Mishpatim 2009

Too often we forget, that the word ‘Torah’ can be translated as a word for ‘Law’. And there’s no better Parasha to make a case for that than Mishpatim. Am Israel, freshly given the Ten Commandments is now handed multiple ordinances, or Mishpatim.

According to Rashi, the Torah makes no difference in the importance of any of these Mishpatim. The parasha starts off matter of factly with the words: “And these…” thereby adding to what was directed to Am Israel before; namely the Ten Commandments.
It’s important to know that these Mishpatim were “…set before them” - not taught by Moses, but rather a written law. Lest they forget them. Rashi argues (Tanchuma Mishpatim 3) that these laws were for Am Israel only - not for gentiles, hence the difference in importance here between oral Torah and written Torah. (From Mechilta, Eruvin 54b)

With the second sentence the Torah dives into various laws in a very direct and clear language, as if it were a law book one finds in a common law office. Is there a meaning as to the order of these new laws? Why start of with slaves and especially Hebrew slaves?

Recently, in a documentary on the life of Abraham Lincoln and his fight against slavery that aired on PBS, several historians made a point of reminding the audience that history should be judged within the time it took place. That Mister Lincoln didn’t wake up one day and took on slavery, but rather that it was a gradual and carefully planned struggle.

Perhaps the Torah features slavery first, as if it wants to immediately set certain things straight. Slaves and slave ownership was common among nations, but it was to be different among Am Israel. The human value of the lowest person within Israel’s society was just as much HaShem’s creation as any other member of our People - Ha-Am.
So why start off with slaves? I couldn’t find the exact reason but I did find this.
Arbarbanel looked for a lesson to be learned from the juxtaposition between the Ten Commandments and the passage on Hebrew slaves at the beginning of the Parasha. Abarbanel felt that the juxtaposition taught - that by taking the Israelites out of bondage, Hashem acquired them as His very own - as indicated by the Midrash by the words, “The children of Israel are My servants,” (Lev. 25:58) “and not servants of servants”.

Not exactly what I had hoped for. Personally, I thought that maybe the Torah wanted to make a direct connection between our slavery in Mitzrayim and keeping slaves of our own as something that is wrong.

In Diyyukim, Rabbi Pinehas Wolf asks - why did the Torah allow slavery at all? He argues that had slavery been abolished, this act would not have achieved its goals among all peoples. Indeed, the Torah would not have had an impact on all people. The other nations would have dismissed it as another crazy idea from the Hebrews just as taking off a day from work. The word for slave used here is ‘Eved’ directly from the root La-Avod - to work. At our seder tables we sing Avad-iem Hayenu - which of course literally translates into ‘workers we were’. Unless the meaning of the root ‘To Work, La-Avod’ - means ‘To Slave’, we could find the answer in the notion that there may be no word in Hebrew for slave, as we understand it in English. Maybe the Torah means simply ‘worker’. In modern and older English, throughout translated books, whether for the Mishna, Midrash or Torah, we find the word ’slave’ more often than not translated as ’servant or maiden’. Then again, Mishpatim continues with very precise laws that make the life of the sold or bought human, whether called slave, servant or maiden, better and more secure than any other slave among any other People.

Let’s say for a moment that Mishpatim did start off with slavery because of Am Israel’s own recent history as slaves. Can we then find other links between the recent past and the recent freedom? Are we not called “Bnei Israel”- Children of Israel, in BeShallach and as such reduced into children that must learn things anew after hundreds of years in captivity?

Is Mishpatim simply the deeper lesson that had to follow the Top Ten Commandments of Good Behaviour? Or is there a reason for putting it in a certain order?
Let’s see.

Mishpatim continues with murder. As slaves, Pharaoh and other forms of criminal behaviour by the Egyptians often exposed us at unlawful murder. Mishpatim even points out that murder by a beast is just as punishable as that by a human. Next, laws about offences against property. In Egypt, there was no property to think off and even if there was, it could be taken by the Egyptians at any time. Followed by Laws of Morality. Laws against witchcraft, sodomy, oppression of the weak and polytheism meant to keep Israel on the straight and narrow path of the One G’d, rather than the common law of multiple Gods in Egypt. Laws of thievery. Didn’t the Egyptians steal our lives, our freedom our wives and children? How to deal rightfully with strangers. Weren’t we treated wrongfully as strangers in Egypt? Rules of lending and mercy towards the poor. Doesn’t that help keep a People together and make a People stronger? Isn’t it so that when one man falls, a People begin to fall? Not for nothing it is stated in the Torah: Iem Kesef Talveh eht-Ami - When you lend My People money - thereby pointing towards one People and not a singular person.

Up next: laws towards honesty and avoidance of falsehoods. Clearly the glue to keep a People at peace and united. Followed by the prohibition to not take bribes, to not take gifts, to stay on the side of the righteous. Rashi points out in Bereshit Rabbah (70,8) - “…there is no transgression more serious and widespread than falsehood.”
And then?

Moses ascends to the mountain. Returns after forty days. Reads the book of the Covenant and the People answer as one. Not individually, but as one People. “Vah-yomeru kol asher diber HaShem na-aseh veh-nishmah.” “And they said, all that The Lord has spoken we will do and obey.”

And so the children of Israel begin to learn through mitzvoth the lesson to become one People. From Bnei Israel to Am Israel. Something they could never have imagined nor achieved in Egypt.