Комментарий к Шмот 21:2

כי תקנה עבד עברי IF THOU BUYEST AN עבד עברי — This means a servant who is a Hebrew. Or perhaps this is not so, but it means a servant of a Hebrew (one who had been the servant of a Hebrew), i. e. a Canaanitish servant whom thou hast bought from an Israelite, and it is with regard to him that Scripture states “six years he shall serve”! — And if you ask, how I will then explain the commandment, (Leviticus 25:46) “and you shall leave them (the Canaanitish servants) as an inheritance for your children [and they shall serve you forever]”? then I reply, that this refers to the case of a Canaanitish servant who has been bought from a heathen; but if such a servant has been bought from an Israelite he shall go free at the end of six years! — This explanation that our text refers to a Canaanite servant will not hold, for Scripture states, (Deuteronomy 15:12) “and if thy brother an Hebrew man be sold unto thee [and serve thee six years, then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee]” — the Torah says, as it were, by using the two terms העברי and אחיך: I tell you this (that the servant shall go free in the seventh year) only with regard to thy brother! Consequently Leviticus 25:46 has to be applied to any Canaanite servant, whether bought from a Hebrew or from a heathen and עבד עברי in our text can only denote עבד שהוא עברי. (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:2:2)

IF THOU BUY A HEBREW SERVANT. G-d began the first ordinance with the subject of a Hebrew servant, because the liberation of the servant in the seventh year contains a rememberance of the departure from Egypt which is mentioned in the first commandment, just as He said on it, And thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the Eternal thy G-d redeemed thee; therefore I command thee this thing today.²¹Deuteronomy 15:15. It also contains a remembrance of the creation, just as the Sabbath does, for the seventh year signals to a servant a complete rest from the work of his master, just as the seventh day of the week does. There is in addition a ‘seventh’ amongst the years, which is the jubilee, for seven is the chosen of the days [to be the Sabbath], and of the years [to be the Sabbatical year], and of the [seven] Sabbaticals [to be the jubilee]; and they all point to one subject, namely, the secret of the days of the world — from bereshith (in the beginning) till vayechulu (and they were finished).²²Genesis 2:1. See Ramban Vol. I, pp. 61-64. Therefore this commandment deserved to be mentioned first, because of its extreme importance, alluding as it does to great things in the process of creation.²³Ramban’s reticent and challenging language is illuminated in an essay by I. Weinstock (B’maglei Haniglah V’hanistar, pp. 151-241) where he traces the development of this Cabalistic doctrine: The universe is subject to cycles of seven thousand years; after each six thousand years of growth and activity the seventh thousand is one of “rest” — destruction. This process repeats itself seven times — representing a total of forty-nine thousand years, the fiftieth thousand being the jubilee when all existence returns to its beginnings. This phenomenon applies to the planet on which we live as well as to the worlds above us. One can thus get a glimpse into the meaning of Ramban’s words before us, that this commandment “alludes to great things in the process of creation.” This is why the prophet Jeremiah was very stringent about it and said, Thus saith the Eternal, the G-d of Israel: I made a covenant with your fathers;²⁴Jeremiah 34:13. At the end of the seven years ye shall let go every one his manservant, and every one his maidservant.²⁵Ibid., Verses 14 and 10 (Ramban combined here parts of these verses). And on account of its violation, G-d decreed the exile,²⁶Ibid., Verses 17-22. just as the Torah decreed exile for the Sabbatical rest of the land which was not observed,²⁷Leviticus 26:34-35. as I will yet write,²⁸Ibid., 25:2. with the help of the Rock.
When He finished stating the ordinance of this [first] commandment as it applies to Hebrew servants, He began the ordinance of the commandment, Thou shalt not murder,²⁹Above, 20:13. since it is the worst [sin] and then [He stated the ordinances of the commandments] to honor one’s parents, and of Thou shalt not steal,²⁹Above, 20:13. and then He went back to the ordinance of one who smites his fellow-man but did not kill him,³⁰Further, Verses 18-19. and then to the murder of a bondman, which is worse than the killing of an offspring,³¹See further Verse 22 — that for killing an unborn child a fine is paid, while in the case of the bondman, if he did not survive for twenty-four hours after he was struck by the master, the master is liable to death (Verses 20-21). and after that to [injury to] the limbs of Israelites and bondmen,³²Ibid., Verses 24-27. and then to cases of death inflicted by cattle which cause injury.³³Ibid., Verses 28-32. All the sections are thus arranged in logical sequence and in proper order.

