Mga Sanggunian sa Talmud para sa Exodo 21:7: Jerusalem Talmud Terumot, Jerusalem Talmud Kiddushin, Jerusalem Talmud Maaser Sheni & Jerusalem Talmud Ketubot

Nathan bar Hoshiah²⁵A Babylonian (in the Babli, Rav Nathan bar Hoshaiah) who immigrated into Galilee and became a member of R. Joḥanan’s academy. said, one speaks about a girl²⁶In the technical sense, נערה is a girl who no longer is a minor (so she cannot be sold in marriage, Ex. 21:7–11) but is not yet an adult who can marry on her own. Practically, a girl is a minor if she is less than 12 years old and becomes an adult at 12 years 6 months. The father has the right to marry her off as נערה and he collects the fine if she is raped before she is married. The Mishnah in Ketubot refers only to נערה since the verse determining the fine uses that expression., the other about an adult woman. The girl has a fine but cannot be sold, the adult has no fine, she cannot be sold; has she no claim for shame and blemish²⁷Anybody injured by another person has a claim for pain, shame, and diminished standing. Hence, even if the fine is excluded the adult woman has a monetary claim and Nathan bar Hoshaiah cannot assume that the Mishnah in Makkot refers to an adult.? The rabbis of Caesarea said, explain it that she seduced him or forgave him²⁸In the Babli, if she became an adult and forgave him. Since she is an adult, she may waive the monetary claim. In that case, because the rapist does not have to pay, he is whipped. {The נערה cannot waive the claim since the claim is her father’s.}. Nathan bar Hoshaiah thinks that in a case of flogging and payment he pays and is not flogged. Why should he not be flogged and have to pay? (Deut. 25:2) “Because of his guilt.” You sentence him for one guilt but you may not sentence him for two guilts⁶“Guilt” (in the singular) here is taken to mean “atonement for his guilt”, that for one transgression there can be only one punishment. It is quite possible that with one act one commits a multiple sin; then each sin separately can be punished but no one sin can incur more than one punishment (Sifry Deut. 286).. Why should he pay and not have to be flogged? From perjured witnesses. Just as perjured witnesses pay and are not flogged²⁹Perjury is definitely sinful; it should be punished by flogging. But the verse decrees (Deut. 19:19): “Do to him what he intended to do to his brother”. If the perjury was in a civil case, the perjurer has to pay to the injured party the amount the latter would have had to pay if the testimony had stood. Since this is the only punishment decreed by the verse, the perjurer cannot be flogged. {In criminal cases, the perjurer is flogged or executed, as the case may be.}, here also he pays and is not flogged. Rebbi Jonah said, the reason of Nathan bar Hoshaiah: (Deut. 25:2): “The judge shall have him laid down and flogged in his presence.” It refers to one whose flogging frees him from his guilt, excluding one who is told: get up and pay.

⁷⁷The original of this and the following paragraphs is in Šebuot 6:1 (36d, 11. 21–50, ו). There, we have stated: “A judicial oath⁷⁸The oath required by Ex. 22:8 for a person denying a claim when neither he nor the claimant have proof. The defendant can be made to swear only if he admits that at least one peruṭah’s worth of the claim is true; cf. Ketubot 2:1, Note 12 (Mekhilta dR.Ismael,Neziqin2)., for a claim of two silver pieces and a judicial acknowlegdment of a peruṭah. The claim, the House of Shammai say, an obolus⁷⁹One sixth of a drachma identified with the imperial silver denar., but the House of Hillel say, two obols.” The argument of the House of Shammai seems inverted. There⁸⁰Mishnah Qiddušin 1:1. The formulation shows that the origin of the text is in Ševuot., they say, “silver” is a denar, but here, they say that “silver” is an obolus. The argument of the House of Hillel seems inverted. There⁸⁰Mishnah Qiddušin 1:1. The formulation shows that the origin of the text is in Ševuot., they say, “money” is a peruṭah, but here, they say that “money” is two obols. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: The house of Shammai learn from the initial sale of a Hebrew girl¹⁸Ex. 21:11,10, speaking of the “Hebrew slave girl”, the underage girl sold by her father with the understanding that the buyer may use the amount he paid for the girl as bride-money in case he wants to marry her or give her to his son. This certainly is marriage by money. V. 11 notes that if she is not married either within 6 years or by the time she reaches adulthood, she goes free; the money given for her was to buy her working power. V. 10 states that once she is married, she cannot be treated differently from any other wife. It is inferred that as a matter of principle her acquisition cannot be different from that of any other wife.. Since her initial sale was by [at least] a denar, so her preliminary marriage is by [at least] a denar⁸¹It is clear from the biblical text, Ex. 21:7–11, that the person buying an underage Hebrew girl is supposed to marry her when she grows up, or to marry her to his son. The money given for her services is at the same time the money for preliminary marriage. The