Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MALE AND FEMALE SLAVES

(a) (Beraisa): Some things apply only to a male Hebrew slave, others only to an Amah:

1. A male slave leaves after 6 years, in Yovel, or when the master dies - this is not true by an Amah;
2. An Amah leaves when she becomes an adult (Na'arah), and she cannot be sold more than once, and we redeem her against his will - these are not true of a male slave.

(b) Contradiction (Mishnah): In addition to what frees a male slave, an Amah also goes free when she becomes a Na'arah.
(c) Answer (Rav Sheshes): Our Beraisa, which said that what frees a male slave does not free an Amah, is when Yi'ud was done (the master married her).
(d) Objection: If so, obviously she does not go out as a male slave - she needs a Get!
(e) Answer: One might have thought, her initial status (that she leaves after 6 years or Yovel) remains - we hear, this is not so.
(f) Question: If Yi'ud was done, she does not go out at Na'arus!
(g) Answer: The Beraisa says, if Yi'ud was not done, she additionally goes out at Na'arus.
(h) (Beraisa): She cannot be sold more than once...(these are not true of a male slave).
(i) Question: This implies that a male slave can be resold!

1. (Beraisa): "(He will be sold) for his theft" - and not to pay the double (extra) payment that a thief must pay, not for the fine that plotting (false) witnesses must pay;
2. "For his theft" - once he is sold, you cannot sell him again.

(j) [Version #1 (Rashi) Answer #1 (Rava): He can only be sold once to pay for 1 theft, but can be resold to pay for more than 1 theft.
(k) Objection (Abaye): "In his theft" connotes more than one theft!
(l) Answer #2 (Abaye): Rather, he can only be sold once for thefts in one judgment, but he can be resold if he is again brought to judgment for theft.]
(m) [Version #2 (Tosfos) Answer #1 (Rava): He can be resold to pay for 1 theft, but not to pay for more than 1 theft.
(n) Objection (Abaye): "In his theft" connotes all thefts (from 1 person)!
(o) Answer #2 (Abaye): Rather, he can only be resold for thefts from one person, but not for thefts from another person.]
(p) (Beraisa): If he stole 1000, and is worth 500 as a slave - he is sold twice; if he stole 500, and is worth 1000 as a slave, he is not sold at all;

1. R. Eliezer says, if he stole his value, he is sold; if not, not.

(q) (Rava): R. Eliezer can refute the Chachamim!

1. Chachamim say, if he stole 500, and is worth 1000, he is not sold at all - this is because he must be sold entirely to pay for his theft, not half sold;
2. Also if he stole 1000, and is worth 500 - he must be sold for all his theft, not half of it!

(a) (Beraisa): We redeem her against his will.
(b) (Rava): This means, against the master's will.
(c) Objection (Abaye): Do you hold, we can force the master to free her, even though he only receives a document in which she obligates herself to pay her redemption when she will get the money?!

1. It is absurd that we would force someone holding a pearl (something valuable, an Amah) to give it up for a (currently) worthless shard (the document)!

(d) (Abaye): Rather, we force her father to redeem her (if he has the money), because of the blemish to the family.
(e) Question: If so, we should also force the relatives of a male slave to redeem him for this reason!
(f) Answer: This will not help, he will again sell himself.
(g) Question: The same can be said of an Amah, the father will resell her!
(h) Answer: The Beraisa says, he cannot resell her; it is as R. Shimon.

1. (Beraisa): A man can engage his daughter, and again (after she is widowed or divorced) engage her; he can sell her as a slave and resell her (after she goes free); he can engage her after selling her; he cannot sell her after having engaged her;
2. R. Shimon says, just as he cannot sell her after having engaged her, he cannot resell her.

(i) These Tana'im argue as the following Tana'im.

1. (Beraisa - R. Akiva): "b'Bigdo (in his betraying) her" - once (her master) spread his cloak (Beged) over her (for Yi'ud), her father cannot sell her; (this is as Chachamim)
2. R. Elazar says, "in his betraying her" - once (her father) betrayed her (by selling her), he cannot sell her (as R. Shimon). (This is as Rashi - Tosfos switches the opinions of R. Akiva and R. Eliezer.)

(j) Question: On what do they argue?
(k) Answer: R. Eliezer holds, (when a word in the Torah in not read as it is written) we primary follow the way it is written; R. Akiva holds, we follow the way it is read; R. Shimon holds, we follow both (therefore, he says that she cannot be sold after engagement or after being sold).

(a) Question (Rabah bar Avuha): Does Yi'ud make engagement or Nisu'in?

1. This determines whether the master inherits her and becomes Tamei to engage in her burial, and whether he can annul her vows by himself.

(b) Answer #1 (Beraisa): "in his betraying her" - once he spread his cloak over her, her father cannot sell her.

1. He cannot sell her - but he can engage her!
2. Suggestion: If Yi'ud makes Nisu'in - once she had Nisu'in, her father has no jurisdiction over her!
3. Rather, Yi'ud only makes engagement.

(c) Rejection (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): No, the Beraisa speaks of regular engagement.

1. It means - once her father handed her over to someone that is obligated to feed her, clothe her and have regular relations with her (i.e. he engaged her), he cannot sell her.

(d) Answer #2 (Beraisa): A man cannot sell his daughter to relatives; R. Eliezer says, he can.

1. Both agree that a man can sell a widow (his daughter) to a Kohen Gadol, or a divorcee or Chalutzah to a regular Kohen.
2. Question: How did she become a widow (as a minor)?

i. Suggestion: If she engaged herself - she would not be called a widow (her engagement had no effect)!

3. Answer: Rather, her father engaged her.
4. Question: But a man cannot sell his daughter after engaging her!
5. Answer (Rav Amram): She became a widow through Yi'ud, according to R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah, who says that the money paid for an Amah was not given for engagement.

i. If Yi'ud makes Nisu'in - once she was married, the father has no jurisdiction over her!

6. Question: Saying that it makes engagement is also difficult - why does the Beraisa say that 'Both agree that he can sell her'?

i. A man cannot sell his daughter after having engaged her!

7. Answer: We must distinguish: a man cannot sell his daughter after he engaged her, but he can sell her after she engaged herself (through Yi'ud)!

i. We can likewise distinguish, and say that a girl leaves her father's jurisdiction after he married her off, but not after she married herself off (through Yi'ud (if Yi'ud makes Nisu'in))!
ii. Rejection: This reasoning is wrong! We can distinguish when he engages her from when she engages herself - but there cannot be a distinction in Nisu'in (since she totally leaves the father's jurisdiction).

8. Question: Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak holds that even R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah agrees that the money paid for an Amah was given for engagement (if the master will do Yi'ud) - how will he explain the Beraisa?
9. Answer: The Beraisa is as R. Eliezer (Rashi; Tosfos - R. Akiva), who says that a man cannot sell his daughter twice, but he can sell her after engaging her.