## Gittin Daf 39b

###### Gittin 39b:1
[Gittin 39b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:1)

בְּפֵירוּשׁ שְׁמִיעַ לָךְ, אוֹ מִכְּלָלָא שְׁמִיעַ לָךְ? מַאי כְּלָלָא? דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי, אָמְרוּ לִפְנֵי רַבִּי: אָמַר ״נִתְיָיאַשְׁתִּי מִפְּלוֹנִי עַבְדִּי״, מַהוּ? אָמַר לָהֶם: אוֹמֵר אֲנִי, אֵין לוֹ תַּקָּנָה אֶלָּא בִּשְׁטָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Did you hear it explicitly** said by Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, **or did you hear it by inference,** i.e., did you infer it from some other statement of his? Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi asked him: **What inference** could I have drawn? Rabbi Zeira answered: **As Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says** that **they said before Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi: If one **says: I have despaired of** recovering **so-and-so, my slave, what** is the *halakha*? **He said to them: I say** that his slave **has no remedy other** than **via a bill** of manumission.


###### Gittin 39b:2
[Gittin 39b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:2)

וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי? גָּמַר ״לָהּ״–״לָהּ״ מֵאִשָּׁה – מָה אִשָּׁה בִּשְׁטָר, אַף עֶבֶד נָמֵי בִּשְׁטָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues explaining the possible inference. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What is the reasoning of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi? **He derived** this by means of a verbal analogy, understanding the meaning of **“to her [*lah*],”** written with regard to a maidservant in the verse: “Nor was freedom given to her” (Leviticus 19:20), **from** the meaning of **“for her [*lah*],”** written with regard to **a wife:** “And he writes for her a bill of divorce” (Deuteronomy 24:3). **Just as a wife** is released from her husband **via a bill** of divorce, **so too, a slave** is **also** emancipated only **via a bill** of manumission.


###### Gittin 39b:3
[Gittin 39b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:3)

וְקָא דָיְיקַתְּ מִינַּהּ, כְּאִשָּׁה – מָה אִשָּׁה אִיסּוּרָא וְלָא מָמוֹנָא, אַף עֶבֶד נָמֵי אִיסּוּרָא וְלָא מָמוֹנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**You** heard this statement **and deduced from this** comparison that with regard to his master’s death, a slave is **comparable to a wife. Just as a wife** is released by the death of her husband from **a prohibition but not** from **a monetary** bond, **so too, a slave** is **also** emancipated by his master’s death from **a prohibition but not** from **a monetary** bond. Therefore, an adult slave, who can acquire ownership of himself, is freed entirely by means of the death of his master. However, in the case of a minor slave, who cannot acquire possession of his own person, the monetary bond remains, in accordance with the opinion of Abba Shaul.


###### Gittin 39b:4
[Gittin 39b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:4)

וְאִי מִכְּלָלָא מַאי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אַדְּרַבָּה! דּוֹק מִינַּהּ לְאִידַּךְ גִּיסָא: מָה אִשָּׁה – בֵּין גְּדוֹלָה בֵּין קְטַנָּה, אַף עֶבֶד נָמֵי – בֵּין גָּדוֹל בֵּין קָטָן! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בְּפֵירוּשׁ שְׁמִיעַ לִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi said to him: **And if** this was derived **by inference, what** of it? Rabbi Zeira **said to him:** If you derived this by inference from Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s statement, then, **on the contrary, deduce from this to the other side** and say as follows: **Just as a wife** is released by her husband’s death and requires no bill of divorce **whether** she is **an adult or a minor, so too, a slave** is **also** emancipated when his master dies **whether** he is **an adult or a minor,** in opposition to the opinion of Abba Shaul. **He said to him: I heard explicitly** that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said that the *halakha* is in accordance with the opinion of Abba Shaul.


