## Gittin Daf 40a

###### Gittin 40a:1
[Gittin 40a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:1)

יָצָא לְחֵירוּת. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כָּל כָּךְ יֵשׁ בְּיָדְךָ?! וַאֲנִי שׁוֹנֶה: הַכּוֹתֵב שְׁטַר אֵירוּסִין לְשִׁפְחָתוֹ, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֵינָהּ מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**he is emancipated. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to** Rabbi Zeira: **You possess such** an extreme *halakha*, **but I teach** this *halakha*: With regard to **one who writes a document of betrothal for his maidservant,** stating: You are hereby betrothed to me, **Rabbi Meir says: She is betrothed, and the Rabbis say: She is not betrothed,** as even this, when he betroths her directly, does not serve as proof that he emancipates her.


###### Gittin 40a:2
[Gittin 40a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:2)

כִּדְאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר רַב שֵׁילָא – כְּשֶׁרַבּוֹ הִנִּיחַ לוֹ תְּפִילִּין; הָכָא נָמֵי – כְּשֶׁרַבּוֹ הִשִּׂיאוֹ אִשָּׁה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Just **as that** which **Rabba bar Rav Sheila says** in a different context, that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is referring to a case **where** a slave’s **master placed phylacteries on him, here too,** the context of Rabbi Zeira’s statement is not that of a slave who married a woman in his master’s presence but a case **where** the slave’s **master** himself **provided a wife for him,** as this is certainly proof that he had emancipated him.


###### Gittin 40a:3
[Gittin 40a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:3)

וּמִי אִיכָּא מִידֵּי דִּלְעַבְדֵּיהּ – לָא מִעֲבַד לֵיהּ אִיסּוּרָא, וְאִיהוּ – עָבֵד אִיסּוּרָא?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara questions this answer: **Is there anything** like this, **where for his slave he would not violate a prohibition,** and by providing a wife for his slave he indicates that he must have emancipated the slave, **but he** himself might **violate the prohibition,** as he is suspected of marrying his maidservant without having freed her?


###### Gittin 40a:4
[Gittin 40a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:4)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – דְּאָמַר לָהּ: ״צְאִי בּוֹ וְהִתְקַדְּשִׁי בּוֹ״; רַבִּי מֵאִיר סָבַר: יֵשׁ בַּלָּשׁוֹן הַזֶּה לְשׁוֹן שִׁחְרוּר, וְרַבָּנַן סָבְרִי: אֵין בַּלָּשׁוֹן הַזֶּה לְשׁוֹן שִׁחְרוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: With what are we dealing here?** This is a case **where he said to** the maidservant when he gave her the document of betrothal: **Become emancipated with this and become betrothed** to me **with this. Rabbi Meir holds that this formulation** written in the document of betrothal: You are hereby betrothed to me, **contains a formulation of emancipation** and therefore serves both as a bill of manumission and a document of betrothal. **And the Rabbis hold: This formulation is not a formulation of emancipation.** That is why the Rabbis hold she is not betrothed in this case. However, according to everyone, a master is not suspected of marrying his maidservant without first freeing her.


###### Gittin 40a:5
[Gittin 40a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:5)

אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: עֶבֶד שֶׁהִנִּיחַ תְּפִילִּין בִּפְנֵי רַבּוֹ – יָצָא לְחֵירוּת. מֵיתִיבִי: לָוָה הֵימֶנּוּ רַבּוֹ, אוֹ שֶׁעֲשָׂאוֹ רַבּוֹ אַפּוֹטְרוֹפּוֹס, אוֹ שֶׁהִנִּיחַ תְּפִילִּין בִּפְנֵי רַבּוֹ, אוֹ שֶׁקָּרָא שְׁלֹשָׁה פְּסוּקִים בְּבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת בִּפְנֵי רַבּוֹ, הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יָצָא לְחֵירוּת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to this issue, **Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: A slave who dons phylacteries in the presence of his master is emancipated,** as this is unusual behavior for a slave because slaves are not obligated in this mitzva. The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita*: If a slave’s **master borrowed** money **from him; or if his master appointed him as a steward** over his possessions; **or if** the slave **donned phylacteries in the presence of his master; or if he read three verses** of the Torah reading **in the synagogue in the presence of his master,** although all of these activities are ordinarily performed only by freemen, **this** slave **is not emancipated.** This seems to contradict the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi.


