Gittin 75

ולא הם קונים מכם ולא הם קונים זה מזה יכול לא יקנו זה את זה יכול לא יקנו זה את זה האמרת לא הם קונים זה מזה ה"ק ולא הם קונים זה מזה לגופו

but they cannot acquire from you nor can they acquire from one another. Shall I then say that they cannot acquire one another? [What do you mean by saying,] Shall I say that they cannot acquire one another? Have you not just said that they cannot acquire from one another?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And still less from an Israelite, so how can they acquire at all? ');">¹</span>

יכול לא יקנו זה את זה למעשה ידיו אמרת ק"ו עובד כוכבים ישראל קונה עובד כוכבים עובד כוכבים לא כ"ש

— What it means is this: They cannot acquire [slaves] from one another as far as their person is concerned.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that if he escapes he becomes free without a deed of emancipation. ');">²</span>

ואימא הני מילי בכספא אבל בחזקה לא אמר רב פפא עמון ומואב טהרו בסיחון

Shall I say also that they cannot acquire them for [their] labour? You may conclude [that this is not so] by an argument <i>a fortiori</i>. A heathen may acquire an Israelite [for his labour];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is based on the verse, And if a stranger or sojourner with thee be waxen rich etc. Lev. XXV, 47. ');">³</span>

אשכחן עובד כוכבים עובד כוכבים עובד כוכבים ישראל מנלן דכתיב (במדבר כא, א) וישב ממנו שבי

surely then all the more so another heathen. But may I not say that such acquisition can only be by purchase,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Lit., 'money.' Lev. XXV, 47. from which we learn that a heathen may acquire an Israelite as slave, speaks expressly of 'purchase money', v. verse 51.] ');">⁴</span>

אמר רב שמן בר אבא א"ר יוחנן עבד שברח מבית האסורים יצא לחירות ולא עוד אלא שכופין את רבו וכותב לו גט שיחרור

but not by <i>hazakah</i>?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This word seems here to have the double meaning of 'presumptive title' (supposing that the original owner has given up hopes of recovering him), and 'act of possession,' e.g., making the slave serve him. The question thus remains. — Was the brigand the rightful owner? ');">⁵</span>

תנן רשב"ג אומר בין כך ובין כך ישתעבד ואמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר יוחנן כל מקום ששנה רשב"ג במשנתנו הלכה כמותו חוץ מערב וצידן וראיה אחרונה

— R. Papa said: The territory of Ammon and Moab became purified [for acquisition by the Israelites] through [the occupation of] Sihon.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Israel were forbidden to occupy the territory of Ammon and Moab (Deut. II, 9, 19). Sihon had taken some of the land of Moab (Num. XXI, 26), and this the Israelites were permitted to conquer from him and occupy. (Cf. Jud. XI, 15 ff.). This shows that a heathen can acquire ownership by act of possession. ');">⁶</span>

בשלמא לאביי מוקי לה להאי לפני יאוש והאי לאחר יאוש

We have satisfied ourselves that a heathen [can acquire] a heathen [by act of possession]. How do we know that a heathen [can acquire] an Israelite [in the same way]? — From the text, And he took some of them captive.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXI, 1. The lesson is derived from the fact that the Israelites taken by the king of Arad are called 'captives'. ');">⁷</span>

אלא לרבא דאמר לאחר יאוש קשיא דרבי יוחנן אדרבי יוחנן

R. Shaman b. Abba said in the name of R. Johanan: A slave who escapes from prison becomes a free man, and what is more, his master may be compelled to make out a deed of emancipation for him. We have learnt: RABBAN SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAYS, IN EITHER CASE HE RETURNS TO SLAVERY, and Rabbah b. Bar Hanah has stated in the name of R. Johanan that wherever Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel records a statement in our Mishnah, the <i>halachah</i> is in accordance with him, except in the matters of the surety,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. B.B. 173a. ');">⁸</span>

אמר לך רבא טעמא מאי משום דחזקיה בורח שאני השתא לקטלא מסר נפשיה אפולי אפיל נפשיה לגייסות

of Sidon,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. infra 74a and notes. ');">⁹</span>

אמתיה דמר שמואל אשתבאי פרקוה לשום אמהתא ושדרוה ליה שלחו ליה אנן כרשב"ג סבירא לן את אי נמי כרבנן סבירא לך אנן לשום אמהתא פרקינן לה ניהלה

and the latter proof.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Sanh. 31a. ');">¹⁰</span>

ואינהו סבור לפני יאוש הוה ולא היא לאחר יאוש הוה ושמואל לא מיבעי' דאשתעבודי לא משתעבד בה אלא גיטא דחירותא נמי לא אצרכה

Now on the view of Abaye [that the Mishnah speaks of the case where the master has not yet given up hope of recovering], there is no conflict [between the two statements of R. Johanan], since he makes the latter<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That in any case the slave returns to slavery. ');">¹¹</span>