House of Shammai hold that the original buying price, which later is shown to be at least a silver denar, is the bridal money used for the legal acquisition of the girl as preliminarily wedded wife. The House of Hillel hold that only the amount not amortized by the girl’s work in the meantime is bridal money. Since the master can marry the girl even on the last day of her servitude, he can marry her for a peruṭah’s worth and, as shown before, he can marry any other woman also for a peruṭah’s worth.. The House of Hillel learn from the end of her diminution⁸²Since Ex. 21:8 states that “if she is bad in her master’s eyes, who does not intend her for himself, let her be redeemed”, it is concluded that the Hebrew girl-servant can be redeemed during her servitude, in contrast to the Hebrew indentured servant who has to serve his full six years. Since it is prescribed for the Hebrew servant of a Gentile master that he can be redeemed by paying off the proportion of his original price not amortized by the time spent in servitude (Lev. 25:50), the same must hold for the servant girl. As long as she still is a servant, the redemption price is at least a peruṭah.. Since the end of her diminution is a peruṭah, so her preliminary marriage is by a peruṭah¹⁸Ex. 21:11,10, speaking of the “Hebrew slave girl”, the underage girl sold by her father with the understanding that the buyer may use the amount he paid for the girl as bride-money in case he wants to marry her or give her to his son. This certainly is marriage by money. V. 11 notes that if she is not married either within 6 years or by the time she reaches adulthood, she goes free; the money given for her was to buy her working power. V. 10 states that once she is married, she cannot be treated differently from any other wife. It is inferred that as a matter of principle her acquisition cannot be different from that of any other wife.. What is the reason of the House of Shammai? As it is said: “She leaves gratis, without silver⁸³Ex. 21:11. At the end of six years, the master cannot ask for money to let her go..” Would we not know that it is without money? Why does the verse say, “without silver”⁸⁴Since “gratis” means “without payment”.? From there, that she is sold for more than silver. And what is more than silver? A denar. But maybe “silver” is a peruṭah, more than silver two peruṭot? The smallest silver coin is an obolus⁸⁵Even though in Achaemenid Persia, the silver half-obolus was currency (also minted in the province of Yehud), in later times, prior to the Roman conquest, the obolus was the smallest silver coin. In Roman currency, the denarius was the smallest silver coin.. So why is it not an obolus? Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Judah bar Pazi: For if she wants to diminish, she diminishes every year by an obolus and leaves⁸⁶Since she serves for six years, her price must be a six-fold multiple of a silver coin. This determines the drachma as the minimum price.. Could she not diminish by a peruṭah⁸⁷And be bought at the start for 6 peruṭot.? Rebbi Abun said, think of it. If she wanted to compute the diminution at the start of the sixth year, there would be a peruṭah left, and at the end of the sixth year, there would be a peruṭah left. But the start of the diminution must be an obolus, the end of the diminution a peruṭah. If there is only one peruṭah left, can she not pay the diminished amount and leave? Just as the last diminished amount is a peruṭah, so her preliminary marriage should be a peruṭah⁸⁸This argument is correctly missing in Šebuot since the House of Shammai consider the original sum as bride-money, cf. Note 81. The Yerushalmi’s interpretation of the House of Shammai is explicitly rejected in the Babli, 12a.! What is the reason of the House of Hillel? Since her last diminished amount is a peruṭah, you know that her preliminary marriage is by a peruṭah^81,It is clear from the biblical text, Ex. 21:7–11, that the person buying an underage Hebrew girl is supposed to marry her when she grows up, or to marry her to his son. The money given for her services is at the same time the money for preliminary marriage. The House of Shammai hold that the original buying price, which later is shown to be at least a silver denar, is the bridal money used for the legal acquisition of the girl as preliminarily wedded wife. The House of Hillel hold that only the amount not amortized by the girl’s work in the meantime is bridal money. Since the master can marry the girl even on the last day of her servitude, he can marry her for a peruṭah’s worth and, as shown before, he can marry any other woman also for a peruṭah’s worth.⁸⁹The Šebuot text has here an additional text similar to the text used in Qiddušin in the discussion of the House of Shammai: הַגַּע עַצְמְךָ שֶׁאִם נִשְׁתַּיֵּר שָׁם שְׁוֵה פְּרוּטָה שֶׁמָּא אֵינָהּ מְגָרָעַתּוֹ וְיוֹצָא. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁסּוֹף גֵּרוּעֶיהָ בִּפְרוּטָה אַף קִדּוּשֶׁיהָ בִּפְרוּטָה. "Think of it, if there is one peruṭah's worth left, can she not pay the diminished amount and leave? Just as the last diminished amount is a peruṭah, so her preliminary marriage is a peruṭah.".

