(c) Apr 18 2001 RashiYomi Inc. MY COLLECTED & INDEXED MAIL JEWISH POSTINGS-Ver #1
Individual Postings 1st appeared(& were copied in html form) on the Email List Mail Jewish

From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@mcs.drexel.edu>
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 1999 23:37:17 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Morality of Slavery

There have been some response to my posting defending Slavery in
Messianic times (Because the owners help rehabilitate the thief who was
sold into slavery and this is superior to a prison system). There have
even been those who brought support for the theory (Like Yehoshua Cohen
who cited Rav Kook).

However there were several questions asked in v29n16 which have not yet
been answered. I answer three points.

David Cohen points out that my social worker theory (the owner
rehabilitates the slave) would work well for a thief but not for those
sold for debts or poverty.

Indeed, that is the law. Only a thief is sold. People who can't pay
debts are not sold. Poor people are also not sold by the courts.  A
person who voluntarily sells himself because of poverty has a status of
a worker not a slave. (Notice how Rav HIrsch's theory is consistent with
the Law, a characteristic of Rav Hirsch)

Similarly Gittele Rapoport asks how this social worker theory applies to
a non jewish slave (since non jewish slave status continues from
generation to generation--where is the potential rehabilitation).

But this too was answered in another posting: A non jewish slave can be
free for purposes of doing a mitzvah (even a Rabbinic mitzvah..  cf
Rambam Slaves Chapter 9:5-7). The example was brought of a Rabbi who
freed his slave to become part of the minyan. This clearly creates an
atmosphere where non jewish slaves 'want to do commandments' in order to
become free. Hence we have social rehabilitation here also.  Again we
see here the consistency of Rav Hirsch's theory and Jewish law.

Finally Yitzchok Zlochower still considers slavery barbaric. My problem
with Yitzchok's posting is that it does not contain details. How for
example does Yitzchok deal with a person who is so poor that he has
already sold his house and clothes---should we allow him to make a
legitimate deal to sell his minor children so he can support his other
children and not let them beg? Is this barbaric? Does Yitzchak have a
better solution?

Furthermore how does Yitzchok deal with the thief? Does he put him in
prison? If so why is that less barbaric then selling him to an
individual owner for purposes of rehabilitation.

My point is not that I agree or disagree but rather that no details have
been discussed making the possibility of conversation difficult.

Russell Jay Hendel; Phd ASA
Moderator Rashi Is Simple
http://www.shamash.org./rashi