Hebrew Servants (Exo 21)
1 “And these [just as what precedes was stated at Sinai, so these] are the laws [this section being juxtaposed with that of the altar to teach that the Sanhedrin should preside near the sanctuary] that you are to set [as a “set” table, the laws not merely to be mandated to them, but to be “digested” for them] before them [and not before gentiles, even if their law, in the instance in question, coincides with Jewish law (this, to avoid diminution of the honor of Heaven)].
Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:1:1
And these are the laws—R. Yishmael says: And these—What follows is being added to what precedes, viz.: Just as what precedes was stated at Sinai, so, what follows.
Midrash Tanchuma, Mishpatim 6:1
A question: An Israelite involved in a litigation with his neighbor, is prohibited from going to a heathen judge for judgment, since it is said: and these are the laws that you are to set before them (Exo 21:1). It is taught by R. Simeon the son of Azzai: Even if you should discover a non-Jewish court where the law is identical with the law in an Israelite court, you are prohibited from bringing the case before them, since it is said: That you are to set before them. Before them, and not before non-Jews, before them, and not before ignorant men.
Rashi’s Commentary
And these are the laws—Wherever “these” is used it cuts off the preceding section from that which it introduces; where, however, “and these” is used it adds something to the former subject (i. e. forms a continuation of it). What is the case with the former commandments? They were given at Sinai! So these, too, were given at Sinai! (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:1:1; Shemot Rabbah 30:3; cf. also Midrash Tanchuma, Mishpatim 3) If this be so, why is this section dealing with the “civil laws” placed immediately after that commanding the making of the altar? To tell you that you should seat (i. e. provide quarters for) the Sanhedrin in the vicinity of the Temple.
Mat 28:20
teaching them to obey all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.
1Th 4:1
Finally then, brethren, we ask and urge you in the Lord Jesus, that as you received from us instruction as to how you ought to live and please God (just as you actually do live), that you excel still more.
Hebrew Servants
2 “If you buy [from the hand of the court] a Hebrew servant, he shall serve for six years, and in the seventh year, he shall go out to freedom without charge.
Rashi’s Commentary
To freedom—Heb. לַחָפְשִׁי, to freedom.
Mat 18:25
But since he did not have the means to pay, his master commanded him to be sold, along with his wife and children and all that he had, and repayment to be made.
1Co 6:20
For you were bought at a price; therefore honor God in your body.
3 If he comes in alone [without a wife], he shall go out alone [if he were not married when he came, his master may not give him a Canaanite bondswoman for the begetting of slaves]; if he is a married man, then his wife shall go out with him. [(When did she come in?) It is hereby derived that one who buys a Hebrew servant is required to feed his wife and children.]
Rashi’s Commentary
If he comes in alone—This means that he was unmarried—as the Targum renders it אִם בִּלְחוֹדוֹהִי. The term בְּגַפּוֹ means “with his skirt,” i.e., the skirt of his cloak, meaning that he came in only just as he was, alone, merely wrapped “in the skirt of his garment.”
He shall go out alone—This intimates that if he was unmarried originally (when he came in), his master is not allowed to give him against his will a Canaanite handmaid with the object of raising slaves (Kiddushin 20a).
If he is a married man—Lit., if he is someone’s husband, meaning an Israelite woman (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:3:2).
His wife shall go out with him—But who brought her in (into the state of service) that the text has to state she shall go out? But by saying this Scripture intimates that he who acquires a Hebrew servant is bound to provide his wife and children also with food (Kiddushin 22a; Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:3:3).
4 If his master gives him a wife [a Canaanite bondswoman] and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and he shall go out alone.
5 “But if the servant declares, ‘I love my master, my wife [the bondswoman] and my children; I shall not go free,’
Rashi’s Commentary
My wife—The handmaid mentioned above.
6 then his master must take him to the judges, and he shall take him to the door or the doorpost and his master shall pierce his ear with an awl, and he will serve him forever.
Kiddushin 14b:15
The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of the first tanna, who says that one who sells himself is not pierced with an awl? The Gemara answers: He derives this from the fact that with regard to one sold by the court, the Merciful One excludes a certain case by the verse: “And his master shall pierce his ear with an awl” (Exo 21:6), which teaches: His ear, of this slave, and not the ear of a slave who sells himself.
Kiddushin 21b:3
The Gemara returns to the mishna, which teaches: And a Hebrew slave who is pierced after serving six years is acquired as a slave for a longer period through piercing his ear with an awl. The Gemara explains that this is as it is written: “And his master shall pierce his ear with an awl, and he will serve him forever” (Exo 21:6).
Kiddushin 21b:4
The mishna further teaches that a pierced slave acquires himself through the advent of the Jubilee Year and through the master’s death. The Gemara explains that this is as it is written: “And he will serve him forever” (Exo 21:6). This term indicates that he serves only the master, but not the son and not the daughter. The term “forever” is referring to the forever represented by the Jubilee Year. The word “forever” does not mean for eternity, but refers to the end of the cycle of the Jubilee Year.
The López-Toribios (2/2) by César Astudillo is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0
Giant Gavel by Sam Howzit is licensed under CC BY 2.0
The Ties That Bind by Wetsun is licensed under CC BY 2.0
7 “If a man sells his daughter [a minor (under twelve)] as a servant, she is not to go free as the [Canaanite] male servants do [with the master’s knocking out a tooth or an eye (but: at the end of six years, at the Jubilee year, or at her bringing (pubertal) signs—whichever is first)].
