Kiddushin 42

ההוא לקובעו חובה ואפי' לרבי יהושע

That is to make it an obligation, and even on R'Joshua's view.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who maintained that the redemption of an inherited field by relations is merely a privilege.');">¹</span> Come and hear: Why is 'he shall redeem him,' 'he shall redeem him,' 'he shall redeent him,' stated three times? To include all cases of redemption, that they must be redeemed in this order.

ת"ש מה ת"ל (ויקרא כה, מח) יגאלנו יגאלנו יגאלנו ג' פעמים לרבות כל הגאולות שנגאלות כסדר הזה מאי לאו בתי ערי חומה ועבד עברי הנמכר לישראל לא בתי חצרים ושדה אחוזה בתי חצרים בהדיא כתיב בהו (ויקרא כה, לא) על שדה הארץ יחשב אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק לקרוב קרוב קודם:

Surely that refers to houses in walled cities, and Hebrew slaves sold to Israelites? - No: to houses in villages and fields of possession.' Houses in villages'! but there it is explicitly stated: 'they shall be reckoned with the fields of the country'? - Said R'Nahman B'Isaac: It is to teach, the nearer the kinsman, the greater his precedence. HE WHOSE EAR IS BORED IS ACQUIRED BY BORING.

והנרצע נקנה ברציעה: דכתיב (שמות כא, ו) ורצע אדוניו את אזנו במרצע וגו':

For it is written, then his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, etc.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXI, 6.');">²</span> AND ACQUIRES HIMSELF BY JUBILEE OR BY HIS MASTER'S DEATH. For it is written: 'and he shall serve'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXI, 6.');">²</span>

וקונה את עצמו ביובל ובמיתת האדון: דכתיב ועבדו ולא את הבן ולא את הבת לעולם לעולמו של יובל

him - but not his son or daughter; for ever' - until the eternity of jubilee.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 17b.');">³</span> Our Rabbis taught: '[With] an awl': I only know [that he can be bored with] an awl. Whence do I know to extend [the law to] a prick,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a sharpened piece of wood.');">⁴</span>

תנו רבנן מרצע אין לי אלא מרצע מנין לרבות הסול והסירא והמחט והמקדח והמכתב ת"ל (דברים טו, יז) ולקחת לרבות כל דבר שנקח ביד דברי ר' יוסי בר' יהודה

thorn, needle, borer, or stylus? From the verse, then thou shalt take,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XV, 17, likewise referring to the boring of a slave.');">⁵</span> which includes everything that may be taken by hand: this is the opinion of R'Jose son of R'Judah.

רבי אומר מה מרצע מיוחד של מתכת אף כל של מתכת ד"א המרצע להביא המרצע הגדול

Rabbi said: Just as an awl is specified, as being of metal, so must everything [used for this purpose] be of metal. Alternatively, [thou shalt take] the awl<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., translation; E.V. disregards the def. art. of the text.');">⁶</span> is to teach<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'bring'.');">⁷</span>

אמר רבי אלעזר יודן בריבי היה דורש כשהן רוצעים אין רוצעים אלא במילתא וחכ"א אין עבד עברי כהן נרצע מפני שנעשה בעל מום וא"ת במילתא הם רוצעים היאך עבד עברי כהן יעשה בעל מום הא אין נרצע אלא בגובה של אזן במאי קמיפלגי

[that] the great awl [is meant].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is explained below.');">⁸</span> R'Eleazar said: Judan Berabbi<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Berobbi, Beribbi, a contraction of Be Rabbi, was a title of scholars, generally applied to disciples of R. Judah ha-Nasi (Rabbi par excellence) and his contemporaries, but also to some of his predecessors, and occasionally to the first Amoraim (Jast. s.v.) ; v. Nazir (Sonc. ed.) p. 64. n. 1.');">⁹</span> used to expound: When it [his ear] was bored, only the lobe was bored.

דרבי דריש כללי ופרטי ולקחת כלל מרצע פרט באזנו ובדלת חזר וכלל כלל ופרט וכלל אי אתה דן אלא כעין הפרט מה הפרט מפורש של מתכת אף כל של מתכת

But the Sages maintained: A Hebrew slave, [who is] a priest, cannot be bored, as he is thereby blemished;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And unfit for service in the Temple.');">¹⁰</span> and should you say that the lobe is bored, how is he thereby blemished?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A hole in the lobe is not a blemish.');">¹¹</span> Hence he was bored through the upper part of his ear.