שמואל לטעמיה דאמר שמואל המפקיר עבדו יצא לחירות ואינו צריך גט שיחרור שנאמר (שמות יב, מד) וכל עבד איש מקנת כסף עבד איש ולא עבד אשה אלא עבד שיש לו רשות לרבו עליו קרוי עבד שאין לו רשות לרבו עליו אין קרוי עבד

refer to [the period] before [the master has] given up hope and the former [to the period] after he has given up hope. But on the view of Raba that [the latter also] refers to [the period] after [the master] has given up hope, there is a conflict, is there not, between the two statements of R. Johanan? — Raba can reply: What is R. Simeon's reason? The statement of Hezekiah [that the slave may give himself up to raiders]. But this does not apply to one who escapes; seeing that he risks his life [to do so], is it likely that he will throw himself into the hands of raiders?

אמתיה דרבי אבא בר זוטרא אישתבאי פרקה ההוא תרמודאה לשום איתתא שלחו ליה לדידיה אי יאות עבדת שדר לה גיטא דחירותא

A female slave of Mar Samuel was carried off [by raiders]. Some [Israelites] ransomed her as a slave and sent her to him, along with a message saying, We hold with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That even if we ransomed her for freedom, she must again become a slave. ');">¹²</span>

היכי דמי אי דמצו פרקי לה למה לי גיטא דחירותא אי דלא מצו פרקי לה כי שדר לה גיטא דחירותא מאי הוי

but even if you hold with the Rabbis [you may accept her], because we have ransomed her as a slave. They thought that he had not yet given up hope [of recovering her], but this was not correct, as he had given up hope [of recovering her], and Samuel not only refrained from making her a slave again but he did not even require her to obtain a deed of emancipation. In this he followed his own maxim that 'if a man declares his slave common property,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is equivalent to giving up hope of recovery. ');">¹³</span>

לעולם דמצו פרקי לה וכיון דמשדר לה גיטא דחירותא חבורי מחברי אהדדי ופרקי לה ואב"א לעולם דלא מצו פרקי לה וכיון דמשדר לה גיטא דחירותא מיתזלא באפיה ומפריק לה

he becomes a free man and does not require a deed of emancipation, since it says, Every man's servant that is bought for money.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XII, 44. ');">¹⁴</span>

והאמר מר חביבה להן בהמתן של ישראל יותר מנשותיהן הני מילי בצינעא אבל בפרהסיא זילא בהו מילתא

Does this mean the servant of a man and not of a woman? No; it means that a slave over whom his master still has control is called a slave, but a slave over whom his master has no control is not called a slave.

ההיא אמתא דהות בפומבדיתא דהוו קא מעבדי בה אינשי איסורא אמר אביי אי לאו דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל כל המשחרר עבדו עובר בעשה הוה כייפנא ליה למרה וכתיב לה גיטא דחירותא רבינא אמר כי הא מודה רב יהודה משום מילתא דאיסורא

A female slave of R. Abba b. Zutra was carried off by raiders. A certain [heathen] from Tarmud<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Palmyra. ');">¹⁵</span>

ואביי משום איסורא לא האמר רב חנינא בר רב קטינא אמר ר' יצחק מעשה באשה אחת שחציה שפחה וחציה בת חורין

ransomed her in order to marry her. They<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Jewish authorities in the district. ');">¹⁶</span> sent a message to him [R. Abba] saying, If you wish to act well, send her a deed of emancipation. What was the point of this message? If they were able to redeem her,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if the heathen was willing to surrender her for a ransom. ');">¹⁷</span> why did they want a deed of emancipation?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They could redeem her back into slavery. ');">¹⁸</span> If they were not able to ransom her, of what good would a deed of emancipation be? — The fact was that it was possible to ransom her, and if he sent them a deed of emancipation, they would club together and [find the money] to ransom her. Or if you like I can say that they were not [at first] able to ransom her, but if the master would send her a deed of emancipation she would go down in the esteem of the heathen<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because it would become generally known that she was the slave of a Jew. ');">¹⁹</span> and he would consent to her ransom. But has not a Master said that the heathen like the cattle<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And therefore the slaves also. ');">²⁰</span> of Israel better than their [own] wives? — This is their real sentiment, but they think it beneath their dignity to show it. There was a certain female slave in Pumbeditha who was used by men for immoral purposes — Abaye said: Were it not that Rab Judah has said in the name of Samuel that whoever emancipates his [heathen] slave breaks a positive precept, I would compel her master to make out a deed of emancipation for her. Rabina said; In such a case, Rab Judah would agree [that this is proper], in order to check immorality. And would not Abaye [act in the same way] to prevent immorality, seeing that R. Hanina b. Kattina has reported in the name of R. Isaac that the master of a certain woman who was half slave and half free<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. infra 42a. ');">²¹</span>