- Using a lost get which was found
The next Mishnah states: המביא גט ואבד הימנו– One who was bringing a get and lost it, מצאו לאלתר כשר – if he found it immediately, it is valid, ואם לאו פסול – but if not, it is invalid, out of concern it was written for another man (and woman) of the same name. The Gemara asks that this contradicts another Mishnah which implies that a get could be used by the husband even if it was recovered after a long time. Rabbah answered: כאן במקום שהשיירות מצויות – [Our Mishnah] is where caravans are common, increasing the possibility that it fell from someone else. כאן במקום שאין השיירות מצויות – [The other Mishnah] is where caravans are uncommon, therefore we are not concerned the get was someone else’s, even after a long time. The Gemara further qualifies Rabbah’s position: והוא שהוחזקו שני יוסף בן שמעון בעיר אחת – this concern is only where it has been established that two people named Yosef ben Shimon (for example) live in a single city where the get was written. Otherwise, we are not concerned for the possible existence of another such person, nor another city of the same name. Rav Huna was concerned about the possibility of another city with this name.
- Using simanim to identify gittin
After Rebbe Yirmiyah offers a second answer to the above contradiction, Rav Ashi offers a third: כגון דקאמר נקב יש בו בצד אות פלונית – The Mishnah which allows using a found get indefinitely is where he says, “There is a hole next to a particular letter in the get,” דהוה ליה סימן מובהק – because it is a uniquely identifying mark and may be relied on even with regard to gittin. The Gemara clarifies that Rav Ashi would only be willing to rely on a truly distinctive mark such as identifying the spot of the hole, but if he merely says it has a hole somewhere, it is insufficient basis to return a get. The reason is: מספקא ליה סימנין אי דאורייתא אי דרבנן – [Rav Ashi] is uncertain if ordinary simanim, upon which we rely to return lost objects, are sufficient evidence on the Biblical level, or only Rabbinically, but cannot be used for gittin. Rabbah bar bar Channah once lost a get, and when it was found, he said he could identify it with a siman, or by טביעות עינא – visual recognition. They returned it to him, but he did not know if they returned it based on the siman given, and they held simanim are d’Oraysa, or based on his visual recognition, which is only sufficient for a Torah scholar (whose exceptional honesty can be relied upon).
- Definition of finding “immediately”
A Baraisa teaches: איזהו שלא לאלתר – What interval is not considered immediate? The Gemara cites six opinions: (1) Rebbe Nassan says: ששהה כדי שתעבור שיירא ותשרה – enough time for a caravan to have passed and set up camp, since it may have fallen from a traveler. (2) Rebbe Shimon ben Elazar says: כדי שיהא אדם עומד ורואה שלא עבר שם אדם – The get can be returned as long as a person stands there and sees that no one passed by, but if even one person may have passed, it cannot be returned. (3) Some say: שלא שהה אדם שם – so long as someone stands and sees that no one stayed there. (4) Rebbi said enough time to write a get, (5) Rebbe Yitzchok said enough time to read one, and (6) others say enough time to write and read a get. Rashi explains that these last three opinions are not expressing the reason for their view but giving examples to express the length of time sufficient for concern of a fallen get. The Gemara says the halachah follows the second or third opinion.
