Slaves And Commandments

The Gemorah in Chagigah 4a learns a gezerah shavah of לה לה  that it says by a גט and by the שטר שחרור of שפחה חרופה to tell us that עבדים כנענים are obligated in the mitzvot that a woman is obligated to fulfill.  [It is noteworthy that Rashi Yevamot 47b ד"ה אבל עבד brings an additional source that we learn out from למען ינוח .. עבדך ואמתך, see Aruch L’nair asks why does Rashi quote an additional source that it doesn’t say in the Gemorah.]

The opinion of Tosfos and the ruling of Rema (Orach Chaim 17) is that woman can say a blessing on a mitzvah that they aren’t obligated in.  The Rishonim explain they can say the blessing because they have a קיום מצוה.  [Rabbenu Tam gives a different explanation that a ברכה לבטלה is only a Rabbinic prohibition and they didn’t apply there issur on woman doing mitzvot.]  What about regarding slaves, can they recite a blessing or not?  Rav Moshe Feinstein (Dibrot Moshe Gittin Ch. 4 הערה 88) assumes that they can’t say a blessing for they are lacking kedushat Yisroel.  However, the simple reading of Tosfos Gittin 40a ד"ה כשרבו indicates not that way and this din is explicit in the Rashba.  The Rama (ibid) also indicates that he rules that way.  We need to understand why they would disagree with Rav Moshe; seemingly his argument makes a lot of sense?

It can be dependent on the following chakirah.  What would the status of the slave be without the gezerah shavah.  Would they be considered obligated in all mitzvot and the gezerah shavah comes to excempt them from time-bound mitzvot or would they be completely exempt and the gezerah shavah comes to tell us that they are obligated in some mitzvot? 

The Turah Even Chagigah 4a asks how can we learn from a possuk written regarding a שפחה to an עבד, yes the שפחה is only obligated like a woman because that’s what she is but how do we know that an עבד, a man is only obligated in non-time-bound mitzvot?  He explains that without any verse we would assume that עבדים are completely exempt from mitzvot so we only can know that they are obligated as much as we can derive from the verse, which is like a woman.  Rabbi Akiva Eger in his commentary to the Mishna (Berachot 3:3) assumes the same way.  The Nodeh B’Yehuda volume 2 Choshen Mishpat #51 learns that way in Tosfos Babba Kammah 88b as well.  This would fit with Rav Moshe that the slaves only have a concept of a mitzvah in so far as we see they are obligated.  Women on the other hand, would be obligated in all the mitzvot like men in not for the fact that the Torah gives them an exemption on time-bound-mitzvot and therefore they have a קיום מצוה.  It could be that the Tosfos and Rashba hold like the other side.

Possibly we can look at this from a different angle.  The Torah Temimah asks why is this law learnt from words written in the document of the slave’s freedom, it would seem more appropriate for the limud to be written for when the slave is in servitude?  He explains based upon what the Abudrohom write that woman are exempt from time-bound-mitzvot because their time is under the jurisdiction of their husbands.  The same reason applies to a slave.  Since their time is bound to their master, therefore they are exempt from mitzvot that are controlled by time.  Because that is the reason of their exemption, the Torah hints to it via a reference to their שיעבוד which is expressed when they are freed.  Based upon this he answers the question of the Turay Even as to how we learn out עבד from שפחה because they share the same reason for the exemption.  The idea of the Torah Temimah can already be found in the Bechor Shor on next week’s parsha 23:42.  Based upon this approach we can get a better understanding about even if we assume that slaves would have been obligated in everything without a derash, the Torah would exempt them.