Commentary page

Kiddushin 22a

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 22a

Kiddushin 22a. The full printed text of this folio side — 14 numbered segments, about 402 words — with the classic commentaries printed on the page.

Original text

Segment 1

תְּמוּתוֹת שְׁחוּטוֹת, וְאַל יֹאכְלוּ בְּשַׂר תְּמוּתוֹת נְבֵילוֹת. ״וְחָשַׁקְתָּ״ – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָהּ נָאָה. ״בָּהּ״ – וְלֹא בָּהּ וּבַחֲבֶרְתָּהּ.

of dying animals that were slaughtered, and let them not eat the meat of dying animals that were not slaughtered but which will become carcasses. In other words, it is preferable for this act to be performed in a somewhat permitted way rather than in a manner that is entirely prohibited. The expression: “And you have a desire for her and would take her to you as a wife” (Deuteronomy 21:11), teaches that this halakha applies even if she is not pretty, as this is a subjective judgment dependent on one’s desire. The term “for her” indicates that he may take her, but not her and another woman. A soldier is allowed to take only one captive in this manner.

Segment 2

״וְלָקַחְתָּ״ – לִיקּוּחִין יֵשׁ לְךָ בָּהּ. ״לְךָ לְאִשָּׁה״ – שֶׁלֹּא יִקַּח שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים, אַחַת לוֹ וְאַחַת לְאָבִיו, אַחַת לוֹ וְאַחַת לִבְנוֹ. ״וַהֲבֵאתָהּ״ – מְלַמֵּד שֶׁלֹּא יִלְחָצֶנָּה בַּמִּלְחָמָה.

The phrase “and would take her” teaches: You have the ability to take her, i.e., to marry her. “To you as a wife” teaches that he may not take two women, one for him and one for his father, or one for him and one for his son. The verse: “Then you shall bring her home into your house” (Deuteronomy 21:12), teaches that he should not pressure her to engage in sexual intercourse during the war, but he should first take her into his home.

Segment 3

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אִם אָמֹר יֹאמַר״ – עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר וְיִשְׁנֶה. אָמַר בִּתְחִילַּת שֵׁשׁ וְלֹא אָמַר בְּסוֹף שֵׁשׁ – אֵינוֹ נִרְצָע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לֹא אֵצֵא חׇפְשִׁי״ – עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר בִּשְׁעַת יְצִיאָה.

§ The Sages taught: It is stated with regard to a pierced slave: “But if the slave shall say [ amor yomar ]: I love my master, my wife, and my children, I will not go out free” (Exodus 21:5). The repeated verb teaches that he is not pierced unless he says this statement and repeats it. If he said at the beginning of his six years of service that he wants to be pierced, but he did not say it at the end of six years, he is not pierced, as it is stated: “I will not go out free,” i.e., he is not pierced unless he says it when he leaves.

Segment 4

אָמַר בְּסוֹף שֵׁשׁ וְלֹא אָמַר בִּתְחִילַּת שֵׁשׁ – אֵינוֹ נִרְצָע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אִם אָמֹר יֹאמַר הָעֶבֶד״ – עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר כְּשֶׁהוּא עֶבֶד.

If he said this statement at the end of six years but did not say it at the beginning of his six years, he is likewise not pierced, as it is stated: “If the slave shall say [ amor yomar ],” which indicates that he is not pierced unless he states it while he is still a slave. This concludes the baraita .

Segment 5

אָמַר מָר: אָמַר בִּתְחִילַּת שֵׁשׁ וְלֹא אָמַר בְּסוֹף שֵׁשׁ – אֵינוֹ נִרְצָע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לֹא אֵצֵא חׇפְשִׁי״. מַאי אִירְיָא, מִ״לֹּא אֵצֵא חׇפְשִׁי״? תִּיפּוֹק לֵיהּ דְּבָעֵינַן: ״אָהַבְתִּי אֶת אֲדֹנִי אֶת אִשְׁתִּי וְאֶת בָּנָי״ וְלֵיכָּא!

The Gemara analyzes this baraita . The Master said above: If he said it at the beginning of his six years and he did not say it at the end of six years, he is not pierced, as it is stated: “I will not go out free.” The Gemara asks: Why does the tanna of the baraita learn this halakha specifically from the phrase “I will not go out free”? Let him derive it from the fact that we require another condition. He has to be able to say: “I love my master, my wife, and my children” (Exodus 21:5) in order to become a pierced slave, and he cannot say this, as at the start of the six years he does not yet have children from the Canaanite maidservant his master provided for him.

