What Does the Torah Say About Slavery? A Comparative Religious Overview

The Torah — the five books of Moses — is the primary source for Jewish law on slavery, and it's frankly complex. It doesn't abolish slavery; it regulates it, and the regulations differ significantly depending on whether the enslaved person is a fellow Israelite (eved ivri) or a foreigner (eved Canaani) Mishnah Eduyot 1:13.

For Hebrew slaves, Exodus 21:2 mandates release after six years of service. Deuteronomy 15:12–15 extends this to women and commands masters to send freed slaves away with provisions. The Jubilee year (Leviticus 25:10) required the release of all Hebrew debt-slaves every fifty years. These protections were substantial by ancient Near Eastern standards.

Non-Israelite slaves had fewer statutory protections, though they were still entitled to Sabbath rest (Exodus 20:10) and could not be killed with impunity (Exodus 21:20–21). The Mishnah reflects ongoing rabbinic debate about the status of people caught between categories — literally half-slave, half-free Mishnah Eduyot 1:13.

The Mishnah tractate Eduyot records a famous dispute between the schools of Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel over a person who is half-slave and half-free. Beth Hillel initially said such a person should alternate days of work between master and self; Beth Shammai argued this was unjust because it left the person unable to marry. Ultimately, Beth Hillel reversed their position and agreed the master must be compelled to free the person entirely Mishnah Eduyot 1:13. This is a striking example of rabbinic law bending toward human dignity.

The Mishnah also shows that slaves were woven into the fabric of priestly household economics. Slaves owned by a priest's wife could eat teruma (priestly food portions), a legal status that had real material consequences Mishnah Yevamot 7:2.

Modern scholars like David Brion Davis (Slavery and Human Progress, 1984) and Nahum Sarna have noted that Torah slavery law, while not abolitionist, introduced unprecedented limits on masters' absolute power. The rabbis of the Talmudic era, particularly in tractate Kiddushin, pushed further toward restricting the institution, though they never formally abolished it.

Christianity inherited the Torah's slavery texts as part of its Old Testament canon, so the question is directly in scope. The New Testament doesn't repeal Mosaic slavery law, and this created centuries of interpretive tension.

Early Christian writers like Paul (Philemon, Ephesians 6:5) urged slaves to obey masters and masters to treat slaves fairly, without calling for abolition. Medieval theologians, including Thomas Aquinas, treated slavery as a consequence of sin rather than a natural institution, but still didn't condemn it outright.

The same Torah passages that regulated Hebrew slavery — the six-year release, the Jubilee, the prohibition on killing slaves — were read by some abolitionists as seeds of liberation theology. Figures like William Wilberforce (1759–1833) and Frederick Douglass drew on the Exodus narrative specifically as a counter-argument to pro-slavery readings of the same texts.

The story of Judah offering himself and his brothers as slaves in Genesis 44 was read typologically by many Christian commentators as prefiguring voluntary self-sacrifice Genesis 44:16, though the text itself is simply a narrative moment of desperation rather than a theological statement about slavery.

Contemporary Christian scholarship, including work by Willard Swartley (Slavery, Sabbath, War, and Women, 1983), acknowledges that the Bible was used on both sides of the slavery debate, and that the Torah's regulatory framework doesn't map cleanly onto either pro- or anti-slavery positions.

Islam's relationship to slavery is a distinct topic rooted in the Quran and Hadith rather than the Torah, so a direct answer to "what does the Torah say about slavery" isn't applicable from an Islamic standpoint. However, the Hadith literature does record specific prophetic regulations on the treatment of enslaved people that are worth noting for comparative purposes.

The Prophet Muhammad explicitly forbade the sale of a freed slave's wala' (patronage bond), protecting the social and legal ties that came with manumission Sahih al Bukhari 2535Sahih al Bukhari 6756. He also prohibited exploiting enslaved women through forced prostitution Sahih al Bukhari 5348. These are regulatory prohibitions, not abolition, but they do reflect a pattern of limiting the worst abuses of the institution.

The Torah’s narrative vocabulary acknowledges “slaves” (eved/avadim) as a social category; for instance, Judah offers himself and his brothers as “slaves” to Joseph, reflecting the term’s presence in the patriarchal storyworld. Genesis 44:16

Post-biblical halakhah preserves concrete rulings about slave status and manumission pressures. The Mishnah records a debated case of a person who is “half a slave and half a free man,” with the final ruling compelling the master to free him so he can marry, citing creation’s purpose for human propagation. Mishnah Eduyot 1:13 It also addresses whether certain slaves associated with a priest’s household may partake of terumah, distinguishing property categories introduced in marriage contracts. Mishnah Yevamot 7:2

In Christian Bibles, the Torah (Pentateuch) likewise includes passages where “slaves” appear in narrative settings; Genesis 44:16 uses the term as Judah offers himself and his brothers as “slaves” to Joseph. Genesis 44:16 While the question focuses on the Torah itself, Christians typically look to these same Old Testament texts to note the presence of slavery as a recognized social category in Israel’s ancestral narratives. Genesis 44:16

Not applicable. Concerns Torah/Old Testament scripture; no direct counterpart in Islamic scripture is required for this question.