Why Did the Torah Permit Slavery?

Overview: Why slavery wasn’t and couldn’t be outlawed by the Torah. The treatment of Hebrew and Gentile slaves in the Israelite home.

The Torah is regarded as the de-facto code of morality given by God Himself. Yet modern thinkers have challenged this notion by the Torah’s embracement of institutionalized slavery in which one human being is regarded as the property of another.[i] The Torah which places every human being under the category of “created in the Image of God”[ii] surely should have rejected all forms of slavery. We will attempt to reconcile Torah’s morality with its acceptance of slavery by providing historical context to these Torah laws.

Perhaps the word “slave” should be replaced with “servant” in our discussion, as servant resembles more loyally the character of a “slave” in the Israelite home. The word eved referred to in the Torah translates to both a slave and a servant (e.g., Moses is called a servant of God[iii]).

Two points can be made to help us understand why slavery/servitude wasn’t prohibited in the Torah:

(1) It’s a known principle in law and regulation enforcement that you don’t demand what will not be kept. Sometimes, there’s the need to sort of negotiate for the sake of preserving at least some element of law and order. What do I mean? Slavery back in the days, was a part of regular society who couldn’t comprehend life without it. The Jewish people were no angels and often even compromised their monotheistic beliefs adapting idol-worship from their neighbors. If the Torah would have forbade slavery, there’s no doubt that it would have been violated—nationally. In addition, the very livelihood of everyone back then was highly depended on slavery, making it highly unlikely that the Israelites would abandon it. The Torah recognized this and settled to at least regulate and enforce many laws and rights for the slaves, rights unheard of in any other nation at the time (as we shall soon discuss).

This is similar to the law of a captured woman in Deuteronomy 21:10-14.

“If you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord, your God, will deliver him into your hands, and you take his captives, and you see among the captives a beautiful woman and you desire her, you may take [her] for yourself as a wife. You shall bring her into your home, and she shall shave her head and let her nails grow. And she shall remove the garment of her captivity from upon herself, and stay in your house, and weep for her father and her mother for a full month. After that, you may be intimate with her and possess her, and she will be a wife for you. And it will be, if you do not desire her, then you shall send her away wherever she wishes, but you shall not sell her for money. You shall not keep her as a servant, because you have afflicted her.”

The Talmud[iv] explains that it was permitted as a compromise to the robust lust and desire of a man who would either-way have taken this woman even if the Torah would outlaw it. Torah therefore pushes for some good treatment of this captive. First of all, she must be his legal wife and not merely a sex-slave (as was the custom for female captives in ancient society). Second, he should provide her a month to mourn over her lost parents (who died at the war). Thirdly, if after some time she is no more desirable to the man, she must not be used for labor or be sold to another; rather she must be let free.

(2) Slavery in the Israelite’s house was not so scary. We will now lay out the rules and guidelines put forth in the Torah for treatment of a slave and his rights. While this doesn’t totally answer the full extreme of the question, it does help somewhat and certainly supports the previous answer.

Let’s take a brief glimpse into slavery before the modern world developed: The slave, in the ancient world, was regarded as subhuman, treated like an animal, and killed like flies. They had absolutely zero rights.[v] Now, let’s compare this with what the Torah tells us:

The Hebrew slave/servant was granted, in the Torah, more rights than the Gentile slave/servant. The reason for the distinction is found in verse 42 of Leviticus 25: “For they are My servants (says the Lord), whom I freed from the land of Egypt; they may not give themselves over into servitude.”  Moreover, a more obvious reason is that one should not be permitted to enslave his own brothers. This is not racism but priorities. For example, a citizen of a country is defended by the country and prioritized even when abroad. If a dangerous crisis were to develop in a foreign land, the citizen of that country visiting would be defended by his people before others.

Here are the basic principles for all slaves/servants, whether Jew or Gentile:

> Kidnapping people for slavery was forbidden and punishable by death.[vi]

> This would follow that all slaves gave themselves into servitude consensually (to the exception of a thief who couldn’t pay the owner back and prisoners of war).

Why would a person give themselves up to slavery? Well back in ancient times, there was little to no social benefits from the government (to the exception of biblical institutions like masser ani, peah, and leket in Israel). As a result, many people were left starving in the streets and would opt to give themselves up for slavery so that their master would provide them with bread to eat and a roof to live under.[1]

Since kidnapping slaves was forbidden, it is also forbidden to buy from a slave owner who acquired the slaves via forced abduction. It is unclear whether or not the children of slaves were kept as slaves or not.[2]

> Beating a slave to death was an offense and resulted in Capital Punishment.[vii] [3]

> A beating that caused permanent damage to a limb granted release of the slave.[viii]

> A slave was privileged to participate in the religious ceremonies of God’s people. The Gentile slave partially joins the Chosen Nation of God.[ix]

> A slave who has escaped his master’s home (implying that he was mistreated), is not to be returned to his master. Rather he can dwell in any city in Israel as he desires without being abused.[x] This was certainly an incentive for them to treat their slaves properly.

> The slave was not to work on the Shabbat. It was his off-day just like his master’s.[xi] Similarly, the enjoyed a sabbatical free from field labor every seventh year on Shemitah.

No specific guidelines were addressed in the Torah regarding the financial treatment and provision of a Gentile-slave. But as the Torah as a whole encourages morality and compassion it was probable that the slave in an observant Israelite’s home would be treated respectfully and with dignity.[xii]

If we were to escape our secular humanistic mindset for a moment into the true religious mindset, we would appreciate the great privilege the Gentile slave actually had to be in an Israelite’s household. Economic freedom (or “rights”) is regarded as the epitome of freedom in the secular mind, but from a religious point of view (and thus the deeper truth) economic freedom is only a means to serving God better. Now we can ask the daring question: would those Gentiles be better off as slaves and participants in the Jewish home, amongst God’s people or would they be better off with economic freedom amongst the God’less, idol-worshipping nations of the world? I think the uncomfortable true answer is clear to the objective thinker.

The Hebrew slave/servant serving his brother had additional rights than a Gentile slave, for the reasons mentioned above. Those rights include:

> Slavery would only be the decision of the slave who cannot make it financially on his own and therefore sells himself to a household to get fed while performing duties.[xiii]

> A master cannot force the slave to do laborious or embarrassing activity (i.e. slave-like activity).[xiv]

> He is to be released after 6 years or at Jubilee. (Permission is granted for the slave to stay longer if the slave wishes to do so).[xv]

> Upon freedom, the slave is to be supplied with food, money, gifts, and supplies from the master.[xvi]

> Sometimes the slave was able to earn a salary.[xvii]

The Torah was actually (from) the first to set some moral standards for the slavery—in sharp contrast with all other religions and societies.[4]