Segment 6

וְתוּ, אָמַר בְּסוֹף שֵׁשׁ וְלֹא אָמַר בִּתְחִילַּת שֵׁשׁ אֵינוֹ נִרְצָע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״הָעֶבֶד״. אַטּוּ סוֹף שֵׁשׁ לָאו עֶבֶד הוּא? אָמַר רָבָא: מַאי בִּתְחִילַּת שֵׁשׁ – בִּתְחִילַּת פְּרוּטָה אַחֲרוֹנָה. וּמַאי בְּסוֹף שֵׁשׁ – בְּסוֹף פְּרוּטָה אַחֲרוֹנָה.

And furthermore, the baraita states that if he said this statement at the end of six years but did not say it at the beginning of his six years, he is likewise not pierced, as it is stated “the slave.” Is that to say that he is not a slave at the end of six years? Rava said: What is the meaning of: At the beginning of six? This is not referring to the actual beginning of his six years of service, but to the beginning of the last peruta , i.e., when he reaches the start of his final stage of work worth one peruta , when he is still a slave. And what is the meaning of the term: At the end of six? At the end of the last peruta .

Segment 7

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: לוֹ אִשָּׁה וּבָנִים, וּלְרַבּוֹ אֵין אִשָּׁה וּבָנִים – אֵינוֹ נִרְצָע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי אֲהֵבְךָ וְאֶת בֵּיתֶךָ״. לְרַבּוֹ אִשָּׁה וּבָנִים וְלוֹ אֵין אִשָּׁה וּבָנִים – אֵינוֹ נִרְצָע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אָהַבְתִּי אֶת אֲדֹנִי אֶת אִשְׁתִּי וְאֶת בָּנָי״.

The Sages taught: If the slave has a wife and children and his master does not have a wife and children, he is not pierced, as it is stated: “Because he loves you and your house” (Deuteronomy 15:16). The word “house” is referring to a wife and children, and therefore if the master does not have a wife and children the verse cannot be fulfilled, and the slave is not pierced. Similarly, if his master has a wife and children and he does not have a wife and children, he is not pierced, as it is stated: “I love my master, my wife, and my children” (Exodus 21:5).

Segment 8

הוּא אוֹהֵב אֶת רַבּוֹ וְרַבּוֹ אֵינוֹ אוֹהֲבוֹ – אֵינוֹ נִרְצָע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי טוֹב לוֹ עִמָּךְ״. רַבּוֹ אוֹהֲבוֹ וְהוּא אֵינוֹ אוֹהֵב אֶת רַבּוֹ – אֵינוֹ נִרְצָע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי אֲהֵבְךָ״. הוּא חוֹלֶה וְרַבּוֹ אֵינוֹ חוֹלֶה – אֵינוֹ נִרְצָע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי טוֹב לוֹ עִמָּךְ״. רַבּוֹ חוֹלֶה וְהוּא אֵינוֹ חוֹלֶה – אֵינוֹ נִרְצָע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״עִמָּךְ״.

Furthermore, if he loves his master but his master does not love him, he is not pierced, as it is stated: “Because he fares well with you” (Deuteronomy 15:16), which indicates that it is good for both of them to be with each other. If his master loves him but he does not love his master, he is not pierced, as it is stated: “Because he loves you.” If he is ill and his master is not ill, he is not pierced, as it is stated: “Because he fares well with you,” which excludes a sick person. Similarly, if his master is ill and he is not ill, he is not pierced, as it is stated “with you,” which equates the well-being of the pair.

Segment 9

בָּעֵי רַב בִּיבִי בַּר אַבָּיֵי: שְׁנֵיהֶם חוֹלִין, מַאי? ״עִמָּךְ״ בָּעֵינַן – וְהָא אִיכָּא, אוֹ דִילְמָא ״כִּי טוֹב לוֹ עִמָּךְ״ בָּעֵינַן – וְהָא לֵיכָּא? תֵּיקוּ.

Rav Beivai bar Abaye raised a dilemma: If both of them are ill, what is the halakha ? Do we require only that the slave be “with you,” i.e., in the same condition as the master, and that is the case here, as they are both ill, and the slave can be pierced? Or perhaps we require “because he fares well with you,” i.e., it must be good for both of them, and that is not the case here, as they are both ill. If so, he cannot be pierced. No answer was found, and therefore the Gemara says that the dilemma shall stand unresolved.