###### Gittin 39b:5
[Gittin 39b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:5)

וְרַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּאַבָּא שָׁאוּל. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא לְרַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא: בְּפֵירוּשׁ שְׁמִיעַ לָךְ, אוֹ מִכְּלָלָא שְׁמִיעַ לָךְ? מַאי כְּלָלָא? דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי, אָמְרוּ לִפְנֵי רַבִּי: ״נִתְיָיאַשְׁתִּי מִפְּלוֹנִי עַבְדִּי״, מַהוּ? אָמַר לָהֶם: אוֹמֵר אֲנִי, אֵין לוֹ תַּקָּנָה אֶלָּא בִּשְׁטָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan** says: **The *halakha* is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Abba Shaul. Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: Did you hear it explicitly** that Rabbi Yoḥanan said it, **or did you hear it by inference?** Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba asked: **What inference** could have been drawn? Rabbi Zeira answered: **For Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says** that **they said before Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi: If one **says: I have despaired of** recovering **so-and-so, my slave, what** is the *halakha*? **He said to them: I say** that his slave **has no remedy other** than **via a bill** of manumission.


###### Gittin 39b:6
[Gittin 39b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:6)

וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי? גָּמַר ״לָהּ״–״לָהּ״ מֵאִשָּׁה – מָה אִשָּׁה בִּשְׁטָר, אַף עֶבֶד נָמֵי בִּשְׁטָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues explaining the possible inference. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What is the reasoning of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi? **He derived** this *halakha* by means of a verbal analogy, understanding the meaning of the words **“to her,”** written with regard to a maidservant, **from** the meaning of **“for her,”** written with regard to **a wife. Just as a wife** can leave her husband only **via a bill** of divorce, **so too, a slave** is **also** emancipated only **via a bill** of manumission.


###### Gittin 39b:7
[Gittin 39b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:7)

וְקָא דָיְיקַתְּ מִינַּהּ, כְּאִשָּׁה – מָה אִשָּׁה בֵּין גְּדוֹלָה בֵּין קְטַנָּה, אַף עֶבֶד נָמֵי בֵּין גָּדוֹל בֵּין קָטָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**You** heard this statement **and deduced from this** comparison that with regard to his master’s death, a slave is **comparable** to **a wife. Just as a wife** is released by her husband’s death **whether** she is **an adult or a minor, so too, a slave** is **also** emancipated **whether** he is **an adult or a minor,** and there is no distinction between a minor slave who receives a bill of manumission and a minor slave whose master dies.


###### Gittin 39b:8
[Gittin 39b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:8)

וְאִי מִכְּלָלָא מַאי? אַדְּרַבָּה! דּוֹק מִינַּהּ לְהָךְ גִּיסָא: מָה אִשָּׁה – אִיסּוּרָא וְלָא מָמוֹנָא, אַף עֶבֶד נָמֵי – אִיסּוּרָא וְלָא מָמוֹנָא! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בְּפֵירוּשׁ שְׁמִיעַ לִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba asked him: **And if** this was derived **by inference, what** of it? Rabbi Zeira said to him: If you derived this by inference, then, **on the contrary, deduce from this to the other side** and say as follows: **Just as a wife** is released by the death of her husband from **a prohibition and not** from **a monetary** bond, **so too, a slave** is **also** emancipated by his master’s death from **a prohibition and not a monetary** bond. **He said to him: I heard** this **explicitly** from Rabbi Yoḥanan.


###### Gittin 39b:9
[Gittin 39b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:9)

אָמַר מָר, אָמַר לָהֶם: אוֹמֵר אֲנִי, אֵין לוֹ תַּקָּנָה אֶלָּא בִּשְׁטָר. וְהָתַנְיָא, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: אוֹמֵר אֲנִי, אַף הוּא – נוֹתֵן דְּמֵי עַצְמוֹ וְיוֹצֵא, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כְּמוֹכְרוֹ לוֹ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ In connection with the *baraita* cited above, the Gemara discusses the matter itself. **The Master said** above: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi **said to them: I say** that his slave **has no remedy other** than **via a bill** of manumission. The Gemara challenges: **But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says: I say** that **even** the slave **himself can give his own monetary value and is emancipated, due to** the fact **that it is as if** the Temple treasurer **sold him to himself.** This demonstrates that a slave can be emancipated by paying money in addition to receiving a bill of manumission.


