פירוש על קידושין 30:17

Leviticus 25:54 refers to an Israelite sold to a Gentile. The Torah says that he may be redeemed by his relative. Rabbi [Judah Hanasi] rules that he does not go free after six years. Rabbi points out that we might have made a kal vehomer from a Hebrew slave sold to a Jew. He cannot be redeemed by his relatives and yet he does go free at six years. This proves that Rabbi does not learn from the repetition of the word “sakhir” for the word “sakhir” is used in both the context of a Jew sold to Gentiles and a Jew sold to other Jews. If Rabbi learned from “sakhir” then both types of slaves could be redeemed by their relatives.

Leviticus 25:54 refers to an Israelite sold to a Gentile. The Torah says that he may be redeemed by his relative. Rabbi [Judah Hanasi] rules that he does not go free after six years. Rabbi points out that we might have made a kal vehomer from a Hebrew slave sold to a Jew. He cannot be redeemed by his relatives and yet he does go free at six years. This proves that Rabbi does not learn from the repetition of the word “sakhir” for the word “sakhir” is used in both the context of a Jew sold to Gentiles and a Jew sold to other Jews. If Rabbi learned from “sakhir” then both types of slaves could be redeemed by their relatives.

As occurred earlier, the Talmud rejects the notion that Rabbi does not learn from the repetition of the word “sakhir.” In general he does, but in this case he does not because he reads the verse as specifically limiting the one able to be redeemed by relatives to the Hebrew sold to a Gentile. Thus according to Rabbi we could say that the laws of Exodus apply to the slave described in Leviticus. But we could also distinguish between a slave sold to a Gentile and one sold to a Jew.

Rabbi reads the words “by these” as teaching that a slave purchased by a Gentile does not go free after six years. In contrast, two other tannaim read the phrase as teaching something different. R. Yose the Galilean reads them as teaching that if a relative redeems the slave, he goes free. But if he is redeemed by a non-relative, then he becomes a slave to that redeemer. R. Akiva reads this opposite—if he is redeemed by the relative, then he remains a slave. If by any other man, then he goes free.

The Talmud shows how each of these two rabbis reads the verse. R. Yose inserts the difference between a relative and a stranger straight into the verse.
R. Akiva reads the verse slightly differently. If he is not redeemed by any but these, then he goes free. But if he is redeemed by these, i.e. the relatives, he does not go free until the Jubilee year.
R. Yose counters that R. Akiva’s reading is not actually written in the verse and requires the insertion of several words.

The Talmud now offers a different reason for their dispute, which is anchored in the words of the verse. There are three forms of redemption alluded to in the verse—by relatives, by oneself, by strangers. Rabbi Yose Hagalili says that redemption by oneself teaches something about what appears before—redemption by relatives. Just as self-redemption is (obviously) for freedom, so is redemption by relatives. R. Akiva says that the verse teaches about that which follows. Just as redemption by oneself leads to freedom, so does redemption by others.

The Talmud now offers a different reason for their dispute, which is anchored in the words of the verse. There are three forms of redemption alluded to in the verse—by relatives, by oneself, by strangers. Rabbi Yose Hagalili says that redemption by oneself teaches something about what appears before—redemption by relatives. Just as self-redemption is (obviously) for freedom, so is redemption by relatives. R. Akiva says that the verse teaches about that which follows. Just as redemption by oneself leads to freedom, so does redemption by others.

The phrase “by these” is used to offer some limitation. The words indicate that some sort of redemption leads to freedom and some sort does not.

The phrase “by these” is used to offer some limitation. The words indicate that some sort of redemption leads to freedom and some sort does not.

Rather, the Talmud suggests that their dispute is due to differing assessments of psychology. R. Yose Hagalili argues that by allowing the slave to remain in servitude, we are encouraging Jews to redeem him from non-Jews. In contrast, R. Akiva argues that if he were to go free when redeemed by relatives, he would just sell himself into slavery over and over again, knowing that a relative would redeem him and he would go free.

Rather, the Talmud suggests that their dispute is due to differing assessments of psychology. R. Yose Hagalili argues that by allowing the slave to remain in servitude, we are encouraging Jews to redeem him from non-Jews. In contrast, R. Akiva argues that if he were to go free when redeemed by relatives, he would just sell himself into slavery over and over again, knowing that a relative would redeem him and he would go free.

According to Rabbi, no matter who redeems the slave, the slave goes free. “By these” implies, as we learned above, that a slave sold to a Gentile does not go free after six years.

According to Rabbi, no matter who redeems the slave, the slave goes free. “By these” implies, as we learned above, that a slave sold to a Gentile does not go free after six years.

According to Rabbi, the verse in Leviticus refers to a Gentile who lives under Israelite rule. He owns the Hebrew slave and must send him free at the Jubilee. It cannot refer to the Gentile not living under Israelite rule because such a Gentile would not listen to the Jew in the first place.