כי תקנה עבד עברי, "When you purchase a Jewish slave, etc." Perhaps the meaning is: "when you are about to buy a slave, buy a Jewish slave (rather than a Gentile)." You should not buy a Gentile because you know you can keep him indefinitely.

כי תקנה עבד עברי, the Torah speaks about a Jewish thief who did not have enough money to make restitution (compare Exodus 22,2, “if he is unable to make restitution he will be sold in settlement of what he stole.”) שש שנים יעבוד, this applies to the thief who was sold by the court. The case of someone who had to sell himself (his labour) is discussed by the Torah in Leviticus 25,39 under the heading of כי ימוך אחיך ומכר לך, “when your brother has fallen on economically hard times so that he had to sell himself to cover his debts, etc.” Concerning that situation the Torah adds that he goes free in the Jubilee year (verse 40 there) In our situation, the term he is sold for is 6 years. Some of our sages (Kidushin 14) hold that both situations are halachically similar based on a gezeyrah shavah, identical wording being used by the Torah in both examples, i.e. the word in question being the unnecessary word יעבוד in Leviticus 25,40.

כי תקנה עבד עברי, ”When you acquire the services of a Jewish labourer,” Nachmanides writes that the reason why the Torah commences the legislation following with this example of the details of setting such a labourer free from his obligations vis a vis you in the seventh year, is that this law contains reminiscences of the Jewish experience in Egypt. This is why the Torah (in Deut. 15,15) writes: “you shall remember that you were a serf in the land of Egypt and the Lord your G’d set you free; this is why I command you this thing this day.” In addition to the reminder of the bondage experience of the Jewish people in the legislation containing the treatment of Jews performing forced labour, there is also a reminder of the 6 days of Creation followed by the Sabbath, the same cycle (in terms of years) applies to the period that a man who has sold himself, or been sold by the Court, has to serve out his term with the same master. The element of the sanctity of the seventh time seven years surfaces once more if said servant voluntarily extends his term of service for the same master. The entire legislation reflects symbolisms, seeing that the number seven surfaces as something intrinsically holy, or as something to be sanctified in terms of years or multiples of shemittah cycles. This is also why the prophet Jeremiah 34,13 warns the Jews that they will be punished with exile (becoming slaves again) for collectively violating the law which required them to release their servants not later than after 49 years, i e in the Jubilee year, as well as the law governing the abstention from working one’s land or orchard every seventh year. The Torah continues with laws governing murder or killing through negligence, which is the most serious of crimes committed against one’s fellow man, followed by the laws about not treating parents with the respect due them, even bodily harming them, followed by the laws about stealing property, etc., one after another in logical sequence.

כי תקנה עבד עברי “if you will purchase a Hebrew slave, etc.” The reason the Torah commences with legislation involving rules about how to treat a Hebrew slave is because the Israelites had only recently emerged from all being slaves, albeit to masters of another nationality. This legislation is also a reminder of the Exodus from Egypt. The essence of the liberation of the Jews from Egypt was to exchange their masters. Whereas prior to the Exodus they were enslaved to a mortal master, a cruel one at that, ever since the Exodus they became the charge of an eternal Master, the most kind-hearted imaginable. By liberating the Jewish people from a cruel fate G’d had established a claim to their loyalty, much as He had established an especial claim to the loyalty of the Jewish firstborn who had been exempted from the slaying of the firstborn.
Just as G’d had mentioned the fact that He had taken the Jewish people out of Egypt as the reason for claiming obeisance as their sole owner, (Leviticus 25,55) “for the Children of Israel are My servants,” so mention of this fact in the first of the Ten Commandments provides the justification for legislation regulating treatment of Jewish servants. This legislation is also a reminder of the fact that the Lord created the universe, as the Sabbath is the foremost reminder of that fact in the Decalogue. Just as free men are to rest every seventh day as an acknowledgment of their Creator who created the world in seven days, so the Jewish servant is no less obligated to devote the Sabbath to His master in heaven rather than to devote it to his master’s deputy, his employer on earth. The number seven permeates Judaism in more ways than one. Not only the seventh day, but the seventh month as well as the seventh year all have special significance. This special meaning of cycles of seven years culminates in the Yovel legislation which concludes a cycle called עולם, “forever,” in the words of the Torah (Leviticus 25,20). The term Sabbath is not reserved exclusively for the seventh day, but is also applied to the seventh year, the year when agricultural work is suspended.

