Rabbi Eliezer tackles a textual ambiguity in the Torah's laws of servitude that has real legal consequences. The verse under discussion deals with the acquisition of servants, and the question is straightforward: does this particular passage refer to a Canaanite servant or a Hebrew one?
The distinction matters enormously. A Hebrew servant had strict protections under Torah law. His service was limited to six years. He had to be treated with dignity, fed well, and housed properly. A Canaanite servant operated under a different legal framework entirely, with different rules governing acquisition, treatment, and release.
Rabbi Eliezer argues that the verse speaks specifically of a Canaanite servant. But he anticipates the objection immediately. Someone might read the verse and assume it refers to a Hebrew servant instead. How can we be certain?
The proof comes from (Leviticus 25:44), which states explicitly: "From them shall you buy a man-servant and a maid-servant." The "them" refers to the surrounding Canaanite nations, not to fellow Israelites. This cross-reference locks the interpretation in place. When the Torah uses the language of purchase in this context, it points specifically to the Canaanite institution, not the Hebrew one.
This method of interpretation, using one verse to clarify another, is characteristic of the Mekhilta's legal reasoning. Rabbi Eliezer does not simply assert his position. He builds it on textual evidence, showing how different parts of the Torah speak to each other across books and chapters. The result is a legal ruling grounded not in opinion but in the internal logic of Scripture itself.