How has the eved ivri served you 'twice as much as a hired servant'?

Summary: Considering the approaches of a group of meforshim on this phrase, and pasuk. Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ibn Caspi, Seforno, Rashbam, and Shadal. While I add a bit of my own analysis to Rashbam's analysis, the topic is not yet settled in my mind, so I don't end up taking sides.

Post: In parashat Re'eh, in Devarim 15:18, when speaking about sending away the eved ivri at the end of six years, with gifts, the pasuk states:

18. You shall not be troubled when you send him free from you, for twice as much as a hired servant, he has served you six years, and the Lord, your God, will bless you in all that you shall do.		יח. לֹא יִקְשֶׁה בְעֵינֶךָ בְּשַׁלֵּחֲךָ אֹתוֹ חָפְשִׁי מֵעִמָּךְ כִּי מִשְׁנֶה שְׂכַר שָׂכִיר עֲבָדְךָ שֵׁשׁ שָׁנִים וּבֵרַכְךָ יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשֶׂה:
		כי משנה שכר שכיר: מכאן אמרו עבד עברי עובד בין ביום ובין בלילה. וזהו כפלים שבעבודת שכירי יום. ומהו עבודתו בלילה, רבו מוסר לו שפחה כנענית והולדות לאדון:

Rashi explains that "From there they {=Chazal} said that an eved ivri serves both during the day and the night. And this is the twice more than the service of the daily worker. And what is his night 'work'? That his master can appoint him a shifcha kenaanis and bear children {servants} for the master."

Other meforshim explain this doubled service differently. Ibn Ezra understands this as a matter of Jewish law, that one may not hire a worker for a period of more than three years:

[טו, יח]
לא יקשה בעיניך -מצאנו כתוב: שלש שנים כימי שכיר וזו ראיה כי אין רשות לאדם שישכיר עצמו יותר משלש שנים, ג"כ לשוכר אותו הנותן שכרו. וזה טעם משנה. כמו כפל. 

His proof it the pasuk in Yeshaya 16:14:

יד  וְעַתָּה, דִּבֶּר ה לֵאמֹר, בְּשָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים כִּשְׁנֵי שָׂכִיר, וְנִקְלָה כְּבוֹד מוֹאָב בְּכֹל הֶהָמוֹן הָרָב; וּשְׁאָר מְעַט מִזְעָר, לוֹא כַבִּיר.  {פ}

14 But now the LORD hath spoken, saying: 'Within three years, as the years of a hireling, and the glory of Moab shall wax contemptible for all his great multitude; and the remnant shall be very small and without strength.' {P}

Thus, three years are the years of a hireling, and six years are the years of an eved ivri. And (I would add) perhaps they even darshened this pasuk in Re'eh and arrived at that halacha referred to as an understood matter. An interesting approach, but this does seem to be adding halachot which Chazal made no reference to. Not the end of the world, as we see other derashot change over time from the neviim to Chazal. Still, it is noteworthy that Ibn Ezra would maintain this.

I would guess that this was troubling Ibn Caspi. He more or less echoes Ibn Ezra, but changes one detail:

He cites the same pasuk in Yeshaya, but while Ibn Ezra had it that a person was not allowed to hire himself for more than three years, and similarly, one may not hire someone for more than three years, Ibn Caspi just puts it as a minhag pashut beineihem, a standard common practice among them. This makes sense, and then the pasuk in Devarim does not introduce a new law about hired workers, but simply refers to common practice.

Rashbam rejects the idea of the 2X being twice the number of years. He writes:

פסוק יח 
לא יקשה בעיניך - שתשלחנו חפשי מעמך במה שאתה נותן לו משנה וכפילות - שכר שכיר - בעבודת שש שנים שעבד אותך שאתה מעניק לו מצאנך ומגרנך ומיקבך מלבד שכירות של קנין שש שנים שקנית אותו שהרי למען כן יברכך ה', בכל אשר תעשה.
והרי פירוש פסוק זה דוגמת: ולא ירע לבבך בתתך לו - וכן: תרע עינה באיש חיקה ובבנה ובבתה מתת לא' מהם, כי רוע העין וקשיות הלב מדבר על נתינת ממון לאחרים. ואשר הורגלו לפרש לא יקשה בעיניך על מה שאתה משלחו חפשי לסוף שש, שהרי הרבה עבדך שש שנים, כלומר יותר משאר שכירים, שטות הוא בידם.
וכי למה יקשה בעיניו בשילוח חפשי והלא לא קנאו מתחלה אלא לפי עבודת שש שנים שהכל יודעים שבשביעית יצא?
ועוד לא היה לו לומר משנה שכר שכיר אלא משנה שכיר? 
ויש מפרשים:
משנה שכיר שש שנים הם, לפי שסתם שכיר שלש שנים, כדכתיב: בשלש שנים כשני שכיר ונקלה כבוד מואב. וגם זה הבל.
כי במקום אחר כתיב: בעוד שנה כשני שכיר. ופירוש כשני שכיר. שלש שנים מצומצמות כשני שכיר שהיא שנה מצומצמת. 