“If you buy. . .” A slave who is a Hebrew. Whereas if the verse was indeed referring to a gentile slave, it would have said: “When you buy a gentile slave from a Jew who sold him to you,” and it is not referring to a slave who was sold by a court for his theft. This is why Rashi first explains the meaning of עבד עברי before the words of כי תקנה that appear earlier, so that in this way, כי תקנה will prove that the verse is speaking of a [Hebrew] slave sold by the court.

V. 2. כי תקנה עבד עברי. Nichts dürfte dem vorurteilslosen Denker die Wahrheit der mündlichen Gesetztradition also in die Augen springend dokumentieren, wie sofort die ersten beiden Paragraphen, VV. 2 — 6 und VV. 7 —11, mit welchen diese, "mosaische Gesetzgebung" beginnt. Es soll das Zivil- und Kriminalrecht einem Volke gegeben werden, es sollen die Grundsätze und Bestimmungen des Rechts und der Menschlichkeit ausgesprochen werden, die das Verhalten des Menschen zum Menschen in einem Staate zu regeln bestimmt sein sollen, der erste Gesetzestitel ist, wie natürlich, dem Personenrechte gewidmet, und dieser Titel beginnt mit den Sätzen: Wenn ein Mensch den andern, und wenn ein Vater seine Tochter verkauft!!! Welch eine völlig undenkbare Ungeheuerlichkeit, wenn in der Tat diese "Schrift" das "Gesetzbuch" des jüdischen Volkes, sie und nur sie die primäre und einzige Quelle des "jüdischen Rechts" sein sollte! Was muss nicht alles bereits gesagt und bestimmt, besprochen, festgesetzt und erläutert sein, ehe das Gesetz zu diesen, doch jedenfalls nur Ausnahmefällen, kommen, ja von ihnen nur sprechen kann. Und mit diesen, das heiligste persönliche Recht, das Recht persönlicher Freiheit beschränkend negierenden Sätzen, beginnt das Gesetz!

