Commentary page

Kiddushin 17a

This page gathers the commentary on one source unit: the classic commentaries as they are printed, the sources the text cites, the sages named in it and direct links back to the text.

Read the full text in the reader

Babylonian Talmud · folio map

Kiddushin 17a

Kiddushin 17a. The full printed text of this folio side — 18 numbered segments, about 467 words — with the classic commentaries printed on the page.

Original text

Segment 1

יָכוֹל אֲפִילּוּ חָלָה? – תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וּבַשְּׁבִעִת יֵצֵא״?

One might have thought that even a slave who became sick and is unable to work must work additional time to compensate for the time missed. Therefore, the verse states: “And in the seventh he shall go out” (Exodus 21:2), which indicates that he leaves his master in any case, even if he has not worked the full six years.

Segment 2

אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן, כְּגוֹן שֶׁבָּרַח וּפָגַע בּוֹ יוֹבֵל. מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: הוֹאִיל וְאַפֵּיק לֵיהּ יוֹבֵל, ״שִׁילּוּחוֹ מֵעִמָּךְ״ קָרֵינַן בֵּיהּ, וְלָא נִיקְנְסֵיהּ, וְנַעֲנֵיק לֵיהּ, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

Rav Sheshet said: With what are we dealing here? This concerns a case where he fled and the Jubilee Year arrived immediately afterward, and therefore he did not complete the six years of servitude. The novelty of this halakha is as follows. Lest you say: Since the Jubilee Year released him, he is considered sent away by you, the master, and therefore we should not penalize him but grant him the severance gift, the baraita teaches us that once he flees he forfeits his right to the severance gift.

Segment 3

אָמַר מָר: יָכוֹל אֲפִילּוּ חָלָה – תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וּבַשְּׁבִעִת יֵצֵא״. אֲפִילּוּ חָלָה כׇּל שֵׁשׁ? וְהָתַנְיָא: חָלָה שָׁלֹשׁ וְעָבַד שָׁלֹשׁ – אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב לְהַשְׁלִים, חָלָה כׇּל שֵׁשׁ – חַיָּיב לְהַשְׁלִים! אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: בְּעוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֵׂה מַחַט.

The Master said above: One might have thought that even a slave who became sick and was unable to work must work additional time to compensate for the time missed. Therefore, the verse states: “And in the seventh he shall go out” (Exodus 21:2). The Gemara asks: Is he excused from working additional time even if he was sick for all six years? But isn’t it taught in a baraita : If he was sick for three years and served for three years, he is not obligated to complete the six years of actual labor, but if he was sick for all six years he is obligated to complete the six years of actual labor. Rav Sheshet said: This is referring to a case where he is unable to perform strenuous labor but can execute minor tasks, such as performing needlework or sewing clothes. Since he can perform work of some kind, this slave is not required to work additional time to compensate for the time missed, even if he was ill for all six years.

Segment 4

הָא גוּפָא קַשְׁיָא – אָמְרַתְּ: חָלָה שָׁלֹשׁ וְעָבַד שָׁלֹשׁ – אֵין חַיָּיב לְהַשְׁלִים. הָא אַרְבַּע – חַיָּיב לְהַשְׁלִים. אֵימָא סֵיפָא: חָלָה כׇּל שֵׁשׁ – חַיָּיב לְהַשְׁלִים. הָא אַרְבַּע – אֵין חַיָּיב לְהַשְׁלִים! הָכִי קָאָמַר: חָלָה אַרְבַּע, נַעֲשָׂה כְּמִי שֶׁחָלָה כׇּל שֵׁשׁ וְחַיָּיב לְהַשְׁלִים.

The Gemara comments: This matter itself is difficult, as the baraita is apparently self-contradictory. On the one hand, you said that if he was sick for three years and he served for the other three years he is not obligated to complete the six years of actual labor. This indicates that if he was ill for four years he is obligated to complete the six years of labor. On the other hand, say the last clause of the baraita : If he was sick for all six years he is obligated to complete the six years of actual labor. That indicates that if he was ill for four years he is not obligated to complete the six years of actual labor. The Gemara answers that this is what the baraita is saying: If he was sick for four years he becomes as one who was sick for all six years, and therefore he is required to complete the six years of actual labor.

