Kommentar zu Schemot 21:11

ואם שלש אלה לא יעשה לה means IF HE DO NOT one of THESE THREE UNTO HER. What are these three? He should designate her to himself as his wife, or to his son, or allow her a deduction from the ransom so that she may go free (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:11:1). This man, however, has neither betrothed her to himself, nor to his son, and she herself does not possess the entire sum paid for her originally that she might buy herself out, therefore shall she go out free without money.

ואם שלש אלה לא יעשה לה, If he fails to do these three things for her, etc. The three are 1) marrying her, שארה; 2) providing her with a clothing allowance, etc., כסותה; 3) maintaining marital relations with her at designated intervals, עונתה; the Torah stresses the word אלה, these, so as to exclude previous conditions such as the need to betrothe her. ויצאה חנם אין כסף, she may leave for nothing without money. Both master and son have lost their authority over this girl; they cannot force her to serve the balance of the six years her father contracted for, or until she displays signs of puberty. Rather the master has to give the girl a document releasing her if he does not decide to consummate the betrothal. The words "without money," mean that there is no need for money to change hands whereas there is a need for a divorce document releasing her as the Torah considered the girl as betrothed to her master ever since her father had sold her. Our sages in the Mechilta add that the words אין כסף also mean that whereas the maidservant does not have to compensate her master financially if he failed to meet the conditions mentioned, she can also gain her freedom by merely attaining the age/or signs of puberty. All of these rulings are of Sinaitic origin, independent of any allusions in the text.

ואם שלש אלה, that he neither wants to marry her himself, nor have her marry his son, nor allow her to buy herself out of her contract,

שלש אלה, “these three,” the three options the Torah provided to the master-employer, 1) to marry her herself; 2) to make her his son’s bride; 3) to release her before her contractual 6 years of service have expired if she showed premature signs of puberty. No compensation for time not served is due her master/employer in such or similar circumstances.

ואם שלש אלה לא יעשה לה, “and if he does not perform these three for her, etc.” If he does not marry her himself, nor give her to his son as a wife or allow her father to release her, as per the word והפדה, then she leaves the employ of her master without having to compensate him for breach of contract and her father cannot prevent her from leaving. If even her father who had the right to sell her has lost his authority over her, her master whose authority over this girl never equaled that of her father most certainly cannot detain her. All of this is contained in the words ויצאה חנם, “she goes out free.” If you were to argue that her master can demand part of his purchase price back from her father, the Torah wrote the word חנם, “without compensation,” to make it clear that the father also does not have to compensate a master who had not honoured his undertaking. If you were to say that her master has to compensate her financially for having disappointed her, the Torah adds the words אין כסף, meaning she has no financial claim on him because he did not marry her. These are the words from which our sages learned in Kidushin 4 that a maidservant acquires her freedom merely by displaying signs of puberty.

If he does none of these three things. . . [Rashi knows this] because if the verse meant doing all three, why does it say, “She goes out free with no repayment of money?” If he designated her as a wife to himself or his son, she needs a divorce document [rather than going out freely]. And if he deducted from her redemption price, she must pay the rest [rather than going out without money]. Alternatively, [Rashi knows this] because doing all three is impossible: it would entail designating her to both himself and his son. (Re’m)

AND IF THESE THREE — designating her to himself as his wife, or to his son, or allowing her to be redeemed — HE DO NOT UNTO HER, then SHALL SHE GO OUT FOR NOTHING, WITHOUT MONEY, as do the menservants mentioned.¹⁰⁹I.e., at the end of six years, or the jubilee year. It is thus in contrast to Verse 7 above: And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. But if the master do not these three things to her [as explained], then she shall go out as the menservants do. See Ramban above at the end of Verse 8 [“The plain meaning of Scripture in this section etc.”]. To this he now adds that if the master fails to do any of the three ways to ameliorate her condition, then she shall go out free for nothing, as menservants do.

