Gemara Clarity

Gittin 43a

גיטין מ״ג ע״א

Learn Gittin 43a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Gittin 43a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Transferring an ox or slave only for its קנס, and קידושין involving a person who is half slave and half free.

Overview

The amud opens by finishing a question: can someone give another person ownership of his ox only for goring, or of his slave only for שן ועין? The גמרא explains why the question is real both for רבי מאיר, since the קנס might never come about if the owner admits, and for the רבנן, since the ox and slave already exist. רבי אבא tries to prove from a ברייתא on ויליד ביתו that a slave can be worth nothing, which would not happen if every slave could be sold for his קנס. The גמרא answers that a טרפה slave who is also disgusting or covered with boils is truly worthless, so the proof does not decide the question. Next the גמרא asks whether a man who is half slave and half free can make קידושין with a free woman. A ברייתא about his 'heirs' is brought as proof, but רבא shows it only means heirs who would be entitled to the money in principle. Then comes a dispute about a woman who is half שפחה and half free. רבא and רב ששת say her קידושין fail, like betrothing half a woman, while רב חסדא argues nothing is held back, and רבה בר רב הונא publicly takes back his ruling. The amud ends as רב חסדא begins a case about such a woman betrothed to two brothers and יבום, which continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

דִּלְמָא מוֹדֶה וּמִיפְּטַר.

Perhaps he will admit and become exempt.

וְתִבְּעֵי לְרַבָּנַן –

And you can ask this question according to the Rabbis too –

עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמְרִי רַבָּנַן

The Rabbis only said

אֵין אָדָם מַקְנֶה דָּבָר

that a person cannot transfer ownership of something

The steps (27)

  1. RejectionWhy the question exists even for רבי מאיר: the owner might admit and be exempt
  2. QuestionWhy the question exists even for the רבנן: the ox and the slave already exist
  3. Proofרבי אבא brings a proof: why does the פסוק need to mention a slave born in the house?
  4. ResponseThe ברייתא's answer: a home-born slave eats even when he has no money value
  5. ChallengeThe ברייתא raises another possible mistake
  6. ResponseThe פסוק puts both slaves together
  7. Proofרבי אבא's proof: every slave would have some value
  8. RejectionA טרפה slave has no קנס
  9. ChallengeBut he can still stand before his master
  10. ResolutionA disgusting slave or one covered with boils
  11. Questionקידושין by a man who is half slave and half free
  12. QuestionWhy the question is not simple
  13. QuestionMaybe the half-slave case is even better than half a woman
  14. ProofProof from the ox that killed a half-slave
  15. RejectionThe ox only made him a טרפה, and 'heirs' means himself
  16. Challengeרבא's two problems with the טרפה reading
  17. RejectionHeirs who are fit to take, but do not exist
  18. Statementרבא: A half-maidservant cannot be betrothed
  19. Statementרבה בר רב הונא teaches the same ruling in public
  20. Challengeרב חסדא: The two cases are not alike
  21. Statementרבה בר רב הונא publicly takes back his ruling
  22. Statementרב ששת defends the original ruling
  23. ChallengeA source that seems to show she can be betrothed
  24. ResolutionAnswer: Follow רבי ישמעאל's reading
  25. ChallengeCan a full Canaanite maidservant even be betrothed?
  26. ResolutionBetrothed really means designated
  27. Statementרב חסדא's case: a half-שפחה betrothed to two brothers