רבא explains the הלכה of the משנה that the שליח says 'בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם', to testify that the get was written לשמה.
רבה argues and explains that he is testifying that the get was not forged.
Question 1. why does רבא argue on רבה? (what doesn't רבא like about רבה Peshat?)
Answer 1. Because if he is testifying that the get is לשמה, he should have to say 'בפני נחתם לשמה........'
Question 2. So then how come, according to רבה, the שליח doesn't say 'לשמה'?
Answer 2. Really he should say the word 'לשמה', but if we give him too many words to say, he might leave out the word 'לשמה', and רש"י quotes a גמרא that if you change from the setup of חז"ל by גיטן then the child is going to be a 'ממזר'.
Question 3. So now also, He might leave out words?
Answer 3. 1 out of 3 words he might leave out, (He might not say לשמה), but 1 out of 2 he won't leave it out (He's not going to say just בפני and nothing else).
רש"י - so when he says only בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם without saying לשמה, Then how do we know that it's לשמה?
The משנה says if someone threw a גט to his wife, is she's standing in her house or courtyard, which רש"י explains means her house of נכסי מלוש, she is divorced.
רש"י explains the reason she is divorced is because her property is קונה the גט for her
If he threw it to her but she is in his property she is nor divorced even if he threw it on the bed that she is lying on!
But if he threw it onto her lap, or into her pocketbook, then even if she's in his property she is divorced
The answer is that the רי"ף has a different way to say our גמרא instead of saying "A lady is kosher to bring a גט" it says "A lady is kosher to bring her own גט"
The difference between the two versions is, that our version (The 1st one) we are talking about any random lady bringing the גט and the גמרא is saying that she can't be a judge, the גמרא is saying that a lady is not allowed to be a Judge.
But according to the version of the רי"ף (The 2nd one) the גמרא is talking about the wife herself, bringing her own גט the reason why she is not allowed to be the Judge is not because she is a female, rather because she is the באל דבר, the person who is being Judged and a באל דבר is not allowed to be a Judge.
ר"ת says that the version of our גמרא which comes out that a lady is not allowed to be a Judge
and the מהרש"א explains that ר"ת is explaining the גמרא not like the 2nd version which comes out that a באל דבר is not allowed to be a Judge but a lady can be a Judge
תוס continues that ר' חננאל also had the version like him and that the גמרא could have also said that we are concerned that a relative who is not allowed to be the Judge might bring the גט
The מפרשים explain that ר"ת didn't like the 2nd version because according to that version we are concerned about a very far-fetched case (where the husband gives the גט to his wife on condition that she does not become divorced until she brings it to Israel, and that she herself is the one who is bringing the גט) and we know that the חכמים do not make a decree because of an uncommon case.
But according to the 2nd version that we are concerned about any random lady or a relative bringing the גט then it is common to have a problem and that's why the חכמים made a decree that even a man who brings גט has to say בפ"נ ובפ"נ in front of 3 people (according to ר' חננאל).
The משנה says, if somebody brings a גט from חוץ לארץ to ארץ ישראל and he can't say בפ"נ ובפ"נ, they should verify the גט with the signatures.
They asked, what does it mean that he can't say בפ"נ ובפ"נ, if the case is that he is a deaf mute, he is not kosher to be a שליח to bring the גט as the משנה teaches us, everyone is kosher to bring a גט except for a חרש שוטה וקטן?
ר' יוסף explains that the case is talking about where the שליח started out as a well person and after he gave the גט, before he had a chance to say בפ"נ ובפ"נ he became a deaf mute.
Asks the גמרא this משנה is good according to רבא but is a קשיא on רבה because verifying a גט does not tell us that it was written לשמה?
Answers the גמרא we are talking about לאחר שלמדו, after the people in חוץ לארץ, learned that a גט needs to be written לשמה.
If its לאחר שלמדו, then even in a case where he can say בפ"נ ובפ"נ he should not have to, let him just verify the גט with the signatures?
Answers the גמרא the חכמים made a דין that the שליח has to say בפ"נ ובפ"נ , it's a גזירה maybe the situation will go back to it's ruined state.
If so then even where the שליח can't say בפ"נ ובפ"נ it should not be enough to verify the signatures.
The case of normal then he became a person that is deaf and mute is not a common case therefore the חכמים didn't make a גזירה by this case.
But a case of the wife herself bringing the גט is not common, so then why does she have to say בפ"נ ובפ"נ?
Answer, חז"ל didn't want to differentiate between cases of a שליח, that this one has to say and this one doesn't have to say, so they said across the board that all שלוחים have to say בפ"נ ובפ"נ.
If so, when the husband himself brings the גט he should have to say בפ"נ ובפ"נ?
