## Kiddushin Daf 15a

###### Kiddushin 15a:1
[Kiddushin 15a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:1)

וְאִידָּךְ? הָהִיא – לִגְזֵירָה שָׁוָה הוּא דַּאֲתָא. דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: מִנַּיִן לִרְצִיעָה שֶׁהִיא בְּאֹזֶן יָמָנִית? נֶאֱמַר כָּאן: ״אֹזֶן״, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן: ״אֹזֶן״. מָה לְהַלָּן יָמִין – אַף כָּאן יָמִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the other** Sage, Rabbi Elazar, would say: **That** term, “his ear,” **comes for a verbal analogy. As it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Eliezer says: From where** is it derived that the **piercing** of a Hebrew slave’s ear with an awl is performed **on the right ear? It is stated: Ear, here,** with regard to a Hebrew slave, **and it is stated there,** with regard to the ritual purification of a leper: “The right **ear** of he who is to be purified” (Leviticus 14:14). **Just as there,** with regard to a leper, it specifies the **right** ear explicitly, **so too here,** the piercing of a slave must be performed on the **right** ear.


###### Kiddushin 15a:2
[Kiddushin 15a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:2)

וְאִידַּךְ? אִם כֵּן לֵימָא קְרָא ״אֹזֶן״, מַאי ״אׇזְנוֹ״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** how does **the other** Sage, the first *tanna*, derive that this piercing can be performed only on the right ear? The Gemara answers: He would argue that **if it is so** that the word “ear” is stated only for the sake of the verbal analogy, **let the verse say** merely: **Ear,** and one would learn the *halakha* through a verbal analogy from the case of the leper’s ear. **What** is the reason that it states **“his ear”?** This serves to teach that one who sells himself may not be pierced.


###### Kiddushin 15a:3
[Kiddushin 15a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:3)

וְאִידַּךְ? הַהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ: ״אׇזְנוֹ״ – וְלֹא אׇזְנָהּ. וְאִידַּךְ? נָפְקָא לַהּ מִ״וְּאִם יֹאמַר הָעֶבֶד״ – הָעֶבֶד וְלֹא אָמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the other** Sage, Rabbi Elazar, would answer: **That** formulation **is necessary** to teach that the mitzva of piercing applies to **“his ear” but not her ear.** He learns from the pronoun that piercing may be performed only on a male slave, not a maidservant. The Gemara asks: **And** from where does **the other** Sage, the first *tanna*, derive this *halakha*? The Gemara answers: **He derives it from** the verse: **“But if the slave shall say”** (Exodus 21:5). This indicates that piercing applies to **the slave but not** to **a maidservant.**


###### Kiddushin 15a:4
[Kiddushin 15a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:4)

וְאִידַּךְ? מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ: עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר כְּשֶׁהוּא עֶבֶד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the other** Sage, Rabbi Elazar, who does not derive this ruling in the same manner as the first *tanna*, **requires** this verse for a different *halakha*: A slave may declare that he wishes to be pierced **provided that he says** this **when he is** still **a slave.** After he has been emancipated, he can no longer say that he wishes to remain with his master.


###### Kiddushin 15a:5
[Kiddushin 15a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:5)

וְאִידַּךְ? מֵ״עֶבֶד״ ״הָעֶבֶד״ נָפְקָא. וְאִידַּךְ? ״עֶבֶד״ ״הָעֶבֶד״ לָא דָּרֵישׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** from where does **the other** Sage, the first *tanna*, learn this *halakha*? The Gemara responds: **He derives** it **from** the terms: **Slave,** and **“the slave.”** If the verse had stated only: Slave, one would have learned that a slave may say this only while still a slave. Since it is actually written “the slave,” this teaches the other *halakha* as well, that a slave may be pierced but a maidservant may not. The Gemara comments: **And the other** Sage, Rabbi Elazar, **does not learn** a *halakha* from this slight difference between: **Slave,** and **“the slave.”**


###### Kiddushin 15a:6
[Kiddushin 15a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:6)

מַאי טַעְמָא דְּתַנָּא קַמָּא דְּאָמַר מוֹכֵר עַצְמוֹ אֵין מַעֲנִיקִין לוֹ? מִיעֵט רַחֲמָנָא גַּבֵּי מְכָרוּהוּ בֵּית דִּין: ״הַעֲנֵיק תַּעֲנִיק לוֹ״ – לוֹ, וְלֹא לְמוֹכֵר עַצְמוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara clarifies additional details with regard to this dispute: **What is the reasoning of the first *tanna*, who says** that **one does not grant** a severance gift **to one who sells himself? With regard to one sold by the court, the Merciful One excludes** a certain case by the verse: **“You shall give a severance gift to him”** (Deuteronomy 15:14). **“To him”** means to one who is sold by the court, **but not to one who sells himself.**


