The Mishna on 43b teaches us that a Jewish master who sells his slave to live outside of Israel is fined by the Rabbis and compelled to set him free. This indicates the Rabbis' recognition of the significant disruption to the spiritual life of the slave when forced to live outside of Israel. It is noteworthy that even the spiritual well-being of a slave is held in high regard. Additionally, the Mishna states that if a Jewish master sells his slave to a gentile, he will also be penalized and required to redeem him, recognizing the detrimental impact on the slave's spiritual life by denying him the ability to live according to Jewish practices and mitzvot.

Our Gemara on 44a explores the case of a master who sells his slave to a gentile but retains ownership on Shabbos and holidays. The question raised is whether this arrangement would still trigger the penalty or not.

Chasam Sofer raises a logical objection to this discussion. If living in Israel is deemed important even though the servant can fulfill most mitzvos except those specifically related to residing in Israel, then shouldn't the penalty also apply when a Jewish master sells his slave to a gentile and is prevented from many mitzvos? Although the slave would still observe Shabbos, he would be unable to fulfill many other mitzvos that are presumably more stringent than those achievable outside of Israel.

Chasam Sofer answers that there is a qualitative difference between the performance of all mitzvos in Israel compared to outside of Israel. As we learn in Kiddushin 110b: "Anyone who resides in Eretz Yisrael is considered as one who has a God, and anyone who resides outside of Eretz Yisrael is considered as one who does not have a God." This statement highlights the profound qualitative experience of observing mitzvos in the land of Israel compared to outside its borders.

Another notable point emphasized by Chasam Sofer is his choice to use the recitation of the Shema as an example. Despite the exemption of women and servants from time-bound mitzvos, including the recitation of Shema, Chasam Sofer underscores the remarkable difference between observance in Israel and outside of Israel. Even a commandment that one is not obligated to fulfill still carries greater significance when performed in Israel.

Furthermore, Chasam Sofer may be emphasizing that since the recitation of Shema serves as a declaration of faith, and according to the aforementioned Gemara in Kiddushin, living outside of Israel is likened to having no God, one might assume that accepting the yoke of heaven would not be affected by location. Therefore, Chasam Sofer emphasizes that even when consciously accepting the yoke of heaven and declaring belief in God, there remains an inherent qualitative difference between faith expressed in the land of Israel and faith expressed outside its borders.

Lastly, Chasam Sofer provides some comfort to those who do not live in Israel. While the qualitative difference is significant, it is particularly evident in individuals lacking Torah knowledge, such as a Canaanite slave. Such individuals, devoid of Torah thought, struggle to cultivate awareness and connection to God outside of Israel. However, a Torah sage recreates, to some extent, the essence of the land of Israel wherever they go. As stated in Menachos (110a): "In every place where mention is made of Me, I shall come to you and bless you" (Exodus 20:21). This refers to Torah scholars who engage in Torah study in every place. God attributes to them credit as though they offer sacrifices in His name.

This concept is eloquently expressed by the theologian Abraham Joshua Heschel, when he calls the Torah, “the portable homeland of the Jewish people". 

Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation

Do you like what you see? Please subscribe and also forward any articles you enjoy to your friends, (enemies too, why not?)