Kiddushin, Daf Kaf Daled, Part 3

Introduction

The Talmud discusses whether a slave going free because his master put out one of his limbs requires a deed of emancipation.

ת"ר בכולם עבד יוצא בהם לחירות וצריך גט שחרור דברי ר"ש ר"מ אומר אינו צריך ר"א אומר צריך ר’ טרפון אומר אינו צריך ר"ע אומר צריך המכריעים לפני חכמים אומרים נראין דברי ר"ט בשן ועין שהתורה זכתה לו ודברי ר"ע בשאר אברים הואיל וקנס חכמים הוא קנס הוא קראי קא דרשינן אלא הואיל ומדרש חכמים הוא

Our Rabbis taught: On account of all these a slave goes free, and he needs a deed of emancipation, the words of R. Shimon.

R. Meir said: He does not need one.

R. Elazar said: He does need one.

R. Tarfon said: He does not need one.

R. Akiba said: He needs one.

Those who sought to make a decision before the Sages said: R. Tarfon’s view is preferable in respect of tooth and eye, for the Torah merited him his freedom [on their account] and R. Akiba’s view in respect of other limbs, since it is a fine [against the master] enacted by the Sages.

A fine ? [They derived this] from verses. Rather it is a midrash of the Sages.

This baraita contains a dispute over whether the slave being emancipated because his master put out his eye, tooth or other major limb, needs a deed of emancipation. The number of sages who participate is somewhat unusual. In the end, a compromise seems to have been reached. Since tooth and eye are mentioned explicitly in the Torah, the slave does not need a deed of emancipation. But for the other limbs, which are only derived through a midrash, he does.

מ"ט דר"ש יליף שילוח שילוח מאשה מה אשה בשטר אף עבד נמי בשטר

ור"מ אי כתב חפשי לבסוף כדקאמרת השתא דכתב לחפשי ישלחנו הוה ליה חפשי מעיקרא

What is R. Shimon’s reason? He derives the meaning of sending here from sending in the case of a [married] woman: just as a woman [is sent forth] by deed, so is a slave too [sent forth] by deed.

And R. Meir? If to freedom had been written at the end [of the verse, it would be] as you say; now that it is written to freedom shall he send him away it implies that he is free at the very outset.

The Talmud explains the midrashic origins of the dispute. The word sending is used both in the context of the slave and in the context of a woman being divorced. According to R. Shimon, just as a woman being divorced needs a document, so too a slave going free always needs a document.

R. Meir uses the order of the words in the verse to posit that he does not. The phrase begins with to freedom and therefore R. Meir holds that the slave is free right away, even without a deed.