Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) PROOFS OF FREEDOM

(a) Question (R. Yochanan - Beraisa - R. Meir): A man wrote a document of engagement to his slave - she is engaged;

1. Chachamim say, she is not engaged.

(b) Answer: Just as Rabah bar Rav Shilo taught - a slave is free if his master himself put Tefilin on the slave - here, he goes free if the master himself married off the slave.
(c) Question: Can Chachamim really say, the master would not cause his slave to sin, but he himself would sin (by marrying his slave without freeing her)?
(d) Answer (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): The case is, he told her that the document of engagement should free her and engage her to him.

1. R. Meir says, ('You are engaged to me') is a valid language of freedom; Chachamim say, it is not.

(e) (R. Yehoshua ben Levi): A slave that dons Tefilin in front of his master goes free.
(f) Question (Beraisa): If the master borrowed from his slave, or made the slave an overseer, or if the slave donned Tefilin in front of his master, or read 3 verses in synagogue in front of his master, he does not go free.
(g) Answer (Rabah bar Rav Shilo): He goes free if the master himself put Tefilin on the slave.

(a) (Rav Dimi): A dying man said that his heirs should not make his slave work - we force them to free her.
(b) Objection (R. Ami and R. Asi): But her children are slaves - why must the heirs free her?
(c) (Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah): A dying man said, 'My slave made me happy, my heirs should make her happy' - we force them to make her happy.
(d) Question: Why?
(e) Answer: It is a Mitzvah to fulfill the request of the deceased.
(f) Version #1 (Ameimar): Reuven declared his slave Hefker - there is no solution (that the slave should become a Yisrael).
(g) Question: Why not?
(h) Answer: Reuven does not (monetarily) own the slave, but regarding prohibitions (i.e. a blockage to the slave's conversion), he is still considered Reuven's slave.

1. Reuven cannot give over (to the slave) ownership regarding prohibitions.

(i) Question (Rav Ashi): But Ula and R. Chiya bar Avin taught that he goes free and needs a Get of freedom!
(j) Answer (Ameimar): He needs one, but he cannot get one.
(k) Version #2 (Ameimar): Reuven declared his slave Hefker, and Reuven died - there is no solution.
(l) Question: Why not?
(m) Answer: After making him Hefker, Reuven did not (monetarily) own him; regarding prohibitions, he was still considered Reuven's slave.

1. Reuven does not bequeath ownership regarding prohibitions.

(n) Question (Rav Ashi): But Rav Dimi (above, (a)) taught that the heirs can free a slave, even if they did not inherit monetary ownership!
(o) Answer (Ameimar): Rav Dimi is wrong (he was refuted)
(p) Question (Rav Ashi): What is Rav Dimi's mistake - that the father did not say a language of freedom? But if he said a language that she should go free, we would force the heirs to free her!
(q) Answer (Ameimar): I hold that R. Yochanan never said (even your amended version of) what Rav Dimi cited him to say, rather like R. Shmuel bar Yehudah reported.

(a) A city of (Kana'ani) slaves was sold to a Nochri. Their new masters died; they came before Ravina.

1. Ravina: Ask the children of your original owners to write for you Gitin of freedom.
2. Rabanan: But this is like Ameimar's case, and he says that there is no solution for such slaves!
3. Ravina: I hold like Rav Dimi.
4. Rabanan: But Rav Dimi was refuted!
5. Ravina: Rav Dimi's mistake was that the father did not say a language of freedom. But if he said a language that she should go free, we would force the heirs to free her!

i. The law is like Ravina.

(b) Two partners had a slave; one freed his half. The other feared that Chachamim would find out and force him to free his half (there was an enactment to free half-slaves). To prevent this, he transferred ownership of his slave to his son, who was a minor (and unable to free him).

1. Rav Papa: As he did, will be done to him - his scheme will backfire! Children love coins - appoint an overseer, have him get the child to agree to free the slave in exchange for some coins, and write a Get of freedom in the child's name.

4) THE PROPER WORDING OF A DOCUMENT OF TRANSFER

(a) (Beraisa): A master said: 'I made my slave a free man', or 'Behold he is free' - he is free;
(b) 'I will free him' - Rebbi says, he acquires his freedom; Chachamim say, he does not.

1. R. Yochanan: In all of these, the case is that these words were written in a document.

(c) (Beraisa): 'I gave my field to Peloni', or 'It is given to Peloni', or 'Behold, it is his' - Peloni acquires it;
(d) 'I will give it to Peloni' - R. Meir says, he acquires it, Chachamim say, he does not.

1. R. Yochanan: In all of these, the case is that these words were written in a document.

(a) (Beraisa): Reuven said: 'I freed Peloni, my slave', and Peloni denies this - we are concerned, perhaps Reuven gave a Get of freedom to a third party to acquire on behalf of the slave (and Reuven must free him).

1. If Reuven said: 'I wrote and gave a Get of freedom to Peloni, my slave', and Peloni denies this - Peloni's admission is like 100 witnesses that he is not free (and Reuven may say that he erred, and reclaim his slave).

(b) (Beraisa): Reuven said: 'I gave my field to Peloni, and Peloni denies this - we are concerned, perhaps Reuven asked a third party to acquire on behalf of Peloni (and Peloni gets the field).

1. If Reuven said: 'I wrote a document to give the field, and I gave the document to Peloni', and Peloni denies this - Peloni's admission is like 100 witnesses that he did not get it (and Reuven may say that he erred, and reclaim his field).
2. Question: Who eats the fruits (if Reuven does not retract)?
3. Answer #1 (Rav Chisda): Reuven.
4. Answer #2 (Rabah): We store the fruits by a third party.

i. They do not argue - If Peloni is alive, since he admitted it is not his, Reuven eats the fruits;
ii. If Peloni is dead, Peloni's son could not make a meaningful admission, so the fruits are stored (perhaps witnesses will clarify the matter).