יא דתנן הכותב כל נכסיו לעבדו יצא בן חורין שייר קרקע כל שהוא לא יצא בן חורין ר"ש אומר
11 what is the ruling? — Abaye said: Since the document makes him his own master, it makes him owner of the property also.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And we do not give the statement two diverse applications, one in respect of himself and one in respect of the property. ');"><sup>10</sup></span> Said Raba to him: I agree that he becomes his own master, because [in respect of himself his document] is on a par with the Get of a wife. But he must not become owner of the property, because [in respect of the property his Get] requires confirmation like any other document. Abaye then corrected himself and said: Since he does not become by means of his document the owner of the property, he does not become his own master either. Said Raba to him: I agree that he should not become owner of the property, because in respect of the property [his document] requires confirmation like any other document; but he should become his own master, because [in respect of himself, his document] is on a par with the Get of a wife. The fact of the matter is, continued Raba, that both with the one [wording] and the other, he becomes his own master but not owner of the property. Said R. Abba b. Mattena to Raba: This ruling accords with the principle laid down by R. Simeon, that a single statement may receive two diverse applications, for we have learnt: If a man assigns all his property to his slave, the latter becomes ipso facto free, but if he excepted a piece of land, however small, he does not become free.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because we say that since he excepts the land he excepts the slave also. ');"><sup>11</sup></span> R. Simeon, however, holds