My translation:

"You shall not be troubled when you send him free from you, in that you have given him twice, and double, that of the wages of a hired worker, for the service of six years that he served you, in that you give him presents from your flock, from your grain and from your wine, besides the wages of the hiring of six years, in which you acquired him. For behold, this is so that Hashem will bless you, 'in all that you do.'
And behold, the explanation of this verse shall serve as an example. {Same perek, pasuk 10:}

10. You shall surely give him, and your heart shall not be grieved when you give to him; for because of this thing the Lord, your God, will bless you in all your work and in all your endeavors.

י. נָתוֹן תִּתֵּן לוֹ וְלֹא יֵרַע לְבָבְךָ בְּתִתְּךָ לוֹ כִּי בִּגְלַל הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה יְבָרֶכְךָ יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל מַעֲשֶׂךָ וּבְכֹל מִשְׁלַח יָדֶךָ:

and so too {Devarim 28:56}:

55. of giving any one of them of the flesh of his children that he is eating, because not a thing will remain for him in the siege and in the desperation which your enemies will bring upon you, in all your cities.		נה. מִתֵּת לְאַחַד מֵהֶם מִבְּשַׂר בָּנָיו אֲשֶׁר יֹאכֵל מִבְּלִי הִשְׁאִיר לוֹ כֹּל בְּמָצוֹר וּבְמָצוֹק אֲשֶׁר יָצִיק לְךָ אֹיִבְךָ בְּכָל שְׁעָרֶיךָ:
56. The most tender and delicate woman among you, who would not venture to set her foot upon the ground, because of delicateness and tenderness, will begrudge the husband of her embrace and her own son and daughter,		נו. הָרַכָּה בְךָ וְהָעֲנֻגָּה אֲשֶׁר לֹא נִסְּתָה כַף רַגְלָהּ הַצֵּג עַל הָאָרֶץ מֵהִתְעַנֵּג וּמֵרֹךְ תֵּרַע עֵינָהּ בְּאִישׁ חֵיקָהּ וּבִבְנָהּ וּבְבִתָּהּ:

For begrudging and hardness of heart is speaking regarding giving money to others. And that which they {=other meforshim} are accustomed to explain לֹא יִקְשֶׁה בְעֵינֶךָ as referring to that you are sending him free at the end of six, for much has he served for you for six years, that is to say, more than other hired laborers, this is shtus in their hands. For why should it be difficult in his eyes to send him free? After all, did he not from the start purchase him for servitude of six years, for everyone knows that on the seventh year, he leaves?! And further, should it not have stated מִשְׁנֶה שָׂכִיר, twice that of a hired laborer, rather than מִשְׁנֶה שְׂכַר שָׂכִיר, twice the wages of a hired servant? 

And there are those who explain that twice that of a hired laborer is six years, since a typical hired laborer is for three years, as is written [in that pasuk in Yeshaya]. And this is also vanity. For in another place, it is written {Yeshiva 21:16}:

טז  כִּי-כֹה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי, אֵלָי:  בְּעוֹד שָׁנָה כִּשְׁנֵי שָׂכִיר, וְכָלָה כָּל-כְּבוֹד קֵדָר.

16 For thus hath the Lord said unto me: 'Within a year, according to the years of a hireling, and all the glory of Kedar shall fail;

And the meaning in "like the years of a hireling" is three precise years, like the years of a hireling, which is a precise year."

