Study Gittin folio 9A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
לעולם הוא בן חורין, עד שיאמר ״כל נכסיי נתונין לפלוני עבדי חוץ מאחד מריבוא שבהן״.
He always becomes a freeman regardless of the wording of the document, even if the owner reserved land for himself, unless it says in the document: All of my property is given to so-and-so my slave, except for 1/10,000th of it, as in that case it is possible that the master meant to include the slave in the portion that he is not giving. Consequently, the slave is not emancipated. In any case, according to the opinion of R' Shimon, when the document states: All my property, a distinction is drawn between the emancipated slave and the property, as claimed by Rava.
והאמר רב יוסף בר מניומי אמר רב נחמן: אף על פי שקילס רבי יוסי את רבי שמעון – הלכה כרבי מאיר, דתניא: כשנאמרו דברים לפני רבי יוסי, קרא עליו המקרא הזה: ״שפתים ישק משיב דברים נכוחים״!
The Talmud asks: But didn’t Rav Yosef bar Minyumi say that Rav Naḥman said: Even though R' Yosei praised the ruling of R' Shimon with regard to this issue, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir, the first tanna in that Mishnah. The Talmud elaborates how R' Yosei bestowed praise. As it is taught in the Tosefta (Pe’a 1:13): When these matters were said by the rabbis before R' Yosei, he recited this verse about him: “He kisses the lips that give the right answer” (Proverbs 24:26). Despite this praise, the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of R' Shimon.
ומי אמר רב נחמן הכי? והאמר רב יוסף בר מניומי אמר רב נחמן: שכיב מרע שכתב כל נכסיו לעבדו, ועמד – חוזר בנכסים, ואינו חוזר בעבד.
With regard to Rav Adda bar Mattana’s proof, the Talmud asks: And did Rav Naḥman actually say this, that we do not divide the statement? But didn’t Rav Yosef bar Minyumi say that Rav Naḥman said: With regard to a person on his deathbed who wrote all of his property to his slave, and afterward he recuperated and arose from his illness, he can retract his transfer of property with regard to the gift of the property to the slave, but he cannot retract his transfer with regard to the emancipation of the slave.