is, the bed is 10 Tefachim tall. It is above (not in) the husband's domain. Even though the legs of the bed rest in his domain, one does not care about such a small place (he pardons it).

17.Bava Basra 51b (Rava): The Halachah is, if one gave a gift to his wife, she acquires and she eats the Peros.

18.Bava Metzia 102a (Mishnah): Dung in the Chatzer belongs to Reuven (who owns the house). Shimon (the renter) gets only (ashes) from the oven.

19.The case is, it is Reuven's Chatzer, and dung from others' animals.


1.Rif and Rosh (Gitin 8:1,3): A Get thrown to her house or courtyard is valid. Even though a man acquires his wife's property, she is divorced and receives Reshus over her yard at the same moment. If he threw the Get into her bed, if it is 10 Tefachim tall, she is divorced. One does not care about the place of the legs.

2.Rosh (3): One is not particular about the place of the legs of one's wife's bed.

3.Rambam (Hilchos Gerushin 5:1): The Torah requires only that the Get come to her. It can come to her hand, garment or Chatzer, whether the Chatzer is hers, or she rented or borrowed it.

4.Rambam (Hilchos Sechirus 6:5): Dung in a Chatzer from the renter's animals belongs to the renter. Dung of others' animals belongs to the owner. One's yard acquires for him, even if it is rented.

5.Rosh (Bava Basra 3:54): One does not eat the Peros of a gift that he gave to his wife. Why did Rav Ilish (Gitin 77b) say that she does not acquire the place, and why was Rava initially embarrassed? Some say that there he did not give a gift, only a loan until divorce (and he eats the Peros). I disagree. R. Tam answers that rights to acquire do not depend on eating the Peros. Rava holds like Reish Lakish, who says that Kinyan (the right to eat) Peros is not like Kinyan ha'Guf (owning the property itself). Her husband's Kinyan Peros does not uproot her Kinyan ha'Guf. Rather, the place does not acquire for her because she cannot sell or give it. Even though he generously gave to her Kinyan Peros for her entire life, he intends to get it back after she dies. Also, even though she eats the Peros, the Peros become Nichsei Melug, and he eats Peros of the Peros.

6.Tosfos (Bava Basra 51b DH b'Matanah): R. Yanai answered that he wrote to her during Eirusin 'I have no claims to your property.' Even in this case he gets the Peros, unless he writes '...and their Peros.' Nevertheless, since his words enable her to sell it, she acquires through it. However, this is not a proof. R. Yanai means that he said 'and their Peros', even though he did not explicitly say so.

7.Question: A renter acquires, even though he cannot sell the property!

8.Answer (R. Tam, in Tosfos): A renter has great rights. Even if he died during the rental period, his heirs keep the premises until the end of the period. If a woman sold property and died, her husband takes it back immediately.

9.Tosfos (ibid.): The Yerushalmi in Gitin asks, since he eats the Peros, she should not be divorced! It answers that he waived his Peros rights. This implies that Kinyan depends on Peros, not on ability to sell, unlike R. Tam!


1.Shulchan Aruch (EH 139:1): If one threw a Get to his wife's Chatzer, whether she owns it, borrowed it or rented it, she is divorced.

i.Beis Yosef (DH u'Mah she'Chosav Rabeinu Oh): A borrowed or rented Chatzer works because a loan or rental is like a sale for that period of time.

ii.Beis Yosef (DH u'Mah she'Chosav Rabeinu v'Hi): The Gemara asked that she will not acquire the area, because what a wife acquires belongs to her husband! Rava answered that she acquires her Get and Yad together.

iii.Beis Shmuel (1): This is only if the yard was Nichsei Melug. Her Get does not come together with Nichsei Tzon Barzel (property for which there is compensation if its value when he returns it is different than when she brought it in). This is because Tzon Barzel, even land, needs to be collected. (It is Muchzak to belong to her husband.)

iv.Beis Meir (1): 'Rented' connotes that she rented it with money of her Nichsei Melug, or she had rented or borrowed it before Nisu'in and entered it with Nichsei Melug. This is like the Tur (CM 313), but it is unlike the Rambam, who says that the owner of a field acquires through it, even if it is rented to someone else. If so, how can she acquire a Get through a rented field?

See also:


Other Halachos relevant to this Daf: