One, Two, Three Years You're Out At The Old Ball Game

I can think of two possible Biblical prohibitions resulting from playing the game. The first is hotza'ah, transporting an object ("carrying"). A stadium is a very large reshus ha'yachid ("private domain"). Hitting a ball hit out of the park can be a violation of hotza'ah, taking an item out from a reshus ha'yachid into a reshus ha'rabbim ("public domain"). In the old Yankee Stadium this was never a problem; no one ever hit a ball out of the stadium. In Chicago, however, homerun balls have occasionally left Wrigley Field and landed on the street outside. I'm not sure whether any ballplayer actually has intention to cause the ball to leave the field, so this also might not be a problem.

The second violation is charishah (plowing the earth); a player may makes holes in the ground with his cleats. However, it is unintentional and possibly undesired as well, so once again this might not be a problem.

Nevertheless, playing baseball on Shabbos is certainly not proper. The Midrash Rabbah on Eichah tells of a city that existed during the years of the Churban Bayis Sheni. The residents were not guilty of sinas chinam, yet the city was destroyed due to playing ball on Shabbos.

The above was just tangential. I really wanted to discuss contract terms. Shawn Green signed a six-year contract. What could possibly be the problem with that? The Gemara (Bava Metzia 10a) says that a day laborer may quit in the middle of a day without penalty. The Gemara offers the following verse as a source: "Ki li B'nei Yisrael avadim, avadai heim" (Vayikra 25:55). The Gemara extrapolates: "avadai heim," "They [the Jewish nation] are My servants"-not servants to other servants. The Ritva explains that this is a specific scriptural decree (gezeiras ha'kasuv) that a worker may back out of his commitment to work for a specific term without any loss in already accrued pay. Not being able to do so would be a violation of "avadai heim."

The Gemara uses the same verse and exposition in Kiddushin to teach us that it is not proper for a Jew to sell himself as an eved (bond servant); he may not be an eved to anyone but Hashem. The simple understanding is that only selling oneself as an eved violates this verse. However, the Hagahos Mordechai notes that the Gemara in Bava Metzia uses this verse in connection with a day laborer (albeit in relation to a different halachah). He therefore concludes that if one signs a work contract for more than three years, this can be a violation of the injunction against becoming an eved. The Hagahos Mordechai's opinion is cited as practical law by the Rema in Choshen Mishpat (333:3). However, before you get too excited about this new chumrah, the prohibition has limitations.

The following is a paraphrase of the Hagahos Mordechai: "And it appears to me that for this reason, a teacher, a scribe, or other professional, should be careful not to hire himself out to be in the house of the homeowner in a permanent fashion and to rely on his food without interruption for more than three years. More than three years, one is no longer called a worker but an eved." A strict interpretation of his words would severely limit the prohibition; it would apply only to someone who ate and worked in the homeowner's house for three years.

However, the Chasam Sofer (quoted in the Pischei Teshuvah) says this applies to community rabbis, as well. He writes that since rabbis have their food expenses covered by the community, they are included in this injunction. A master can tell his eved to buy food from the market and eat there. Likewise, an eved doesn't necessarily work in his owner's house. Similarly, rabbis are given funds from the community to cover their food expenses. They eat where their community wants them to-in their own house. They work where they are instructed to-at the synagogue. So a rabbi potentially would not be allowed to sign a contract for longer than three years, or he might be deemed an eved.

However, the Aruch HaShulchan writes that some are of the opinion that a contract may be signed for up to six years, the normal term of an indentured servant, before violating the aforementioned prohibition. The Vilna Gaon notes that Tosefos in Bava Metzia disagrees with the Hagahos Mordechai and writes that in any situation where the hired party may back out of the deal without penalty, he may sign a contract for as long as he desires. The very fact that he can back out of the deal makes his situation substantially different from that of an eved who is stuck working for six years. The Aruch HaShulchan states that a rabbi usually can back out of his contract and is therefore not subject to the prohibition, according to Tosefos. However, he writes that as a practical matter, a rabbi should not back out of his contract, since it is dishonest.

It seems to me that this entire prohibition is not even relevant nowadays, where rabbis have vacation time included in their contract. The Hagahos Mordechai states that to be a violation the contract must call for work for three years "without interruption." It certainly wouldn't apply to Shawn Green or any other baseball player, who have winters off. So at least in this particular regard, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with Shawn's $84 million contract. He can feel free to consult me on any other halachic matters that come up.