Kiddushin - Daf 16
- The source for acquiring an עבד עברי with a שטר, and machlokes who writes it
(1) Ulla says the source that an עבד עברי may be acquired with a שטר is the passuk: אם אחרת יקח לו – if he takes another wife (in addition to his father’s אמה עבריה), הקישה הכתוב לאחרת – the passuk compares [the אמה] to the other ordinary wife. Just as a wife is acquired with a שטר, an אמה (and by extension, an עבד) is also acquired with a שטר. However, this derashah depends on a machlokes about who writes the שטר of an אמה עבריה. Rav Huna holds: אדון כותבו – the master writes it and gives it to the father, and Rav Chisda holds: אב כותבו – the father writes it and gives it to the master. According to Rav Huna, the שטר of אמה עבריה parallels the שטר of kiddushin (that the “acquirer,” the husband, writes and gives the שטר), but according to Rav Chisda that the “seller,” the father, writes and gives it, the שטר of אמה עבריה cannot be derived from that of kiddushin!? (2) Rav Acha bar Yakov provides a second derashah: לא תצא כצאת העבדים – [An אמה עבריה] shall not leave like the leaving of Canaanite slaves, אבל נקנית היא כקנין עבדים – but she may be acquired like Canaanite slaves are acquired. ומאי ניהו שטר – and what is the way in which she may be acquired? Through a שטר. The Gemara proceeds to explain how to derive שטר specifically from this derashah.
- An עבד עברי acquiring himself with a שטר: עבד עברי גופו קנוי
It was taught in a Baraisa: וקונה את עצמו בכסף ובשוה כסף ובשטר – And [an עבד עברי] can acquire himself with money, items worth money, and a document. After explaining the source for money and items worth money, the Gemara analyzes the case of שטר. If the שטר is obligating himself for the redemption money, that is the equivalent of money, and not an additional method. If, instead, it is a document of שחרור – emancipation (freeing him before his term is completed), why is a שטר necessary? לימא ליה באפי תרי זיל – Let him tell [the servant], in front of two witnesses, “Go!” אי נמי באפי בי דינא זיל – or, tell him in front of Beis Din, “Go!” thereby waiving his monetary right to his service!? Rava concludes: זאת אומרת עבד עברי גופו קנוי – This demonstrates that an עבד עברי’s body is owned by the master during his term, והרב שמחל על גרעונו אין גרעונו מחול – and therefore, the master who forgives the remainder of what the slaves owes him, the remainder is not forgiven (because the master’s partial ownership of the עבד עברי cannot be forgiven).
- If an אמה עבריה goes free when her father dies
Reish Lakish says: אמה העבריה קונה את עצמה במיתת האב מרשות אדון – An אמה עבריה acquires herself from her master’s domain through the father’s death. This is derived from a kal vachomer: If סימנים – signs of naarus, do not remove a girl from the father’s domain, yet remove her from the master’s domain, then the father’s death, which removes her from her father’s domain (i.e., her labor belongs to her, and not his heirs), surely should remove her from the master’s domain! Reish Lakish’s ruling is challenged and defended, until finally, Rav Amram quotes a Baraisa which lists the servants who receive הענקה as: one who goes out at the end of six years, at Yovel, with the master’s death, and an אמה עבריה through סימנים, but does not list the father’s death. This proves conclusively that an אמה עבריה does not go free with the father’s death, and the Gemara explains that Reish Lakish’s kal vachomer can be undermined: מה לסימנין שנשתנה הגוף – what comparison is there with signs of naarus, where her body has physically changed causing her to go free; תאמר במיתת אב שכן לא נשתנה הגוף – will you say the same with the father’s death, where her body has not physically changed?