###### Kiddushin 15a:7
[Kiddushin 15a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:7)

וְאִידַּךְ? הַהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ: לוֹ, וְלֹא לְיוֹרְשָׁיו. יוֹרְשָׁיו אַמַּאי לָא? ״שָׂכִיר״ קַרְיֵיהּ רַחֲמָנָא, מָה שָׂכִיר פְּעוּלָּתוֹ לְיוֹרְשָׁיו – אַף הַאי פְּעוּלָּתוֹ לְיוֹרְשָׁיו! אֶלָּא: לוֹ, וְלֹא לְבַעַל חוֹבוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** what does **the other** Sage, Rabbi Elazar, derive from that verse? The Gemara answers: **He requires that** verse to teach the following: **“To him”** means that one grants a severance gift only to the slave himself **but not to his heirs.** The Gemara asks: **Why not** give this gift **to his heirs?** After all, **the Merciful One calls** a Hebrew slave **“a hired worker.” Just as** payment for **the labor of a hired worker** is given **to his heirs** when he dies, **so too this** severance gift for **his labor** should be given **to his heirs** when he dies. **Rather,** this verse teaches **“to him,” but not to** the slave’s **creditor.** One to whom the slave owes money may not collect the slave’s severance gift as repayment of the debt.


###### Kiddushin 15a:8
[Kiddushin 15a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:8)

מִדִּסְבִירָא לַן בְּעָלְמָא כְּרַבִּי נָתָן, דְּתַנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי נָתָן: מִנַּיִן לַנּוֹשֶׁה בַּחֲבֵרוֹ מָנֶה, וַחֲבֵרוֹ בַּחֲבֵרוֹ – מִנַּיִן שֶׁמּוֹצִיאִין מִזֶּה וְנוֹתְנִין לָזֶה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְנָתַן לַאֲשֶׁר אָשַׁם לוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Why is it necessary to emphasize that a creditor has no rights to the severance gift? That is necessary due to the fact **that we generally hold in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Natan, as it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Natan says: From where** is it derived **that** in the case of **one who lends one hundred dinars to another, and the other** lends a similar sum **to** yet **another,** a third person, **from where** is it derived **that** the court **appropriates** the money **from this one,** the third person, **and gives** it **to that one,** the first creditor, without going through the second person, who owes money to the first and is owed that same amount by the third? **The verse states: “And he shall give it to him whom he has wronged”** (Numbers 5:7), which indicates that the loan should be repaid to the creditor to whom the money is ultimately owed.


###### Kiddushin 15a:9
[Kiddushin 15a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:9)

אֲתָא ״לוֹ״ לְאַפּוֹקֵי. וְאִידַּךְ? בְּעָלְמָא נָמֵי לָא סְבִירָא לַן כְּרַבִּי נָתָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Therefore, the term **“to him” comes to exclude** this possibility, as the severance gift is given to the slave and not to his creditor. **And** how does **the other** Sage, the first *tanna*, respond to this claim? He maintains that **we generally do not hold in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Natan.** Consequently, this exposition is unnecessary.


###### Kiddushin 15a:10
[Kiddushin 15a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:10)

מַאי טַעְמָא דְּתַנָּא קַמָּא דְּאָמַר מוֹכֵר עַצְמוֹ אֵין רַבּוֹ מוֹסֵר לוֹ שִׁפְחָה כְּנַעֲנִית? מַיעֵט רַחֲמָנָא גַּבֵּי מְכָרוּהוּ בֵּית דִּין: ״אִם אֲדֹנָיו יִתֶּן לוֹ אִשָּׁה״ – לוֹ, וְלֹא לְמוֹכֵר עַצְמוֹ. וְאִידַּךְ? לוֹ – בְּעַל כׇּרְחוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues to ask: **What is the reasoning of the first *tanna*, who says** that if **one sells himself his master does not provide him** with **a Canaanite maidservant?** The Gemara answers: **With regard to one sold by the court, the Merciful One excludes** a certain case by the verse: **“If his master give to him a wife”** (Exodus 21:4). This serves to emphasize **“to him” but not to one who sells himself. And the other** Sage, Rabbi Elazar, explains: **“To him”** means even **against his will.**