ר' יוסי דריש ריבויי ומיעוטי ולקחת ריבה מרצע מיעט באזנו ובדלת חזר וריבה ריבה ומיעט וריבה ריבה הכל

Wherein do they differ? - Rabbi interprets [by the method of] general propositions and particularizations.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In all cases such as the one under discussion Rabbi regards the verse as consisting of a generalization followed by a specification and then again by a generalization. In that case we say that the generalization includes only what is similar to the specification, as explained in the text.');">¹²</span> [Thus:] 'Then thou shalt take' - this is a generalization;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., it implies anything that may be taken, as above.');">¹³</span> 'an awl' - this is a specification: 'through his ear unto the door' is again a generalization.

מאי רבי רבי כל מילי מאי מיעט מיעט סם

Now [in a sequence of] generalization, specification and generalization, you can include<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'judge'.');">¹⁴</span> only what is similar to the specification: just as the specification is explicit as of metal, so must everything [used for this purpose] be of metal. R'Jo interprets [by the method of] amplification and limitation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the general term is an amplification, extending the law to all things; the limitation that follows limits the law to such things as are similar to itself; hence these two alone are sufficient to arrive at the result deduced by Rabbi. Consequently, if a further amplification is added, it includes even dissimilar things, while the limitation can only exclude one or two things which are entirely unlike, v. Shebu. (Sonc. ed.) p. 12, n. 3.');">¹⁵</span>

אמר מר המרצע להביא מרצע הגדול מאי משמע כדאמר רבא (בראשית לב, לג) הירך המיומנת שבירך ה"נ המרצע מיוחד שבמרצעין:

[Thus:] Then thou shalt take - this is an amplification;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Extending the law to anything that may be taken.');">¹⁶</span> an awl - this is a limitation;. through his ear unto the door is again an amplification.

א"ר אלעזר יודן בריבי היה דורש כשהן רוצעין אין רוצעין אלא במילתא וחכ"א אין עבד עברי כהן נרצע מפני שנעשה בעל מום ויעשה בעל מום אמר רבה בר רב שילא אמר קרא (ויקרא כה, מא) ושב אל משפחתו למוחזק שבמשפחתו

sequence of] amplification, limitation and amplification extends [the law to] everything. What is included? All things.

איבעיא להו עבד עברי כהן מהו שימסור לו רבו שפחה כנענית חידוש הוא לא שנא כהנים ול"ש ישראל

And what is excluded? Chemicals.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A chemical, e.g., an acid, may not be placed on the ear to burn it through.');">¹⁷</span> The Master said: "'The awl" is to teach that the great awl [is meant].'

או דילמא שאני כהנים הואיל וריבה בהן הכתוב מצות יתירות רב אמר מותר ושמואל אמר אסור

How is this implied? - As Raba said: [Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sinew of the hip which is upon the hollow of] the thigh<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Gen. XXXII, 33.');">¹⁸</span> implies the right thigh;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The def. art. implies the well-known, the most important, hence the right, which is the stronger side.');">¹⁹</span> so here too, 'the awl' implies the most distinguished of awls.

א"ל רב נחמן לרב ענן כי הויתו בי מר שמואל באיסקומדרי איטלליתו מ"ט לא תימרו לי' מהא וחכ"א אין עבד עברי כהן נרצע מפני שנעשה בעל מום

R'Eleazar said: Judan Berabbi used to expound: When it [his ear] was bored, only the lobe was bored. But the Sages maintained: A Hebrew slave [who is] a priest, cannot be bored, because he is thereby blemished.' Then let him be blemished! - Rabbah son of R'Shila said: Scripture saith, and he shall return unto his own family:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 41.');">²⁰</span>

וא"ת אין רבו מוסר לו שפחה כנענית תיפוק לי דבעינא (שמות כא, ה) אהבתי את אדוני את אשתי ואת בני וליכא תו לא מידי

i.e., to the established rights of his family.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But if he is bored, he loses his established rights of officiating in the Temple.');">²¹</span> The Scholars propounded: A Hebrew slave [who is] a priest - can his master give him a heathen bondwoman?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To produce slaves.');">²²</span> Is it an anomaly,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a heathen bondwoman may be given to any Hebrew slave.');">²³</span>

