Commentary for Kiddushin 46:10
ר"מ סבר כי אמר ליה קני קני עבד וקני רביה וכי אמר ליה על מנת לא כלום קאמר ליה ורבנן סברי לדידיה נמי הא לא קא מקני ליה דהא לא אמר ליה אלא על מנת שתצא בו לחירות
R'Meir holds that when he says to him, 'Acquire [it],' the slave acquires it and [ipso facto] his master; when he says: 'on condition,' he says nothing. Whereas the Rabbis maintain, He did not give possession of it [even] to him [the slave], since he said to him, 'Only on condition that you gain your freedom therewith.'
Daf Shevui to Kiddushin
R. Elazar says that the third party cannot really say “on condition that your master has no right to it.” All would agree that such a condition does not prevent the master from gaining rights to the money acquired by the slave. R. Meir and the rabbis rather disagree about a case where the third party says “on condition that with it you go free.” To R. Meir this still does not work and the master acquires it immediately. The other rabbis hold that this works because the third party did not transfer ownership of the maneh to the slave—he only gave it to the slave for the slave to free himself. Since the slave has not come into possession of the maneh, he is able to use it become emancipated.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy