POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Gitin 41
GITIN 41 - In memory of Meir ben Reb Yechezkel Shraga Brachfeld
(Antwerp/Yerushalayim), at the conclusion of the Shiv'a
following his untimely passing on 15 Adar 5761. A widely
respected supporter of many Torah causes, Reb Meir's premature
loss is mourned by the entire Olam ha'Torah.
1) BREAKING LIENS
(a) (Mishnah): Shimon lent Reuven money; Reuven made his
slave Tavi an Apotiki (collateral, with a guarantee that
the loan may be collect from Tavi's value) and freed him
- by letter of the law, Tavi owes nothing to his master;
2) WHEN ONE CANNOT COLLECT FROM AN APOTIKI
(b) As an enactment for the betterment of the world, we force
the master to write a Get of freedom, and Tavi writes a
document obligating himself to pay his value to his
1. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, only the one who freed
(c) (Gemara) Question: Who freed him?
(d) Answer #1 (Rav): Reuven.
1. By letter of the law, Tavi owes nothing to his
second master (Shimon, who was supposed to receive
him), because of Rava's law.
(e) Question: On what do they argue?
2. (Rava): The following uproot a lien: The borrower
made the collateral Hekdesh;
i. The collateral was Chametz, and Pesach came (so
one may not benefit from the Chametz);
3. We are concerned that Shimon might see Tavi and say
'You are my slave' (and people will say that Tavi is
still a slave) - therefore, Chachamim enacted that
Shimon write a Get of freedom, and Tavi owes his
value to Shimon.
ii. The collateral was a slave, and the borrower
4. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, the slave does not
obligate himself to pay his value, rather Reuven
(f) Answer: Whether Reuven must compensate Shimon for
damaging property on which was a lien to pay a debt to
1. Chachamim say he is exempt; R. Shimon ben Gamliel
says he is obligated.
(g) Answer #2 (To question 3:c, 40B - Ula): Shimon declared
Tavi to be free.
2. One who damages collateral for a loan - Chachamim
and R. Shimon ben Gamliel argue if the damager must
pay the lender.
1. Letter of the law, Tavi is not obligated in the
Mitzvos (special to free men) at all; however, since
he was called free, for the betterment of the world
it was enacted that Reuven free him, and Tavi
obligates himself to pay his value to Reuven.
(h) Question: On what do they argue?
2. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, Shimon owes the money.
(i) Answer: Whether one must pay for damage that it not
1. Chachamim say it is not considered damage; R. Shimon
ben Gamliel says, it is.
(j) Question: Why didn't Ula learn like Rav?
(k) Answer: You cannot say that Shimon is referred to as the
new master (he never received the slave!)
(l) Question: Why didn't Rav learn like Ula?
(m) Answer: You cannot say that Shimon freed him (since he
was not the master, his words had no effect).
(a) (Ami Shapir Na'eh): Levi made his field an Apotiki (a
property specially designated for collection of a loan)
and it was flooded - the lender does not collect from
3) THE ENACTMENT FOR A HALF-SLAVE
(b) Objection (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): This is wrong!
(c) Answer: The case is, Levi specified that the loan could
only be collected from this field.
1. Support (Beraisa): Levi made his field an Apotiki
and it was flooded - the lender does not collect
from other property; if Levi specified that the loan
could only be collected from this field, it is not
collected from other property.
(d) (Beraisa): Yehudah made his field an Apotiki to a
creditor or to pay his wife's Kesuvah - they may collect
from other property;
1. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, the creditor may collect
from other property, not the wife, for it is not the
way of women to go to Beis Din to collect.
(Therefore, we assume that the total responsibility
to pay the Kesuvah was placed on the designated
(a) (Mishnah - Beis Hillel): A half-slave alternates, 1 day
he serves his master, the next day, he keeps his
1. Beis Shamai: That is good for his master, but not
for the half-slave!
i. He cannot marry a female slave, for he is
half-free; he cannot marry a Bas Yisrael, for
he is half-slave;
(b) (Gemara - Beraisa - Rebbi): Reuven freed half of his
slave - the slave becomes half-free;
ii. You cannot say he should never marry - the
world was created so that people should have
2. Rather - for the betterment of the world, we force
his master to free him, and the half-slave writes a
document obligating himself to pay half his value to
i. Beis Hillel retracted, and agreed to Beis
1. Chachamim say, he remains a full slave.
(c) Opinion #1 (Rabah): They argue when Reuven gave a Get of
1. Rebbi holds, "She was not redeemed, her Get of
freedom was not given to her" - this equates a Get
of freedom to (redemption) money.
(d) Opinion #2 (Rav Yosef): They argue when the slave was
redeemed half-way through money.
i. Just as money can fully or partially redeem a
slave, also a Get of freedom.
2. Chachamim learn a Gezeirah Shavah "Lah-Lah" from a
woman being divorced.
i. Just as a woman cannot be half-divorced, a
slave cannot be half-freed.
3. All agree that money may partially redeem her.
4. Suggestion: Rebbi and Chachamim argue whether it is
better to learn from a Hekesh (things written next
to each other, which teaches us to equate them) or a
5. Rejection: No - all agree, usually a Gezeirah
Shavah is better;
i. Here is different - since a wife cannot be
divorced through money (which can partially
redeem a slave), we do not learn from a Get of
divorce that a Get of freedom cannot work
1. Rebbi holds, "Redeemed, she was not redeemed" - this
shows, she is partially redeemed;
(e) Question (against Rav Yosef - Beraisa): One who
half-frees his slave through a Get - Rebbi says, it
works; Chachamim say, it does not.
2. Chachamim say, the Torah speaks as people (the verb
is doubled, we do not learn from this).
3. All agree, a Get of half-freedom does not work at
1. Rav Yosef is refuted (regarding his opinion that all
agree, a Get does not work half-way).
(f) (Beraisa): "She was redeemed" - one might have thought,
in all respects - "she was not redeemed";
2. Suggestion: Rav Yosef is also refuted regarding his
opinion that they argue whether money can
i. Since they argue by a Get, this suggests that
all agree that money works!
3. Answer: No - they argue by both.
i. The Beraisa gave the case of a Get to show the
extremity of Rebbi, that even a Get works
ii. Question: Rather, they should argue regarding
money, to show the extremity of Chachamim, that
even money does not work half-way!
iii. Answer: The Tana prefers to teach the lenient
1. "She was not redeemed" - one might have thought, not
at all - "she was redeemed";
(g) After Rav Yosef was refuted, he will say that this
Beraisa is as Rebbi.
2. She is partially redeemed - this redemption is with
money or something of value.
3. One might have thought, freedom can only be through
money - "Or her freedom was not given to her"
i. Another verse says, "He will write her a Sefer
of divorce"; we learn a Gezeirah Shavah
"Lah-Lah" to teach that the freedom of a slave
is also through a document.
4. Question: We have seen that money can accomplish
partial redemption, and a Get can bring full freedom
- how do we know that a Get can make her half-free?
5. Answer: "She was redeemed...her freedom" - the verse
equates freedom through money and a through a
document, that either can work fully or partially.
(h) Question: According to Rabah - the beginning of the
Beraisa is as all the Tana'im, the end of the Beraisa is
only as Rebbi!
(i) Answer #1 (Rabah): Yes, that is the structure of the
(j) Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): Rebbi taught the entire Beraisa;
Chachamim agree to his first law, and argue on his second