Torah Sparks
A Service of The United Synagogue of Conservative
Judaism
PARASHAT
MISHPATIM
BIRKAT HAHODESH
SHABBAT SHEKALIM
February 25, 2006 - 27 Shevat 5766
Annual: Ex. 21:1 - 24:18 (Etz Hayim, p. 456; Hertz p.
306)
Triennial: Ex. 22:4 - 23:19 (Etz Hayim, p. 464; Hertz p. 311)
Maftir: Ex. 30:11 - 16 (Etz Hayim, p. 523; Hertz p. 352)
Haftarah: II Kings 12:1 - 17 (Etz Hayim, p. 1276; Hertz p. 992)
Prepared by Rabbi Michael Gold
Congregation Beth Torah, Tamarac, FL
Department of Congregational Services
Rabbi Paul Drazen, Director
SUMMARY
Some people say that God is in the details. That idea certainly fits with
this week's portion. We move from the broad moral and religious issues
discussed in the Ten Commandments to the day-to-day details of living
life under the covenant. This week's parasha contains a long list
of civil and religious laws and therefore is often called the Book of
the Covenant.
The portion begins with the laws governing a Hebrew slave,
who will work for six years and go free in the seventh. If he refuses
his freedom, a hole is to be bored into his ear. This parasha also contains
the law that a man may not withhold food, clothing, or sexual rights from
his wife. It continues with a number of laws about damages, including
the well-known rule "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," which Jewish
law interprets as paying damages. It also contains the laws about damages
caused by an ox that gores, and considers whether the ox has a history
of goring.
The portion contains laws about theft, and draws a distinction
between the theft done at night or during the day. The night thief is
considered to pose a threat to a homeowner and deadly force can be used.
The portion continues with the laws of bailment, which involve a person's
property being damaged or destroyed while in someone else's possession.
This portion includes many laws regulating the treatment of the poor,
widows, and orphans
It ends with a reaffirmation of the covenant, including
the statement "We will do and we will understand." In the end, the elders
"see" a vision of God; there seems to be sapphire stones under God's feet.
Moses goes back up onto the mountain for forty days and forty nights.
ISSUE #1 - THE WORST FORM OF THEFT
"If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he
shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep" (Exodus
21:37).
DISCUSSION
If a thief steals an inanimate object and is caught, he must pay back
double. Theft becomes a civil rather than a criminal matter, as it is
in our society. The punishment is more severe, however, if the thief
steals an ox or a sheep. Why?
Could the reason be linked to the nature of society? When the Torah
was written, the majority of Israelites were shepherds. Therefore, to
lose a sheep was to lose much more than just property; it was to lose
a livelihood. Could the fine be higher because the thief literally has
stolen the victim's ability to make a living? Why would stealing the
ability to earn a living be worse than taking things? What does this
say about the Torah's attitude toward earning a living? What would be
modern equivalents of stealing a shepherd's sheep?
The Torah forbids stealing a neighbor's landmark. The rabbis understand
this situation as another way to steal his or her livelihood. How do
they come to this interpretation? Does this law speak to the issue of
fair competition? Is it right for a person to open a business that undercuts
another's ability to earn a living? This ancient issue is not easy to
resolve; it is still alive today. If a large chain discount store opens
in a community, and that forces small mom-and-pop shops out of business,
is that stealing a neighbor's landmark? What if such stores are bad
for its competition but good for consumers?
If taking away a person's ability to earn a living is the lowest form
of stealing, does that relate to what should be the highest form of
giving? Of course, Maimonides taught the highest of the eight levels
of tzedakah he outlined is setting up a person up in business so he
or she could earn a living.
ISSUE #2 - ABORTION
"If men quarrel, and hurt a pregnant woman, so that her fruit depart
from her, and yet no further harm follows; he shall be surely punished,
according to what the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall
pay as the judges determine" (Exodus 21:22).
DISCUSSION
Dare we talk about the most controversial social and political issue
in our country?
Is abortion murder? According to the verse quoted above, if a man causes
a woman to miscarry through his negligence, he must pay a fine. Yet
a fine is never allowed in the case of murder. (See Numbers 35:31) From
this portion, we see that causing the death of an unborn child is not
considered murder according to the Torah's laws. Could even the most
ardent pro-life advocate really equate abortion with killing an adult,
even when the Bible indicates otherwise?
Is abortion a mere medical procedure? The Talmud teaches that for the
first 40 days, the developing embryo is "mere fluid" (Yebamot 69a) After
40 days, the fetus is more than mere fluid; it has some legal standing.
An abortion during this period has profound consequences in Jewish law.
For example, if a woman aborts a fetus after formation and later gives
birth to a baby boy, there is no pidyon haben, the celebration traditionally
reserved for the firstborn. Why? Clearly, the rabbis understand that
there is more involved than "mere fluid."
Does Judaism point toward a middle way regarding abortion? Could such
a middle way have some bearing in a society that is debating this difficult
issue?
|