My reaction to each of these three counterpoints to the other meforshim:

1. Why should it be difficult to send him away, given that this is the operating assumption? Well, it is only the operating assumption once the Torah law has been set. In the backdrop of Ancient Near Eastern law, or even against the Torah laws of eved kanaani, it is standard that a slave is owned perpetually. Indeed, if we look even in the context in this parasha, the immediately preceding pasuk is that of the eved nirtza, who served perpetually, or at least until Yovel. So in enacting this reform, for Hebrew slaves, Moshe is giving them justification, such that they should understand that the Torah's reform is not burdensome, but rather the reform is rooted in fairness and justice.
2. Why should it state מִשְׁנֶה שְׂכַר שָׂכִיר, rather than just מִשְׁנֶה שָׂכִיר? One would need to work it out grammatically, but I would assume that these meforshim who understand it as referring to the term of service maintain that this is twice the hiring period of the sachir. Can it work out grammatically? I would assume so, even if one needs to appeal to either an arcane word form or a revocalization. But Rashbam is not opposing those meforshim who speak of terms of service. Rather, he is opposing those who understand it שְׂכַר שָׂכִיר as the labor provided by the sachir. I will grant that this is rather difficult. But we can interpret this as "twice what you get in the hiring of the laborer." Or, less smoothly, sechar as a derived form from the noun sachir, meaning that which the sachir produces.
3. Rashbam's third point is rather strong, in my opinion. It is nice to take a verse out of context, from another sefer, and use it to bolster a local interpretation. But what does כִּשְׁנֵי שָׂכִיר in context mean in Yeshaya. The other verse in Yeshaya indicates how the author intends it. If so, Ibn Ezra's proof fails.

Interestingly, Ibn Ezra himself does not provide this commentary of three years as a mandatory maximum as he comments locally on sefer Yeshaya. Rather, on the "three year" verse in 16:14, he writes

That is, that "the intent of "as the days of the hireling" is that every day, we will be mevaser his soul when the time will end. So is the prophet rejoicing when the time of their destruction is reached."

However, on reflection, this need not be contradictory. The question is why one would use the parallel to the years of a hireling, and the answer is the psychological feature of looking towards the end. But such a parallel could still be appropriate, and thus ripe to be made, by virtue of it being the hiring maximum.

What about on the second verse, of the single year? Ibn Ezra writes:

Once again, it seems that there is some psychological component -- that this year is deemed long, like the year of a hireling.

But, the three-year maximum period is not appropriate here, and Ibn Ezra never made reference to it in his commentary on either verse. It truly seems as if Ibn Ezra is not advancing this explanation here. And it is difficult to say how he would answer the Rashbam's objection.

And I would think Ibn Ezra (1089-1164) was familiar with the commentary of the Rashbam (1085-1158). It was Rashbam who wrote the commentary on Bereishit contrary to Chazal that peshat in the pasuk was that night followed day, and Ibn Ezra speaks of having a dream in which Shabbos complained to him about his having a heretical commentary in his possession which stated precisely that. Maybe he cast the Rashbam's commentary out of his house prior to reading it in its entirety?

Could we save this explanation? Perhaps. For instance, Yeshaya 20:1 represents a time-change: בִּשְׁנַת בֹּא תַרְתָּן, אַשְׁדּוֹדָה, בִּשְׁלֹחַ אֹתוֹ, סַרְגוֹן מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר; וַיִּלָּחֶם בְּאַשְׁדּוֹד, וַיִּלְכְּדָהּ. Perhaps, then, two years have passed, and the first sets up the three year period, while the second represents a one-year countdown to the same time? It is difficult, and requires further investigation.

Here is what R' Ovadia Sporno has to say:

פסוק יחלא-יִקְשֶׁה בְעֵינֶךָ. לְהַעֲנִיק עִם שִׁלּוּחו חָפְשִׁי, כִּי רָאוּי הוּא לָזֶה וְאַתָּה לא תֶחְסַר.

וּבֵרַכְךָ ה' אֱלהֶיךָ. וּמִשֶּׁלּו תִּתֵּן. 

The difficulty is in giving him presents, together with sending him free. Why? Because this is fitting for him, and you are not losing anything by it. And Hashem will bless you, such that you are giving him from His. This is similar to Rashbam, in that both say that the comfort is one giving him the presents.