כי תקנה עבד עברי, “if you acquire a Hebrew servant;” according to Rashi, the scenario described here is that a thief who did not have the means to compensate his victim for what he had stolen, has been “sold” (i.e. the value of his labour for six years) by the court which had convicted him. [A Jew’s body cannot be sold by any court. Ed.] The procedure has been described in Exodus 22,2. Alternately, the person described in the Torah here has fallen on hard times and has sold his labour for six years to a “master” in order to pay off his creditors. If he had been “sold” by the court he does not automatically leave his master’s employment at the conclusion of six years service. Thus far Rashi on above verse. The problem is what prompted Rashi to write that someone sold by the court does not automatically conclude his service at the end of six years? We have a verse in Deuteronomy 15,12, according to which if someone who is a Jew or Jewess, has been “sold” to you, his contract is valid for six years be he a male or a female. He is to be released at the end of that period, and his master is to provide him with a minimal stake to enable him to establish himself economically from that point. (verses 13-14 there) Clearly, that verse and its provisions do not apply to someone who had “sold” himself but had been “sold” by the court. Rashi there also comments that the person in question had been sold by someone other than himself. We must assume therefore that Rashi was explaining the commentary of the Mechilta, according to which the words: כי תקנה apply to the son or daughter of the original master, who had died during these years. The question is whether the contract can be inherited by the master’s children, or in the event that the master did not leave behind any children, whether whosoever inherits the master’s estate this includes the unexpired period of such a servant’s contract. In the event that such a servant had been “sold” by the court would the contract expire automatically with the death of the original purchaser? The wording in Deuteronomy, כי ימכר לך, “if he has been sold to you,” as is distinct from the wording in our verse where the master is described as actively acquiring the servant, i.e. כי תקנה, suggest that the two situations described are not identical. In Deuteronomy the period of service is spelled out as being six years, adding that in the seventh year such a servant has to be released unconditionally, whereas in Exodus, in our verse the Torah adds the same clause. In Deuteronomy the word (unnecessary) ועבדך, “he shall serve you” is added. This reference to “you” is absent in our verse here. In Leviticus 25,39, where the subject of an impoverished Israelite selling himself is first raised, the Torah does not speak of a term of 6 years but a period concluding with the Jubilee year, a year when all such forced sales of land or labour are automatically reversed. If such servants are not released until the Jubilee year, it stands to reason that they continue serving the son or daughter of their master if he passed away before the onset of the Jubilee year (once in 50 years). This means that the verse we are dealing with, commencing with the words: “when you acquire, etc.,” must apply to someone who had been sold by the court. If the Torah, in dealing with the acquisition of a Jewish servant, had only written the one verse on the subject in our portion, I might have thought that such a “servant” would have to continue serving upon the death of his master either his son or even his brother. To prevent us from misunderstanding this, the Torah had to write when speaking of a servant who had been sold by the court: כי ימכר לך אחיך, “when your brother has been sold to you,” and it had to add: ועבדך שש שנים, “and he has to serve you, (the purchaser) for six years.” This excludes any service to an heir of the purchaser. We therefore find that on the one hand the text implies something additional, and on the other hand it implies something less. The Rabbis therefore interpreted the addition as being the heir if he is a son or a daughter, but excluding the brother in the event the master did not leave behind a son or daughter in the event that the servant had been sold by the court. We find in the Talmud, tractate Kiddushin, folio 17 that the Talmud asks what forces us to include as heir the son, while at the same time excluding the heir when he is a brother, i.e. not a direct descendant. The answer given is that a son takes the place of his father when it comes to inheriting landed property or a maidservant whom the father may assign to his son to inherit as maidservant, (wife) when of age. (Compare Leviticus 27,20 and Talmud tractate Erchin folio 25.) [At this point our author refers to Rashi saying that the whole concept of the servant leaving his master’s forced employment is a chidush, something not derived from standard methods of interpreting the Torah’s laws, and he proceeds to suggest that it could be a g’zeyrah shaveh, an accepted method of interpretation. As I have not found in my editions of Rashi, any reference to his saying that there is a chidush, I’ll skip this. Ed.]

כי תקנה עבד עברי, “If you acquire a Jewish slave, etc.;” the reason why the Torah commences its list of social laws with this particular law is that the Israelites had recently been redeemed from slavery themselves, so that they had good reason to understand how important it is not to treat one of their own as they had been treated in Egypt. Even if an Israelite had committed a crime for which he had been sold, the maximum length of time he was allowed to have his freedom to choose his employer restricted was six years. Even during these six years, his master, who did not own him bodily even then, was not allowed to force him to perform menial tasks. כי תקנה, “when you purchased etc.” Rashi explains that the “slave” the Torah speaks about was not purchased at a public auction, but was acquired as a servant from a duly elected Jewish Court whose task it also is to ensure that a thief’s victim is compensated by his victim. If he cannot do so from his own means he is “sold,” i.e. his labour is sold for a maximum of six years, his victim being paid the wages that this servant would earn during the next six years if he had not been “sold,” and is given by the court to his victim. [This editor has rounded out the picture based on the Talmud, for the benefit of readers totally unfamiliar with this subject.] There was some discussion in the Mechilta if our verse deals with an Israelite who had fallen on hard times and accumulated debts that he could not repay and who “sold himself,” (based on Leviticus 25,39). According to that view an Israelite “sold” by the court would not automatically be able to terminate his employment after 6 years maximum. This view is in apparent contrast with what the Torah wrote in Deuteronomy. According to Leviticus 25,46, gentile slaves who are owned bodily by Jews may be inherited by their children. The words ונמכר לך, “and he has been sold to you,” refer to an Israelite “sold” by the court. The Torah continues by decreeing that such a “slave” must not be required to perform menial tasks for his “master.” Clearly, this rule does not apply to gentile slaves whose bodies are owned by their Israelite masters. Deuteronomy 15,12 makes it quite clear that the law of releasing a slave after 6 years applies only to Jews who have been sold by the court. The passive form of yimacher, is absolutely clear. The Mechilta does not disagree, but derives the rule from a different type of exegesis. The author there (Rabbi Yishmael) uses a method known as gezeyrah shaveh. [I have slightly abbreviated our author’s presentation of this subject. Ed.] שש שנים יעבוד, “he is to serve for six years.” The number “6” in this verse is viewed also as an allegorical reference to six empires that at one time or another will enslave the Jewish people. They are: “Egypt, Ashur, Babylon, the Medes, the Greeks, and the Romans, (descendants of Edom). According to this interpretation, after the collapse of the Roman Empire the Jewish people, [as a whole, Ed.] will not again experience enslavement. This is based on the end of the verse: “and in the seventh year he will be released unconditionally.”