V. 11. ואם שלש אלה kann sich unmöglich auf die unmittelbar zuvor genannten drei Ehepflichten des Mannes beziehen, dagegen spricht entschieden der Nachsatz ויצאה חגם וגו׳. Ist sie einmal seine Frau, so kann sie nur durch Scheidebrief von ihm ausgehen, und hätte ja dann auch das חנם אין כסף keinen Sinn, da sie dann ja gar nicht mehr in Dienstpflicht zu ihm gestanden, die etwa erst durch Geld abgelöst werden müsste. Vielmehr bezieht es sich auf die bisher angegebenen drei Eventualitäten, die ihren Dienststand beendigen können: dass der Herr sie heiratet, der Sohn sie heiratet, oder ihre Auslösung bewirkt wird. Geschieht keines von diesen dreien, so geht sie mit Beendigung ihrer Dienstzeit ohne weiteres aus. Sie konnte, wie bereits zu V.7 bemerkt, nur als Minderjährige, קטנה, verkauft werden, und würde auch stillschweigend ihre Dienstpflicht nur haben bis zur vollendeten Volljährigkeit, בוגרות, dauern können, da nur so lange das Dispositionsrecht des Vaters sowohl über die Arbeitskraft als über die Eheeingehung seiner Tochter juridisch dauert, er aber dem Herrn kein größeres und länger dauerndes Anrecht übertragen kann, als ihm selbst zusteht. Mit ויצאה חנם wäre daher die Beendigung ihrer Dienstpflicht bereits selbstverständlich mit Beendigung ihrer juridischen väterlichen Hörigkeit, somit mit ימי בוגרות ausgesprochen. Auf weiter hinaus konnte der Vater in keinem Falle ein Herrenrecht erteilen, da er selbst auf weiter hinaus keins besaß. Nun steht aber noch der Beisatz: אין כסף, es muss daher die Dienstpflicht bei dem Herrn in einem Momente enden, über welchen hinaus sein Recht noch hätte dauern können, in welchem somit eine Entschädigung noch hätte denkbar und dem Gesetze Veranlassung sein können, ausdrücklich zu bemerken, dass gleichwohl die Entschädigung nicht stattfinden solle. Offenbar muss daher ihr Dienst beim Herrn früher als ihr Verhältnis zum Vater, somit in einem Momente zu Ende gehen, über den hinaus der Vater wohl noch Rechte über die Tochter hat, die stillschweigend dem Herrn hätten übertragen werden und für deren Erlass eine Entschädigung denkbar gewesen wäre. Dieser Moment ist aber kein anderer, als der Eintritt der Pubertät, ימי נערות, daher der Satz (Kiduschin 4 a): ויצאה חנם אלו ימי בוגרות אין כסף נערות. Sie geht mit Eintritt der ימי נערות aus dem Dienst, und obgleich dann der Vater noch bis zu ימי בוגרות Rechte über die Tochter hat, die in den Verkauf an den Herrn hätten mit einbegriffen sein können, und daher eine Entschädigung an diesen gerechtfertigt sein dürfte, so negiert doch das Gesetz diesen Anspruch mit: אין כסף, sie geht als נערה aus, und dem Herrn ist doch keine Entschädigung zu zahlen. — Gleichzeitig ist damit noch auf ein zwiefaches hingewiesen. Indem das Gesetz einen Austritt als בוגרת erwähnt, muss derselbe in Praxi möglich sein und findet sich derselbe da, wo der körperlichen Unreife willen, die mit אילונית bezeichnet wird, נערות gar nicht, und die Volljährigkeit, בוגרות, in Folge des Alters eintritt, das Mädchen somit ohne Zwischenstadium von קטנות zu בוגרות übergeht. Und ebenso liegt darin der Satz angebahnt, dass אין כסף לאדון זה ויש כסף לאדון אחר, dass, wenn sie vor בוגרת als נערה aus dem Verhältnis zum Vater durch Eingehung einer Ehe tritt, die Traugabe dem Vater zufällt (siehe Kiduschin 3 b und 4a u. b).

ואם שלש אלה לא יעשה לה, “and if her master had not performed any of the three options offered him by the Torah, etc.” Rashi spells out what these three options were; a) he marries her; b) his son marries her; c) seeing that she cannot release herself, he must give her an unconditional release. The interpretation of the three options do not refer to her enduring upon being married to her former master that her husband marries someone else in addition, less frequent opportunities to marital relations with her husband. Her entitlements to clothing, marital relations are unimpaired. When she leaves her master’s employ (which resulted upon her puberty in his marrying her) she must receive a definite document of divorce to ensure that she can marry without problems.

