Kiddushin 15bקידושין ט״ו ב
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save 'Kiddushin 15b'
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
15bט״ו ב

(ויקרא כה, נד) ואם לא יגאל באלה רבי אומר באלה הוא נגאל ואין נגאל בשש

A Hebrew slave sold to a gentile can be redeemed by his relatives, as it is stated: “And if he is not redeemed by any of these, then he shall go out in the Jubilee Year” (Leviticus 25:54). Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: He can be redeemed only through these, i.e., the assistance of his relatives, and he is not redeemed after six years of labor.

שיכול והלא דין הוא ומה מי שאינו נגאל באלה נגאל בשש זה שנגאל באלה אינו דין שנגאל בשש ת"ל באלה באלה הוא נגאל ואין נגאל בשש

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi elaborates: As I might have argued that one sold to a gentile should be released after six years. Could this not be derived through an a fortiori inference: If one who cannot be redeemed by these relatives, i.e., a Hebrew slave who was sold to a Jew, as he cannot be redeemed by his rela-tives, nevertheless is redeemed after six years of labor, is it not logical that this Hebrew slave sold to a gentile, who can be redeemed by these relatives, can likewise be redeemed after six years of work? Therefore, the verse states “by any of these,” to emphasize that one sold to a gentile can be redeemed only through these relatives, and he cannot be redeemed after six years.

ואי סלקא דעתך יליף שכיר שכיר אמאי קאמר ומה מי שאינו נגאל באלה נילף שכיר שכיר

The Gemara explains the proof: And if it enters your mind that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi derives the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker,” why does he say: If one who cannot be redeemed by these, with regard to one who is sold to a Jew? Let him derive that halakha from the case of one sold to a gentile, through the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker.” The term “hired worker” is used in reference to one sold to a gentile as well: “As a hired worker year by year he shall be with him” (Leviticus 25:53), and accordingly one can say that even one sold to a Jew can be redeemed by his relatives. The fact that he does not accept this claim indicates that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi rejects the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker.”

אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק לעולם יליף שכיר שכיר ושאני הכא דאמר קרא (ויקרא כה, מח) יגאלנו לזה ולא לאחר

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: This proof can be refuted, as one can say that actually Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi does derive the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker,” and it is different here, with regard to one sold to a gentile, as the verse states: “Either his uncle or his uncle’s son may redeem him” (Leviticus 25:49). This emphasis of “him” teaches that redemption is an option only for this slave and not for another type of slave.

ומאן תנא דפליג עליה דרבי ר' יוסי הגלילי ור"ע דתניא (ויקרא כה, נד) לא יגאל באלה ר' יוסי הגלילי אומר באלה לשחרור בשאר כל אדם לשעבוד ר"ע אומר באלה לשעבוד בשאר כל אדם לשחרור

With regard to the dispute itself the Gemara inquires: And who is the tanna who disagrees with Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi with regard to this? It is Rabbi Yosei HaGelili and Rabbi Akiva. As it is taught in a baraita concerning the verse: “And if he is not redeemed by any of these” (Leviticus 25:54), that Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: The expression “by any of these” indicates that redemption by one’s relatives is to freedom, i.e., one becomes an entirely free man. But if a slave is redeemed by anyone else who pays the gentile master, it is to slavery. The redeemed slave becomes indentured to his redeemer until he repays the cost of his redemption through his work. Rabbi Akiva says the opposite: By these relatives he is redeemed to slavery, whereas if he is redeemed by anyone else, it is to freedom.

מאי טעמא דרבי יוסי הגלילי אמר קרא אם לא יגאל באלה אלא באחר ויצא בשנת היובל ור"ע אומר אם לא יגאל אלא באלה ויצא בשנת היובל ור' יוסי הגלילי מידי אלא באלה כתיב

The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili? The verse states concerning a redeemed slave who is emancipated: “If he is not redeemed by any of these” relatives; but if he is redeemed by another, “then he shall go out in the Jubilee Year,” not earlier, as he becomes enslaved to him. And Rabbi Akiva says: “If he is not redeemed” in any other manner but only “by any of these,” “then he shall go out in the Jubilee Year,” i.e., if he is redeemed by relatives, he is emancipated only at the close of Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year. By contrast, if he is redeemed by others he is emancipated immediately. And how does Rabbi Yosei HaGelili respond to this claim? He would ask: Is it written: Only by any of these?