Segment 10

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״כִּי טוֹב לוֹ עִמָּךְ״ – עִמְּךָ בַּמַּאֲכָל, עִמְּךָ בַּמִּשְׁתֶּה. שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא אַתָּה אוֹכֵל פַּת נְקִיָּה וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פַּת קִיבָּר, אַתָּה שׁוֹתֶה יַיִן יָשָׁן וְהוּא שׁוֹתֶה יַיִן חָדָשׁ, אַתָּה יָשֵׁן עַל גַּבֵּי מוֹכִין וְהוּא יָשֵׁן עַל גַּבֵּי תֶּבֶן. מִכָּאן אָמְרוּ: כׇּל הַקּוֹנֶה עֶבֶד עִבְרִי – כְּקוֹנֶה אָדוֹן לְעַצְמוֹ.

The Sages taught: The verse states concerning a Hebrew slave: “Because he fares well with you,” which teaches that the slave should be with you, i.e., treated as your equal, in food, meaning that his food must be of the same quality as yours, and with you in drink. This means that there shall not be a situation in which you eat fine bread and he eats inferior bread, bread from coarse flour mixed with bran, which is low quality. There shall not be a situation in which you drink aged wine and he drinks inferior new wine. There shall not be a situation in which you sleep comfortably on bedding made from soft sheets and he sleeps on straw. From here the Sages stated: Anyone who acquires a Hebrew slave is considered like one who acquires a master for himself, because he must be careful that the slave’s living conditions are equal to his own.

Segment 11

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְיָצָא מֵעִמָּךְ הוּא וּבָנָיו עִמּוֹ״, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: אִם הוּא נִמְכָּר – בָּנָיו וּבְנוֹתָיו מִי נִמְכָּרִים? מִכָּאן שֶׁרַבּוֹ חַיָּיב בִּמְזוֹנוֹת בָּנָיו. כַּיּוֹצֵא בַּדָּבָר אַתָּה אוֹמֵר: ״אִם בַּעַל אִשָּׁה הוּא וְיָצְאָה אִשְׁתּוֹ עִמּוֹ״, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: אִם הוּא נִמְכָּר – אִשְׁתּוֹ מִי נִמְכְּרָה? מִכָּאן שֶׁרַבּוֹ חַיָּיב בִּמְזוֹנוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ.

The Sages taught with regard to a verse that deals with the emancipation of a slave: “Then he shall go out from you, he and his children with him” (Leviticus 25:41). Rabbi Shimon said: This verse is puzzling, as, if he is sold, are his sons and daughters sold? Rather, from here it is derived that his master is obligated to provide sustenance for his children, and when the slave is emancipated his sons are released as well. You say something similar with regard to the verse: “If he is married then his wife shall go out with him” (Exodus 21:3). Rabbi Shimon said: If he is sold, is his wife sold? Rather, from here it is derived that his master is obligated to provide sustenance for his wife.

Segment 12

וּצְרִיכָא, דְּאִי אַשְׁמוֹעִינַן בָּנָיו, מִשּׁוּם דְּלָא בְּנֵי מֶיעְבַּד וּמֵיכַל נִינְהוּ. אֲבָל אִשְׁתּוֹ, דְּבַת מֵיכַל וּמֶיעְבַּד הִיא, אֵימָא תַּעֲבֵיד וְתֵיכוֹל.

The Gemara comments: And it is necessary for the baraita to mention both cases, as if it had taught us only that the master is required to provide sustenance for the slave’s children, one might say that this is because they are not fit to work and eat. Since they are unable to support themselves, the master is required to support them. But with regard to his wife, who can eat and work, one might say that she should work and eat in payment for her work, and the master is not required to support her for free.

Segment 13

וְאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן אִשְׁתּוֹ, דְּלָאו דִּירְכַּהּ לְהַדּוֹרֵי, אֲבָל בָּנָיו, דְּדִירְכַּיְיהוּ לְהַדּוֹרֵי, אֵימָא לָא, צְרִיכָא.

And conversely, if the baraita had taught us only about his wife, one might say that the master is required to support her since it is not her manner to circulate and collect charity, as she is too embarrassed to do this. But with regard to his children, since it is their manner to circulate and beg, i.e., this is not beneath their dignity, one might say no, he is not required to support them. Therefore it is necessary to issue both rulings.

Segment 14

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן:

The Sages taught:

Kiddushin 22a

Kiddushin 22a

Rashi

Tosafot

Rashba

Ritva

Meiri

Maharsha (Chidushei Halachot)

Penei Yehoshua

Ben Yehoyada

What this page contains

Continue the sequence

Parallel sources

Lessons and study tools

Original text