Study Kiddushin folio 23B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
According to the opinion of R' Shimon ben Elazar, in the case of a Canaanite slave, what is the halakha with regard to the possibility that a slave can appoint an agent to accept his bill of manumission from the hand of his master? Does one say that since R' Shimon ben Elazar derives the verbal an
Or perhaps, in the case of a woman, as she can accept her bill of divorce herself, she can also appoint an agent, whereas a slave is different, as he cannot accept his bill of manumission himself, and consequently he cannot appoint an agent either. After raising the dilemma, Rabba subsequently re
The Talmud comments: But consider that which Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, says with regard to the service in the Temple: These priests are the agents of God, i.e., they perform the Temple service as the emissaries of God. As if it enters your mind that they are our agents, is there anything that
This statement leads to the following question: But is it not true that an agent can be appointed to perform a task that cannot be done by the one who sent him? But according to Rava’s conclusion there is the case of a slave, who is unable to accept his bill of manumission himself, and yet he can ap
The Talmud rejects this suggestion: And that is not so. The difference between the cases is that an Israelite is not involved in the halakhot of offerings at all, as a non-priest is never permitted to sacrifice offerings. By contrast, a slave is somewhat involved in bills of manumission, as it is