Study Kiddushin folio 69A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
With regard to one who says to his pregnant Canaanite female slave: You are hereby a free woman but your offspring shall remain a slave, the offspring is emancipated like her. This is the statement of R' Yosei HaGelili. And the Rabbis say: The master’s statement is upheld, because it is stated: “T
The Talmud expresses surprise at this ruling: What is the biblical derivation here? How do the Rabbis learn from here that the child of an emancipated female slave remains a slave in this case? Rava said: The proof from the verse beginning with: “The wife and her children,” is not the source of the
Mishnah: R' Tarfon says: Mamzerim can be purified, so that their offspring will not be mamzerim. How so? With regard to a mamzer who married a Canaanite female slave, their offspring is a slave. If his master subsequently emancipates him, that son is found to be a freeman, rather than a mamze
Talmud: A dilemma was raised before the rabbis: Did R' Tarfon state his halakha ab initio, i.e., a mamzer is permitted to marry a female slave, or did he state it only after the fact, but he does not permit a mamzer to marry a female slave ab initio? The Talmud answers: Come and hear proof from a
The Talmud explains the apparent proof from this baraita. And if you say that R' Tarfon stated his halakha ab initio and permitted a mamzer to marry a Canaanite female slave, a mamzeret should also be allowed to marry a Canaanite slave and her child can then be emancipated as well. The Talmud answer