Exodus Chapter 21 verse 26 Holy Bible
And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, and destroy it; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake.
read chapter 21 in ASV
If a man gives his man-servant or his woman-servant a blow in the eye, causing its destruction, he is to let him go free on account of the damage to his eye.
read chapter 21 in BBE
And if a man strike the eye of his bondman or the eye of his handmaid, and it be marred, he shall let him go for his eye.
read chapter 21 in DARBY
And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake.
read chapter 21 in KJV
And if a man shall smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it shall perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake.
read chapter 21 in WBT
"If a man strikes his servant's eye, or his maid's eye, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for his eye's sake.
read chapter 21 in WEB
`And when a man smiteth the eye of his man-servant, or the eye of his handmaid, and hath destroyed it, as a freeman he doth send him away for his eye;
read chapter 21 in YLT
Pulpit Commentary
Pulpit CommentaryVerses 26, 27. - Assaults on Slaves. The general law of retaliation was not made to extend to slaves. For ordinary blows the slave was not thought entitled to compensation, any more than the child. They were natural incidents of his condition. In extremer cases, where he was permanently injured in an organ or a member, he was, however, considered to have ground of complaint and to deserve a recompense. But for him to revenge himself upon his master by inflicting the same on him was not to be thought cf. It would have put the slave into a false position, have led to his prolonged ill-treatment, and have been an undue degradation of the master. Therefore, compulsory emancipation was made the penalty of all such aggravated assaults, even the slightest (ver. 27). Verses 26, 27. - If a man smite the eye, etc. The "eye" seems to be selected as the most precious of our organs, the "tooth" as that the loss of which is of least consequence. The principle was that any permanent loss of any part of his frame entitled the slave to his liberty. A very considerable check must have been put on the brutality of masters by this enactment.
Ellicott's Commentary
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers(26, 27) The eye . . . Tooth.--An exception to the law of retaliation is here made. If the injurer is a free man and the injured person a slave, the marked social inequality of the parties would make exact retaliation an injustice. Is the slave, then, to be left without protection? By no means. As the legislation had already protected his life (Exodus 21:20), so it now protects him from permanent damage to his person. The master who inflicts any such permanent damage--from the least to the greatest--loses all property in his slave, and is bound at once to emancipate him. The loss of an eye is viewed as the greatest permanent injury to the person; the loss of a tooth as the least.