Shadal collects, and reacts to, many of the prior meforshim on this. He writes:

 יח ] כי משנה שכר שכיר עבדך שש שנים: אמרו קצת מן הקדמונים ואחריהם ראב"ע ורלב"ג, כי אין רשות להשכיר עצמו יותר משלוש שנים, ויפה השיבהו רשב"ם ודון יצחק כי זה הבל, כי שלש שנים כשני שכיר ( ישעיה ט"ז י"ד), אין ענינו רק שנים מצומצמות. וכן כתוב ( שם כ"א ט"ז) בעוד שנה כשני שכיר; 

גם פירוש רשב"ם ור' עובדיה ספורנו לא ייתכן, כי הכתוב אומר: בשלחך אותו, לא: בהעניקך אותו, ועוד אין להענקת שיעור, ואיך יאמר שנתן לו שכר כפול מפני שהעניקו? 

גם דברי רד"ק ור"י עראמה הקרובים לדברי רש"י שהשכיר נשכר ליום או ללילה, והעבד הוא בכל רגע תחת ממשלתך, לא ייתכנו כי היה לו לומר משנה "עבודת" שכיר, לא "שכר" שכיר. 

והנכון לדעתי: לא יקשה בעינך בשלחך אותו חפשי, כי אמנם אם באת לשכור שכיר היית מוכרח לשלם לו כפליים, כי כן דרך השכירים, כי צריכים הם להביא טרף לביתם, והמוכר עצמו לעבד מסתמא אין עליו משא אשה ובנים; והנה אע"פ שתשלחנו כבר הרווחת הרבה. ופירוש המילות כך הוא: משנה וכפליים ( ממה שנתת לעבד זה) היה השכר שהיית צריך לתת לשכיר שיעבדך שש שנים. 

והיום י"ג טבת תרכ"א נ"ל ודאי כי מילת עבדך שש שנים חוזרת לעבד (כמו שהבינו כל העולם) ולא לשכיר ( כמו שפירשתי אני), גם ראיתי כי מילת משנה אף כשהיא בסגול היא תמיד דבקה בענין לשם שאחריו (משנה כסף, בראשית מ"ג ט"ו, ומשנה שברון, ירמיה י"ז י"ח), והנה משנה שכר שכיר משמע כפליים של שכר שכיר, ולא ששכר שכיר הוא כפליים כנגד שכר העבד. לפיכך נ"ל לפרש כי כפליים ממה שנותנים לשכיר היה ראוי ליתן לאיש הזה, כי עבדך שש שנים, ומילות אלו (עבדך שש שנים) הן דרך קריאה, כמו במה ישכב (שמות כ"ב כ"ו), אשר ינאף את אשת רעהו ( ויקרא כ"ב י'), מיד איש אחיו ( בראשית ט' ח'). כ 

והמכוון בקריאה הזאת הוא: האיש הזה עבד אותך כעבד ולא כשכיר, באופן שלא היתה לו שעה שלא היה משועבד לך, ולא למלאכה אחת, אלא לכל דבר שהיית מבקש היה משועבד לך וחייב לעשות רצונך, וכל זה לא היה ליום או ליומים, לשנה או לשנתיים, אבל עבדך שש שנים! ואתה לא נתת לו אלא פחות ממה שנותנים לשכיר שנה בשנה, תחת כי לפי שורת הדין היה ראוי לך ליתן לו משנה וכפליים ממה שנותנים לשכיר, כי השכיר איננו משועבד רק למלאכות מיוחדות, והעבד לא נשאר לו שום חירות בעולם, והאיש הזה נשתעבד לך כעבד במשך שש שנים שהוא ג"כ זמן בלתי קצר, א"כ לא יקשה בעינך בשלחך אותו וגם בהעניקך לו; ומלבד שזה מחוייב לפי שורת הדין, עוד תדע כי בשכר זה יברכך ה ' אלקיך בכל אשר תעשה.

My translation:

כִּי מִשְׁנֶה שְׂכַר שָׂכִיר עֲבָדְךָ שֵׁשׁ שָׁנִים -- A few of the kadmonim, and following them, Ibn Ezra and Ralbag, that it was not permitted for him to hire himself out for more than three years. And Rashbam and Don Yitzchak Abarbanel answered them well that this is vanity, for "three years like the years of a hireling" {from Yeshaya 16:14} only means precise years. And so is written {Yeshaya 21:16} "in one year, like the years of a hireling".