‎כי תקנה IF THOU BUYEST [AN HEBREW SERVANT] — This means an Hebrew servant whom thou hast bought from the hand of the court which sold him for a theft which he had committed, as it is said, (Exodus 22:2) “if he (the thief) have nothing, then shall he be sold for his theft”. Or perhaps this is not so, but Scripture is referring to the case of one who sells himself as a servant on account of his destitution, whilst he who has been sold by the court for his theft shall not go free at the end of six years! This assumption it erroneous, for when Scripture states, (Leviticus 25:39, 40) “and if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and he sells himself unto thee … [he shall serve thee unto the year of jubilee]”, it is plain that in this passage there is mentioned the case of one who sells himself on account of his destitution. How then must I explain כי תקנה in this verse? Obviously as referring to him who was sold by the court (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 21:2:1).

ובשביעית, the seventh year after he was sold, not the seventh year of the Shmittah cycle.

But if bought from a Jew he shall go free after six years. And accordingly, piercing the slave’s ear [so he will serve until the yovel] would be a decree of the Torah rather than because of [what Rashi explained in v. 6]: “The ear, which heard upon Mount Sinai, ‘You shall not steal!’. . .” and “‘For to Me are the B’nei Yisrael servants’. . .”

The reason the Torah refers to the slave as עבדי instead of ישראלי, may be that the Torah is sensitive about combining the words עבד and ישראל. The Torah also wants us to know that the term עבד when used as applicable to a Jew denotes a temporary status only, seeing that all Jews are permanently G'd's servants. This is one of the reasons such a Jewish servant must leave his master in the seventh year. The Torah also hints that unless a Jew had violated the Torah's commandments he would not find himself in the position of being a slave. Kiddushin 14 in particular states that the Torah speaks of a thief who was unable to make restitution and who has been "sold" by the court in order that the proceeds of the sale be used to compensate his victim. Even in a situation discussed by the Torah in Deut. 15,12 when the subject has sold himself, he did not find himself in such a desperate situation had he not previously violated Torah law. Rabbi Ami tells us in Shabbat 55 that afflictions have always been preceded by sins committed by the individual afflicted.

