Siman 196

A Canaanite slave has the status of land regarding acquisition, and is acquired through silver, a document, chazakah, and kinyan sudar, as it is written: "And you shall leave them as an inheritance to your children after you, to inherit as a possession." The verse compared them to a possession, and all modes of acquisition for a possession apply to them. A document is only effective from an Israelite, as has been written in siman 194 [Netivot HaMishpat]. A slave is also acquired through meshikhah like movable property, since meshikhah is applicable to him, whereas meshikhah is not applicable to land. Just as they instituted the acquisition of meshikhah for movable property, so too for a slave. And even though one can also find the acquisition of meshikhah for land, and nevertheless it is not an acquisition—such as seeds in a perforated pot, as has been written in siman 202—this is because meshikhah is not applicable to all lands, and they did not wish to institute it for this alone. But regarding slaves, where meshikhah is applicable to all of them, why should they not be acquired through it? Furthermore, regarding matters of rabbinic law, a slave is considered like movable property [Tosafot Bava Kamma 12a]. So too, he is acquired through kinyan chatzer when he is guarded by the knowledge of the owner and not by his own knowledge, such as when he is bound or sleeping [as is evident in Tosafot ibid. s.v. lama li].

How is the meshikhah? If he pulled the slave toward him and brought him to himself, he has acquired him. However, if he called him and he came to him, or if his first master said to him, "Go to the buyer," and he went to him, he has not acquired him. This is not comparable to an animal, where he acquires in such a manner as I wrote in siman 197, because the slave is a sentient being and goes of his own volition and will. Therefore, if the slave is a minor or a deaf-mute who lacks sentience, he acquires in such a manner, for he is drawn after his calling like an animal. But when his first master said to him, "Go to the buyer," and he went to him, he has not acquired him, for he goes because of the seller, and this is not an act of acquisition for the buyer. Thus agreed the great later authorities, unlike the one who disagrees in this matter.

In what manner is the chazakah for the acquisition of slaves? That he uses him in the presence of his first master in the manner that one uses slaves; and if the chazakah was not in the presence of his first master, he must say to him, "Go, perform chazakah and acquire." And what is the usage? If the slave loosened his shoe, or put his shoe on him, or carried his vessels after him to the bathhouse, or undressed him, or anointed him, or scraped him, or dressed him, or lifted his new master, he has acquired him. And it appears to me that the same law applies if he performed one of the usages for one of the members of his household according to his command, it is an acquisition. And some say that the same law applies if the master lifted the slave, that it is an acquisition, for there is no chazakah greater than lifting, which acquires movable property in every place, as will be explained; for even with meshikhah he acquires him, and certainly with lifting. And regarding work that the slave does for him in the manner of a craft and not a usage of the body, such as if he sewed a garment for him or the like, some say that he has acquired him, and some say that this is the way of a craft and not the way of servitude, and he has not acquired him.