Gittin 3:8 - 4:1

המניח פירות להיות מפריש עליהן כו' – He relies upon these and eat from other TEVEL/eatables forbidden to be consumed prior to the separation of sacred gifts that he has, and says, ‘Behold their heave-offerings [come] from these fruits that I have set aside for this purpose.’

ואם אבדו – He went to check them and found that they had become lost.

הרי זה חושש – for these selfsame eatables forbidden to be consumed prior to the separation of sacred gifts, which he had legally fit for use by giving the priestly dues with the promise of those. And if he did not eat them, he must separate [tithes] from them, lest when he says: ‘Behold their priest-due is with the fruit that I have set aside’ have already become lost.

מעת לעת – of being examined. And when he checked them and found them to be lost, he fears lest from yesterday at that particular time they had been lost, and if he had designed them as tithes in the midst of the time period of twenty-four astronomical hours over other fruit. He must separate from them [tithes] out of doubt, and more than this, the Rabbis were not stringent to fear, but they rely upon the presumptive continuance of an actual condition until evidence of change is produced.

בודקין את היין – that he left it to [have tithes] separated out, he must check it, lest it soured, since we don’t offer heave-offerings from wine that had soured.

בקדים של מוצאי החג – since when the east wind blows at the conclusion of the festival [of Sukkot].

בשעת כניסת המים – when they are like the white bean (see Mishnah Kilayim 1:1), they are called half-ripe fruit (i.e. grapes). But when the moistness enters and grows in it when one is able to store away from them a bit, that is at the time when the water enters. Another explanation: When they were crushing the grapes when they were half-ripe, and putting water into it, and making vinegar to make it subject to setting aside sacred gifts. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.

השולח גט והגיע בשליח – for he had not intended to pursue after him to overtake him, but rather, when the agent got detained along the way and he [the husband] was on the path to there and saw him and nullified the Jewish bill of divorce, even so, it is nullified. And we don’t say that he intended to merely cause suffering, for if he had intended to nullify it, he (the husband) would have pursued after him.

אינו יכול לבטלו – that comes to teach us that even though we saw him that he ran after him to nullify it, we don’t say that this matter was revealed retroactively that he (i.e., the husband) had revoked the Jewish bill of divorce. For where a person gives a Jewish bill of divorce to his wife for a time or on condition, or says to her, “Behold this is your Jewish bill of divorce from now or from this [particular] time”; or if the specific condition had been fulfilled, and if he did not say to her “from now” – even if after her Jewish bill of divorce had reached her hand, he can annul it.