Segment 5

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: כַּמָּה מַעֲנִיקִים לוֹ? חָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים מִכׇּל מִין וָמִין, שֶׁהֵן חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה סְלָעִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: שְׁלֹשִׁים, כִּשְׁלֹשִׁים שֶׁל עֶבֶד. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: חֲמִשִּׁים, כַּחֲמִשִּׁים שֶׁבָּעֲרָכִין.

§ The Sages taught: How much does one grant a freed slave as a severance gift? It is five sela in value of each and every type mentioned in this verse: “And you shall grant severance to him out of your flock, and out of your threshing floor, and out of your winepress” (Deuteronomy 15:14), which is a total of fifteen sela . This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: He is given thirty sela in total, like the thirty shekels of the fine that is paid for a slave (see Exodus 21:32). Rabbi Shimon says: The master gives him fifty shekels, like the sum of valuations, in which fifty shekels is the largest designated amount for a man (see Leviticus 27:3).

Segment 6

אָמַר מָר: חָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים מִכׇּל מִין וָמִין, שֶׁהֵם חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה סְלָעִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וְרַבִּי מֵאִיר, מִנְיָנָא אֲתָא לְאַשְׁמוֹעִינַן? הָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן: מִיבְצָר הוּא דְּלָא (מְבַצַּר) [לִיבְצַר] לֵיהּ מֵהַאי מִנְיָנָא, וְאִי בָּצַר לֵיהּ מֵחַד מִינָא וְטָפֵי לֵיהּ מֵחַד מִינָא – לֵית לַן בַּהּ.

The Master said above: The master gives five sela of each and every type, which is fifteen sela ; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Meir come to teach us to count? His novelty certainly cannot be that three fives equal fifteen. The Gemara answers that Rabbi Meir teaches us this: The master may not give less than this total number, but if he gives him less of one type and more of one other type, we have no problem with it, and he has fulfilled the mitzva.

Segment 7

מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר? יָלֵיף ״רֵיקָם״ ״רֵיקָם״ מִבְּכוֹר. מָה לְהַלָּן חָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים – אַף כָּאן חָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים.

The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of Rabbi Meir? The Gemara explains: He derives a verbal analogy from “empty” stated with regard to the severance gift: “You shall not send him away empty” (Deuteronomy 15:13), and “empty” stated with regard to a firstborn: “All the firstborn of your sons you shall redeem; and none shall appear before Me empty” (Exodus 34:20). Just as there, in the case of the firstborn, one must give five sela , so too here, in the case of severance gifts, one must give five sela .

Segment 8

וְאֵימָא, חָמֵשׁ סְלָעִים מִכּוּלְּהוּ! אִי כְּתִיב ״רֵיקָם״ לְבַסּוֹף, כִּדְקָאָמְרַתְּ. הַשְׁתָּא דִּכְתִיב ״רֵיקָם״ בְּרֵישָׁא, שְׁדִי ״רֵיקָם״ אַ״צֹּאן״, ״רֵיקָם״ אַ״גּוֹרֶן״, ״רֵיקָם״ אַ״יֶּקֶב״.

The Gemara asks: But one can say that he is obligated to give only five sela in total from all of the three types listed in the verse. The Gemara answers: If “empty” were written at the end of the verse, i.e., Deuteronomy 15:14, the halakha would be as you said. But now that “empty” is written before the verse, i.e., at the end of Deuteronomy 15:13, apply the phrase “Do not send him away empty” to “flock,” and apply “empty” to “threshing floor,” and likewise apply “empty” to “winepress.” Consequently, there must be five sela for each type.

Segment 9

וְנֵילַף ״רֵיקָם״ ״רֵיקָם״ מֵעוֹלַת רְאִיָּה! אָמַר קְרָא: ״אֲשֶׁר בֵּרַכְךָ ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ״.

The Gemara asks: And let us derive a verbal analogy between “empty” and “empty” from the case of the burnt-offering of appearance in the Temple brought on the pilgrimage Festivals, with regard to which it is said: “And they shall not appear before the Lord empty” (Deuteronomy 16:16). The burnt-offering of appearance has no fixed value. The Gemara answers that the verse states: “Of that with which the Lord your God has blessed you” (Deuteronomy 15:14), which indicates that one must give a respectable amount as a severance gift.