###### Gittin 39b:10
[Gittin 39b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:10)

הָכִי קָאָמַר: אוֹ בְּכֶסֶף אוֹ בִּשְׁטָר; וְהַאי – פְּקַע לֵיהּ כַּסְפֵּיהּ. וּלְאַפּוֹקֵי מֵהַאי תַּנָּא –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **This is what he is saying:** A slave can be emancipated **either via money or via a bill** of manumission. **And** with regard to **this** master, who despaired of recovering his slave, **his monetary** hold over this slave **is abrogated,** and he can be emancipated only via a bill of manumission. **And** this statement, that generally a slave can be emancipated either via a bill of manumission or by paying money, serves **to exclude** the opinion **of this *tanna*** in the following *baraita*.


###### Gittin 39b:11
[Gittin 39b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:11)

דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: יָכוֹל יְהֵא כֶּסֶף גּוֹמֵר בָּהּ, כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁשְּׁטָר גּוֹמֵר בָּהּ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְהׇפְדֵּה לֹא נִפְדָּתָה״ –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Shimon says in the name of Rabbi Akiva:** One **might** have thought that paying **money completes** the emancipation of a Hebrew maidservant, **just as a bill** of manumission **completes her** emancipation. **The verse states,** concerning a Jewish man who engages in sexual intercourse with a maidservant who had been designated to cohabit with a Hebrew slave: “And whoever lies carnally with a woman that is a bondmaid designated for a man, **and not at all redeemed,** nor was freedom given to her; there shall be inquisition; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free” (Leviticus 19:20). In this case, neither the Jewish man nor the maidservant is liable to receive the death penalty, in contrast to a man who engages in sexual intercourse with a married woman.


###### Gittin 39b:12
[Gittin 39b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:12)

אוֹרְעָה כָּל הַפָּרָשָׁה כֻּולָּהּ לְ״לֹא חוּפָּשָׁה״, לוֹמַר לָךְ: שְׁטָר גּוֹמֵר בָּהּ, וְאֵין הַכֶּסֶף גּוֹמֵר בָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The** *halakha* of this **entire portion** of a maidservant who had been designated to cohabit with a Hebrew slave **is linked to,** i.e., dependent on, only the phrase **“nor was freedom** given her” by means of a bill of manumission. The reason she does not have the status of a free woman is that she was not granted her freedom by means of a bill of manumission. If the *halakha* of this portion would be dependent upon the phrase “and not at all redeemed,” this would indicate that the reason she does not have the status of a free woman is that she was not redeemed with money. This is in order **to say to you: A bill** of manumission **completes her** emancipation entirely, **and money does not complete her** emancipation. According to Rabbi Shimon, a slave can be emancipated only via a bill of manumission but not by paying money.


###### Gittin 39b:13
[Gittin 39b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:13)

אָמַר רָמֵי בַּר חָמָא אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. וְרַב יוֹסֵף בַּר חָמָא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rami bar Ḥama says** that **Rav Naḥman says: The *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon. And Rav Yosef bar Ḥama says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan** says: **The *halakha* is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon.**


###### Gittin 39b:14
[Gittin 39b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:14)

אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק לְרָבָא בַּר שְׁאֵילְתָא, דַּהֲוָה קָאֵי אַפִּיתְחָא דְּבֵי תְפִלָּה. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הֲלָכָה אוֹ אֵין הֲלָכָה? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲנִי אוֹמֵר – אֵין הֲלָכָה; וְרַבָּנַן דַּאֲתוֹ מִמָּחוֹזָא אָמְרִי, אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן: הֲלָכָה;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak found Rava bar She’eilta when he was standing at the entrance to a house of prayer. He said to him,** with regard to this issue: Is the ***halakha*** in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, **or** is the ***halakha* not** in accordance with his opinion? **He said to him: I say** that the ***halakha*** is **not** in accordance with his opinion in this matter, **and the Rabbis who came from Meḥoza say** that **Rabbi Zeira said in the name of Rav Naḥman:** The ***halakha*** is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon.