ואם שלש אלה, “if he fails to provide any of these three items, she will leave his house without paying the master any compensation for leaving his employ before her contract had been completed.” (Ibn Ezra)

ויצאה חנם THEN SHALL SHE GO OUT FOR NOTHING (i. e. without making any payment) — Scripture adds in her case one more way of acquiring freedom than it provides for menservants. What is this additional way of acquiring freedom? This verse teaches you that she goes free also on account of having shown signs of incipient puberty: but she must stay with him until she reaches this stage of incipient puberty. For that she goes free if the termination of the six years happened to come before the signs of incipient puberty we have already learned, since it is said, (Deuteronomy 15:12) ,‘[and if thy brother], an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman [be sold unto thee], and serve thee six years [then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee]” (cf. Rashi v. 7). What then must be the meaning of what is stated here, “she shall go out for nothing”? That when the signs of incipient puberty appear before the six years are at end she shall go out on account of them. Or perhaps Scripture states here that she shall go free only when she has reached the intermediate stage of womenhood (בגרות, fuller development after twelve years and a half), if this stage happened to be reached before the termination of the six years! To teach this Scripture states “without money” — which would be superfluous since it has already said “she shall go out חנם” — in order to add as another date of her acquiring freedom the time of her reaching this stage of womanhood. And though it necessarily follows that she goes free an reaching the state of בגרות since her freedom is brought about even by the earlier stage of נערות yet if Scripture had not used both terms (both חנם and אין כסף), I might have said that ויצאה חנם refers to the stage of womanhood; therefore both expressions are used in order to give a disputant no opportunity to offer a different explanation (i. e. Scripture wishes to be quite clear on the point in order to preclude all possibility of misunderstanding) (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:11:3; Kiddushin 4a).

ויצאה חנם אין כסף, the court will declare her free from her contract without her owing the master-employer any compensation for unexpired years of service. Our sages, (Kidushin 4) understood the verse halachically as meaning that she is entitled to leave that employ upon the signs of puberty without reference to the Jubilee year or the expiry of the six years for which her father had contracted her to the employer.

What are the three things. . . [Rashi knows this] because if the three were sustenance, clothing and conjugal rights, she would not go out freely. She would need a divorce document, since he designated her as a wife.

Seeing that the rulings are not dependent on allusions in the text, we are free to see in the text allusions to moral/ethical values, i.e. רמזים. We are basing ourselves on Sotah 42 that when the word איש appears by itself, i.e. without a name, the subject is G'd Himself, such as in Exodus 15,3. Our sages in Shir Hashirim Rabbah chapter 3 have said further that G'd insisted on expressing His fondness of the community of Israel by referring to it as His daughter. We also find that Scripture defines exile of the Jewish people as G'd having sold the Jewish people (compare Kings I 12,9). Inasmuch as the Torah legislated that if one acquires a male Jew as a slave he has to serve six years and no more, the Torah i.e. the Jewish people, is portrayed here as complaining to G'd why if the male Jewish slave should have to serve only six years, a Jewish girl, אמה, may have to serve longer; the Torah says that such a maid-servant will not automatically leave her master's employ after six years as does her male counterpart. In other words: "why has the Jewish people (the daughter) been sold into this long and bitter exile? Why are they not entitled to be treated in accordance with the male Jewish servant described in our chapter?"

Verbrechen und Armut, das sind die beiden Potenzen, die in gewöhnlichen sozialen Kreisen die Achtung der persönlichen Menschenwürde bis auf Null herabzubringen geeignet sind. Einen Verbrecher und ein Kind des Elends hat das Gesetz an den Eingang zu seinem Personenrechte gestellt und hat an ihnen gezeigt, was es unter Achtung der Menschenpersonen verstehe und wie es diese Achtung bis hinab zu den tiefsten Stufen der Gesellschaft gewahrt wissen wolle.

ויצאה חנם, “she will leave for nothing without money” (to her master). This verse speaks of her leaving after having attained the status of נערה, the period between twelve years and a day, and twelve and a half years.

Until she demonstrates signs (of puberty). [Rashi is explaining that] she does not go out immediately upon his failure to do one of these three things.