###### Gittin 40a:6
[Gittin 40a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:6)

אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר רַב שֵׁילָא: כְּשֶׁרַבּוֹ הִנִּיחַ לוֹ תְּפִילִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba bar Rav Sheila says:** Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi was referring to a case **where** the slave’s **master placed phylacteries on him.** In that case it is clear that the slave is donning phylacteries with the consent of his master, and a master would not place phylacteries on his slave unless he had already emancipated him.


###### Gittin 40a:7
[Gittin 40a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:7)

כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִי שֶׁאָמַר בִּשְׁעַת מִיתָתוֹ ״פְּלוֹנִית שִׁפְחָתִי אַל יִשְׁתַּעְבְּדוּ בָּהּ לְאַחַר מוֹתִי״ – כּוֹפִין אֶת הַיּוֹרְשִׁים וְכוֹתְבִין לָהּ גֵּט שִׁחְרוּר. אָמְרוּ לְפָנָיו רַבִּי אַמֵּי וְרַבִּי אַסִּי: רַבִּי, אִי אַתָּה מוֹדֶה שֶׁבָּנֶיהָ עֲבָדִים?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **When Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he reported that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** In a case of **one who says at the moment of his death:** With regard to **so-and-so, my maidservant,** my heirs **should not treat her as a slave after my death,** the court **compels the heirs and they write for her a bill of manumission. Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi said before him: My teacher, don’t you admit that her children are slaves?** The master meant only that his heirs should not subjugate her excessively. He did not intend to free her, and her children remain slaves. Why, then, are the heirs compelled to free the maidservant?


###### Gittin 40a:8
[Gittin 40a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:8)

כִּי אֲתָא רַב שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר יְהוּדָה, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִי שֶׁאָמַר בִּשְׁעַת מִיתָתוֹ ״פְּלוֹנִית שִׁפְחָתִי קוֹרַת רוּחַ עָשְׂתָה לִי; יֵעָשֶׂה לָהּ קוֹרַת רוּחַ״ – כּוֹפִין אֶת הַיּוֹרְשִׁין וְעוֹשִׂין לָהּ קוֹרַת רוּחַ. מַאי טַעְמָא? מִצְוָה לְקַיֵּים דִּבְרֵי הַמֵּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he reported a different version of what **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** In a case of **one who says at the moment of his death: So-and-so, my maidservant, gave me satisfaction** and **one should do for her** something that gives her **satisfaction,** the court **compels the heirs to give her satisfaction,** and if she will be satisfied only by being emancipated, they must do so. **What is the reason** for this? **It is a mitzva to fulfill the statement of the dead.**


###### Gittin 40a:9
[Gittin 40a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:9)

אָמַר אַמֵּימָר: הַמַּפְקִיר עַבְדּוֹ – אוֹתוֹ עֶבֶד אֵין לוֹ תַּקָּנָה. מַאי טַעְמָא? גּוּפֵיהּ לָא קָנֵי לֵיהּ – אִיסּוּרָא הוּא דְּאִיכָּא גַּבֵּיהּ, וְאִיסּוּרָא לָא מָצֵי מַקְנֵי לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ameimar says:** With regard to **one who renounces ownership of his slave,** there is **no** halakhic **remedy for that slave,** and he cannot marry a Jewish woman. **What is the reason** for this? The slave **himself does not belong to** his master. However, **there is the prohibition** against marrying a Jewish woman that remains **in** the master’s possession, **and** the master **cannot transfer ownership of the prohibition to** the slave, as this is not something that can be transferred. A bill of manumission is not effective in this case because the slave already does not belong to him.


