Mishpatim — Slave Labor

The Divrei Haneviim are filled with words of Tochacha and prediction, as well as narrative. Sometimes there is an intersection, wherein the words of the Navi are the direct result of a particular event. when we come across this type of Nevuah, we must examine not only what the Navi is saying, but what precipitated his reaction. This is especially true when the Nevuah seems to have grave consequences.

The Haftorah for Parshas Mishpatim is taken from Sefer Yermiyahu and speaks of a most interesting sequence of events in our history. The fact that the Haftorah is not read in most years—as Misphatim often coincides with Shekalim—combined with a general lack of familiarity with Neviim Achronim, means that many are not aware of this chapter in our history, or its import. Before examining the Pessukim, then, it is important to provide some context.

During the days of Tzidkiyahu, Nevuchadnetzer laid siege to Yerushalayim, and it seemed that he would be successful in its capture. Out of fear, Tzidkiyahu and his advisors looked for a Zechus that might allow them to be saved. It was determined that a particular Mitzvah had been overlooked, perhaps leading to their precarious situation. It had apparently become customary to ignore the Halachos of Eved Ivri and keep Avadim long past their prescribed term of six years. To rectify the situation, Tzidkiyahu declared that all Avadim were to be freed, even holding a ceremony in the Bais Hamikdash solidifying this new path. This approach seems to have worked, as Nevuchadnetzer soon turned his attention to another foe, Mitzrayim, releasing his grip on Yerushalayim.

Our Haftorah begins by recounting these events, but then tells us: “VaYashuvu Acharei Ken VaYashivu Es HaAvadim V’Es HaShfachos…”. Once the threat of invasion had passed, Tzidkiyahu and his subjects brought their former Avadim back into servitude, oppressing them once again. The remainder of the Haftorah is devoted to a Nevuah given to Yirmiyahu in response to this entire incident.

The message of the Navi is quite clear: HKBH finds the actions of the people to be utterly repugnant. Because the people did not listen to the Dvar Hashem and failed to free their slaves, Hashem tells them: “Hinini Koreh Lachem Dror…El Hacherev El HaDever V’El HaRa’av.”. Rashi explains that HKBH will no longer act as their master, protecting them from all manner of destruction.

In fact, the Navi goes on to tell us that Bnei Yisroel would find themselves at the mercy of the “Mivakshei Nafsham”, and the army of Bavel. Further, Tzidkiyahu and his officers, who played a leading role in this scheme, would also be subject to the whims of their enemies.

Clearly the actions of Bnei Yisroel relating to their Avadim had serious ramifications to their safety and wellbeing. Its seem, however, that the affects of their actions were even more far-reaching that it might at first seem.

The Passuk says “Galsa Yehuda M’Oni U’Merov Avodah”. The simple meaning of these words is that the Galus was accompanied by hard labor at the hands of the Kasdim, as Rashi there explains. The Medrash in Eicha Rabba provides another explanation for words Al Derech HaDrush: “Al Shehayu Mishtabdim B’Eved Ivri.” The Galus, according to this Medrash, was the result of a misuse of the Din of Eved Ivri. The Medrash proves this from a Passuk towards the beginning of the Haftorah which discusses the Chiyuv to free the Avadim after seven years.

Now, based on this Medrash we might assume that the lack of adherence to the Dinim of Eved Ivri was one of the contributing factors that resulted in the Churban. After all, we know that the Dor of Tzidkiyahu was lacking in many ways—maybe this was one and perhaps it was even the “straw that broke the camel’s back”. There is a Gemarah, however, that seems to expand on this idea.

The Yerushalmi in Rosh Hashana brings a Memra from Rav Iyla: “Lo Ne’enshu Yisroel Ela Al Parashas Shiluach Avadim”. The implication of this Memra, also based on the words from our Haftorah, is that the Galus came exclusively because of a lack of adherence to Dinim of Eved Ivri. Clearly this Gemara takes the words of the Medrash one step farther: Eved Ivri was not one of many Mitzvos that contributed to Galus, it was in some way the only one.

There are two questions that must be asked on these Mamarei Chazal, one very general, and one more specific to the story told in our Haftorah.

First, we must understand the statement made by both the Medrash and Gemarah. why would the Churban and Galus be caused by a lack of adherence to the Mitzvah of Eved Ivri? The are other Mamaerei Chazal that tell us about Aveiros which caused Galus—including Avodah Zarah, Shefichas Damim and Giluy Arayos—and we certainly would not place Eved Ivri into the same category in terms of severity. And yet, Chazal seem to be telling us that Eved Ivri does in fact carry severe consequences. How can we understand this?

Second, and more specific to the Hafotrah, we must understand why the Navi only portends Galus at this point. If, as Chazal teach us, the prolonged enslavement of Eved Ivri leads to Galus, that should have been the case prior to the mass emancipation enacted by Tzidkiyahu. It is clear from the Pessukim that until the siege of Nevuchadnetzar the Avadim were kept well beyond their six-year terms. If that was the case, the news of the impending Churban should have been given then. Why is it only now, when the Avadim were freed only to enslaved once again, that we are told that this behavior would lead to destruction?