The commentary of Rashbam and R' Ovadia Sporno is also not possible, for the verse  stated, "when you send him out", not "when you grant him presents". And furthermore, there is no measure to the presents, so how could one say that he gives him twice the wages, because he is giving him presents? 

Also the words of Radak and R' Yitzchak Arama which are close to the words of Rashi, that the laborer is hired out to either a day or to a night, while the servant is under your command at every moment, is not possible. For it then should have stated that it is twice the "avodah" of the sachir, not the sechar {wages?} of the sachir.

And what is correct to my mind is: It should not be difficult in your eyes, when you set him free. For consider that if you came to hire a laborer, you would be required to pay him twice as much, for such is the way for hired laborers, for they require to bring provisions to their homes. Meanwhile, one who sells himself for a slave presumably does not have upon him the burden of a wife and kids. And behold, even though you are sending him away, you have already profited much. And the explanation of the words is as follows: Twice and double (from that which you have given this slave) was the wages that you would have had to give to a hired laborer to work for you for six years.

[Shadal then updates]: And today, the 13th of Teves, 5621 {=1861}, it appears to me certain that the phrase עֲבָדְךָ שֵׁשׁ שָׁנִים modifies the earlier slave (just as the entire world understands) and not to the hired laborer (as I had explained). I have also seen that the word מִשְׁנֶה, even when it is with a segol, always is attached in meaning to the noun which follows (see וּמִשְׁנֶה-כֶּסֶף לָקְחוּ בְיָדָם in Bereshit 43:15, and וּמִשְׁנֶה שִׁבָּרוֹן שָׁבְרֵם in Yirmeyahu 17:18). And behold, מִשְׁנֶה שְׂכַר שָׂכִיר implies twice that of the wages of the hired laborer, not that the wages of the hired laborer would be twice the wages of the slave. Therefore, it appears to me to explain that 'double that which you give to the laborer is fitting to give to this man, for he has served you for six years', and these words ( עֲבָדְךָ שֵׁשׁ שָׁנִים ) are by way of calling out {=because of this reason}, such as in {Shemot 22:26}

26. for it is his only covering; it is his garment for his skin. With what shall he lie? And it shall be [that] if he cries out to Me, I will hear because I am gracious.

כו. כִּי הִוא [כסותה] כְסוּתוֹ לְבַדָּהּ הִוא שִׂמְלָתוֹ לְעֹרוֹ בַּמֶּה יִשְׁכָּב וְהָיָה כִּי יִצְעַק אֵלַי וְשָׁמַעְתִּי כִּי חַנּוּן אָנִי:

and in {Vayikra 20:10}

10. And a man who commits adultery with [another] man's wife, committing adultery with the wife of his fellow the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

י. וְאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִנְאַף אֶת אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִנְאַף אֶת אֵשֶׁת רֵעֵהוּ מוֹת יוּמַת הַנֹּאֵף וְהַנֹּאָפֶת:

{Note the doubling; Shadal refers to the second phrase.} And {Bereshit 9:8}

5. But your blood, of your souls, I will demand [an account]; from the hand of every beast I will demand it, and from the hand of man, from the hand of each man, his brother, I will demand the soul of man.

ה. וְאַךְ אֶת דִּמְכֶם לְנַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם אֶדְרֹשׁ מִיַּד כָּל חַיָּה אֶדְרְשֶׁנּוּ וּמִיַּד הָאָדָם מִיַּד אִישׁ אָחִיו אֶדְרֹשׁ אֶת נֶפֶשׁ הָאָדָם:

{These seem to work as a kind of interjection.} And the intent in this calling out is: This man served you as a servant and not as a hired worker, in a manner that he did not have an hour that he was not subservient to you. And not for a single labor, but for any matter that you wished, he was subservient to you and obligated to do your will. And all of this was not only for a day or two, for a year or two, but he served you for six years! And you only gave him less than one would give to a laborer who served you year by year. Because, according to the shurat hadin, it would be fitting for you to give him twice, and double, that which you would give to a hired laborer, for the hired laborer is only subservient in regards to specific work, while the servant has not a speck of freedom in the world. And this man was subservient to you as a servant for a span of six years, which is also a time which is not short. If so, it should not be difficult in your eyes as you send him away, and also as you grant him presents. And besides the fact that this is what is required according to the shurat hadin, you should further know that in reward for this, Hashem your God shall bless you in all that you do.

I have to think more about this before I come to my own conclusion in this sugya.