Mishpatim: 

The Mai Shiloach  writes: 

“And these are the laws that you shall place before them ….” (Shemot, 21:1)
Here it is not said, “And God spoke to Moshe saying,” as with all the mitzvot, for the matter here discusses civil legal enactments (“mishpatim”), and concerning justice there is no difference between the great and the small. This may be compared to when the king goes out to inspect and judge his soldiers; then they all stand in the same line, even their senior officer standing in the line.

Yithro, last week's parsha, and Mishpatim, this week's, form a section of the Torah. They can be seen as a circumscribed story of Moses relinquishing a unique relationship to the law, informing the people of its content and transferring the  administration to a hierarchy.  Moses' unique understanding and interpretation is now replaced by the democracy of public information. Hence, Mishpatim opens without the usual attributions of provenance. These are the kinds of laws that people would invent on their own.  The details are Divine  These are the rules of adjudication. This is the basis of conflict resolution.  

The first rule limits servitude to six years. The edict assumes the legality of servitude, but limits its duration.  This is one of several laws that involve the master slave relationship.  In contemporary America, dealing with the long aftermath of race-based slavery, the mention of the concept is jarring: How could this Bible condone the concept of owned people? 

One could argue  that the  people addressed by these laws had, themselves, been slaves and  would not understand a society devoid of slavery.  In this (pseudo) historical context: limiting slavery's duration and restricting the master's dominion and conferring rights to the slave - are positive, humanistic acts. They do not go far enough for our taste, but  a revolution must recognize limits if the outcome is to be a viable society. The structure created by these new rules must be recognizable to people born a decade earlier. This is an apology. 

I believe that the review of the Torah has meaning to me, in the world that I live in. My world claims that the great crime of slavery has been abolished in all enlightened nations and should be universally banned.  The truth of that claim depends upon the definition of  slavery.  Do I really live in a world in which one person does not have power over another? What does it mean to buy a service? What are you willing to forgo to maintain your lifestyle? The slave is not merely the person who toils under the leather whip.  The slave is the migrant who travels in a band from dormitory to dormitory and picks fruit. The slave is the worker who toils on Sunday so that she has a job on Monday.  The slave follows orders under the threat of legal prosecution.  A slave can earn wages. 

The anachronism allows us to examine the meaning of slavery.  It can include every relationship in which a human is dependent. The dependency can include other people or it can be to institutions. These relationships allow great achievements: feeding the billions of people in the world, the internet, the tower of Babel, the Russian army. Rules that transcend the instant are needed for the system to work; and for us to feel good about it. 

Slavery is any state of compulsion.  It enforces the separation of possession with an enthralled army of police.

In our times, we come to understand the manipulation of self-enforced compulsion.  The doctor-pharmacy-drug company that gives a person, who claims pain, oxycodone, has caused and addiction, an enslavement to a substance.  The hacker that released a well directed meme softly compelled a vote for autocracy. If we abandon Spotify [in protest] will we be able to relax?  This is enslavement to the Yetzer Hara ( the evil inclination).  Now we have statistical evidence that our inclination can be effectively manipulated.  The manipulators reserve the freedom for themselves. They hire lobbyists to deflect legislation that could limit their exploitation. They cry, "Free Speech. "What does that do to the manipulated? 

Ultimately the Israelites, the acceptors of the law, are enslaved... by the law itself.  They announce

וַיִּקַּח֙ סֵ֣פֶר הַבְּרִ֔ית וַיִּקְרָ֖א בְּאׇזְנֵ֣י הָעָ֑ם וַיֹּ֣אמְר֔וּ כֹּ֛ל אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּ֥ר יְ   נַעֲשֶׂ֥ה וְנִשְׁמָֽע׃ 

Then he took the record of the covenant and read it aloud to the people. And they said, “All that the LORD has spoken ^aLit. “we will do and obey.”we will faithfully do!”^-a

The people bind themselves with the vow to (blindly) follow the law. Do they believe in the beneficence of the author, or are they intimidated by the power?  Regardless, they are bound, they are in a new bondage... not necessarily bad. 