Ein ganz anderes ist es, wenn nicht dieses "Buch"; wenn das lebendig gebliebene Wort der Gesetzesüberlieferung, welcher dieses "Buch" nur die Stütze des Gedächtnisses und das Korrektiv des Zweifels bewahren soll, die Quelle des jüdischen Rechts bildet, wenn, wie es ja in dem Buche selbst konstatiert ist, das Gesetz bereits vierzig Jahre lang in seiner Vollständigkeit dem lebendigen Bewusstsein des Volkes übergeben und eingeprägt und zu eigen gemacht war, als vor seinem Scheiden ihm Mosche dieses Buch einzuhändigen hatte. Dann begreift es sich, wie eben Ausnahmsfälle zunächst zur Verzeichnung kommen, um eben an ihnen die Prinzipien des Normalen um so schlagender gegenwärtig zu halten, wie überhaupt nicht Rechtsprinzipien, כללים, sondern vorzugsweise einzelne konkrete Fälle, und zwar so lehrreich im "Buche" verzeichnet worden, dass sich von ihnen mit Leichtigkeit die dem lebendigen Bewußtsein anvertrauten Prinzipien abstrahieren lassen, und wie überhaupt die Sprache in diesem "Buche" eine so kunstvoll gewählte ist, dass oft mit einem auffallenden Ausdrucke, einer veränderten Konstruktion, einer Wortstellung, einem Buchstaben etc. eine ganze Reihe von Rechtsbegriffen angedeutet ist. Sollte doch aus diesem Buche nicht das Recht geschöpft werden. Sollte es doch dem bereits des Rechtes Kundigen nur als Mittel der Erhaltung und Immerwiederneubelebung seiner dem Gedächtnis anvertrauten Kunde, sowie dem Rechtslehrer zum Lehr-Mittel in die Hand gegeben sein, daran die zu tradierende Rechtskunde also befestigend zu knüpfen, dass es dem aufhorchenden Rechtsjünger leicht werde, an der Hand der ihm schriftlich vorliegenden Sätze die mündlich empfangene Kunde sich immer aufs neue im Geiste zu reproduzieren.

יעבוד, “he will serve.” The word refers here to ordinary household chores etc., not to backbreaking labour.

לחפשי means INTO FREEDOM (i. e. חפשי is a noun like חֹפֶשׁ but having a redundant י at the end).

יצא לחפשי, the word lachofshi, a participle of a verb, means “without having to pay compensation;” had the word described the state of liberty of the “servant” now released, the word should have been vocalised lechofshi with the semi vowel sheva under the letter ל.

If your brother, the Hebrew, is sold to you. In other words, through a gezeirah shavah we learn the meaning of עברי in this verse, from עברי (in Devarim 15:12), “Your brother, the Hebrew ( העברי ) . . .” For the word העברי there is superfluous — since it says “your brother”, [we know it is speaking of a Hebrew. So] why say also “the Hebrew”? Thus, עברי there is for a gezeirah shavah, teaching that עברי here is “your brother”, [i.e., a Hebrew]. So explained the Re’m.

Another nuance in the words עבד עברי instead of עברי עבד, "a Jew as a slave," is a reminder to the purchaser that the individual in question was an עבד already before the present master had purchased him. The idea is that he was already guilty vis-a-vis Heaven. The court would not sell him until he had been convicted. As a result we need not have any misgivings about the term עבד עברי being used by the Torah in this instance as opposed to Deut. 15,12 where the Torah characterises the "slave" as אחיך העברי, "your brother the Jew."

Es verhält sich die תורה שבכתב zur תורה שבעל פה, wie die kurzen Diktate nach einer vollständig mündlich vorgetragenen Disziplin einer Wissenschaft sich zu dem mündlich Vorgetragenen verhalten. Für die Jünger der Wissenschaft, die die mündlichen Vorträge gehört, sind kurze Diktate vollkommen hinreichend, um zu jeder Zeit, an der Hand dieser Diktate, sich die ganze Wissenschaft vollständig gegenwärtig zu halten und immer aufs neue wieder zu vergegenwärtigen. Für sie genügt oft ein Wort, ein beigefügtes Fragezeichen, Ausrufungszeichen, ein Gedankenstrich, ein Punkt, ein Strich unter einem Worte etc., um eine ganze Gedankenreihe, eine Bemerkung, Beschränkung usw. wieder ins Leben zu rufen. Für diejenigen, die die mündlichen Vorträge des Meisters nicht gehört, werden solche Diktate völlig unbrauchbar sein. Wollen sie sich lediglich aus ihnen die Wissenschaft konstruieren, so werden sie vielfach irre gehen müssen; Worte, Zeichen usw., die den durch die mündlichen Vorträge eingeweihten Jüngern als die belehrendsten Leitsterne zur Festhaltung der gelehrten und gelernten Wahrheiten dienen, starren den Uneingeweihten als nichtssagende Sphinxe entgegen, und die Wahrheiten, welche die eingeweihten Jünger nur an ihnen reproduzieren, nicht aber aus ihnen produzieren, werden die Uneingeweihten nur als bodenlose Spiele des Witzes und leere Träumereien belächeln. —

