(Devarim 15:11) "for a poor man will not cease from the midst of the land": And elsewhere it is written (Ibid. 4) "But, there shall not be in you a poor man." How are these two verses to be reconciled? When you do the will of the L-rd, the poor will be in others (i.e., the gentiles); but when you do not do the will of the L-rd, the poor will be in you.
"to your brother, your poor one, and your pauper in your land.": Why are all of these mentioned? Scripture apprises us: One whom it befits to give a loaf, give a loaf; one whom it befits to give dough, give dough; one whom it befits to give money, give money; one whom it befits to be fed, feed him.
(Ibid. 12) "If there be sold, to you, etc.": Whence is it derived that if you buy (a servant), you should buy only a Hebrew servant? From (Shemoth 21:2) "When you buy a Hebrew man-servant." Whence is it derived that if he sells himself, he should sell himself only to you? From (Vayikra 25:39) "And if your brother grows poor with you and he is sold to you…" Whence is it derived that if beth-din sells him, he is sold only to you? From (Ibid. 12) "If there be sold to you (by beth-din, for his theft) your brother …"
"the Hebrew man or the Hebrew woman": Why are (both of) these mentioned? For there obtains with the first what does not obtain with the second, and with the second, what does not obtain with the first. The Hebrew man-servant leaves (his master) with (the lapse of six) years, Yovel, and deduction of money (from the time he has served) — which does not obtain with the Hebrew maid-servant. The Hebrew maid-servant leaves with signs (of puberty), and is not sold and re-sold, and is redeemed perforce — which does not obtain with the Hebrew man-servant. So that since there obtains with the first what does not obtain with the second, and with the second what does not obtain with the first, both must be mentioned.
"then he shall serve you": — and not your heir. I might think, not even your son; it is, therefore, written (Shemoth 21:2) "Six years shall he serve" (implying that he does serve your son). And why do you see fit to include the son and to exclude the heir (i.e., the daughter)? I include the son for he stands in place of his father for yeidah (living with his father's handmaid), and for (acquiring his) field of holding (viz. Vayikra 25:25), and I exclude the daughter, who does not.
If he ran away and returned, whence do I derive that he completes his (six) years (of service)? From "then he shall serve you six years." I might think that if he took sick and recovered he makes up for his days of idleness; it is, therefore, written "and in the seventh year you shall send him free from you."
(דברים טו יא) כִּי לֹא יֶחְדַּל אֶבְיוֹן מִקֶּרֶב הָאָרֶץ, וּלְהַלָּן הוּא אוֹמֵר (דברים טו ד) ״אֶפֶס כִּי לֹא יִהְיֶה בְּךָ אֶבְיוֹן״. כֵּיצַד נִתְקַיְּמוּ שְׁנֵי כְתוּבִים הַלָּלוּ? בִּזְמַן שֶׁאַתֶּם עוֹשִׂים רְצוֹנוֹ שֶׁל מָקוֹם – אֶבְיוֹנִים בַּאֲחֵרִים, וּכְשֶׁאֵין אַתֶּם עוֹשִׂים רְצוֹנוֹ שֶׁל מָקוֹם – אֶבְיוֹנִים בָּכֶם.
(Devarim 15:11) "for a poor man will not cease from the midst of the land": And elsewhere it is written (Ibid. 4) "But, there shall not be in you a poor man." How are these two verses to be reconciled? When you do the will of the L-rd, the poor will be in others (i.e., the gentiles); but when you do not do the will of the L-rd, the poor will be in you.
עַל כֵּן אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ לֵאמֹר, ״עַל כֵּן״ – מִפְּנֵי כֵן. אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ לֵאמֹר – עֵצָה טוֹבָה אֲנִי נוֹתֵן לְךָ מִטּוֹבָתְךָ.
"Therefore, I command you, saying": I give you goodly counsel, for your benefit: "Open shall you open your hand...give shall you give."
פָּתוֹחַ תִּפְתַּח אֶת יָדְךָ לְאָחִיךָ לַעֲנִיֶּךָ וּלְאֶבְיוֹנְךָ, לָמָּה נֶאֶמְרוּ כֻלָּם? הָרָאוּי לִתֵּן לוֹ פַּת – נוֹתְנִים לוֹ פַּת. עִיסָּה – נוֹתְנִים לוֹ עִיסָּה. מָעָה – נוֹתְנִים לוֹ מָעָה. לְהַאֲכִילוֹ בְּתוֹךְ פִּיו – מַאֲכִילִים אוֹתוֹ בְּתוֹךְ פִּיו.
"to your brother, your poor one, and your pauper in your land.": Why are all of these mentioned? Scripture apprises us: One whom it befits to give a loaf, give a loaf; one whom it befits to give dough, give dough; one whom it befits to give money, give money; one whom it befits to be fed, feed him.