Segment 10

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: שְׁלֹשִׁים כִּשְׁלֹשִׁים שֶׁל עֶבֶד. מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה? יָלֵיף ״נְתִינָה״ ״נְתִינָה״ מֵעֶבֶד. מָה לְהַלָּן שְׁלֹשִׁים – אַף כָּאן שְׁלֹשִׁים.

The baraita states that Rabbi Yehuda says that a freed slave is given thirty sela in total, like the thirty shekels of the fine that is paid for a slave. The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of Rabbi Yehuda? The Gemara answers: He derives a verbal analogy between giving, as stated with regard to the severance gift, from the expression of giving stated in connection to a Canaanite slave gored by an ox: “He shall give to their master thirty shekels of silver” (Exodus 21:32). Just as there, he must pay thirty shekels for the slave, so too here, in the case of a severance gift, he must pay thirty.

Segment 11

וְנֵילַף ״נְתִינָה״ ״נְתִינָה״ מֵעֲרָכִין, מָה לְהַלָּן חֲמִשִּׁים – אַף כָּאן חֲמִשִּׁים!

The Gemara asks: But let him derive a similar verbal analogy between “giving” stated with regard to the severance gift and “giving” from valuations (see Leviticus 27:23): Just as there, in the case of valuations, it is fifty shekels for an adult male, so too here, it should be fifty.

Segment 12

חֲדָא, דְּתָפַשְׂתָּה מְרוּבֶּה לֹא תָּפַשְׂתָּה, תָּפַשְׂתָּה מוּעָט תָּפַשְׂתָּה. וְעוֹד, עֶבֶד מֵעֶבֶד הֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמֵילַף.

The Gemara responds: One answer is, as people say, that if you grasped too much, you did not grasp anything; if you grasped a bit, you grasped something. In other words, if there are two possible sources from which to derive the sum of the severance gift, then without conclusive proof one may not presume that the Torah intended to teach the larger amount. Consequently, the master should be required to give only thirty shekels, not fifty. And furthermore, one should derive the halakha of a slave, i.e., the severance gift, from another case involving a slave, i.e., the thirty shekels paid when a Canaanite slave is gored by an ox, rather than derive the halakha of the severance gift from valuations, which apply to all people.

Segment 13

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: חֲמִשִּׁים כַּחֲמִשִּׁים שֶׁבָּעֲרָכִין. מַאי טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן? גָּמַר ״נְתִינָה״ ״נְתִינָה״ מֵעֲרָכִין, מָה לְהַלָּן חֲמִשִּׁים – אַף כָּאן חֲמִשִּׁים. וְאֵימָא: כַּפָּחוּת שֶׁבָּעֲרָכִין! ״אֲשֶׁר בֵּרַכְךָ ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ״ כְּתִיב.

The baraita further teaches that Rabbi Shimon says: The master gives him fifty shekels, like the fifty shekels of valuations for an adult male. The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of Rabbi Shimon? He derived a verbal analogy between “giving” and “giving” from valuations (Leviticus 27:23): Just as there, he pays fifty, so too here, he pays fifty. The Gemara asks: But one can say that as this verbal analogy is referring to valuations in general, he should pay the smallest of the valuations, which is merely three sela . The Gemara answers that it is written: “Of that with which the Lord your God has blessed you” (Deuteronomy 15:14), which indicates that one must give a respectable amount as a severance gift.

Segment 14

וְנֵילַף ״נְתִינָה״ ״נְתִינָה״ מֵעֶבֶד, מָה לְהַלָּן שְׁלֹשִׁים – אַף כָּאן שְׁלֹשִׁים; חֲדָא, דְּתָפַשְׂתָּה מְרוּבֶּה לֹא תָּפַשְׂתָּה, וְעוֹד, עֶבֶד מֵעֶבֶד הֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמֵילַף! רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן ״מִיכָה״ ״מִיכָה״ גָּמַר.

The Gemara asks: But let Rabbi Shimon derive, like Rabbi Yehuda, the verbal analogy between “giving” and “giving” from the verses discussing the goring of a Canaanite slave, teaching that just as there he pays thirty, so too here, he pays thirty? The Gemara adds that there are two reasons to prefer this derivation, as stated above: One reason is that if you grasped too much, you did not grasp anything; if you grasped a bit, you grasped something. And furthermore, one should derive the halakha of a slave from another case involving a slave. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Shimon derives a verbal analogy between poverty and poverty. With regard to valuations the Torah states: “But if he is too poor” (Leviticus 27:8), and concerning a Hebrew slave the verse says: “And if your brother grows poor” (Leviticus 25:39).