The Torah (Israel) repeats the argument by saying: "assuming that the girl is רעה, still guilty of the sins that caused her to be exiled in the first place (compare Isaiah 50,1: 'you have been sold on account of your iniquities') in the eyes of her master to whom she has been betrothed," after all she was also G'd's betrothed," as has been spelled out in Song of Songs 4,8? To this question the Torah (G'd) replies that the word לו in אשר לו יעדה, has also been spelled with the letter א, i.e. meaning that there are times when Israel does not qualify as G'd's betrothed. Israel is portrayed as countering that as long as it is in exile under the dominance of alien masters והפדה, she is deserving of release, seeing that her shortcomings are not even recognisable while she languishes under alien masters, בעיני אדוניה. Israel argues that her inadeqacies could come to light only if she would be redeemed and still fail to demonstrate her true repentance. As long as her erstwhile master has not redeemed her she could not do proper repentance. G'd replies that Israel was sold because it did not remain true to her master (G'd) while it lived in peace and unmolested, at a time when no alien ruler dominated her.

Es folgen nun Sätze aus dem Personenrechte VV. 12 —32; und zwar VV. 12 bis 17 Verbrechen gegen das Leben und dem Leben gleichgeachtete Beziehungen, VV. 18. bis 26 Verbrechen gegen die Körperintegrität, Verletzungen und Gesundheitsschädigungen, VV. 27. — 32 Körperverletzungen und Tötung durch Tiere.

The additional words: אין כסף, “without money changing hands,” apply to a situation in which she has attained the status of בגרות, biological maturity, i.e. over twelve and a half years of age. (Talmud, tractate Kiddushin folio 4) The reason this had to be added is that if the Torah had not written this, we would have assumed that already the words ויצאה חנם apply to her having this status, which would have been a simple assumption to make. In the event that you the reader would raise the question that seeing that this girl is legally entitled to leave the employ of her master already when having attained the status of נערה, why would the Torah have to add anything further, the answer to this question given by the Talmud we quoted, is that if she had displayed symptoms of being unable to bear children, i.e. she never displayed the symptoms attesting to the fact that she had matured biologically, in which case the Torah rules that when she attains the age of twelve and a half she must be given her freedom regardless of any other considerations.

ויצאה חנם, “she will leave, with the consent of the court;” the Torah here does not specify a particular point in time, but does so at a later time in Deuteronomy 15,12, where we read: כי ימכר לך אחיך העברי או העבריה ועבדך שש שנים, “when your brother the Hebrew is forced to sell himself to you or your sister a female Hebrew, he/she is to serve (work for) you for six years.” אין כסף, “if she falls sick at the end of her six years and is unable to leave, and her master supplies her with food, she need not compensate him for this. (Based on Torah shleymah by Rabbi Menachem Kasher Mishpatim, quoting Jerusalem Talmud, item 230 on our verse.) According to the simple meaning of the text, the words: אין כסף which are superfluous after the word חנם, “without compensation,” are a way of underlining the statement, just as the statement מת את ולא תחיה, “you are dead and will not live.”

Israel tries again by saying that if G'd did not want her as His bride, at least He ought to treat her as His son, seeing that there are numerous occasions in the Bible when the Jewish people are described as G'd's sons when compared to the other nations. Those nations are fully aware that the Jewish people enjoy a special relationship with G'd, even their very name reflecting this. If Israel still enjoyed a special relationship with G'd, at least it should not be treated worse than any other nation, something that unfortunately is evident to everyone following the history of the fate of the Jews. It should be enough punishment that the Jewish people are no longer superior to the other nations. G'd replies to this argument by saying Israel will be treated according to משפט הבנות, the laws applying to daughters. They are called daughters even if they do not qualify as being called G'd's daughter. To this Israel replies אם אחרת יקח לו, "if He takes another in her place," the daughter in question must still not be denied her statutory rights, i.e. שארה, כסותה, עונתה. The Zohar volume 2 page 152 writes that when the destruction of the Temple occurred all the sources which normally supplied Israel with G'd's bounty were turned in a different direction so that this bounty was directed at the other nations. Whereas previously the sacred sites were recipients of this bounty, now the situation was reversed and all this Divine bounty was poured out in unholy places. Israel is depicted as requesting that G'd at least not direct all His bounty to other nations. Even if G'd were to grant most of His bounty to the other nations because He still considers Israel's sins as unexpiated, at least He should not deny her her statutory rights such as שארה, etc. In this instance the meaning of שארה would be her sustenance as per the opinion of Rabbi Aushiyah in the Mechilta. כסותה would refer to her clothing requirements, and עונתה in this instance would refer to G'd answering Israel's prayers when it is in difficulties. [from the word עונה answer, Ed.]

