Study Gittin folio 85A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
דברי הכל כשר. ומתניתין, דקתני ״כתבו״ ואוקימנא ב״חוץ״; אבל ״על מנת״ לא פסיל – איבעית אימא: לפני התורף, ורבנן; ואיבעית אימא: לאחר התורף, ודברי הכל.
everyone agrees that it is valid. And the Mishnah, which teaches that if he wrote his qualification in the bill of divorce it is invalid, and we established that it is referring only to a case of an exception, but a condition does not render the bill of divorce invalid, does not contradict this baraita. As if you wish, say that the Mishnah is referring to a case where the qualification is written before the essential part of the bill of divorce, and it is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. And if you wish, say that it is referring to a case where the qualification is written after the essential part, and everyone, even R' Yehuda HaNasi, agrees with regard to its ruling.
ורבא אמר: מחלוקת לאחר התורף – דרבי סבר: גזרינן אטו לפני התורף; ורבנן סברי: לא גזרינן אטו לפני התורף. אבל לפני התורף – דברי הכל פסול.
And Rava said: The dispute between R' Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis is with regard to a case where the condition is written after the essential part, as R' Yehuda HaNasi holds that we issue a decree rendering the bill of divorce invalid due to a case where the condition is written before the essential part, and the Rabbis hold that we do not issue a decree due to a case where it is written before the essential part. But if it is written before the essential part, everyone agrees that it is invalid.
ומתניתין, דקתני ״כתבו״ ואוקימנא ב״חוץ״; אבל ״על מנת״ לא פסיל – אחר התורף, ורבנן היא.
And accordingly, the Mishnah, which teaches that if he wrote his qualification in the bill of divorce it is invalid, and we established that it is referring only to a case of an exception, but a condition does not render the bill of divorce invalid, does not contradict this baraita. It is referring to a case where he wrote the condition after the essential part, and it is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, who hold that a condition written after the essential part does not render the bill of divorce invalid.