###### Gittin 40a:10
[Gittin 40a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:10)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אָשֵׁי לְאַמֵּימָר: וְהָאָמַר עוּלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, וְרַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין אָמַר רַב: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה יָצָא לְחֵירוּת, וְצָרִיךְ גֵּט שִׁחְרוּר! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״צָרִיךְ״ – וְאֵין לוֹ תַּקָּנָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi said to Ameimar: But didn’t Ulla say** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says, and** similarly **Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin** says that **Rav says: Both** in **this** case of one who betroths his slave, **and** in **that** case of one who renounces ownership of his slave, the slave **is emancipated but** nevertheless **requires a bill of manumission?** This demonstrates that when one renounces ownership of his slave, the slave is no longer in his possession but can still become a freeman upon receiving a bill of manumission. Ameimar **said to him:** They meant that **he requires** a bill of manumission to be considered a freeman and to marry a Jewish woman, **but** there is **no remedy for him,** as the master cannot issue one.


###### Gittin 40a:11
[Gittin 40a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:11)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר אַמֵּימָר: הַמַּפְקִיר עַבְדּוֹ וָמֵת – אוֹתוֹ הָעֶבֶד אֵין לוֹ תַּקָּנָה. מַאי טַעְמָא? גּוּפֵיהּ לָא קָנֵי לֵיהּ – אִיסּוּרָא הוּא דְּאִיכָּא גַּבֵּיהּ, וְאִיסּוּרָא לִבְרֵיהּ לָא מוֹרֵית. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אָשֵׁי לְאַמֵּימָר: וְהָא כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** a different version of this exchange: **Ameimar says:** With regard to **one who renounces ownership of his slave and dies,** there is **no** halakhic **remedy for that slave** and he cannot marry a Jewish woman. **What is the reason** for this? The slave **himself does not belong to** his master; however, **there is the prohibition** against marrying a Jewish woman that remains **in** the master’s possession, **and** the master **cannot bequeath the prohibition to his son. Rav Ashi said to Ameimar: But when Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael, he reported that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says** that if one says that his heirs should not treat his maidservant as a slave, the heirs are compelled to write a bill of manumission. This demonstrates that the heirs can write a bill of manumission although they do not own the maidservant.


###### Gittin 40a:12
[Gittin 40a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:12)

דְּרַב דִּימִי טָעוּתָא הִיא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מַאי טָעוּתָא – דְּלָא אַמְרַהּ בִּלְשׁוֹן שִׁחְרוּר; הָא אַמְרַהּ בִּלְשׁוֹן שִׁחְרוּר – הָכִי נָמֵי! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲנָא כִּדְרַב שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר יְהוּדָה סְבִירָא לִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Ameimar answered: The report **of Rav Dimi** quoting Rabbi Yoḥanan **is erroneous,** and Rabbi Yoḥanan never stated that *halakha*. **He said to him: What** is **erroneous** about Rav Dimi’s statement? The reason it is erroneous is **that** the master **did not state this using a formulation of emancipation, but** if **he** had **stated this using a formulation of emancipation,** then **indeed** they would be able to write for her a bill of manumission? Why then do you not concede to his opinion? **He said to him: I hold in accordance with** the report **of Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda,** that Rabbi Yoḥanan was discussing a case where the master said that his heirs should give the maidservant satisfaction. Therefore, the master never stated that the heirs would not have ownership over the maidservant, only that they should fulfill his dying instruction to grant her satisfaction.