The whole reason why he has to say בפ"נ ובפ"נ is because the husband might come and make CHA-CHA, but now that h himself is bringing the גט we are not concerned that he will come and make CHA-CHA Therefore he doesn't have to say בפ"נ ובפ"נ.
רב נחמן says that according to רב מאיר is somebody finds גט in the garbage (was certainly not written לשמה) if he gets it signed and he gives it to her, its כשר.
תוס says that even לכתחלה he can get the גט signed and give it to her.
תוס asks - if so why does the גמרא tell us this הלכה using language of ב''ע that if he signs it and gives it its כשר, the גמרא should rather say "sign it and give it"?
תוס answers - Because if the גמרא would say "Sign it and Give it" you would thing you Have to sign it and give it, therefore the גמרא says it בלשון ב"ע to tell you that if you want to you can use it, not that you have to.
ר"ת asks whats the difference between the הלכה of מחובר that according to רב מאיר you need לכתחלה to write it detached, but here regarding the הלכה of שלא לשמה, you can לכתחלה a גט that was written שלא לשמה?
תוס answers ר"ת by שלא לשמה we are not concerned that because it was written שלא לשמה that they are going to sign it שלא לשמה, but by מחובר we are concerned that since they wrote it on something that is attached they will come to sing it while it is still attached.
Our גמרה brings down a משנה that says there are three types of גיטין that are פסול but if she gets married after being divorced with one of these גיטין, the child is kosher (not a ממזר).
'תוס brings a שיטה that this מ"ד is רב מאיר.
'תוס asks רב מאיר's שיטה is that any גט that was changed from the procedure that the חכמים instituted by גיטין, the גט is פסול and the child will be a ממזר, so how can the child be כשר in our cases?
'תוס answers it was instituted originally that in these three cases the child is כשר (not a ממזר)
'תוס asks another question רב מאיר hold's that when the תורה says וכתב לה it means that he should sign, if so you need the signing מדאורייתא, so how could a גט that has no signatures be כשר?
'תוס answers that when the husband writes the גט in his own hand writing which is the best signature possible.
תוס Says two answers to his question......
He answers that even if the כתיבה would need to be לכתחילה written לשמה, We would still not be able to establish the משנה like רב אלעזר, because since if the גט would be written not לשמה it would still be kosher, the רבנן would not be מתקן that the שליח has to say בפני נכתב
Another תרץ, there is a משנה later that says that if the שליח does not say בפני נכתב then the גט is פסול, that certainly is not רב אלעזר
The גמרא says that according to רב מאיר the signatures need to be לשמה but the כתיבה does not need to be לשמה
Asks תוס from where do we see that the writing does not need to be לשמה,
לכאורה the same way regarding the הלכה of מחובר, (attached or detached) the writing לכתחילה should be written on something that is already detached so too regarding the הלכה of לשמה the כתיבה לכתחילה should be written לשמה?
רבא - If he would say "ידענו", wouldn't he be believed?
רש"י explains, this means that if the שליח would say ידעתי, "I recognize the signatures on the גט" then the גט will be good.
The reason for this is because whats the difference if he says בפני נחתם or ידעתי either way he is being מקיים the גט.
'תוס says, it comes out from רש"י that if the שליח would come into בית דין and say "ידעתי instead of בפני נחתם" the גט would be good.
'תוס continues to explain, according to רש"י we need to explain the word ידענו which is plural, that it is referring to all שלוחים who say ידעתי.
This that the גמרא on :דף ב doesn't bring down the case of ידעתי as a case of a מחלוקת between רבה and רבא is because those case's are נ"מ if you have to say בפני נחתם or not, but this is a נ"מ if what you say works or not.
(סתמא לשמה).
Question 1 - Why doesn't רבה (who explains the reason for בפני נחתם is because of לשמה) agree to רבא's explanation, that the שליח is being מקיים the גט?
Answer 1 - because the שליח would have to say only בפני נחתם, why does he have to say בפני נכתב? it must be that he is testifying that its לשמה not being מקיים the גט.
Question 2 - so what does רבא hold? why does the שליח have to say בפני נכתב?
Answer 2 - in order that you should not mix up גט and other שטרות and think that just like you could be מקיים a גט with only one עד so too by שטר you can be מקיים with only one עד (its not true קיום שטרות needs 2 עדים)
Question 3 - so what does רבה hold? (why doesn't he agree to this פשט?)
Answer 3 - He holds that you wont mix up גט with other שטרות because there are 3 differences between them.
By גט an אשה is believed, by שטר an אשה is not believed.
By גט the בעל דבר (the lady herself) is believed, By שטר the בעל דבר is not believed.
By גט you need to say בפני, by שטר you can say ידענו (I know/recognize the signatures).
רבא holds that if he would say ידענו by גט, he would be believed, so a person would come to mix up גט with שטר therefore the שליח has to say בפני נכתב.
