A widow who comes to collect her ketuba money form the orphans, must swear that the husband didn’t give her any of the ketuba money in his lifetime (just like all creditors need to do to collect from orphans on their father’s debts). The Rabbis were concerned she may swear falsely and therefore would not allow her to swear. Since they could no longer collect their ketuba money, Rabban Gamliel instituted that a woman could take a vow instead of swearing. Why is the concern only for widows? Why is a vow better than swearing in terms of concern for lying? Historically, Rav would not allow women to collect their ketubot because he saw that people didn’t take vows seriously. This lead to a woman getting very angry and caused the death of a Rabbi and as a result, Rav Yehuda make a public declaration endorsing Shmuel’s opinion against Rav. Why is there not a concern that a woman’s husband will cancel her vow or she will go to a chacham to annul the vow?
What is the reason for the takana of Rabban Gamliel and how does it connect to the issue of in front of how many people does he need to cancel the get. If one goes against the takana of Rabban Gamliel and cancels a get in a court (or in a court in a different city) is the get cancelled or not? Do Rabbis have the power to override Torah law? The gemara explains that the Rabbis have the power to uproot the marriage in this case because the husband didn’t keep to their rules regarding marriage and therefore didn’t keep to his conditions of “k’dat moshe v’yisrael” that he accepted when he got married. To what extent can this concept be applied has important ramifications. If one cancels testimony, does he need to cancel it in front of all those who he told it to? Is gilui da’at – if his intent is clear without him actually saying tha he is cancelling the get – effective in cancelling a get? this is one of the 6 cases where we hold like Abaye over Rava. He holds that it is ineffective.
How does one cancel a get? At what stage can it be cancelled? Which wording is effective and which wording would not be effective to cancel? If he cancels the get that a messenger is sending, can he reuse the same get later if he in fact decides to divorce his wife or is the get itself cancelled?
A person has maaser that belong to a levi in his house. Can he buy it off of him and not worry that they is trumat maaser there? A few different explanations of exactly what the situation is are given. A big discussion ensues over the weather – what are the differnet kinds of winds and what kind of damage they can incur.
If someone makse a condition to giving the get and the condition isn’t fulfilled for reasons beyond his control – is the get a good get or not? the mishna and gemara discuss of case of someone who loans money and stipulates that instead of getting paid back, he will deduct the amount from truma or maaser (assuming the loan was given to a kohen, levi or poor person).
Can a messenger sent to bring a get appoint a new messenger in his place? Does it depend on why he wants to do that – because he is unable or simply doesn’t want to? Does it depend on if he is bringing it within Israel or from abroad?
In what cases do we presume someone is dead and in what cases do we not? Is there a difference between a case of a get sent by a sick person via a messenger – is the get valid – or a case where a Kohen went abroad and we want to know if his wife can continue eating teruma or should we be concerned he died?
Three opinions are brought in the mishna regarding a get and other documents whether you can prepare the documents in advance and if so, which parts. The gemara brings different interpretations regarding the first tanna’s opinion whether it corresponds to rabbi Meir or Rabbi Elazar’s opinion.
Is the concept of bereira dependent on whether the determining factor is in the person’s control or not?
Are any women believed to be a messenger to bring the get? What if they are characters who are suspected of having ulterior motives (like a mother-in-law)? Is there a difference if we are talking about a case where they need to say “befanai nichtav u’befanai nechtam?” If so, what is the difference? In which case would a woman bringing her own get from chutz la’aretz need to say “befanai nichtav u’befanai nechtam?” The new perek starts delving into the issue of lishma and gives 4 different cases where a get is not considered lishma and would be no good. THe gemara discusses the difference between all 4 cases and possible ramifications from here to other promissory notes.