Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) BREAKING LIENS

(a) (Mishnah): Shimon lent Reuven money; Reuven made his slave Tavi an Apotiki (collateral, with a guarantee that the loan may be collect from Tavi's value) and freed him - by letter of the law, Tavi owes nothing to his master;
(b) As an enactment for the betterment of the world, we force the master to write a Get of freedom, and Tavi writes a document obligating himself to pay his value to his master;

1. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, only the one who freed him writes.

(c) (Gemara) Question: Who freed him?
(d) Answer #1 (Rav): Reuven.

1. By letter of the law, Tavi owes nothing to his second master (Shimon, who was supposed to receive him), because of Rava's law.
2. (Rava): The following uproot a lien: The borrower made the collateral Hekdesh;

i. The collateral was Chametz, and Pesach came (so one may not benefit from the Chametz);
ii. The collateral was a slave, and the borrower freed him.

3. We are concerned that Shimon might see Tavi and say 'You are my slave' (and people will say that Tavi is still a slave) - therefore, Chachamim enacted that Shimon write a Get of freedom, and Tavi owes his value to Shimon.
4. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, the slave does not obligate himself to pay his value, rather Reuven does.

(e) Question: On what do they argue?
(f) Answer: Whether Reuven must compensate Shimon for damaging property on which was a lien to pay a debt to Shimon.

1. Chachamim say he is exempt; R. Shimon ben Gamliel says he is obligated.
2. One who damages collateral for a loan - Chachamim and R. Shimon ben Gamliel argue if the damager must pay the lender.

(g) Answer #2 (To question 3:c, 40B - Ula): Shimon declared Tavi to be free.

1. Letter of the law, Tavi is not obligated in the Mitzvos (special to free men) at all; however, since he was called free, for the betterment of the world it was enacted that Reuven free him, and Tavi obligates himself to pay his value to Reuven.
2. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, Shimon owes the money.

(h) Question: On what do they argue?
(i) Answer: Whether one must pay for damage that it not recognizable.

1. Chachamim say it is not considered damage; R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, it is.

(j) Question: Why didn't Ula learn like Rav?
(k) Answer: You cannot say that Shimon is referred to as the new master (he never received the slave!)
(l) Question: Why didn't Rav learn like Ula?
(m) Answer: You cannot say that Shimon freed him (since he was not the master, his words had no effect).

(a) (Ami Shapir Na'eh): Levi made his field an Apotiki (a property specially designated for collection of a loan) and it was flooded - the lender does not collect from other property.
(b) Objection (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): This is wrong!
(c) Answer: The case is, Levi specified that the loan could only be collected from this field.

1. Support (Beraisa): Levi made his field an Apotiki and it was flooded - the lender does not collect from other property; if Levi specified that the loan could only be collected from this field, it is not collected from other property.

(d) (Beraisa): Yehudah made his field an Apotiki to a creditor or to pay his wife's Kesuvah - they may collect from other property;

1. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, the creditor may collect from other property, not the wife, for it is not the way of women to go to Beis Din to collect. (Therefore, we assume that the total responsibility to pay the Kesuvah was placed on the designated field.)

(a) (Mishnah - Beis Hillel): A half-slave alternates, 1 day he serves his master, the next day, he keeps his earnings;

1. Beis Shamai: That is good for his master, but not for the half-slave!

i. He cannot marry a female slave, for he is half-free; he cannot marry a Bas Yisrael, for he is half-slave;

ii. You cannot say he should never marry - the world was created so that people should have children!

2. Rather - for the betterment of the world, we force his master to free him, and the half-slave writes a document obligating himself to pay half his value to his master.

i. Beis Hillel retracted, and agreed to Beis Shamai.

(b) (Gemara - Beraisa - Rebbi): Reuven freed half of his slave - the slave becomes half-free;

1. Chachamim say, he remains a full slave.

(c) Opinion #1 (Rabah): They argue when Reuven gave a Get of (half) freedom.

1. Rebbi holds, "She was not redeemed, her Get of freedom was not given to her" - this equates a Get of freedom to (redemption) money.

i. Just as money can fully or partially redeem a slave, also a Get of freedom.

2. Chachamim learn a Gezeirah Shavah "Lah-Lah" from a woman being divorced.

i. Just as a woman cannot be half-divorced, a slave cannot be half-freed.

3. All agree that money may partially redeem her.
4. Suggestion: Rebbi and Chachamim argue whether it is better to learn from a Hekesh (things written next to each other, which teaches us to equate them) or a Gezeirah Shavah.
5. Rejection: No - all agree, usually a Gezeirah Shavah is better;

i. Here is different - since a wife cannot be divorced through money (which can partially redeem a slave), we do not learn from a Get of divorce that a Get of freedom cannot work half-way.

(d) Opinion #2 (Rav Yosef): They argue when the slave was redeemed half-way through money.

1. Rebbi holds, "Redeemed, she was not redeemed" - this shows, she is partially redeemed;
2. Chachamim say, the Torah speaks as people (the verb is doubled, we do not learn from this).
3. All agree, a Get of half-freedom does not work at all.

(e) Question (against Rav Yosef - Beraisa): One who half-frees his slave through a Get - Rebbi says, it works; Chachamim say, it does not.

1. Rav Yosef is refuted (regarding his opinion that all agree, a Get does not work half-way).
2. Suggestion: Rav Yosef is also refuted regarding his opinion that they argue whether money can half-redeem.

i. Since they argue by a Get, this suggests that all agree that money works!

3. Answer: No - they argue by both.

i. The Beraisa gave the case of a Get to show the extremity of Rebbi, that even a Get works half-way.
ii. Question: Rather, they should argue regarding money, to show the extremity of Chachamim, that even money does not work half-way!
iii. Answer: The Tana prefers to teach the lenient opinion.

(f) (Beraisa): "She was redeemed" - one might have thought, in all respects - "she was not redeemed";

1. "She was not redeemed" - one might have thought, not at all - "she was redeemed";
2. She is partially redeemed - this redemption is with money or something of value.
3. One might have thought, freedom can only be through money - "Or her freedom was not given to her"

i. Another verse says, "He will write her a Sefer of divorce"; we learn a Gezeirah Shavah "Lah-Lah" to teach that the freedom of a slave is also through a document.

4. Question: We have seen that money can accomplish partial redemption, and a Get can bring full freedom - how do we know that a Get can make her half-free?
5. Answer: "She was redeemed...her freedom" - the verse equates freedom through money and a through a document, that either can work fully or partially.

(g) After Rav Yosef was refuted, he will say that this Beraisa is as Rebbi.
(h) Question: According to Rabah - the beginning of the Beraisa is as all the Tana'im, the end of the Beraisa is only as Rebbi!
(i) Answer #1 (Rabah): Yes, that is the structure of the Beraisa.
(j) Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): Rebbi taught the entire Beraisa; Chachamim agree to his first law, and argue on his second law.