###### Kiddushin 15a:11
[Kiddushin 15a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:11)

וְאִידַּךְ? מִ״כִּי מִשְׁנֶה שְׂכַר שָׂכִיר״ נָפְקָא, דְּתַנְיָא: ״כִּי מִשְׁנֶה שְׂכַר שָׂכִיר עֲבָדְךָ״ – שָׂכִיר אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵד אֶלָּא בַּיּוֹם, עֶבֶד עִבְרִי עוֹבֵד בֵּין בַּיּוֹם וּבֵין בַּלַּיְלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** from where does **the other** Sage, the first *tanna*, derive that the slave must remain with this maidservant against his will? **He derives** it **from** the verse: **“For double of the hire of a hired worker** he has served you” (Deuteronomy 15:18). **As it is taught** in a *baraita* that this verse: **“For double of the hire of a hired worker he has served you,”** indicates that **a hired worker works only during the day,** whereas **a Hebrew slave works both during the day and at night.**


###### Kiddushin 15a:12
[Kiddushin 15a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:12)

וְכִי תַעֲלֶה עַל דַּעְתְּךָ שֶׁעֶבֶד עִבְרִי עוֹבֵד בֵּין בַּיּוֹם וּבֵין בַּלַּיְלָה? וַהֲלֹא כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר: ״כִּי טוֹב לוֹ עִמָּךְ״ – עִמְּךָ בַּמַּאֲכָל, עִמְּךָ בַּמִּשְׁתֶּה. וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: מִכָּאן שֶׁרַבּוֹ מוֹסֵר לוֹ שִׁפְחָה כְּנַעֲנִית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara clarifies: **And can it enter your mind that a Hebrew slave** actually **works both during the day and at night? But isn’t it already stated: “Because he fares well with you”** (Deuteronomy 15:16), which teaches that he must be **with you in food** and **with you in drink?** All of the slave’s needs must be fulfilled, and his living conditions must be equal to those of the master himself. If so, he cannot be forced to work under unreasonable conditions. **And Rabbi Yitzḥak says** in explanation of this *halakha*: **From here** it is derived **that his master may provide him** with **a Canaanite maidservant** against his will to produce children for the master. This is the service he performs at night.


###### Kiddushin 15a:13
[Kiddushin 15a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:13)

וְאִידַּךְ? אִי מֵהָתָם, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי מִדַּעְתֵּיהּ, אֲבָל בְּעַל כֻּרְחֵיהּ אֵימָא לָא, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the other** Sage, Rabbi Elazar, would say that this is no proof, because **if** it is derived **from there** alone **I would say: This matter applies** only **with his consent; but** as for his master forcing him to live with a maidservant **against his will, I would say no,** he cannot do this. Therefore, the term “to him” **teaches us** that the master can even provide him with a Canaanite maidservant against his will.


###### Kiddushin 15a:14
[Kiddushin 15a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:14)

אֶלָּא, מַאן תַּנָּא דְּלָא יָלֵיף ״שָׂכִיר״ ״שָׂכִיר״? הַאי תַּנָּא הוּא, דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְשָׁב אֶל מִשְׁפַּחְתּוֹ וְגוֹ׳״ אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב: בַּמָּה הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר? אִי בְּמוֹכֵר עַצְמוֹ – הֲרֵי כְּבָר אָמוּר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ According to the above explanation, both Rabbi Elazar and the first *tanna* accept the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker.” **Rather, who is the *tanna*** who **does not derive** the verbal analogy between **“hired worker”** and **“hired worker”? It is this *tanna*, as it is taught** in a *baraita* as follows with regard to the verse: “He shall labor with you until the Jubilee Year, then he shall go out from you, he and his children with him, **and shall return to his own family** and to the possession of his fathers he shall return” (Leviticus 25:40–41). **Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: What is the verse speaking of** when it states: “And shall return to his own family”? **If** it is speaking **of one who sold himself** and the Jubilee Year arrived during his six years of slavery, this **is already stated:** “He shall labor with you until the Jubilee Year, then he shall go out from you” (Leviticus 25:40).