In this parsha related, sometimes nearly contradictory, verses are separated by a few tangential verses. In Chapter 23, verse 3: 

וְדָ֕ל לֹ֥א תֶהְדַּ֖ר בְּרִיבֽוֹ׃ {ס}         nor shall you show deference to a poor man in his dispute.

Implies that the mercy the judge feels toward the poor should not influence the interpretation of the law. 

verse 6: 

לֹ֥א תַטֶּ֛ה מִשְׁפַּ֥ט אֶבְיֹנְךָ֖ בְּרִיבֽוֹ׃ You shall not subvert the rights of your needy in their disputes.

seems to caution against the opposite. Do not belittle the one less capable of defense. 

Of course, the answer is in the next verses: 

מִדְּבַר־שֶׁ֖קֶר תִּרְחָ֑ק   Keep far from a false charge

and 

וְשֹׁ֖חַד לֹ֣א תִקָּ֑ח   Do not take bribe

and 

וְגֵ֖ר לֹ֣א תִלְחָ֑ץ   You shall not oppress a stranger,

The answer to it all is to be fair.  To maintain the balance. 

But where if the fulcrum?  Can it be moved?

 

 

Yithro: the Ten Commandments

 

The ten commandments are the most catholic section of the Torah.  The idea of a set of fundamental rules with a Divine  origin underlies Jewish derived religion. Parshath Yithro gives the origin story.

 

Yithro had met Moses when he was a fugitive from a manslaughter that he had committed in Egypt. The prohibition on killing another person was one of the first laws, established by the uninformed counterexample of Cain. Societal retribution for murder was one of the laws that Gd had given Noah and his offspring after the flood ( the prior Divine declaration of civil law). Yithro now saw this outlaw (who had abandoned his wife can children [how the relationship is introduced]) as the great prophet and leader of a great multitude.  Yithro knew that Moses had a strange relationship with the rules. Moses’ violation of the regulations at the well brought Moses to his home and family.

 

Yithro suggests the law be democratized.

וְהִזְהַרְתָּ֣ה אֶתְהֶ֔ם אֶת־הַחֻקִּ֖ים וְאֶת־הַתּוֹרֹ֑ת וְהוֹדַעְתָּ֣ לָהֶ֗ם אֶת־הַדֶּ֙רֶךְ֙ יֵ֣לְכוּ בָ֔הּ וְאֶת־הַֽמַּעֲשֶׂ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר יַעֲשֽׂוּן׃  

and enjoin upon them the laws and the teachings, and make known to them the way they are to go and the practices they are to follow.

Up until now, People did what they thought was right, balancing the self service with the common good as they saw fit.  They had been trained to follow the instructions of their masters. Now there were no masters. Conflicts arose. Moses, who channeled the powers of Gd, power that overthrew Pharaoh, could enforce his decisions. The people turned to him.  He could protect the weak from the strong, if he so chose. There was no guarantee of fairness, other than disinterest.  There was no assurance of kindness. The law was obscure; it was whatever Moses said. A clear statement of the law, at least the nature of the atoms (of Democritus) that underpinned it, could decrease conflict. An authoritative record of the rules would be available for all as reference. The last 5 commandments  address these issues.

 

Yithro  also suggested  a hierarchy of courts. Public knowledge of the law would not adequately reduce the burden of conflicts.  It might increase it.

The criterion for the judges:

וְאַתָּ֣ה תֶחֱזֶ֣ה מִכׇּל־הָ֠עָ֠ם אַנְשֵׁי־חַ֜יִל יִרְאֵ֧י אֱ אַנְשֵׁ֥י אֱמֶ֖ת שֹׂ֣נְאֵי בָ֑צַע וְשַׂמְתָּ֣ עֲלֵהֶ֗ם שָׂרֵ֤י אֲלָפִים֙ שָׂרֵ֣י מֵא֔וֹת שָׂרֵ֥י חֲמִשִּׁ֖ים וְשָׂרֵ֥י עֲשָׂרֹֽת׃   

You shall also seek out from among all the people capable men who fear God, trustworthy men who spurn ill-gotten gain. Set these over them as chiefs of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens,

Truth and an aversion to bribery are the qualities to be selected. No politics.