Israel asks how could it possibly continue to exist without these necessities? Israel adds, ואם שלש אלה לא יעשה לה, "If G'd were unwilling to grant her even those three necessities," at least He should let her go free, ויצאה חנם, without having to make a payment for such freedom, i.e. it should be released from the undertaking to perform G'd's commandments. The words אין כסף mean that Israel claims that her payment in terms of afflictions is adequate already.

Since we are already indulging moral allusions contained in this passage, here is another possible approach. When the Torah speaks of "a man selling his daughter," the subject is G'd; He is selling His holy nation, Israel, to be a maidservant; seeing that various exiles the Jewish people have found themselves in, such as the exile in Egypt and the exile in Babylon, have not produced the desired rehabilitation of the people, the reason may have been due to Israel having been enslaved to a single nation in each instance. As long as we were a single unit, even while in exile, we never became reduced to the status of אמה, a lowly maidservant. In this present exile when we are scattered amongst all the nations wherever Jews are to be found they are looked down upn, are in disgrace, so much so that even if the redemption would occur tomorrow we have already acquired the title אמה, maidservant. This is why G'd has given us the assurance that the redemption of this nation will not be similar to what it has been in the past, i.e. the word העבדים is a reference to Exodus 20,2 where the Torah spoke about Egypt being בית העבדים, a house of bondage. The difference between the redemption then and the redemption to come is that at that time G'd only had to orchestrate the redemption of a people from one single country as distinct from what will happen in the future. The miracles which will be performed at that future redemption will eclipse the ones performed when the Israelites left Egypt. When the final redemption will occur the rulers of all the nations will prostrate themselves before Israel as predicted in Isaiah 49,23.

The Torah goes on to say אם רעה בעיני אדוניה, which we have to understand in light of a statement in the Zohar that if the redemption would occur as a result of Israel's good deeds as compared to the redemption which will occur because G'd's timetable has run out. If the redemption ocurs because of the former situation, an angel of G'd whose feet are planted on earth and whose head is in Heaven will become visible. If, however, the redemption will occur only because G'd cannot defer it any longer, the redeemer will arrive as a poor man riding on the lowly ass as described in Zachariah 9,9. G'd assures Israel that even if it is still unworthy when the time comes for redemption, רעה בעיני אדויה, in the eyes of her Master, ולא יעדה, and not deserving of redemption (לא spelled with an א), He will release her, והפדה. He will not continue to let her languish amidst עם נכרי, an alien people, although the nature of that redemption would not match the type of redemption which would occur if the people were worthy of it. At any rate, the "sale" of Israel is not something permanent and irreversible. Job 28,3 expresses this redemption as "He has set an end to darkness."

The Torah continues and describes a redemption as the result of Israel's having returned to G'd as a penitent sinner; אם לבנו ייעדנה, if they are deserving to be called בנים, "sons," a state attained when they observe G'd's commandments (compare Baba Batra 22), then כמשפט הבנות יעשה לה, G'd will deal with them according to the laws of the daughters. Their holy souls, also known as בנות ירושלים, will be the recipients of all the promises we find spelled out concerning that period throughout the Books of the Prophets. Those Jews still alive at that time will experience the brilliant light with which G'd will then illuminate the universe. They will all be able to point to G'd by saying זה אלי ואנוהו, "This is my G'd, let me glorify Him."

The words אם אחרת יקח לו in verse 10 describe G'd's promise that regardless of whether Israel is evil so that G'd has sold it in favour of someone else receiving His bounty, or whether it is good so that it qualifies for the status of "son," it will not forfeit the three basics, שאר כסות ועונה. Should it not receive these either, i.e. that the afflictions during exile will be too great, then ויצאה חנם אין כסף. G'd will consider these afflictions as payment for the redemption and Israel will experience the coming of the Messiah even before the final date G'd has set aside in His timetable for that event.