למסולים שאין לו עקב אם כן ניכתוב קרא נעל מאי הנעל שמעת מינה תרתי :
sandals [mesulayim] that have no heels, which do not qualify as shoes. The Gemara answers: If so, that the term is stated only for that purpose, let the verse write “shoe.” What is the meaning of “the shoe”? Learn the two previously stated conclusions from it.
מתני׳ עבד עברי נקנה בכסף ובשטר וקונה עצמו בשנים וביובל ובגרעון כסף יתירה עליו אמה העבריה שקונה את עצמה בסימנין הנרצע נקנה ברציעה וקונה את עצמו ביובל ובמיתת האדון :
MISHNA: A Hebrew slave can be acquired by his master through money or through a document, and he can acquire himself, i.e., he is emancipated, through years, i.e., when he completes his six years of labor, or through the advent of the Jubilee Year, or through the deduction of money. The slave can redeem himself during the six years by paying for his remaining years of slavery. A Hebrew maidservant has one mode of emancipation more than him, as she acquires herself through signs indicating puberty. A slave who is pierced after serving six years is acquired as a slave for a longer period through piercing his ear with an awl, and he acquires himself through the advent of the Jubilee Year or through the death of the master.
גמ׳ עבד עברי נקנה בכסף מנלן אמר קרא (ויקרא כה, נא) מכסף מקנתו מלמד שנקנה בכסף אשכחן עבד עברי הנמכר לעובד כוכבים הואיל וכל קנינו בכסף
GEMARA: The mishna teaches that a Hebrew slave can be acquired through money. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this halakha? The Gemara answers that the verse states: “Out of the money that he was bought for” (Leviticus 25:51), which teaches that he can be acquired through money. The Gemara asks: We found that a Hebrew slave who is sold to a gentile is acquired with money, which is the case discussed in that verse, but this proves nothing with regard to a Jew sold to a Jew. One could argue that since all of the acquisitions of a gentile are performed only with money, he can likewise purchase a Hebrew slave with money.
נמכר לישראל מנלן אמר קרא (שמות כא, ח) והפדה מלמד שמגרעת פדיונה ויוצאה
But from where do we derive that a Hebrew slave can be sold to a Jew with money? The Gemara explains that with regard to a Hebrew maidservant, the verse states: “Then he shall let her be redeemed” (Exodus 21:8), which teaches that if she acquires money and wishes to be emancipated before her time is complete, she deducts a sum from her redemption. The maidservant can deduct the value of time served from her purchase price and pay the remaining amount, and she then is emancipated. This teaches that a Hebrew maidservant is acquired through money, a halakha that applies to a male slave as well.
אשכחן אמה העבריה הואיל ומיקדשה בכסף מיקניא בכסף עבד עברי מנלן אמר קרא (דברים טו, יב) כי ימכר לך אחיך העברי או העבריה ועבדך שש שנים מקיש עברי לעבריה
The Gemara asks: Although we found this halakha with regard to a Hebrew maidservant, one cannot extrapolate from there to this case, as it is possible that it applies only to a female. The reason for this is that since she is ordinarily betrothed through money, she can also be acquired as a maidservant through money. From where do we derive that a Hebrew slave can likewise be acquired through money? The Gemara answers that the verse states: “If your brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman is sold to you, and he shall serve you six years” (Deuteronomy 15:12). This verse juxtaposes a Hebrew man to a Hebrew woman, indicating that the modes through which they are acquired are the same.
אשכחן מכרוהו ב"ד הואיל ונמכר בעל כורחו מוכר עצמו מנלן
The Gemara further asks: We found a source in this verse for a slave who is sold by the court. This verse is referring to a thief who is unable to repay the value of his theft and is sold as a slave so that he can repay his debt. One can therefore argue that this case is unique, since he is sold against his will. From where do we derive that one who sells himself can be sold through money?
יליף (דברים טו, יח) שכיר (ויקרא כה, מ) שכיר הניחא למאן דיליף שכיר שכיר אלא למאן דלא יליף שכיר שכיר מאי איכא למימר
The Gemara answers: One derives this through a verbal analogy between the terms “hired worker” and “hired worker.” This term appears both with regard to one who sells himself: “As a hired worker and as a settler he shall be with you” (Leviticus 25:40), and with regard to one who is sold by the court: “For double of the hire of a hired worker he has served you” (Deuteronomy 15:18). The Gemara asks: This works out well according to the one who derives this verbal analogy between the terms “hired worker” and “hired worker.” But according to the one who does not derive the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker,” what can be said? From where does he derive that one who sells himself may be purchased with money?
