Kiddushin, Daf Tet Vav, Part 2

Introduction

Today s section continues to deal with the baraita that distinguished between the laws applicable to a Jew who sells himself into slavery and those applicable to one who is sold into slavery.

מ"ט דתנא קמא דאמר מוכר עצמו אין מעניקין לו מיעט רחמנא גבי מכרוהו ב"ד (דברים טו, יד) הענק תעניק לו לו ולא למוכר עצמו

What is the reason of the first tanna who holds that he who sells himself into slavery, they do not make a gift to him (on his departure)? The Torah excluded him with regard to one sold by the court: You shall grant him a gift (Deuteronomy 15:14): him but not one who sells himself.

Deuteronomy 15 refers to a Jew sold into slavery by the court. The tanna kamma reads the word him as an exclusion. He receives a gift when he goes free. But one who sells himself into slavery does not.

ואידך ההוא מיבעי ליה לו ולא ליורשיו

And the other [R. Elazar]? He needs it to teach him but not his heirs.

R. Elazar, who says that one who sells himself into slavery also receives a gift when going free reads the word him as excluding his heirs. If the slave dies, his heirs do not receive this gift.

יורשיו אמאי לא שכיר קרייה רחמנא מה שכיר פעולתו ליורשיו אף האי פעולתו ליורשיו

His heirs : why not? The Torah called him a hired servant [sakhir]: just as the wages of a hired servant belong to his heirs, so too these earnings belong to his heirs?

The Talmud rejects this reading of what the word him excludes. The heirs should receive the gift that was supposed to go to the slave himself.

אלא לו ולא לבעל חובו מדסבירא לן בעלמא כרבי נתן דתניא א"ר נתן מנין לנושה בחברו מנה וחברו בחברו מנין שמוציאין מזה ונותנין לזה ת"ל (במדבר ה, ז) ונתן לאשר אשם לו אתא לו לאפוקי

Rather [say]: him , but not to his creditor. [This is necessary,] because elsewhere we agree with R. Natan, as it was taught: R. Natan said: How do we know that if a man holds a debt over another and another holds a debt over another, that we collect from this last one and give it to the first [one]? From the verse, And he shall give it to him to whom he is indebted (Numbers 5:7). Therefore him comes to exclude [the case of a slave who sells himself into slavery].

The Talmud now offers a different reading of what the word him excludes. It excludes giving the gift to the slave s creditor. In general if Reuven owes Shimon money, and Shimon owes Levi, the court can force Reuven to give to Levi. To counter this general teaching the word him comes to teach that this is not so with regard to the gift. The slave receives it and not his creditor.

ואידך בעלמא נמי לא סבירא לן כרבי נתן

And the other one in general does not agree with R. Nathan.

The first opinion does not need the word him to exclude the creditor because the author of opinion does not agree with R. Natan s general rule. Thus it is obvious that the creditor does not get the gift.