To whom "ha'Elohim" refer?
Moshav Zekenim (Al Derech Derush): Refer to 21:3:1:3.
Why is the master obligated to pierce the Eved's ear in front of Beis-Din?
Rashi and Targum Yonasan: Since they sold him for six years and he now wants to remain longer, it is the correct thing to do to consult with them before changing the condition.
R. Bachye: Since he denied the Midas ha'Din which struck the Egyptian firstborn in order to save Yisrael from serving others, he is now obligated to go to the location of Din in order to have his ear pieced. 1
R. Bachye Midah k'Neged Midah. Refer to 21:6:151:2.
Why does the Torah call judges "Elohim"?
Ramban #1 (citing Ibn Ezra): Because they carry out the Dinim of Hashem. 1
Ramban #2: Here and also later (22:8), it hints that Hashem is with the judges when they adjudicate. 2
Who is called 'Elokim on account of His Midas ha'Din.
As the Torah specifically writes in Devarim 1:17, and hints in many other places. See for example, Divrei ha'Yamim, 2, 19:6 and Tehilim, 82:1 (Ramban).
Bearing in mind the Pasuk in Re'ei, 15:17, which only mentions "Deles", why does the current Pasuk add "O el ha'Mezuzah"?
Rashi: To teach us that the door upon which his ear is being pierced must be standing 1 - just like a doorpost. 2
Moshav Zekenim: The Mezuzah is a witness, along with the door. Refer to 21:6:151:1.
Targum Yonasan: The Pasuk means 'the door that is sytandin beside the doorpost'.
Hadar Zekenim, Moshav Zekenim - it must be standing, for it is like a witness. Refer to 21:6:151:1.
Moshav Zekenim: It is called a doorpost only if it is standing. Riva, citing Chizkuni - here, "Oh El" is like "Asher Kavu'a Etzel." Hadar Zekenim - Oh it is like Im - the door is valid only if it like a doorpost (standing).
Which ear does his master pierce?
Rashi and Targum Yonasan: The right ear. 1
Rashi: Which we learn from a Gezeirah-Shavah "Ozen" "Ozen" from Metzora (Vayikra, 14:14). Refer to 21:6:6:3. Moshav Zekenim - the opinion [in the Mechilta and Sifri] that we pierce the Milas (the lobe - the fleshy part at the bottom of the ear) does not learn from the Gezeirah Shavah, for regarding a Metzora, it is the Tenuch (cartilage - in the middle of the ear).
Why does the Torah add the word "Adonav"?
Yerushalmi Kidushin, 2:1: To extrapolate "Adonav", 've'Lo Shelucho' (ve'Lo B'no ve'Lo Shali'ach Beis-Din ? R. Bachye).
Why specifically the Eved's ear?
Rashi (citing Kidushin, 22b) and R. Bachye 1 : The ear that heard on Har Sinai "Lo Signov" 2 , yet it went and stole; and as for an Eved who sold himself - the ear that heard on Har Sinai "Ki Li B'nei Yisrael Avadim", yet he went and acquired a master for himself, let it be pierced. 3
Rashbam: He pierces his ear as a sign that he is an Eved. 4
Kidushin, 22b: This is the prescribed Kinyan by which the master acquires the Eved Ivri until the Yovel. 5
Yerushalmi Kidushin, 1:2: 'The ear that heard on Har Sinai "Lo Yih'yeh l'cha Elohim Acherim", yet he went and removed fro215.m upon himself the yoke of Malchus Shamayim and took upon himself the yoke of a human-being, let it be pierced!' 6
See R. Bachye - near the middle of page 215 who elaborates.
Riva, Hadar Zekenim: The text should not say Lo Signov, (do not kidnap), rather, "Lo Signovu" (Vayikra 19:11 - do not steal property). R"A - our text is fine. Since he heard "Lo Signov", he should have avoided stealing money, which can lead to kidnapping. Moshav Zekenim - all Geneivah is one, and the Gemara was not particular about the wording.
Which explains why the Torah refers to him as an Eved Ivri and not an middle of page 215.Eved Yisrael ? See R. Bachye
Presumably, because a. it is in a location that is visible to all, and b. it is the only limb which can be pierced without much pain.
See Torah Temimah, note 52, as to why the Rambam does not cite the Mishnah exactly as it is written.
See Torah Temimah, note 57 & 58.
What are the implications of "Ozno"?
Kidushin, 14b: To preclude the ear of a Mocher Atzmo.
Kidushin, 16b: "Ozno", 've'Lo Oznah' - the ear of an Amah ha'Ivriyah is not pierced, and she is therefore obligated to leave the domain of her master immediately.
Why is a Nimkar be'Beis-Din permitted to serve until the Yovel, but not a Mocher Atzmo or an Amah Ivriyah?
