Is there no difference if the letter 'Chaf' or a 'Lamed' or a 'Beis' are before the word 'Eved'? Perhaps the reason why Rashi uses the word B'Eved Ivri is not because he expects Beis Din to merely assess the damage caused as if we were selling him K'Eved Ivri or L'Eved Ivri for only a period of 6 years. Because The Rosh's and other's question of this being a lifelong damage is a very strong one! Perhaps Rashi agrees with their position. Yet he doesn't want a Yid (or even any part of a Yid) to be judged to have the same value as a Goy!
So we have to make sure that you realize that we're talking here B'Eved Ivri. and its only ROYIN OSO, and only AS IF he was sold in a markeplace (but yes it is L'Olom)!
And of course the Yadayim of Yakov are not the same as the Yadayim of Esav.
Am I way off base?
If what I wrote above makes any sense and worthy of any thought. Then I would ask you the following.
Since obviously the Chashivus of a Yid does not usually lie in the physical capability of his hands; does that mean that in effect the Nezek of losing a Jewish hand might actually be judged to be worth less than an Afro-American's hand?! And the MAzik would actually pay less in this case?!
A third personal question I would like to ask you is whether I should stop thinking along these type of lines and stick to learning the Shakle V'TAryah of the Gemorah and Rashi. Although I enjoy very much just closing my eyes, to just let similarities to what we are learning about pop into my head from whatever I can remeber or even think of. I have so much faith in Rashi that as hard as the question of the Rosh seems and as much as Reb Akiva Eger is right I ask Hash-m to somehow help me find an answer to Rashi, again from anywhere that I can imagine. Yet I'm wary that my thinking is not straight or that this is not really learning.
Or is it?
Thank you
Alex Lebovits, Toronto, CAnada
(1) I cannot see so much difference between 'Chaf' 'Lamed' and 'Beis' in this particular case. In fact the Nimukei Yosef learns like Rashi, not like the Rosh, but he still uses a Lamed, and if you look in the Ketzos ha'Choshen 420:1 you see that he also uses a Chaf, so it seems that these letters are interchangeable in this case.
(2) Yes, I agree that Rashi doesn't want a Yid to have the same value as a Goy. In fact this seems to be what the above Ketzos writes that "a Yisroel is not valuated as an Eved Kena'ani". In addition to the Havdalah and difference between the two peoples there is also a good reason why Rashi mentioned an Eved Ivri, because a Yid cannot practically speaking sell himself as an Eved Kena'ani.
(3) The Yam Shel Shlomo here (by the Maharshal) explains Rashi. Rashi does not mean that the estimation is done as if he was sold as an Eved Ivri, but rather Rashi is explaining the damage that was done to him, namely that before the injury he possessed the opportunity to sell himself for more as an Eved Ivri. However the evaluation is done as if he was sold as an Eved Kena'ani. The Yam Shel Shlomo proves this from Rashi 84b DH Pegam who discusses the financial loss due to the rape of a Yisraelis, and writes that one estimates the difference between a virgin Shifchah and a non-virgin Shifchah. A shifchah by definition is a Kena'anis so one sees that the estimation of a Yisrael is also carried out according to the measuring stick of an Eved Kena'ani.
(4) With the help of this Yam Shel Shlomo we can see that there never was a dispute between Rashi and the Rosh. If we look carefully at Rashi's words we notice that he is merely explaining why the injury is cosidered as a loss for him - because if he was in need of this he could have sold himself as an Eved Ivri - but Rashi never attempts to explain how one evaluates the exact damage. In contrast the Rosh writes that one considers him as if he was an Eved Kena'ani, while the evaluation of an Eved Ivri would not be appropriate. One notices that the Rosh is explaining how we do the estimation, so Rashi and the Rosh are addressing themselves to two different questions and there is no dispute between them. (This also makes it easier to understand why the Rosh does not mention that his explanation is different from Rashi's).
(5) The way of estimating the damage depends on every individual and I think it would be too much of a generalization to say that an Eved Kena'ani is always worth more than an Eved Ivri.
(6) Speaking generally about learning, I remember that when I learned in the Mir Yeshivah (a long time ago!) Rav Nosson Tzvi Finkel once said in the name of Reb Elchonon Wasserman Zatsal, that when Yehoshua 1:8 says "v'Hogisa Bo Yomam va'Laila" (which the old translations render as "you shall contemplate on the Torah day and night") what the word "Hogisa" means is "Trachten in Learnen" - thinking in learning. In other words the Mitzvah of learning is to think hard about what you are learning. Some people learn a Gemara and hardly have any Kashyas on it, but you, Alex, Baruch Hash-m always have a lot of good questions and insights to offer so in my opinion it is very worthwhile to develop that ability.
BeHatzlocha Rabah
Dovid Bloom