Shalom and welcome to Judeo Talk. The Torah portion for this week is parsha Mishpatim, Exodus 21:1-24:18.
Last week we saw the first of many Torah portions that deal with the establishment of the law for the new Israelite nation. Much of this week's parsha focuses on expanding upon those initial laws, from what to do in specific instances to what punishments should result from breaking the law.
In regard to that last point, Mishpatim has a famous passage. Many people have heard the expression, "Eye for an eye" in regard to retribution for wrongdoing. This phrase has come to have a connotation of revenge, even vindictiveness, in our modern society. The original meaning of the phrase couldn't be farther from that sentiment. The full passage actually begins by talking about what should be done about violence that causes a pregnant woman to miscarry. It is determined that in this or any case of criminal negligence, the restitution should be "Life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe".
This should not be confused for biblical consent to vengeance. If anything, this passage exists to limit the punishment levied on someone found guilty of a crime. By stating that all punishments must match the crime, this passage seeks to keep people from dealing too harshly with one another. As with many things in the Torah, this all seems too extreme. We live in a society that prefers quantifiable and somewhat arbitrary punishments. In the United States were someone to cut off another person's hand, the guilty party would be jailed and fined but would not have his or her hand also severed. In the ancient world the punishment would more than likely have been death. The Toritic law calls for properly weighed justice, nothing more or less.
Mishpatim is, for the most part, a long list of other laws. The frame story for the laws is that God told them to Moses, who then wrote them down in a book and recited the book's entire contents to the people of Israel. This is a sort of follow-through from last week's portion in which Jethro suggested that Moses teach the law to the entire nation.
At the end of Mishpatim, God calls Moses to the top of a mountain to receive the stone tablets with the Ten Commandments, as well as to receive the Torah and the Mitzvot. This passage is often portrayed as just the giving the stone tablets, but the wording itself is very specific. God uses the words "Torah" and "Mitzvah" in addition to referring to "the stone tablets". This in itself is very interesting. God uses the singular "MItzvah" and not the plural "Mitzvot", as well as distinguishing Mitzvah from Torah (in this case meaning the law), and both of those things from the stone tablets. This places them implicitly in three different categories. The stone tablets are listed first, so that implies that they are either the most important thing or that they are simply the earliest to appear in the culture. The second item mentioned is the Torah, followed by the most vague term, the Mitzvah.
If we interpret this often overlooked exchange between God and Moses as following the parsha's theme of establishing law, we can determine the following progression: The Ten Commandments (as much as I don't like that term) are the initial guidelines of the culture. They are the first, the most simple and the most universal of the new nation's code of morals and ethics. The second piece, the Torah, is a much more complex, nuanced document that expands upon the guidelines of the stone tablets. The final item, the very concept of Mitzvah, likely doesn't even have a physical component. Rather, it is an idea, an inherent moral core that will eventually be part of the culture. Even the materials have a sense of progression. Stone tablets, then inscribed paper, then cultural ephemera. This is the progression of early human law.