אלא בהאי קרא קמיפלגי (ויקרא כה, מט) או דודו או בן דודו יגאלנו זה גאולת קרובים (ויקרא כה, מט) או השיגה ידו זה גאולת עצמו ונגאל זו גאולת אחרים

Rather, as this suggested interpretation of the verse by Rabbi Akiva is clearly problematic, the Gemara retracts the previous explanation of the dispute and instead says that they disagree with regard to the precise meaning of this verse: “Either his uncle or his uncle’s son may redeem him, or any that is near of kin unto him of his family may redeem him; or if he becomes rich, and he is redeemed” (Leviticus 25:49). “Either his uncle or his uncle’s son may redeem him”; this is the redemption performed by relatives. “Or if he becomes rich”; this is redemption by himself. “And he is redeemed”; this is redemption by other people.

ר' יוסי הגלילי סבר מקרא נדרש לפניו שדי גאולת קרובים אגאולת עצמו מה גאולת עצמו לשחרור אף גאולת קרובים לשחרור ור"ע סבר מקרא נדרש לאחריו שדי גאולת אחרים אגאולת עצמו מה גאולת עצמו לשחרור אף גאולת אחרים לשחרור

Rabbi Yosei HaGelili maintains: A verse is interpreted homiletically based on its juxtaposition to the verse immediately preceding it. Therefore, one should cast, i.e., compare, the case of redemption performed by relatives to the case of redemption performed by himself: Just as redemption performed by himself leads to complete freedom, so too, redemption performed by relatives leads to freedom. And Rabbi Akiva maintains that a verse is interpreted homiletically based on its juxtaposition to the verse immediately after it. Therefore one should cast the case of redemption performed by others to the case of redemption performed by himself: Just as redemption performed by himself is to freedom, so too, redemption performed by others is to freedom, whereas if he is redeemed by his relatives, he becomes enslaved to them.

אי הכי באלה למה לי אי לאו באלה ה"א מקרא נדרש בין לפניו בין לאחריו והכל לשחרור

The Gemara asks: If so, that this is their dispute, why do I need the phrase “by any of these,” according to both Rabbi Yosei HaGelili and Rabbi Akiva? The Gemara answers: If it were not for the phrase “by any of these,” I would say that a verse is interpreted homiletically based on its juxtaposition to the verse immediately preceding it as well as to the verse immediately after it, and therefore in every manner in which he is redeemed it is to freedom. The phrase “by any of these” limits this freedom either to relatives or other people, according to the respective opinions of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili and Rabbi Akiva.

אי הכי הדר קושיא לדוכתיה אלא בסברא קמיפלגי

The Gemara asks: If so, that the different opinions are based on the phrase “by any of these,” then the difficulty with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, that the verse does not say: If he is not redeemed in any other manner but only by any of these, has returned to its place, i.e., it is still valid, as this phrase indicates that Rabbi Yosei HaGelili’s interpretation of the verse is correct. Rather, Rabbi Yosei HaGelili and Rabbi Akiva disagree with regard to reason. Their dispute is a matter of logic and does not concern textual interpretation.

רבי יוסי הגלילי סבר מסתברא גאולת אחרים לשיעבוד דאי אמרת לשחרור הוו מימנעי ולא פרקי ליה ור"ע סבר מסתברא גאולת קרובים לשיעבוד דאי אמרת לשחרור כל יומא ויומא אזל ומזבין נפשיה

The Gemara elaborates. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili maintains: It stands to reason that redemption performed by others is to slavery, as, if you say it is to freedom, they will refrain and will not redeem him. If the slave is required to serve them, and they incur no financial loss, they will redeem him. And Rabbi Akiva maintains: It stands to reason that redemption performed by relatives is to slavery, as, if you say it is to freedom, each and every day he will go and sell himself over and again, relying on his relatives to free him.

א"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן זו דברי רבי יוסי הגלילי ור"ע אבל חכ"א הכל לשחרור

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This is the statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili and Rabbi Akiva, who hold that a slave is not invariably freed whenever he is redeemed from his gentile master. But the Rabbis say that in every case, when he is emancipated it is to freedom.

מאן חכמים רבי היא דמפיק ליה להאי באלה לדרשה אחרינא ומקרא נדרש בין לפניו ובין לאחריו

The Gemara inquires: Who are these Rabbis? It is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who derives another exposition from this term “by any of these,” as stated above. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi maintains that a verse is interpreted homiletically based on its juxtaposition to the verse immediately preceding it as well as to the verse immediately after it. Consequently, the Hebrew slave of a gentile is emancipated regardless of whether he is redeemed by relatives or other people.

ורבי האי (ויקרא כה, נד) ויצא בשנת היובל מאי עביד ליה מיבעי ליה לכדתניא ויצא בשנת היובל

The Gemara asks: And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, what does he do with the verse: “And if he is not redeemed by any of these means, then he shall go out in the Jubilee Year” (Leviticus 25:54)? The Gemara answers: He requires this verse for that which is taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “Then he shall go out in the Jubilee Year.” If the slave is not redeemed prior to this point in time he leaves his gentile master only in the Jubilee Year.