Study Gittin folio 66A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Let R' Avina lift his basket and go to Rav Huna his teacher, as in order to acquire the item he must rely on the opinion of his teacher, as Rav Huna said: The legal status of one’s bill of divorce is like that of his gift. Just as with regard to a gift given by one on his deathbed, if he recovered
And just as with regard to the bill of divorce of one on his deathbed, even though he did not specify, once he said: Write the bill of divorce, even though he did not say: Give it to my wife, they write and give it to his wife, as it was taught in the Mishnah. So too, with regard to a gift given by
R' Abba objects to that conclusion. If that parallel is valid, extend it and say: Just as a gift is valid after death, so too, a bill of divorce is valid after death. The Talmud rejects this: How can these cases be compared? Granted, a gift is valid after death; however, is a bill of divorce valid
Rather, this is what is difficult according to R' Abba: Geneiva’s instruction is the gift of a person on his deathbed of a portion of his estate, and the gift of a person on his deathbed of a portion of his estate requires an act of acquisition. The Talmud asks: Is that to say, by inference, that
The Talmud asks: Is that to say by inference that R' Abba holds that one who issues an instruction to give the gift due to his imminent death requires an act of acquisition? But don’t we maintain that one who issues an instruction to give the gift due to his imminent death does not require an act of