Yithro supplies a reasoned approach to a problem that he sees.  Gd and Moses turn this into an eternal system. They add spectacle and ritual.

Sinai with its light, sound, earthquakes; the nation as spectators fenced off from the performance -  is the paradigm of the rock concert.  These extravaganzas unify the participants into a tribe, a group with an ineffable collectivity.  The shared experience binds them together. The wishful, terrifying memory of the cloud descending upon the erupting Sinai volcano remains in the dreams of Israel to this day.

The first five commandments do not involve civil law.  The first three deal with Gd and how humans are to relate to the Omnipotent. The declaration אָֽנֹכִ֖י֙ , I , establishes the authorship of theses statements and relates the author to the power that brough the Israelites out of Egypt.   The prohibition of idols means that there is no outside source to turn to for appeals. No crazy ideas allowed.  The  name of Gd cannot be associated with falsehood, it may not be coopted.

 

The Sabbath is a revolutionary idea.  It resets priorities: work is not everything. It  limits the power of masters and bosses:

 אַתָּ֣ה ׀ וּבִנְךָ֣͏ֽ־וּ֠בִתֶּ֗ךָ עַבְדְּךָ֤֨ וַאֲמָֽתְךָ֜֙ וּבְהֶמְתֶּ֔֗ךָ וְגֵרְךָ֖֙ אֲשֶׁ֥֣ר בִּשְׁעָרֶֽ֔יךָ׃

but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God: you shall not do any work—you, your son or daughter, your male or female slave, or your cattle, or the stranger who is within your settlements.

It liberates the slaves!

 

Honoring parents is a belief in continuity.  The world changes but there is much to learned from the past.  It takes years to understand that previous generations were not foolish.

 

The brevity of statement of the next four commandments  

לֹ֥֖א תִּֿרְצָ֖͏ֽח׃ {ס}         לֹ֣֖א תִּֿנְאָ֑͏ֽף׃ {ס}         לֹ֣֖א תִּֿגְנֹֽ֔ב׃ {ס}         לֹֽא־תַעֲנֶ֥ה בְרֵעֲךָ֖ עֵ֥ד שָֽׁקֶר׃ {ס}         

You shall not murder.

You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

Implies their equivalence. Each is as evil as murder.

The last commandment:

לֹ֥א תַחְמֹ֖ד בֵּ֣ית רֵעֶ֑ךָ {ס}         לֹֽא־תַחְמֹ֞ד אֵ֣שֶׁת רֵעֶ֗ךָ וְעַבְדּ֤וֹ וַאֲמָתוֹ֙ וְשׁוֹר֣וֹ וַחֲמֹר֔וֹ וְכֹ֖ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר לְרֵעֶֽךָ׃ {פ}

You shall not covet your neighbor’s house: you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female slave, or his ox or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor’s.

Asks for an internal correction.  Life is more than a competition.

 

It is all mixed up: Authority, fairness, respect, ritual.  There is value in sorting them out.  There is value in keeping them together

Beshalach: slaves to emotion and science

Beshalach: slaves to emotion and science

Beshalach tells the story from an emotional perspective. Everybody has feelings: the Israelites are scared and resentful; Gd is disappointed; Moses feels vilified. The parsha starts by informing us that Gd's guidance is deeply influenced by how the the consequences will impact the mood of the Israelites.

Now when Pharaoh let the people go, God did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines, although it was nearer; for God said, “The people may have a change of heart when they see war, and return to Egypt.”

  They are not ready to face battle, so they will sidestep a potential ( and eventual?) foe. 

Sometimes the recognition of mood is implicit.  When the text adds the seemingly superfluous verse: 

The pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night did not depart from before the people. 

The people needed constant reassurance  of Gd's presence and leadership although they  may not have trusted it yet (...or ever.) 

The Israelites are told to travel and camp in a way that makes them appear lost, trapped. The text is clear that this is a psychological trap for Pharaoh: 

וְאָמַ֤ר פַּרְעֹה֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל נְבֻכִ֥ים הֵ֖ם בָּאָ֑רֶץ סָגַ֥ר עֲלֵיהֶ֖ם הַמִּדְבָּֽר׃ Pharaoh will say of the Israelites, “They are astray in the land; the wilderness has closed in on them.”