ובשביעית, “and in the seventh year;” at the beginning of his seventh year of service. The reference is to the beginning of the seventh year after this servant had been “sold.” When a Jewish servant has not been sold by the court, he is released only with the onset of the Jubilee year.

חנם, “by himself.” If the servant took sick during the period of his (forced) employment the employer cannot demand to be reimbursed for working hours lost, nor can he demand to be reimbursed for medical treatment for which the employer laid out the money. In short, the word חנם means that no money will change hands at the time this servant leaves the employ of his master (Mechilta). This rule applies provided that the servant was not sick for more than three years out of the six. If he was sick for three years or more, he has to make up time lost by working it off. This is based on Isaiah 16,14: “in three years, fixed like the years of a hired hand.” Seeing that this servant has been compared to a “hired hand” in Leviticus 25,40 it follows that the minimum amount of service he must render is three years (compare also Tosafot Kidushin 17A.).

The term עבד had to be used by the Torah to justify why he has to serve his master for six years and cannot leave his employer like ordinary employees.

Indem uns das göttliche Wort die Prinzipien des Rechts und der Humanität vergegenwärtigen will, die es für die Rechtsachtung der Person sanktioniert, greift es zunächst den Verbrecher hervor, und zwar den in allen andern Staaten mit empfindlichsten Leibes- und Freiheitsstrafen bedrohten Verbrecher am Eigentum, und zeigt: welche Behandlung sein Recht in seinem Staate dem Verbrecher diktiert. Lesen wir dies Gesetz:

יצא לחפשי, “he will exit to freedom.” G-d, so to speaks is quoted as saying: “I have redeemed the Israelites from Egypt from the house of slavery (Exodus 20,2). My intention was that they will henceforth be free men. They are therefore not “free” to sell themselves into servitude.” This is the meaning of Leviticus 25,10: “for the Children of Israel are My servants.” My document proving that they are Mine has preceded anyone’s subsequent document, which is thereby rendered legally invalid.

שש שנים יעבוד, he shall serve for six years, etc. The Torah means that even if the slave escaped during these six years he has to complete the term remaining from the original six years. The reason the Torah does not write: "he has to serve you," (i.e. the purchaser) is to allow for the slave to complete the six years if the original master has died and he has now become the property of the son.

כי תקנה עבד עברי. Es lehrt uns die mündliche Überlieferung, daß hier von dem Kap. 22, 2 bezeichneten Falle die Rede ist, dass ein Dieb, der den Diebstahl zu ersehen nicht das Vermögen hat, zum Behufe dieses Ersatzes verkauft wird, אם אין לו ונמכר בגנבתו. Ein solcher Verkauf findet nur zum Ersatz des gestohlenen Wertes, nicht aber zur Aufbringung der dort V. 3 als Pön statuierten doppelten Zahlung, und nur bei einem Diebe, nicht aber bei einer Diebin statt. Daher heißt es dort nicht allgemein: אם אין לו ונמכר, sondern: בגנבתו, für das Gestohlene, und nicht: בגנבה, sondern: בגנבתו, freiwillig/i verkaufe, ist (Wajikra 25, 39) vorgesehen, וכי ימוך ונמכר לך. Darum heißt es auch nur hier: כי תקנה עבד עברי, er ist schon, ehe du ihn kaufst, עבד durch das Gesetz, und du kaufst ihn aus der Hand des Gerichtes. Gleichwohl soll er, wie die מכילתא bemerkt, dir עברי, der nationale Genosse bleiben, es kann nur das Gesetz nicht umhin, ihn עבד zu nennen, יכול תקראנו עבד לשום בזיון ת׳׳ל כי תקנה עבד עברי- התורה קראתו עבד בעל כרחה.

לחפשי, some commentators claim that the letter ל at the beginning of this word, meaning “to” is superfluous, just as that letter is superfluous in Chronicles I 3,2: והשלישי לאבשלום, which means nothing other than והשלישי אבשלום, “the third: Absalom.” Here too the Torah had to write only: יצא חפשי, “will go free.” The letter י in the word חפשי, is a preposition just as in the word: הקדמוני in Ezekiel 10,19, which converts that word to mean: “which is at the eastern gate.” It is similar to the words: שלישי, רביעי, “third, fourth, etc. Other commentators understand the prefix letter ל in לחפשי as converting its meaning to a noun: “לחופש, to freedom.” They compare it to expressions such as “to דרור.” If so, then the letter י at the end of the word: לחפשי would be superfluous, just as the letter י in the words: ,היושבי, המגביהי המשפילי in Psalms 23,1, 113,5 and 113,6 are superfluous. [seeing that there we deal with poetic form of expressions, it is not fair to declare these words as superfluous. Ed.] Other conditions terminating the period of Jewish slaves’ servitude are: sickness, though followed by his complete recovery. The word: חנם, “without compensation to the master,” is the Torah‘s way of informing us of this condition. חנם, without bureaucratic delays such as a document proving that the “slave” had been released by his master. Neither did he have to compensate the master for any hours of work not actually served during any part of those six years.

ובשביעית יצא לחפשי חנם, and in the seventh year he leaves to become free without payment. The Torah means that there are occasions when said slave has to serve also in the seventh year such as when he has been sold in the middle of a calendar year. The six years are counted as commencing the day he is sold. The Torah also indicates by this verse that if the "seventh year," i.e. the שמטה occurs during the six years the slave has to serve, his term of service remains unaffected by that fact. I have found this in the commentary of Maimonides on Kiddushin chapter 1, Mishnah 2.

שש שנים יעבד, es heißt nicht ועבדך שש שנים, es geht somit seine Dienstpflicht über deine Persönlichkeit hinaus, geht also nach dem Tode des Herrn auf seinen Sohn über. Indem aber andererseits es (Dewarim 15, 12) in der Tat ועבדך שש שנים heißt, so bleibt diese Erweiterung auf den nächsten Repräsentanten beschränkt und erstreckt sich nicht auf einen sonstigen Erben (Kiduschin 17 b.).

שש שנים יעבד ובשביעית יצא, hieße es: שש שנים יעבד ואחרי כן יצא so wäre die Wiedererlangung seiner Freiheit absolut von der Leistung einer sechsjährigen Arbeit bedingt, und Ausfälle durch Krankheit müssten nachgeholt werden: hieße es: שש שנים יהיה עמך ובשביעית יצא, so würde das siebte Jahr ihm unbedingt die Freiheit bringen; in der Fassung, wie der Satz vor uns steht, ist der Arbeit und dem siebten Jahre ein sich gegenseitig beschränkender Einfluss eingeräumt, den die Halacha dahin ausspricht: er geht im siebten Jahre aus, sobald er nicht den größten Teil seiner Dienstzeit völlig arbeitsunfähig gewesen (das. 17a).

Der Begriff der Arbeitsleistung ist (Wajikra 25, 40) durch die Bestimmung כשכיר כתושב יהיה עמך dahin bestimmt, dass von ihm keine andere Arbeit gefordert werden dürfe, als die bis jetzt zu seinem Berufe gehört (א׳ אתה רשאי לשנותו מאומנותו) und dürfen nach dem fernern Satz: לא תעבוד בו עבודת עבד (daselbst 30) von ihm nicht einmal solche persönliche Dienstleistungen gefordert werden, die ein Sohn oder ein Schüler freiwillig und gerne einem Vater und einem Lehrer gewähren (מכילתא)

חפש ,לחפשי (verwandt mit חפץ und חפשׂ) der natürliche Zustand des Wollens: Freiheit.

:חנם ohne irgend welchen Ersatz, selbst wenn sein Herr Bedeutendes, z. B. für seine Heilung, verausgabt hat.