אמר קרא (ויקרא כה, מז) וכי תשיג מוסף על ענין ראשון וילמד עליון מתחתון
The Gemara answers: The verse states at the start of the passage dealing with one sold to a gentile: “And if a stranger who is a settler with you becomes rich” (Leviticus 25:47). The conjunction “and” serves to add to the first matter, i.e., the passage discussing one who sells himself to a Jew, as it joins the two issues. And therefore let the above case of one who sells himself to a Jew be derived from the case below of one who is sold to a gentile: Just as one who is sold to a gentile can be acquired with money, so too, one who sells himself to a Jew can be acquired with money.
ומאן תנא דלא יליף שכיר שכיר האי תנא הוא דתניא המוכר עצמו נמכר לשש ויתר על שש מכרוהו ב"ד אינו נמכר אלא לשש
The Gemara comments: And who is the tanna who does not derive the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker”? It is this tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: One who sells himself as a slave is sold for six years, and if he wishes he can be sold for more than six years, whereas one who is sold by the court is sold only for six years, but no more.
המוכר עצמו אינו נרצע מכרוהו ב"ד נרצע מוכר עצמו אין מעניקים לו מכרוהו ב"ד מעניקים לו המוכר עצמו אין רבו מוסר לו שפחה כנענית מכרוהו ב"ד רבו מוסר לו שפחה כנענית
The baraita adds that there are additional differences between these two slaves: One who sells himself may not be pierced with an awl, whereas one who is sold by the court may be pierced with an awl. One who sells himself is not granted a severance gift by his master when he is emancipated, whereas one who is sold by the court is granted a severance gift. With regard to one who sells himself, his master may not provide him with a Canaanite maidservant as a wife to produce slave children, whereas with regard to one sold by the court, his master may provide him with a Canaanite maidservant.
רבי אלעזר אומר זה וזה אינו נמכר אלא לשש זה וזה נרצע וזה וזה מעניקים לו וזה וזה רבו מוסר לו שפחה כנענית מאי לאו בהא קמיפלגי דתנא קמא לא יליף שכיר שכיר ור"א יליף שכיר שכיר
Rabbi Elazar says that there is no difference between these two types of slaves. Rather, both this slave and that slave may be sold for only six years; both this and that one may be pierced with an awl, both this and that one are granted a severance gift, and in both this case and that case his master may provide him with a Canaanite maidservant. What, is it not the case that they disagree with regard to this, that the first tanna does not derive the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker,” and Rabbi Elazar derives the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker”? If one holds that the two cases are juxtaposed, one will equate the halakhot of both slaves. This is the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, in contrast to the opinion of the first tanna, who holds that the halakhot of each type of slave are discrete.
אמר רב טביומי משמיה דאביי דכולי עלמא יליף שכיר שכיר והכא בהאי קרא קמיפלגי מאי טעמא דתנא קמא דאמר מוכר עצמו נמכר לשש ויתר על שש מיעט רחמנא גבי מכרוהו בית דין (דברים טו, יב) ועבדך שש שנים זה ולא מוכר עצמו
Rav Tavyumei said in the name of Abaye: That is not so; rather, everyone derives the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker,” and here, in the dispute in the baraita, they disagree about this following verse. What is the reasoning of the first tanna, who says that one who sells himself is sold for six years and more than six years? He maintains that with regard to one sold by the court, the Merciful One excludes a certain case by the verse: “If your brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, is sold to you, and he shall serve you six years” (Deuteronomy 15:12). That teaches that only this type of slave serves for six years and no more, but the same does not apply to one who sells himself. If he so stipulates, he may serve for more than six years.
ואידך ועבדך לך ולא ליורש
The Gemara explains: And the other, Rabbi Elazar, learns a different halakha from this verse. “And he shall serve you” means that he works for you and not for an heir other than a son. If a master has no sons, his slave is not transferred as an inheritance to a daughter or to a brother like his other property. If he does have sons, they inherit a Hebrew slave.
ואידך ועבדך אחרינא כתיב ואידך ההוא להרצאת אדון הוא דאתא
The Gemara asks: And the other, the first tanna, from where does he derive that a slave is not transferred as an inheritance? The Gemara answers that the phrase, “And he shall serve you,” is written another time, and he derives this halakha from there. The Gemara asks: And the other, Rabbi Elazar, what does he do with that other verse? The Gemara answers: In his opinion that verse comes to appease the master. The verse emphasizes that the servitude is of limited duration to encourage the master to free the slave without hesitation.
מאי טעמא דתנא קמא דאמר מוכר עצמו אינו נרצע מדמיעט רחמנא גבי מכרוהו ב"ד (שמות כא, ו) ורצע אדניו את אזנו במרצע אזנו שלו ולא אזנו של מוכר עצמו
The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of the first tanna, who says that one who sells himself is not pierced with an awl? The Gemara answers: He derives this from the fact that with regard to one sold by the court, the Merciful One excludes a certain case by the verse: “And his master shall pierce his ear with an awl” (Exodus 21:6), which teaches: His ear, of this slave, and not the ear of a slave who sells himself.