###### Gittin 40a:13
[Gittin 40a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:13)

הָהוּא דִּסְקַרְתָּא דְּעַבְדֵי דְּאִזְדַּבַּן לְגוֹי. כְּלוֹ מָרְווֹתָא בָּתְרָאֵי, אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרָבִינָא, אֲמַר לְהוּ: זִילוּ אַהְדַּרוּ אַבְּנֵי מָרְווֹתָא קַמָּאֵי, וְיִכְתְּבוּ לְכוּ גִּיטָּא דְחֵרוּתָא. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ רַבָּנַן לְרָבִינָא, וְהָאָמַר אַמֵּימָר: הַמַּפְקִיר עַבְדּוֹ וָמֵת – אוֹתוֹ הָעֶבֶד אֵין לוֹ תַּקָּנָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving **a certain city** [***diskarta***] **of slaves that was sold to gentiles.** When **their final** gentile **masters died,** the slaves **came before Ravina** and said that since they had no masters, they wanted to be considered full-fledged Jews. **He said to them: Go and return to the children of your first masters and** have them **write for you bills of manumission** so that you will be considered freemen in every respect. **The Rabbis said to Ravina: But didn’t Ameimar say** that with regard to **one who renounces ownership of his slave and dies,** there is **no remedy for that slave?** Similarly, if one sells his slave to a gentile, he no longer has the right to the slave’s labor and can no longer write a bill of manumission for him.


###### Gittin 40a:14
[Gittin 40a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:14)

אֲמַר לְהוּ: אֲנָא כְּרַב דִּימִי סְבִירָא לִי. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: דְּרַב דִּימִי טָעוּתָא הִיא! אֲמַר לְהוּ: מַאי טָעוּתָא – דְּלָא אַמְרַהּ בִּלְשׁוֹן שִׁחְרוּר; הָא אַמְרַהּ בִּלְשׁוֹן שִׁחְרוּר – הָכִי נָמֵי! וְהִלְכְתָא כְּרָבִינָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Ravina **said to them: I hold in accordance with** the report of **Rav Dimi,** who said that Rabbi Yoḥanan says that the heirs can give a bill of manumission. **They,** the Rabbis, **said to him:** That **which Rav Dimi** said **is erroneous. He said to them: What** is **erroneous** about Rav Dimi’s statement? The reason it is erroneous is **that he did not state this using a formulation of emancipation, but** if **he** had **stated this using a formulation of emancipation,** then **indeed** they would be able to write a bill of manumission. The Gemara concludes: **And the *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Ravina,** that the original masters can write a bill of manumission for the slaves.


###### Gittin 40a:15
[Gittin 40a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:15)

הָהוּא עַבְדָּא דְּבֵי תְרֵי, קָם חַד מִינַּיְיהוּ וְשַׁחְרְרֵיהּ לְפַלְגֵיהּ, אֲמַר אִידַּךְ: הַשְׁתָּא שָׁמְעִי בִּי רַבָּנַן וּמַפְסְדוּ לֵיהּ מִינַּאי; אֲזַל אַקְנְיֵיהּ לִבְנוֹ קָטָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara relates: There was **a certain slave who** belonged **to two** partners. **One of them arose and emancipated his half** of the slave. **The other** master **said: Now the rabbis** of the local court **will hear** that my slave is half emancipated **and they will cause me to lose him,** i.e., they will force me to release him, as is stated in the mishna (41b) that the court forces a master to release his slave who has been half emancipated. **He went** and **transferred ownership** of the slave **to his minor son,** who could not be forced by the court to emancipate him, so that the slave would remain in his possession.


###### Gittin 40a:16
[Gittin 40a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/40a:16)

שַׁלְחַהּ רַב יוֹסֵף בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב פָּפָּא, שְׁלַח לֵיהּ: ״כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה כֵּן יֵעָשֶׂה לּוֹ, גְּמוּלוֹ יָשִׁיב לוֹ בְּרֹאשׁוֹ״ – אֲנַן קִים לַן בְּיָנוֹקָא דִּמְקָרְבָא דַּעְתֵּיהּ לְגַבֵּי זוּזֵי; מוֹקְמִינַן לֵיהּ אַפּוֹטְרוֹפּוֹס,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yosef, son of Rava, sent before Rav Pappa** the question of what the *halakha* is in this circumstance. **He sent to him** a response that paraphrased biblical verses: **As he has done, so shall it be done to him, his dealing shall return upon his own head** (see Leviticus 24:19 and Obadiah 1:15). In other words, since the master acted deceitfully to circumvent the ruling of the Sages, one should deal with him deceitfully. **We know that a child is attracted to money. We** will **appoint a steward for** the child, who will clarify the slave’s market value,