If he says to her: pick your get (that is, a bill of divorce) up from the ground, it means nothing [i.e., the divorce is not valid]. And even if it sitting in his hand, and she is close to him and she picks it up from there, it is not a [valid] get, since he did not help her take it. Even if his hand was closed with the get inside, and he opened his hand and she took it from there, that he did help her take it, even so it is not a get, since he did not bring his body near to her. And if the get was buried under the belt on his waist and he pulled in his stomach and loosened it, and tilted himself to her and she took it, we call that legitimate "and he gave" [which is a requirement for a valid get, as it it written:] (Deuteronomy 24:1, 3). However, if he pulled in his stomach but didn't tilt himself toward her, or if he tilted himself toward her but did not pull in his stomach, that is not considered [as if he is] giving [her the get]. And there are those that say that if it was attached on his hand or his hip and he bent his body to her or he tilted his hand until the get fell on its own and he said to her: "this is your get," then this is a [valid] get.
If he put the get (that is, a bill of divorce) in her hand and the string with which it is tied remains in his hand, if the string is strong enough that he can pull it away and bring it to him, then she is not divorced. And if not, she is divorced. And if the tie is strong [enough] that he would be able to pull it away and bring it to him had she not closed her hand, but since she closed her hand he is unable to pull it away and bring it to him, that is not [considered as] giving [her the get], and she is not divorced; and there are those that say that she is divorced. Hegeh: And all of this is only dealing with the circumstance that she closed her hand against the wishes of the husband. However, if the husband commanded her to close her hand, and even if he reached the get out to her and she took it from the other side, it seems to me that this is a [valid] get.
If he gave her the get while she was asleep, and then she awoke, and the get is in her hand, and he says to her "this is your get," he does not need to take it back from her hands and give it to her again. However, if he did not say to her "this is your get," even if he told witnesses, "see the get that I am giving to my wife," it means nothing, since he gave it to her while she was sleeping. And likewise, if it fell from her hand while she was sleeping, even if she went ahead and took it, it is not a [valid] get until he gives it to her again and tells her: "this is your get." Hegeh: If he put her get in her courtyard at the time that she is sleeping, there are those that say that it is not a [valid] get. But, [if he put it] in the hand of her messenger, according to everyone it is a [valid] get. (Beit Yosef in the name of the Ran and the Rashba)
If he said to witnesses: "see this get that I am giving to my wife," but he said to her at the time that he gives it to her: "take this shtar chov (that is, a note indicating that the holder owes money)," this is a [valid] get, even though he didn't say to her: "this is your get." And there are those that say that this is only true if he told the witnesses not in front of her, but if he said it in front of her, and then at the time he gave it to her he said: "take this shtar chov," she questionably divorced. But, if he did not say first: "see this get that I am giving to her," and he said to her: "take this shtar chov," he must say to her: "this is your get," but he does not need to take if from her and give it to her again. And there are those that say that this applies when he says: "take this shtar chov." But if he said to her: "zechi (that is, merit [a phrase which has a connotation of credit as opposed to debit]) in this shtar chov," there is no way to fix [the situation] until he takes it from her and he gives it to her again and says: "this is your get."