Segment 15

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר, הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב צֹאן גּוֹרֶן וָיֶקֶב. אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הַאי צֹאן גּוֹרֶן וָיֶקֶב לְמָה לִי?

Having ascertained the source for each of the opinions in the baraita , the Gemara analyzes their opinions. The Gemara asks: Granted, with regard to the opinion of Rabbi Meir, this is as it is written “flock,” “threshing floor,” and “winepress,” as he derives from these three terms that the severance gift must be worth fifteen sela . But according to the opinions of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon, why do I need these terms “flock,” “threshing floor,” and “winepress,” in light of the fact that one may give his slave any product?

Segment 16

הַאי מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְתַנְיָא: יָכוֹל לֹא יְהוּ מַעֲנִיקִין אֶלָּא מִצֹּאן גּוֹרֶן וָיֶקֶב, מִנַּיִן לְרַבּוֹת כׇּל דָּבָר – תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אֲשֶׁר בֵּרַכְךָ ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ״. אִם כֵּן מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר צֹאן גּוֹרֶן וָיֶקֶב? לוֹמַר לָךְ: מָה צֹאן גּוֹרֶן וָיֶקֶב מְיוּחָדִים, שֶׁיֶּשְׁנָן בִּכְלַל בְּרָכָה – אַף כֹּל שֶׁיֶּשְׁנָן בִּכְלַל בְּרָכָה, יָצְאוּ כְּסָפִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: יָצְאוּ פְּרָדוֹת.

The Gemara answers: These terms are necessary for that which is taught in a baraita : One might have thought that one grants severance gifts only from the flock, the threshing floor, and the winepress; from where is it derived to include every matter? The verse states: “Of that with which the Lord your God has blessed you” (Deuteronomy 15:14). If so, what is the meaning when the verse states “flock,” “threshing floor,” and “winepress”? This serves to tell you that just as a flock, a threshing floor, and a winepress are unique in that they are included in the category of blessing, i.e., they grow and multiply, so too all items that are included in the category of blessing may be given as a severance gift. This excludes money, which does not increase on its own. This is the statement of Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: This excludes mules, which cannot reproduce.

Segment 17

וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן? פְּרָדוֹת מַשְׁבְּחָן בְּגוּפַיְיהוּ. וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב? כְּסָפִים עָבֵיד בְּהוּ עִיסְקָא.

The Gemara asks: And Rabbi Shimon, why does he exclude money but not mules? The Gemara answers: With regard to mules, their bodies grow and enhance. Although they do not reproduce, they still grow. And Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, why doesn’t he exclude money? He maintains that one can conduct business with money and thereby profit from it. In this manner money can increase.

Segment 18

וּצְרִיכָא, דְּאִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא צֹאן, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא בַּעֲלֵי חַיִּים – אִין, גִּידּוּלֵי קַרְקַע – לָא, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא גּוֹרֶן. וְאִי כְּתַב גּוֹרֶן, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: גִּידּוּלֵי קַרְקַע – אִין, בַּעֲלֵי חַיִּים – לָא, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא צֹאן. יֶקֶב לְמָה לִי?

The Gemara notes: And it is necessary for the Torah to mention a flock, a threshing floor, and a winepress, as, if the Merciful One had written only “flock,” I would say that animals, yes, the master may give them to his slave upon his release, but that which grows from the ground, no, he may not give them. Therefore, the Merciful One writes “threshing floor.” And if the Torah had written only “threshing floor,” I would say that that which grows from the ground, yes, he may give them, but animals, no, he may not give them. Therefore, the Merciful One writes “flock.” The Gemara asks: Since threshing floor is stated, why do I need the mention of a winepress?

Kiddushin 17a

Kiddushin 17a

Rashi

Tosafot

Rashba

Ritva

Meiri

Maharsha (Chidushei Halachot)

Penei Yehoshua

Gilyon HaShas

What this page contains

Continue the sequence

Parallel sources

Lessons and study tools

Sages named on this page

Original text