Kiddushin, Daf Kaf Bet, Part 5
Introduction
Today s section begins the discussion of Canaanite slaves which is the term the rabbis used for non-Jewish slaves.
מתני׳ עבד כנעני נקנה בכסף ובשטר ובחזקה
A Canaanite slave is acquired by money, deed, or by possession,
Money and deed acquire Canaanite slaves, just as they acquire Hebrew slaves. In addition, Canaanite slaves can be acquired through possession , which could also alternatively be translated as presumption of ownership. We learned the rules of possession in the third chapter of Bava Batra. Practically this would mean that a slave, who treated a certain person as if that person were his owner, would become the property of that person.
וקונה את עצמו בכסף על ידי אחרים ובשטר על ידי עצמו דברי רבי מאיר וחכמים אומרים בכסף ע"י עצמו ובשטר ע"י אחרים ובלבד שיהא הכסף משל אחרים:
And acquires himself by money through the agency of others, and by document through his own agency, the words of Rabbi Meir.
The Sages say: by money, through his own agency, and by document, through the agency of others, providing that the money comes from others.
Both Rabbi Meir and the Sages agree that a slave acquires his freedom either through a manumission document or through his freedom being purchased with money. However, they disagree over whether or not the slave may purchase himself back. According to Rabbi Meir a Canaanite slave can never own property. Any property which he would acquire would automatically become the property of his owner, since the owner owns the slave. Therefore, only other people may purchase the slave s freedom. When it comes to a document, the document must be received by the slave himself.
The Sages disagree on both counts. They hold that a slave may, under certain circumstances, own his own property. This is possible if other people give the slave money with the condition that the owner not take possession of that money. According to the Sages either he or others may purchase his freedom. Similarly, they disagree about the document. The master can write out a manumission document, give it to another person beside the slave and thereby free the slave. Note that the Sages could have stated that a slave is acquired by documents or money through his own agency or the agency of others. This would have been a clearer and slightly briefer statement of the sages intent. Instead, the mishnah phrases their statement as the opposite of Rabbi Meir s statement in order to retain the parallelism.
גמ׳ מנלן דכתיב (ויקרא כה, מו) והתנחלתם אותם לבניכם אחריכם לרשת אחוזה הקישן הכתוב לשדה אחוזה מה שדה אחוזה נקנה בכסף בשטר ובחזקה אף עבד כנעני נקנה בכסף בשטר ובחזקה
GEMARA. How do we know this? Because it is written: And you shall pass them down as an inheritance for your children after you, to possess as an inheritance (ahuzah) (Leviticus 25:46); just as an ancestral field (ahuzah) is acquired by money, document or hazakah, so a non-Jewish slave is acquired by money, document, or hazakah.
The Torah uses the same word ahuzah which means possession in the context of the ancestral field as it does in the context of non-Jewish slaves. Therefore, they can both be acquired in the same ways. To recall, hazakah is an act that presumes ownership. We shall get more into this later on.
אי מה שדה אחוזה חוזרת לבעלים ביובל אף עבד כנעני חוזר לבעלים ביובל תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כה, מו) לעולם בהם תעבודו
If so, just as an ancestral field reverts to its [original] owner at the Jubilee, so should a non-Jewish slave revert to his [former] owner at the Jubilee? Therefore it is stated, you shall work them forever (Leviticus 25:46).
Unlike the field of inheritance, the non-Jewish slave does not revert to his original owner at the Jubilee. They remain slaves forever.
תנא אף בחליפין ותנא דידן מילתא דליתא במטלטלין קתני מילתא דאיתא במטלטלין לא קתני
A Tanna taught: [He may be acquired] by halifin (symbolic barter) too.
And our Tanna (why does he not include this)? Something which is absent in the case of movable property he teaches; what is present in the case of movable property he does not teach.
A baraita adds in halifin which is a symbolic transfer usually performed with an object of small value fictitiously exchanged for an object of large value. Slaves may be acquired through halifin.
The tanna of our mishnah does not disagree with this law. He just does not include it because halifin can also be used to acquire movable property. The mishnah lists ways of acquisition that cannot be used to acquire movables.
אמר שמואל עבד כנעני נקנה במשיכה כיצד תקפו ובא אצלו קנאו קראו ובא אצלו לא קנאו
Shmuel said: A non-Jewish slave may be acquired by meshikhah. How so? If he [the purchaser] seizes him [the slave] and he goes to him, he acquires him; if he [merely] calls him and he goes to him, he does not acquire him.
Meshikhah is a form of acquisition whereby the acquirer basically pulls the acquired object to himself. According to Shmuel, this form of acquisition works for acquiring slaves. But it must be done physically by taking hold of the slave. Simply calling him is not sufficient.
בשלמא לתנא דידן מילתא דאיתא במטלטלי לא קתני דליתא במטלטלי קתני
אלא לתנא ברא ניתני משיכה
כי קתני מילתא דאיתא בין במקרקעי בין במטלטלי משיכה דבמטלטלי איתא במקרקעי ליתא לא קתני
It makes sense that our tanna [omitted meshikhah]: what is applicable to movable property he did not teach, but what is not applicable to movable property he did teach.
But according to the outside Tanna, let him teach meshikhah?
He teaches only what applies to both land and movable property, but meshikhah, which applies to movable property but not land, he does not teach.
The tanna of the mishnah omitted meshikhah as a means of acquisition because he only taught methods that apply only to land. But the other tanna taught halifin which does apply to goods. So why not also teach meshikhah?
The answer is that the outside tanna only taught methods of acquisition that apply both to land and movable property. This is only halifin. But meshikhah applies only to movable property and not land, and therefore he did not include it.
כיצד תקפו ובא אצלו קנאו קראו ובא אצלו לא קנאו
וקראו לא והתניא כיצד במסירה אחזה בטלפה בשערה באוכף שעליה בשליף שעליה בפרומביא שבפיה ובזוג שבצוארה קנאה כיצד במשיכה קורא לה והיא באה או שהכישה במקל ורצתה לפניו כיון שעקרה יד ורגל קנאה
רבי אסי ואמרי לה ר’ אחא אומר עד שתהלך לפניו מלא קומתה
How so? If he seizes him and he goes to him he acquires him; if he [merely] calls him and he goes to him, he does not acquire him.
But if he calls him [he does not acquire him]? Was it not taught: How [is an animal acquired] by transfer (mesirah)? If he grabs it by its hoof, hair, the saddle which is on it, the saddle-bag on it, the halter in its mouth, or the bell round its neck, he acquires it.
How [does one acquire] by drawing [meshikhah]? He calls it and it comes, or he strikes it with a stick and it runs before him, once it lifts a foreleg and a hindleg, he acquires it.
Rabbi Assi and others say R. Aha said: It must walk its full length before him!
According to the baraita, one does not acquire a slave by calling him and having him come to him. However, according to another baraita, one that discusses acquiring animals, one can acquire an animal by calling it to him. This baraita describes two ways to acquire an animal mesirah, which is physically taking control of the animal, and meshikhah, which is causing it to go in a certain direction. Thus there is a contradiction between the baraita concerning animals and the one concerning slaves.
אמרי בהמה אדעתא דמרה אזלה עבד אדעתיה דנפשיה קאזיל
Say an animal walks by its master’s will; a slave walks on his own will.
An animal can be acquired by calling it because an animal moves when its owner wills it. It has far less of an independent will than a human. A slave on the other hand is a human being and moves on his own will. Therefore, the slave cannot be acquired by a purchaser simply calling it.
R. Ashi said: A slave who is a minor is like an animal.
A minor slave will move according to his master s will. Therefore, he can be acquired by the purchaser calling him to him.