You may make them an inheritance for your children after you, to hold for a possession. Of them you may take your slaves forever, but over your brothers the children of Israel you shall not rule, one over another, with harshness.
To judge according to the laws of a Canaanite bondman
The cited verse
The Hebrew (Masoretic Text)
לְעֹלָם בָּהֶם תַּעֲבֹדוּ וּבְאַחֵיכֶם בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל אִישׁ בְּאָחִיו לֹא־תִרְדֶּה בוֹ בְּפָרֶךְ
In Maimonides’ words
How Maimonides defines this commandment in his Sefer HaMitzvot — his own words, shown as a primary source.
היא שצונו בדין עבד כנעני. והוא שנעבוד בו לעולם ושאין לו חירות אלא בשן ועין והוא הדין לשאר איברים שאינן חוזרין כמו שבא הפירוש המקובל. והוא אמרו לעולם בהם תעבודו וכתיב וכי יכה איש וגו'. ולשון גמרא גיטין (דף ל"ח:) כל המשחרר עבדו עובר בעשה דכתיב לעולם בהם תעבודו ובא בתורה שהוא משתחרר בשן ועין. וכבר התבארו משפטי מצוה זו על השלמות בקדושין וגיטין. (בהר סיני, הלכות עבדים פ"ה):
That is that He commanded us about the law of the Canaanite (gentile) slave. And that is that we enslave him forever, and that he only [attain] freedom through [the master's destruction of his] tooth or eye - and the law is the same for other limbs that do not regenerate, as appears in the received explanation. And that is His saying, "you shall enslave them forever" (Leviticus 25:46); and it is written "When a man strikes, etc." (Exodus 21:26). And the language of the Gemara, Gittin (Gittin 38a), is, "Anyone who liberates his slave transgresses a positive commandment, as it is written, 'you shall enslave them forever.'" But it comes in the Torah that he is freed with a tooth and an eye. And the regulations of this commandment have already been completely explained in Kiddushin and Gittin. (See Parashat Behar; Mishneh Torah, Slaves 5.)
Hebrew: Sefer HaMitzvot, Warsaw 1883 (public domain). English: Sefaria Edition, trans. Rabbi Francis Nataf, 2021 (CC0). Via Sefaria; translator’s footnotes omitted.
Literary form: a flat, unconditional command
Applicability
How the catalog describes where and when this commandment applies. These are independent descriptions, not a verdict on which laws still count.
No applicability flags are recorded for this commandment.
Classical halakhic consequences
The consequences the classical halakhah attaches to this commandment, grouped by who imposes them. Where a category has none recorded, that absence is itself meaningful.
Imposed by a court
No court-imposed penalty is recorded.
At the hands of Heaven
No divinely-imposed consequence is recorded.
Ritual remedy
No ritual remedy is recorded.
How the streams of Judaism treat this commandment
The streams of Judaism read the same commandment differently — an ongoing plurality, not a ranking. Each position below is reported as the catalog records it; none is presented as the correct one.
- Orthodox Inoperative
- Conservative Rejected
- Reform Rejected
- Reconstructionist Rejected
- Karaite Not binding
24 of 613 commandments have been examined in depth so far — this one is queued.
How later traditions received this commandment
How later traditions read or reworked this commandment, each attributed to its own voice. The catalog’s own classification of each reception is shown as it records it, never adopted as GEBible’s.
Rabbinic aggadah
- Genesis Rabbah 36:7 expanded it homiletically links the servile status of Canaan to the curse of Noah (Gen 9:25)
Philo of Alexandria
- De Specialibus Legibus 3.137-143 rationalized it treats the treatment of slaves generally, urging humane conduct; does not directly address the perpetual non-Israelite bondman of Lev 25:44-46
Josephus
- Ant. 4.273 reinterpreted it
The New Testament
- Galatians 3:28 read it spiritually baptismal-unity formula declaring no 'slave nor free' in Christ; relativizes legal-status categories at the soteriological level without addressing or abrogating the institution
- Ephesians 6:5-9 reinterpreted it regulates the master-slave relation under household codes, enjoining masterly restraint
Beside the older legal codes of its world
The commandment set beside the ancient Near-Eastern legal collections scholars compare it to — a descriptive comparison, not a claim of dependence.
- code of hammurabi purchase and status of foreign-acquired slaves Relationship to the parallel: parallel with divergence §§280-281 Roth, Law Collections 2nd ed. (1997)
- hittite laws tiered compensation for fugitive/injured slaves by ethnic-civic status Relationship to the parallel: parallel with divergence §§22-24 Roth, Law Collections 2nd ed. (1997)
Where this commandment meets modern human-rights frameworks
One modern normative lens, attributed to it — not GEBible’s assessment. Each row names the framework it measures against and the catalog’s own classification of the relation.
This framework catalogues tensions; it records agreement in only one of its entries. The near-total tension rate is the shape of the instrument, not a finding.
-
Article 4 (prohibition of slavery and servitude)
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
The commandment explicitly authorizes the permanent, heritable ownership of persons from non-Israelite nations as an *ahuzzah* (perpetual possession), with no manumission provision and no jubilee release — a form of hereditary chattel slavery that Article 4 of the UDHR categorically prohibits.
-
Article 26 (equality before the law without discrimination on any ground including national or social origin)
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
The law constructs an explicit two-tier system in which Israelites are protected from permanent bondage while non-Israelites may be held as heritable property for life — a legally mandated distinction based on ethnic or national origin that directly contravenes the non-discrimination guarantee of ICCPR Article 26.