(דברים טו יב) כִּי יִמָּכֵר לְךָ, מִנַּיִן כְּשֶׁאַתָּה קוֹנֶה לֹא תְּהֵא קוֹנֶה אֶלָּא עֶבֶד עִבְרִי? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שמות כא ב): ״כִּי תִקְנֶה עֶבֶד עִבְרִי״. מִנַּיִן כְּשֶׁהוּא נִמְכָּר, אֵינוֹ נִמְכָּר אֶלָּא לְךָ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (ויקרא כה לט): ״וְנִמְכַּר לָךְ״. מִנַּיִן כְּשֶׁבֵּית דִּין מוֹכְרִים אוֹתוֹ, אֵין מוֹכְרִים אוֹתוֹ אֶלָּא לְךָ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: כִּי יִמָּכֵר לְךָ.
(Ibid. 12) "If there be sold, to you, etc.": Whence is it derived that if you buy (a servant), you should buy only a Hebrew servant? From (Shemoth 21:2) "When you buy a Hebrew man-servant." Whence is it derived that if he sells himself, he should sell himself only to you? From (Vayikra 25:39) "And if your brother grows poor with you and he is sold to you…" Whence is it derived that if beth-din sells him, he is sold only to you? From (Ibid. 12) "If there be sold to you (by beth-din, for his theft) your brother …"
אָחִיךָ הָעִבְרִי אוֹ הָעִבְרִיָּה, יֵשׁ בָּעִבְרִי מַה שֶּׁאֵין בָּעִבְרִיָּה וּבָעִבְרִיָּה מַה שֶּׁאֵין בָּעִבְרִי. עִבְרִי יוֹצֵא בְּשָׁנִים וּבְיוֹבֵל וּבְגֵרְעוֹן כֶּסֶף, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בָּעִבְרִיָּה. עִבְרִיָּה יוֹצְאָה בְּסִימָנִים, וְאֵינָהּ נִמְכֶּרֶת וְנִשְׁנֵית, וּמַפְדִּים אוֹתָהּ עַל כָּרְחָהּ, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בָּעִבְרִי. הָא לְפִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּעִבְרִי מַה שֶּׁאֵין בָּעִבְרִיָּה, וּבָעִבְרִיָּה מַה שֶּׁאֵין בָּעִבְרִי צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר בָּעִבְרִי וְצָרִיךְ לוֹמַר בָּעִבְרִיָּה.
"the Hebrew man or the Hebrew woman": Why are (both of) these mentioned? For there obtains with the first what does not obtain with the second, and with the second, what does not obtain with the first. The Hebrew man-servant leaves (his master) with (the lapse of six) years, Yovel, and deduction of money (from the time he has served) — which does not obtain with the Hebrew maid-servant. The Hebrew maid-servant leaves with signs (of puberty), and is not sold and re-sold, and is redeemed perforce — which does not obtain with the Hebrew man-servant. So that since there obtains with the first what does not obtain with the second, and with the second what does not obtain with the first, both must be mentioned.
וַעֲבָדְךָ שֵׁשׁ שָׁנִים – אַף אֶת הַבֵּן. יָכוֹל אַף אֶת הַיּוֹרֵשׁ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שמות כא ב): ״שֵׁשׁ שָׁנִים יַעֲבֹד״ – מִי לְחָשְׁךָ לְהָבִיא אֶת הַבֵּן וּלְהוֹצִיא אֶת הַיּוֹרֵשׁ? מֵבִיא אֲנִי אֶת הַבֵּן, שֶׁכֵּן קָם תַּחַת אָבִיו לִיעִידָה וְלִשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה, וּמוֹצִיא אֲנִי אֶת הַיּוֹרֵשׁ, שֶׁלֹּא קָם תַּחַת הָאָב לִיעִידָה וְלִשְׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּה.
"then he shall serve you": — and not your heir. I might think, not even your son; it is, therefore, written (Shemoth 21:2) "Six years shall he serve" (implying that he does serve your son). And why do you see fit to include the son and to exclude the heir (i.e., the daughter)? I include the son for he stands in place of his father for yeidah (living with his father's handmaid), and for (acquiring his) field of holding (viz. Vayikra 25:25), and I exclude the daughter, who does not.
בָּרַח וְחָזַר, מִנַּיִן שֶׁמְּשַׁלֵּם לוֹ שָׁנָיו? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״שֵׁשׁ שָׁנִים יַעֲבֹד״. חָלָה וְנִתְרַפֵּא, יָכוֹל יַחֲזִיר לוֹ שְׂכַר בַּטָּלָתוֹ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שמות כא ב): ״יֵצֵא לַחָפְשִׁי חִנָּם״.
If he ran away and returned, whence do I derive that he completes his (six) years (of service)? From "then he shall serve you six years." I might think that if he took sick and recovered he makes up for his days of idleness; it is, therefore, written "and in the seventh year you shall send him free from you."