Torah Temimah: The Torah permits a Nimkar be'Beis-Din to remian out of pity - because he loves his wife and children, something that is not applicable to a Mocher Atzmo or an Amah Ivriyah.
Why does the Torah mention "Martze'a" (an awl) - despite the fact that other implements may be used?
R. Bachye, Rosh, Da'as Zekenim and Ba'al ha'Turim: There was a decree of four hundred years of servitude (and out of love for Yisrael, Hashem decreased it to two hundred and ten - Hadar Zekenim), and he wants to extend his servitude! His ear is pierced with a Martze'a, whose Gematriya is four hundred
Tosfos ha'Shalem (16, citing R. Efrayim) - the letters of "Azno ba'Martze'a" spell 'be'Ozen Metzora', from which we learn a Gezeirah Shavah.
What are the implications of"Va'avado le'Olam"?
Rashi, Ramban (citing the Mechilta), R. Bachye and Targum Yonasan: It implies until the Yovel. 1 2
Rashbam: It implies that he serves his master for as long as he (the Eved Ivri) lives. 3
Kidushin, 21b, R. Bachye: "Va'avado" - implying that he serves his master but not the master's son or daughter in the event that he dies; "le'Olam" ?See answer #1.
Like we find by Shmuel ha'Ramasi. See R. Bachye and R. Chavel' footnotes DH 'u'Shetei Shanim Hayu lo ? '.
Rashi: Since the Pasuk in Vayikra 25:10 writes that all Avadim return to their families when the Yovel arrives And we learn from here that fifty years are called Olam. See also Sifsei Chachamim. Citing the Ibn Ezra, the Ramban translates "le'Olam" as 'time' (as in Koheles, 1:10), and it is because Yovel is the longest time-period that there is in our calendar, that the Torah uses the term "le'Olam" - as if to say that the Eved will begin a new period, to revert to the time when he was free.
See Rashbam's introduction to the Parshah, where he writes that he will explain the Pesukim in Mishpatim according to the simple P'shat - notwithstanding the Halachic interpretation, as indeed he does here.
Why did the Torah specify the door and the doorpost?
Rashi: Because the door and the doorpost were witnesses in Egypt when Hashem passed over them (and did not kill the firstborn of Yisrael inside) and when He declared "Yisrael are My Avadim"; yet the Eved Ivri went and acquired a [human] master for himself - Let his ear be pierced in front of the witnesses.
R. Bachye #1: Since he denied the sign (the blood) on his doorpost,via which Yisrael went from salvey to freedom, he now has his ear pierced against the doorpost and blood will come out of it 1 (and it is pierced by the entrance, because Hashem opened the door to freedom, and he closed it to remain a slave.
R. Bachye #2 (according to Kabalah): "Deles" ? the letter 'Daled' hints at the 'Dales' of "Echad", which is synonymous with Midas 2 Malchus. 3
Rashbam: Because even on a house that is made of stone, the door and the doorpost are made of wood, in which case it is possible to pierce the Eved's ear together with them.
Hadar Zekenim #1: Retzi'ah is in the door itself, since he broke a door in order to steal - and it mentions doorpost to teach us that the door must be standing. 4
Hadar Zekenim #2: The door is clear testimony that it is his Eved Ivri, since the hole in the door is at the height of the hole in the Eved Ivri's ear - and it mentions doorpost to teach us that the door must be standing). 5
See R. Bachye ? at the end of page 215.
R. Bachye: Ehich explains why it is written with 'Hey' (both here "Vehigisho el ha'Deles"and in Devarim 15:17 "Venasato be'Ozno u'va'Deles".
R. Bachye: "O el ha'Mezuzah". Mezuzah has the same Gematriyah as 'Elokim'. See R. Bachye in the miiddle of page 216.
See also Ba'al ha'Turim.
Refer to 21:6:3:1**.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes that he serves until the Yovel, be it soon or after a long time. From where do we know that Yovel frees even an Eved who sinned twice - who stole and who chose to become Nirtza?
Moshav Zekenim: We learn from "v'Ish El Mishpachto Tashuvu" (Vayikra 25:10), for we already know one who sold himself from "Ki Yamuch... Ad Sh'nas ha'Yovel" (ibid., 39-40) and one whom Beis Din sold from "v'Shav El Mishpachto" (ibid., 41). One who sold himself and he was Nirtza, we learn from a Kal v'Chomer from one whom Beis Din sold and he was Nirtza; the latter did two Aveiros. "V'Ish El Mishpachto" refers to something that applies only to a man, i.e. a Nirtza. 1 Why does Kidushin 21b learn only from "v'Avado l'Olam"? Perhaps it teaches only that l'Olam does not mean forever.
Also one who sold himself, or one whom Beis Din sold, applies only to a man! (PF)
