Gitin - Daf 44
- A slave forcibly taken by an idolater as collection on a debt is not bought back and set free
The Mishnah on Daf 43b taught that one who sells his slave to an idolater must buy him back and set him free. A Baraisa states: גבאו בחובו או שלקחו סיקריקון – If [an idolater] forcibly collected [the slave] for his debt, or an extortionist took him, לא יצא לחירות – he does not go free, since he was not willingly sold. This is challenged from a Baraisa which states: הרי שאנסו בית המלך גורנו – If the king’s household forcibly took his granary, אם בחובו חייב לעשר – if it was taken for his debt to the king, he must separate maaser from his own produce for what was taken. We see that a debt collected by force is considered as if it was voluntarily sold!? The Gemara answers: שאני התם דקא משתרשי ליה – It is different there because he gained by the amount he would have had to remove as maaser. Since all the grain was accounted towards his debt, he stands to profit from the maaser he would have had to remove if he had kept the grain.
- מכר עבדו ומת מהו שיקנסו את בנו אחריו
Rebbe Yirmiyah asked Rebbe Assi: מכר עבדו ומת – One who sold his slave to an idolater and then died, מהו שיקנסו את בנו אחריו – what is the halachah regarding penalizing his son, who inherits the estate, after him to require him to buy back the slave? This cannot be resolved from similar cases: Even if you say regarding צרם אוזן בכור – if [a Kohen] nicked the ear of a bechor to disqualify it as a korban and keep it, that just as the father is penalized and cannot shecht the bechor based on this blemish, the son also cannot, that may be specifically for a Biblical commandment, but regarding a Rabbinical prohibition (of selling the slave to an idolater), perhaps they would not penalize the son. On the other hand, even if you say regarding one who scheduled work for Chol Hamoed (which is Rabbinically prohibited, and a violator is penalized to lose the product) that his son is not penalized, that may be because he never actually worked on Chol Hamoed (but died before), but one who did sell the slave, perhaps they would penalize the son as well. This is resolved from a ruling about shemittah, that if someone fertilized his field, he may not plant it in the eighth year, yet if he dies, his son may plant it. Regarding a sold slave as well, the son is not penalized.
- If purchase money is refunded for a slave sold to Chutz La’aretz or land sold during yovel
The Mishnah taught that a slave who is sold to Chutz La’aretz goes free. Rav Anan reported that he heard two rulings from Shmuel, one about the above law, and another regarding: המוכר שדהו בשנת היובל עצמה – One who sells his field during yovel itself (during which fields previously sold are returned to the original owners), Rav says: מכורה ויוצאה – it is sold and immediately leaves to return to the seller’s ownership. Shmuel says: אינה מכורה כל עיקר – it is not sold at all. Shmuel ruled that the money is returned to the buyer in one of these cases, but not in the other, but Rav Anan did not recall which was which. Rav Yosef resolved the question from a Baraisa: המוכר עבדו לחו"ל – One who sells his slave to Chutz La’aretz, יצא לחירות וצריך גט שחרור מרבו שני – he goes free but requires a גט שחרור from his second master. Clearly, the second master owns him, proving that the money is not refunded. It follows that regarding the sale during yovel which was ineffective, that the money is refunded.