###### Kiddushin 15a:15
[Kiddushin 15a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:15)

אִי בְּנִרְצָע – הֲרֵי כְּבָר אָמוּר! הָא אֵין הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר אֶלָּא בִּמְכָרוּהוּ בֵּית דִּין שְׁתַּיִם וְשָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל, שֶׁהַיּוֹבֵל מוֹצִיאוֹ. וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ יָלֵיף ״שָׂכִיר״ ״שָׂכִיר״, לְמָה לִי? נֵילַף ״שָׂכִיר״ ״שָׂכִיר״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If** it is speaking **of a pierced** slave, it **is already stated,** as will be explained. It must be that **the verse is speaking of nothing other** than a man **sold by the court two or three years before the Jubilee** Year, and it teaches **that the Jubilee** Year **releases him** from slavery. The Gemara analyzes this opinion: **And if** it would **enter your mind** that Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov **derives** the verbal analogy between **“hired worker”** and **“hired worker,” why do I** need this verse? **Let him derive** that a man sold by the court is released in the Jubilee Year by the verbal analogy between **“hired worker”** and **“hired worker,”** from the case of one who sold himself.


###### Kiddushin 15a:16
[Kiddushin 15a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:16)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: לְעוֹלָם יָלֵיף ״שָׂכִיר״ ״שָׂכִיר״, וְאִיצְטְרִיךְ, סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא, מוֹכֵר עַצְמוֹ הוּא, דְּלָא עֲבַד אִיסּוּרָא, אֲבָל מְכָרוּהוּ בֵּית דִּין, דַּעֲבַד אִיסּוּרָא, אֵימָא נִיקְנְסֵיהּ, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said** that this claim can be refuted: **Actually,** Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov **derives** the verbal analogy between **“hired worker”** and **“hired worker”** as well, **and** even so it **was necessary** for him to learn that *halakha* from a verse. The reason is that it might **enter your mind to say** that **one who sells himself, who did not commit a transgression,** is emancipated at the onset of the Jubilee Year even if six years have not passed, **but** with regard to **one sold by the court, who did commit a transgression,** as he was sold because he was unable to repay the value of his theft, one might **say** that **we should penalize him** and therefore he should not be emancipated in the Jubilee Year. Consequently, the verse **teaches us** that even this slave is emancipated in the Jubilee Year.


###### Kiddushin 15a:17
[Kiddushin 15a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:17)

אָמַר מָר: אִי בְּנִרְצָע – הֲרֵי כְּבָר אָמוּר. מַאי הִיא? דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְשַׁבְתֶּם אִישׁ אֶל אֲחֻזָּתוֹ וְאִישׁ אֶל מִשְׁפַּחְתּוֹ וְגוֹ׳״ בַּמָּה הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר? אִי בְּמוֹכֵר עַצְמוֹ – הֲרֵי כְּבָר אָמוּר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Master said** earlier, in the *baraita*: **If** it is speaking **about a pierced** slave, it **is already stated.** The Gemara asks: **What is** the verse that teaches that a pierced slave is released in the Jubilee Year? **As it is taught** in a *baraita* that the verse states: **“And you shall return, each man to his land, and** you shall return, **each man to his family”** (Leviticus 25:10). **What is the verse speaking of? If** it is speaking **of one who sells himself,** it **is already stated:** “He shall labor with you until the Jubilee Year” (Leviticus 25:40).


###### Kiddushin 15a:18
[Kiddushin 15a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:18)

אִי בִּמְכָרוּהוּ בֵּית דִּין – הֲרֵי כְּבָר אָמוּר! הָא אֵין הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר אֶלָּא בְּנִרְצַע שְׁתַּיִם וְשָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל, שֶׁהַיּוֹבֵל מוֹצִיאוֹ. מַאי מַשְׁמַע? אָמַר רָבָא בַּר שֵׁילָא: אָמַר קְרָא: ״אִישׁ״, אֵיזֶהוּ דָּבָר שֶׁנּוֹהֵג בָּאִישׁ וְאֵין נוֹהֵג בָּאִשָּׁה – הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר זוֹ רְצִיעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If** it is speaking **of one who was sold by the court,** it **is already stated:** “Then he shall go out from you, he and his children with him, and shall return to his own family” (Leviticus 25:41). It must be that **the verse is speaking of nothing other** than a slave **who is pierced two or three years before the Jubilee** Year, and **that the Jubilee** Year **releases him.** The Gemara asks: **From where may** it **be inferred** that the verse is specifically referring to a pierced slave? **Rava bar Sheila said** that **the verse states “man.” What matter applies to a man and does not apply to a woman? You must say** that **this is piercing** a Hebrew slave’s ear with an awl.