²⁶²Babli 19b; Mekhilta dR.Šim‘on b,Jochai, p. 165.“As a slave girl.²⁶³Ex. 21:7” Only as a slave girl: this teaches that he may sell her on condition that he not have the right of allotment over her, the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages say, he did not do anything, for he stipulated against what is written in the Torah, “and the stipulation of anybody who stipulates against what is written in the Torah is invalid.”²⁶⁴Mishnah Baba meṣi‘a 7:14. But does Rebbi Meïr not agree that “the stipulation of anybody who stipulates against what is written in the Torah is invalid”²⁶⁵Since the Mishnah is anonymous and is based on R. Meïr’s compilation, it is assumed that it represents R. Meïr’s position.? He accepts it if it is impossible to keep the stipulation in the end, but here it is possible to keep the stipulation in the end²⁶⁶This is explicitly stated in Baba meṣi‘a 7:14. Since the master is not required to marry his servant, he will not infringe on any biblical obligation by agreeing not to marry her. Everybody will agree that if a man marries a woman on condition that she be freed from levirate or ḥalîṣah if he should die childless, the stipulation is invalid since it infringes on obligatory biblical law.. Do the rabbis not agree about a stipulation which it is possible to keep in the end? They agree to it in money matters²⁶⁷For which it is formulated in Mishnah Baba meṣi‘a 7:14; cf. Ketubot5:10 Note 227 where all references are given., but this is a personal matter. But did we not state: A person may marry a woman and stipulate with her that she have no claim on him for food, clothing, or marital relations²⁶⁸In the Babli, 19b, it reads: “A person may marry a woman and stipulate with her that she have no claim on him for food, clothing, or marital relations; she is married and the stipulations are void, the words of R. Meïr; R. Jehudah says, in money matters his stipulation is valid.” As noted in Ketubot 5:10 Note 227, R. Jehudah’s opinion is accepted in the Yerushalmi as generally valid.? One understands food and clothing. But are marital relations not a personal matter? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, explain it for an underage girl²⁶⁹Who does not expect sexual relations.. How can that Tanna explain “as a slave girl”²⁷⁰R. Meïr who denies the ability of the father to exclude allotment.? He may sell her as a widow to the High Priest, as a divorcee or one who received ḥălîṣah to a common priest²⁷¹The father may sell her to a person unable to marry her by biblical law (Babli 19b; Mekhilta dR.Šim‘on b,Jochai, p. 165).. How can that Tanna explain “as a servant”? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, explain it by a widow from preliminary marriage²⁷²Since an underage girl is emancipated from her father by definitive marriage (Ketubot 4:3, Note 42), the girl sold as a widow or divorcee must be a widow or divorcee after preliminary marriage only. The mention of ḥăliṣah is a slip of the pen because of the usual combination of the terms; for the House of Hillel ḥălîṣah is possible only after definitive marriage (Yebamot 1:6, Note 192).. But was it not stated: A person may sell his daugher into marriage²⁷³Preliminary, not definitive. and repeat, into servitude and repeat, into marriage after servitude, but not into servitude after marriage²⁷⁴Babli 18a; Massekhet ‘Avadim 1.? Rebbi Joḥanan said, these are different Tannaïm. He who states “a widow to the High Priest” agrees to servitude after marriage; he who does not state “a widow to the High Priest” does not agree to servitude after marriage. How does the latter Tanna explain “as a servant”²⁷⁵As servant only, excluding the possibility of marriage; cf. Note 243.? Rebbi Mattaniah said, explain it if [the master] was married to her sister²⁷¹The father may sell her to a person unable to marry her by biblical law (Babli 19b; Mekhilta dR.Šim‘on b,Jochai, p. 165)..