###### Gittin 39b:15
[Gittin 39b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:15)

וְכִי אֲתַאי לְסוּרָא, אַשְׁכַּחְתֵּיהּ לְרַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין, אָמְרִי לֵיהּ: אֵימָא לִי אִיזִי, גּוּפָא דְעוֹבָדָא הֵיכִי הֲוָה? אֲמַר לִי: דְּהַהִיא אַמְתָּא דַּהֲוָה מָרַהּ שְׁכִיב מְרַע, אָתְיָא בָּכְיָא קַמֵּיהּ, אָמְרָה לֵיהּ: עַד אֵימַת תִּשְׁתַּעְבֵּיד וְתֵיזִיל הָהִיא אִיתְּתָא? שְׁקַל כּוּמְתֵּיהּ שְׁדָא בַּהּ, אֲמַר לַהּ: זִיל קְנִי הָא וּקְנִי נַפְשִׁיךְ. אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן, אֲמַר לְהוּ: לֹא עָשָׂה וְלֹא כְלוּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And when I came to Sura, I found Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin,** and **I said to him: Tell me, my friend [*izi*], the incident itself. What happened,** and what exactly did Rav Naḥman say? **He said to me that** there was **a certain maidservant whose master was on his deathbed. She came crying before him** and **said to him: Until when will that woman,** i.e., I, **continue to be subjugated? He took his hat** [***kumtei***], **threw it to her,** and **said to her: Go acquire this** hat **and** thereby **acquire yourself** as a free woman. **They came before Rav Naḥman** for a ruling, and **he said to them: He did nothing.**


###### Gittin 39b:16
[Gittin 39b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:16)

מַאן דַּחֲזָא, סָבַר מִשּׁוּם דַּהֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן; וְלָא הִיא, אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם דְּהָוֵה לֵיהּ כֵּלָיו שֶׁל מַקְנֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**One who saw** this incident **thought** that he ruled in this manner **because** he holds **that the *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon,** that a maidservant can be emancipated only via a bill of manumission. **But** that **is not so. Rather,** it was **because this was** a legal act of acquisition formalizing the transfer of ownership that was performed with **the items of the one who transfers ownership,** and this mode of acquisition takes effect only when the one who transfers ownership acquires an item belonging to the one to whom the ownership is being transferred. Since the item of the owner was used, the maidservant was not emancipated.


###### Gittin 39b:17
[Gittin 39b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:17)

אָמַר רַב שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר אַחִיתַאי, אָמַר רַב הַמְנוּנָא סָבָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר אַשְׁיָאן, אָמַר רַב הוּנָא, אָמַר רַב הַמְנוּנָא: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. וְלָא הִיא, אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Shmuel bar Aḥittai says** that **Rav Hamnuna the Elder says** that **Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Ashyan says** that **Rav Huna says** that **Rav Hamnuna says:** The ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon.** The Gemara concludes: **And** that **is not so,** as the ***halakha* is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon.**


###### Gittin 39b:18
[Gittin 39b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/39b:18)

אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא, אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא, אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי, אָמַר רַבִּי: עֶבֶד שֶׁנָּשָׂא אֶת בַּת חוֹרִין בִּפְנֵי רַבּוֹ –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Zeira says** that **Rabbi Ḥanina says** that **Rav Ashi says** that **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says:** In the case of **a slave who marries a free woman in the presence of his master,**