Kiddushin 16a:6
The Gemara asks: But if so, one can equally say that they, Canaanite servants, can be acquired through a document, but others cannot be acquired through a document. The Gemara answers: Isn’t it written: “She is not to go free as the men servants do” (Exo 21:7), and this is explained to mean that she, like other servants, can be acquired through a document. The Gemara asks: Since these two verses can be explained in either manner, what did you see that led you to compare a Hebrew servant to a Canaanite servant with regard to a document, and what led you to differentiate her from a Canaanite servant with regard to acquisition through possession? Perhaps the opposite should be the case, i.e., she is similar to a Canaanite servant with regard to possession and differs from him concerning
acquisition through a document?
Kiddushin 20a:20
The Gemara resumes its citation of the baraita: If no move toward repentance comes to his hand, his poverty will increase until he sells his daughter, as it is stated: “If a man sells his daughter as a maidservant” (Exo 21:7). The Gemara comments: And even though “his daughter” is not written with regard to that matter in Lev 25 but in Exodus, nevertheless, it teaches us this principle: A person will sell his daughter rather than borrow with interest. What is the reason for this? His daughter can occasionally deduct money from her debt and use it to leave her master, but this interest continuously increases.
Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:7:7
If a man sells his daughter as a servant—He sells her once as a servant, and not twice. R. Yossi Haglili says: We find, then, that he (a father) can betroth her betrothal after betrothal (i.e., if she were divorced after the first betrothal, he may betroth her to another), and betrothal after (having sold her as a) servant, but not servant after servant, and, it goes without saying, not servant after betrothal.
8 If she is displeasing in the eyes of her master who [on that account] did not designate her for himself [to be his wife, even though he should have], then he must [help] redeem her [by deducting from her six-year redemption money the value of the service she had already rendered]. He [both the master and the father] shall not presume to sell her to a strange nation [i.e., to another man], because he [the master, by not taking her to wife, or the father, by selling her] has been faithless to her.
Rashi’s Commentary
If she is displeasing in the eyes of her master—i. e. that she did not find favour in his eyes so that he might be induced to marry her (cf. Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:8:1).
Who did not designate her—For he should have designated her and married her, and the money paid for her purchase is the money of her betrothal. Scripture hereby implicitly tells you that it is his duty to designate her for himself, and since it makes no mention of the manner in which the marriage is to be contracted it implicitly tells you at the same time that
Kiddushin 22b:1
Had the verse stated: His ear to the door, I would say: He should pierce, opposite his ear, into the door alone. In other words, with regard to the door, yes, it should be pierced, but his ear itself, no, it should not be pierced. The Gemara asks: But how could it even be suggested that his ear should not be pierced? But isn’t it written: “And his master shall pierce his ear with an awl” (Exo 21:6)?
Kiddushin 22b:3
The baraita adds: Since the verse states “door,” I would derive that this applies to any door, regardless of whether it is detached from its doorpost or whether it is not detached. Therefore, the verse states: “Then his master must take him to the court, and he shall take him to the door or the doorpost” (Exo 21:6): Just as a doorpost is upright and attached, so too, a door must be upright and attached to the doorpost.
Rashi’s Commentary
To the judges means to the court. He (the slave)
should take counsel with his vendors (the court) because it was they who sold him to him (the master) (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:6:1).
she requires no other rite of marriage than the passing of the purchase-money from the master to her father (cf. Bekhorot 13a, Kiddushin 19a).
He must redeem her means he shall afford her the opportunity to obtain her release from service—that he himself must cooperate in respect to the amount of her ransom. And what is this opportunity he has to give her? That he allows her a deduction from her ransom corresponding to the number of years she has served in his house, as though she were only hired by him. How can this be done? Supposing he had bought her for a maneh (one hundred shekels) and she had served him two years. We say to him: “You knew that she was to go free at the end of six years; it follows then that you bought the labour of each year for one sixth of a maneh. Now she has served you two years, that is the equivalent of one-third of the maneh: accept therefore two-thirds of a maneh as a ransom and let her go free out of your house (Kiddushin 14b).
1 And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron [Aaron being accorded honor in this first command for having participated and exerted himself along with Moses in the embassy of the signs] in the land of Egypt [outside the city],
Rashi’s Commentary
The Lord said to Moses and Aaron—Because Aaron had worked and toiled in performing the wonders just the same as Moses he paid him this honour at the first command by including him with Moses in the communication (Tanchuma Yahshan 2:3:8).
In the land of Egypt—This must have been outside the city! Or perhaps this is not so, but it was inside the city? Scripture however states, (Exo 9:29) “When I have gone out of the city, I will spread out my hands to the Lord.” Now how was it in regard to prayer which is of light importance in comparison with a communication from God? He did not recite the prayer inside the city! Then, in the case of a divine communication which is of so weighty importance does it not follow all the more that this was also so!—And why, indeed, did he not converse with him inside the city? Because it was full of idols (Mekhilta d’Rabbi Yishmael 12:1:4).
2 “This month [this stage of the moon (the Lord “pointing it out” to Moses)] [Nissan] shall be for you the beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you.
Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 12:2:1
This month shall be for you the beginning of months—R. Yishmael says: Moses pointed out the new moon to Israel and said to them: Thus shall it (the moon) look and the new month be designated thereby for all generations. R. Akiva says: This is one of the three things which Moses could not visualize until they were pointed out to him by the Lord. Likewise, (Lev 11:29) “Now these are unclean for
you among all the creeping animals that move upon the ground.” (Likewise,) (Num 8:4) “And this is the work of the lampstand.” Others say: He was likewise perplexed as to slaughtering, viz. (Num 29:38) “And this is what you shall do upon the altar.” R. Shimon b. Yochai says: Were not all of the commands spoken to Moses in the daytime? How, then, could he have pointed out the moon? R. Elazar says: He spoke with him just before it got dark and showed it to him when it got dark.
This work is a derivative of "The Rashi Chumash" by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein used under CC BY 3.0