Did Pharaoh take this as an opportunity to annihilate the Hebrews? If he thought the wilderness  had closed in in them, he did not need to mobilize his army; thirst and starvation would finish them off. . Perhaps  the Pharaoh wanted to rescue them ... and bring them back as slaves. 

When the Israelites call out  to Moses: 

וַיֹּאמְרוּ֮ אֶל־מֹשֶׁה֒ הֲֽמִבְּלִ֤י אֵין־קְבָרִים֙ בְּמִצְרַ֔יִם לְקַחְתָּ֖נוּ לָמ֣וּת בַּמִּדְבָּ֑ר מַה־זֹּאת֙ עָשִׂ֣יתָ לָּ֔נוּ לְהוֹצִיאָ֖נוּ מִמִּצְרָֽיִם׃ And they said to Moses, “Was it for want of graves in Egypt that you brought us to die in the wilderness? What have you done to us, taking us out of Egypt?

they are reacting to the military force. Presumably surrender was a logical option, but we are told how they felt: doomed. 

The Israelites have been told, by Gd,  to camp on the shore, to allow themselves to be trapped between the geography and the Egyptian forces.  They have been instructed to appear trapped.  A miracle ( an improbable event that can be attributed to Divine intervention) is the only solution. Yet:

מַה־תִּצְעַ֖ק אֵלָ֑י דַּבֵּ֥ר אֶל־בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל וְיִסָּֽעוּ׃ Then the LORD said to Moses, “Why do you cry out to Me? Tell the Israelites to go forward.

Why does  Gd seem annoyed with Moses? The only alternatives are crying out to the Lrd or surrender; and surrender is not a safe or desirable option. Moses and Israel are told to just go ahead and do the impossible: march into the sea; Gd is not limited by the rules that we imagine govern nature. Those scientific principles are about to be violated. 

Does the record of this interaction tell us how Gd would prefer to interact with the desperate: go ahead and expect the rescuing miracle?  No need to beg, just go ahead and expect salvation.  It is hard to know how far this unique episode can be extrapolated. 

The much celebrated song, אָ֣ז יָשִֽׁיר, expresses how the liberated, rescued nation felt about recent events; and how they imagined the news of  these events impacted the expected battles of the future. They celebrate a miracle of rescue, attributing qualities of justice and irony to the Gd that saved them.  They sing of the fear the news of this marvel will strike in the hearts of their future enemies.  It is a song, closer to undulating rhythm than concrete reality. 

Immediately, they are confronted with thirst.  They find water, but the lake is known to be bitter, it is called Marah, bitter. The people complain and a method to make the water potable is applied. Gd's final comment on the incident: 

כִּ֛י אֲנִ֥י  ה רֹפְאֶֽךָ

for I the LORD am your healer.”

Gd will solve the difficult problems.

The Israelites are being weaned from the dependency of slavery.  In Egypt, if a person did the job, food, water, clothing and shelter were provided. Gd will not necessarily provide for the necessities of life. The people will need to do things for themselves.  That will lead to extraordinary, unanticipated problems.. If the Israelites accept Gd's commands, Gd will provide solutions. Like the doctor's potions: sometimes they will work

The parsha began with a detour to avoid a  war.  It ends with the first clash with an eternal enemy, an indecisive battle with a foe that can be overpowered only  when Moses raises the staff, conferring confidence upon the troops. This is the assuredness  that the slaves who had gone into the wilderness for a three day festival needed to acquire before they met their match. Now they could accept that the battle against the cruel enemy that attacks  the downtrodden from behind; a struggle that  will continue until the end of time; but Israel would prevail, even if the methods  violate the belief system of the time. 

Don't be a slave to your beliefs about nature. Don't complain, go forward  and the impossible will yield. (maybe)

 Bo: Bechor

The culmination of the plagues is the killing of the firstborn. This is the plague that is celebrated above all others.  The passing over of Passover  celebrates the exemption from the catastrophic slaughter and  was bought by the participation in the prescribed ritual, including the public identification broadcast by the lamb blood painted in the doorposts and lintel. The parsha ends by repeatedly emphasizing the significance of sparing the Hebrew firstborn.  All the  eldest offspring of Israelite  human and beast now belong to Gd and must be offered, killed or redeemed. This edict is to placed on public display: on doorposts and worn in the head and arm as amulets. 

Moses and Aaron, under orders from Gd , had requested a holiday from the Pharaoh.  After the fourth plague (the swarm of animals) Pharaoh offered an opportunity for the Israelites to perform their ritual locally, in Egypt. 

Then Pharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron and said, “Go and sacrifice to your God within the land.”

But Moses replied, “It would not be right to do this, for what we sacrifice to the LORD our God is untouchable to the Egyptians. If we sacrifice that which is untouchable to the Egyptians before their very eyes, will they not stone us!       Exodus8;21,22

The Passover  ritual, the slaughter of תּוֹעֲבַ֥ת מִצְרַ֛יִם  , what is disgusting to Egypt, an act that seems to invite spontaneous violence, is, in fact, done in Egypt. Participation in this act and the public display of involvement is required for exemption from the plague.  Things change.

The first Rashi in the Torah mentions  this week's parsha;

בראשית. אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק לֹֹֹֹֹא הָיָה צָרִיךְ לְהַתְחִיל אֶת הַתּוֹרָה אֶלָּא מֵהַחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה לָכֶם,

בראשית IN THE BEGINNING — Rabbi Isaac said: The Torah which is the Law book of Israel should have commenced with the verse (Exodus 12:2) “This month shall be unto you the first of the months” 

The implication is that everything that came up to this point is background. Rabbi Isaac suggests that the purpose of this preface is tied to the Promised Land, but that would justify only a short passage attributing creation  to the Gd of Israel.  There is so much more story between  The Beginning and now. 

Much of that story involves inheritance.  Legacy and birthright is the major theme of Genesis.  The firstborn is always supplanted. Isaac supersedes Ishmael. Jacob replaces Esau. Ruben is superseded by Joseph the provider, Judah the commander and Levi the hallowed.  The eldest is generally overthrown.  In this parsha, they are sentenced to death. Gd rescues those that remain and they become Gd's own, the privilege of heir birth is converted into a curse that must be expiated. 

Who are the firstborn in this context? The story up to this point assumes that the  bechor, the eldest,has a much favored status. Jacob risked his life to acquire it, Joseph is disturbed that Jacob misappropriates it to Ephraim, instead of the elder Menashe; Gd calls Israel: Bechor.  This designation, whether by birth or merit, conferred power to its holder. The bechor was the heir-apparent, the designated link in the tradition and the inheritance, the successor.  A plague of death to these people was a grass roots revolution, an insurrection on the family level. Perhaps, it was a step toward meritocracy. 

There is no clear description of  Egyptian society, but the interactions that are reported in the text make it clear that it was autocratic. The Pharaoh had the power, presumably martial, to levy taxes, apportion land and negotiate with outsiders (like Gd) for the Egyptian people.  He had advisors who are designated as servants: 

וַיֹּאמְרוּ֩ עַבְדֵ֨י פַרְעֹ֜ה אֵלָ֗יו עַד־מָתַי֙ יִהְיֶ֨ה זֶ֥ה לָ֙נוּ֙ לְמוֹקֵ֔שׁ שַׁלַּח֙ אֶת־הָ֣אֲנָשִׁ֔ים וְיַֽעַבְד֖וּ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֵיהֶ֑ם הֲטֶ֣רֶם תֵּדַ֔ע כִּ֥י אָבְדָ֖ה מִצְרָֽיִם׃ 

Pharaoh’s servants said to him, “How long shall this one be a snare to us? Let the men go to worship the LORD their God! Are you not yet aware that Egypt is lost?”

This is clearly a hierarchy, but there was an opportunity  for others to express a distressed opinion; to request a change in (foreign) policy. Had the destruction wrought by the plagues prepared an atmosphere ripe for revolution? Did the death of the firstborn disturb the established  hierarchy enough to make anything possible?

Exemption from the plague required joining the Israelites in their ceremony - and publicly displaying the fact. Those who joined could continue the favored status of the bechor. Would they?