It is clear that in order to answer these questions, when must understand the Mitzvah of Eved Ivri on a different level.

There is a question that jumps out as we learn this week’s Sedra. The begins with the words “V’Ela HaMishpatim Asher Tasim Lifnehem”, and immediately speaks about the Dinim of Eved Ivri. Now, the Mitzvah of Eved Ivri is only Nogeah when Yovel is kept—when all of Klal Yisroel is in Eretz Yisroel. Why, then, does the Torah begin its teaching of Mishpatim with these Halachos? Why not start with some of the Mitzvos spoken about later in the Parsha, which are more widely applicable?

This question is raised by some of the Meforshei HaPshat, with each explaining why this Mitzvah is special, and why it goes first. Among these is Ibn Ezra who, as befits his typical style, offers a one line explanation: “V’Ain L’Adam B’Olam Yoser Kasha Alav M’Hiyoso B’Reshus Adam Kamohu”. The Torah begins with these Halachos, explains Ibn Ezra, because there is nothing more difficult for a person that to be in the Reshus of someone like him. Now, this may seem like a psychological explanation for the severity of the Mitzvah, and therefore its placement, but perhaps there is a deeper meaning.

The Shem M’Shmuel, at the beginning of Parshas Mispatim, asks an interesting question: why does the Torah refer to a Jewish slave as an Eved Ivri, and not Eved Yisroel? The term Ivri is unusual, as opposed to the more convention Yisroel—why the change here?

The answer, he explains, lies in the origin of the word “Ivri”.

In the Haggadah we quote a Passuk from Sefer Yeshoshua: “B’Ever HaNahar Yeshvu Avosechem M’Olam”, which comes from Yehoshua’s final address to Klal Yisroel. The Zohar Hakadosh explains that Yehoshua mentioned Avraham’s origins, M’Ever L’Nahar, to reinforce the notion that we, his children, forever dwell on the other side of the river of the rest of the world. We are free of the confines of the rest of mankind, and live in a state of Cheirus. When Avraham Avinu crossed the river, he left behind the world of Gashmi and its constricts, choosing instead the freedom of the Olam Haruchani, and that is our legacy.

This is why the Torah refers to an Eved Ivri and not Eved Yisroel, to remind us that being a slave is a departure from his essence, a reversion to the Avdus that we left behind so many generations ago. The life circumstances of the Eved Ivri may dictate that he be enslaved, but that is a temporary situation, after which he will go back to the world of Cheirus. The term of the Ever Ivri, six years, corresponds to the Sheshes Yimei Beraishis, the six days of the week that belong to the Olam Hagashmi, and he is freed when the seventh year, corresponding to Shabbos, arrives.

The Shem M’Shmuel adds that this idea is brought out in the Dinim of Eved Ivri themselves. Only a Ganav, who steals in secret, is subject to being sold as an Eved as opposed to a Gazalan who steals openly. This is because the Ganav used one of the Middos of Klal Yisroel—Penimius, our inner Chierus—to commit his crime. It is he who must be reminded that he is Ivri, that his Cheirus is to be used properly.

Based on this id”ea we can understand why the Parsha begins with the Din of Eved Ivri: the message of this Mitzvah is so fundamental, and goes to the root of our very existence. By referring to the Jewish slave as Ivri and not Yisroel the Torah passes on a message about our essence that sets the tone for all Mitzvos: they are not to be see as confinements but as expressions of our Cheirus.

Perhaps this is what the Ibn Ezra meant when saying “V’Ain L’Adam B’Olam Yoser Kasha Alav M’Hiyoso B’Reshus Adam Kamohu”. Adam does not refer to a man, but to a Yid, whose essence is Cheirus. For a child of Avraham Avinu, who left the confining world on the other side of the river, there is indeed nothing worse than returning to Shibud. The words “Kamohu”, is added because the indignity is amplified when the one who is Meshabed him is another Yid, one who understands the concepts of Cheirus. To be in the Reshus of such a person is the most difficult situation imaginable.

We can now well understand the statement of the Medrash in Eicha and even the Yerushalmi. “Lo Ne’enshu Yisroel Ela Al Parashas Shiluach Avadim”. By ignoring the Halachos of Eved Ivri and keeping their Jewish slaves confined beyond their term, the Yidden showed that they have no conception of their standing as Beni Avraham, as living M’Ever L’Nahar, and as such were not deserving of Eretz Yisroel. It emerges that road from abuse of Eved Ivri to Galus is quite direct.

Perhaps this is why the Navi portends Galus only now, after the Avadim were freed and then enslaved again: when the siege of NEvuchadnetzer was lifted, the Jews got a taste of renewed Cheirus. They were free to live their lives as the Torah wished, without threats from the outside, in Gashmi or Ruchani. Their reaction should have been to celebrate and embrace Cheirus, but instead they returned to their old ways, enslaving those who deserved to be free. They ignored the Ivri part of the Mitzvah, and in so doing doomed themselves to Galus.

The message to us is clear: we must live our lives as Ivri’im, standing on the opposite side of the river from the rest of the world. If we do so, and act as Avadim to HKBH only, we can rectify the mistakes that put us in Galus and rejoice in a return to lives of total, blissful, Cheirus.