איבעיא להו כהן מהו ביפת תואר חידוש הוא לא שנא כהן ולא שנא ישראל או דילמא שאני כהנים הואיל וריבה בהן מצות יתרות רב אמר מותר ושמואל אמר אסור

and so there is no difference between priests and Israelites; or perhaps, priests are different, since the Writ imposes additional precepts upon them?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence they have a higher degree of sanctity.');">²⁴</span> - Rab said: It is permitted; Samuel ruled: It is forbidden. R'Nahman said to R''Anan: When you were at Mar Samuel's academy you wasted your time in chess.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'you played in chess'; Iskumdre (the 'Aruk reads: iskundre) Pers. iskodar, **; v. Perles, Etymologische Studien, p. 113. R. Han. translates: dog-racing. Krauss, T.A. III, 113 regards it as the dice (Wurfel) in various games of chance.');">²⁵</span>

בביאה ראשונה דכ"ע לא פליגי דשרי דלא דברה תורה אלא כנגד יצר הרע

Why did you not refute him with this: 'But the Sages maintained: A Hebrew slave, a priest. cannot be bored, as he is thereby blemished.' Now if you say that his master cannot give him a heathen bondmaid,it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The law that a Hebrew slave who is a priest is not bored.');">²⁶</span>

כי פליגי בביאה שניה רב אמר מותר ושמואל אמר אסור רב אמר מותר הואיל ואישתריא אישתרי ושמואל אמר אסור דהא הויא לה גיורת וגיורת לכהן לא חזיא

follows because we require [that he should say]. I love my master, my wife. and my children,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXI, 5.');">²⁷</span>

א"ד בביאה שניה כ"ע לא פליגי דאסירא דהויא לה גיורת כי פליגי בביאה ראשונה רב אמר מותר דהא לא דברה תורה אלא כנגד יצר הרע ושמואל אמר אסור כל היכא דקרינא ביה (דברים כא, יב) והבאתה אל תוך ביתך קרינא ביה וראית בשביה כל היכא דלא קרינא ביה והבאתה אל תוך ביתך לא קרינא ביה וראית בשביה

which is absent. Nothing more is possible.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This refutation is absolute.');">²⁸</span> The scholars propounded: May a priest take a 'a woman of goodly form'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Deut. XXI, 11. A priest may not marry a proselyte: how is it here?');">²⁹</span>

ת"ר וראית בשביה בשעת שביה אשת ואפילו אשת איש יפת תואר לא דברה תורה אלא כנגד יצר הרע מוטב שיאכלו ישראל בשר

Is it an anomaly.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'a new,' unexpected law.');">³⁰</span> and so there is no difference between priests and Israelites: or perhaps. priests are different, since the Writ imposes additional precepts upon them? - Rab said: He is permitted; while Samuel maintained, He is forbidden. With respect to the first intercourse there is universal agreement that it is permitted, since the Torah only provided<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'spoke'.');">³¹</span> for man's evil passions;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The permission to take a beautiful captive is a concession to human failings, which priests share equally with Israelites.');">³²</span> their dispute refers to the second intercourse. Rab ruled: It is permitted; and Samuel ruled,it is forbidden. Rab ruled: It is permitted: since it was [once] allowed, it remains so. But Samuel said, it is forbidden; because she is a proselyte, and so ineligible to [marry] a priest. Others state, with respect to the second intercourse it is generally agreed that it is forbidden, since she is a proselyte. Their dispute refers to the first intercourse: Rab maintained, It is permitted, since the Torah only provided for man's evil passions. Whilst Samuel ruled: that it is forbidden: where one can read, then thou shalt bring her home to thine house,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXI, 12, i.e., take her permanently.');">³³</span> we also read, and seest among the captives. [etc.];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 11; i.e., permission to satisfy one's lust.');">³⁴</span> but where we cannot read: 'Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house,' we do not read: 'and seest among the captives [etc.].' Our Rabbis taught: 'And thou seest among the captives' - when taking her captive;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Permission is granted only if the woman was originally taken for lust, but not if she was taken for enslavement.');">³⁵</span> a woman - even married; 'of beautiful countenance' - the Torah only provided for human passions: it is better for Israel to eat flesh of