###### Kiddushin 15a:19
[Kiddushin 15a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:19)

וְאִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִיכְתַּב מְכָרוּהוּ בֵּית דִּין, וְאִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִיכְתַּב נִרְצָע. דְּאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן מְכָרוּהוּ בֵּית דִּין, מִשּׁוּם דְּלָא מְטַאי זִמְנֵיהּ, אֲבָל נִרְצָע, דִּמְטַאי זִמְנֵיהּ, אֵימָא נִיקְנְסֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **And it was necessary** for the Torah **to write** that **one sold by the court** leaves in the Jubilee Year, **and it was** also **necessary to write** the same with regard to **a pierced** slave, as neither case can be derived from the other. The Gemara elaborates: **As, if** the Torah had **informed us** only about **one who was sold by the court,** one might say that the Jubilee Year releases him **because his time had not come** to be freed. **But** with regard to **a pierced** slave, **whose time had come** but he did not wish to be freed, one might **say** that **we should penalize him** and he should remain a permanent slave.


###### Kiddushin 15a:20
[Kiddushin 15a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:20)

וְאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן נִרְצָע, מִשּׁוּם דַּעֲבַד לֵיהּ שֵׁשׁ, אֲבָל מְכָרוּהוּ בֵּית דִּין, דְּלָא עֲבַד לֵיהּ שֵׁשׁ, אֵימָא לָא, צְרִיכָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** conversely, **if** the Torah had **informed us** only about a **pierced** slave, one might say that the Jubilee Year releases him **because he has served** the master **for six** years, as required, **but** with regard to **one who was sold by the court,** who **has not** yet **served** his master **for six** years, one might **say** that he should **not** be freed in the Jubilee Year. Therefore, **it was necessary** for the Torah to state this *halakha* with regard to both cases.


###### Kiddushin 15a:21
[Kiddushin 15a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:21)

וְאִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִיכְתַּב ״וְשַׁבְתֶּם״, וְאִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִיכְתַּב ״לְעוֹלָם״. דְּאִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״לְעוֹלָם״, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא לְעוֹלָם מַמָּשׁ, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״וְשַׁבְתֶּם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** likewise, **it was necessary** for the Torah **to write** with regard to the release of a pierced slave in the Jubilee Year: **“And you shall return,** each man to his land” (Leviticus 25:10), **and it was necessary to write** as well: “And he shall serve him **forever”** (Exodus 21:6), which is interpreted by the Sages as referring to until the Jubilee Year. **As, if the Merciful One** had **written** only **“forever,” I would say** that this **actually** means **forever,** i.e., for his entire life. Therefore, **the Merciful One writes: “And you shall return.”**


###### Kiddushin 15a:22
[Kiddushin 15a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:22)

וְאִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״וְשַׁבְתֶּם״, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: הָנֵי מִילֵּי הֵיכָא דְּלָא עֲבַד שֵׁשׁ, אֲבָל הֵיכָא דַּעֲבַד שֵׁשׁ לֹא יְהֵא סוֹפוֹ חָמוּר מִתְּחִלָּתוֹ, מָה תְּחִלָּתוֹ שֵׁשׁ – אַף סוֹפוֹ נָמֵי שֵׁשׁ, קָמַשְׁמַע לַן: ״לְעוֹלָם״ – לְעוֹלָמוֹ שֶׁל יוֹבֵל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if the Merciful One** had **written** only **“and you shall return,” I would say** that **this statement applies** only **where he did not serve six** years after being pierced; **but** in a case **where he did serve six** years after he was pierced, one might argue as follows: **His final** stage, after he is pierced, **should not be stricter than his initial** stage, when he was first sold: **Just as** after **his initial** stage he serves only **six** years, **so too** in **his final** stage he serves only **six** years and no longer. Therefore, the verse **teaches us “forever,”** which means **forever until the Jubilee** Year, even if the Jubilee Year arrives many years later. In any case, with regard to the issue at hand there is no proof that Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov does not derive the verbal analogy between “hired worker” and “hired worker.”


###### Kiddushin 15a:23
[Kiddushin 15a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/15a:23)

אֶלָּא מַאן תַּנָּא דְּלָא יָלֵיף ״שָׂכִיר״ ״שָׂכִיר״? רַבִּי הִיא, דְּתַנְיָא:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, who is the *tanna*** who **does not derive** the verbal analogy between **“hired worker”** and **“hired worker”? It is Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: