Sealing the Deal

 

Rabbi Yaakov Bieler

Parshat Mishpatim, 5764

 

            The well-known response of the Jewish people to God’s Proposal that they enter into a covenant with Him, “Na’aseh VeNishma” (we will do and we will hear), appears at the end of Parshat Mishpatim (Shemot 24:7). Both Ibn Ezra and Chizkuni interpret the declaration to reflect  the people’s preparedness to fulfill all commandments that they have received to this point (Na’aseh), as well as any additional charges that God Will Give them in the future (Nishma—we will listen and accept any and all edicts that have as yet not been communicated to us.)

            The biblical text relates that this type of declaration is vocalized several times during the giving of the Tora at Sinai. Earlier, in Parshat Yitro, the people make a similar statement: (19:8) “And all of the people declared together and they said, ‘Na’aseh’…” And prior to verse 7 in Chapter 24, we find yet again, (v. 3) “…And the entire people declared in a single voice, ‘All of the things that HaShem Has Spoken Na’aseh.’” Assuming that the Tora ordinarily strives to be concise in its language and description of events, we are challenged to account for this apparent redundancy within the text.

            A closer reading of what the people are responding to on each occasion sheds light on an apparent progression in the manner in which God’s Expectations are conveyed to the people, and their consequent reactions and verbal commitments. The first presentation to the people of the role God Wishes them to serve appears in 19:5-6. Moshe is instructed to convey to the Jews the following message: “And now, if you will surely listen to My Voice, and keep My Covenant, you will be a treasure to Me from amongst all the nations, since the entire earth belongs to Me. And you will be for Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation…” This iteration of God’s Proposal does not spell out any specific commandment or statute that has to be observed. It makes a general reference to the need to listen to God’s Instructions, but the primary emphasis is upon the special status that will be earned by the people once they accept upon themselves Divine Service. The verse leading up to the second time the people say “Na’aseh” suggests that on this occasion, Moshe is far more specific when describing God’s Requirements. (24:3) “And Moshe came and told the people ALL of the words of God and All the laws…” Finally, what precipitates the ultimate “Na’aseh VeNishma” affirmation is the writing and public reading of the words of HaShem: (24:4) “And Moshe wrote All of the words of HaShem…” (24:7)”And he took Sefer HaBrit (the book of the covenant) and he read in the ears of the people…” The verses convey how each time the words of God are presented, it is done with ever-increasing specificity, allowing time for the people to consider the benefits that are being offered, as well gradually increasing the comprehensive scope of the range and breadth of the lifestyle that God is imposing upon them.

            However, while the verses provide a general idea of the manner in which the Divine Law was revealed to the people, we are not told which laws were actually cited. Assuming that the entire corpus of Jewish law was not reviewed at this point by Moshe, what sort of selection did he make, with or without God’s Authorization?  What exactly was said and read by Moshe, and then finally accepted by the Jewish people, is debated among the commentators. (1)

            RaShI opts to accept the Mechilta’s (2) contention that what was first discussed with the people in Chapter 19 were the seven Noachide commandments (3), as well as the commandments that Rabbinic tradition understands to have been presented at Mara (15:25) (4). As for the contents of the Sefer HaBrit that Moshe writes and reads in Chapter 24, RaShI agrees with R. Yosi  BeRabbi Assi in the Mechilta, who contends that this was the Tora text from the beginning of Beraishit until the receiving of the Tora. (5)

            Ibn Ezra and Chizkuni advocate that the material discussed in 24:3, written in 24:4, and read in 24:7, are the verses from Shemot 20:19 until 23:33, i.e. all of the Halachic material that follows the presentation of the Ten Commandments.

            Rabbeinu Bachaye accepts an alternate view recorded in the Mechilta, that of Rabbi Yishmael. This Tanna maintains that the Sefer HaBrit that Moshe read to the Jews contained the contents of VaYikra 25-26, i.e., the laws of Shmitta (the Sabbatical Year), Yovel (the Jubilee Year), how to deal with Jewish slaves, as well as the blessings and curses that comprise the Tochecha (the powerful incentives and disincentives that appear at the end of Sefer VaYikra).

            These three main perspectives with regard to what precipitated the response of “Na’aseh VeNishma” reflect very different educational approaches and emphases.            RaShI’s view assumes that while some commandments should be shared in order to allow the Jews to gain a sense of the type of behaviors that will be expected of them, commitment will be more strongly engendered by a sense of history, personal identity, and the numerous Divine Interventions and Revelations that led up to the Jews being redeemed from Egypt. “If this is where we come from, and how God Has Helped us on so many occasions, then of course we wish to concretize this relationship and develop our peoplehood and worship of HaShem even more.”

            Ibn Ezra and Chizkuni reflect the perspective that the type of social contract, for this is what makes up the bulk of Parshat Mishpatim, that God Envisions for His People is the key selling point of the entire Tora system. When the thrust of Judaism is presented with social justice as the ideal, and with the goal that all people are to be treated equitably and fairly, Jews will naturally be drawn to accept and live by such a code, in all of its present and future manifestations. Perhaps the laws in Parshat Mishpatim are particularly attractive to those who have just emerged from a society in which slavery and discrimination were rampant, and who are looking for an alternative that holds out the potential for the formation of an exemplary, truly just nation.  

            Rabbeinu Bachaye imagines that what is most important to the Jews who have just experienced the exodus from Egypt, is the graphic and specific formulations of rewards and punishments associated with compliance and non-compliance with God’s Law. In his view, the examples of Mitzvot that the Jews are reminded of at this point in time are those that will be dependent upon living and cultivating the land of Israel—allowing it to lie fallow every seven years, declaring all produce that grows to be ownerless, the return of lands that have been sold to their original owners every 50 years, and the redemption and/or release of Jewish indentured slaves after they have rendered their requisite years of service or have had their debts retired. These particular laws share the common theme that God is the exclusive owner of all land and all people, an attractive conception to people who have just experienced harsh slavery themselves. However just as important as these laws and their underlying theological principle, is the delineation of the blessings and curses of the Tochecha. In Shemot 19:5, the people were promised a very esoteric reward, i.e., to be God’s Treasure. VaYikra 26 is graphic almost to a fault, (6) not only listing the tangible benefits, e.g., plentiful harvests and food, peace with one’s neighbors, the absence of predatory animals, and victory in battle, but also dire threats and potential terrors, e.g., disease, defeat in war, plagues of animals and insects, starvation, destruction of cities, and exile from the land. 

            So what would make the greatest impression on the Jewish people at Sinai—recounting Jewish history, a careful analysis of civil law and the imagining of the resultant society or an inventory of the consequences that either complying or not complying with the law will generate? A case could be made for each of these approaches, resulting in the differing views in the Midrash and amongst the commentators.

            While what actually took place at Sinai could have been one of these three particular approaches, or perhaps another tack that has gone unimagined by our primary sources and interpreters, for the contemporary Jew who is not only concerned about his/her biblical history, but also what will engender meaningful commitment on his/her part today, it is important to focus upon and constantly return to each of these approaches. While some of us might be more attracted to only one of these varied dimensions of Jewish culture and tradition, it would appear that they all have a role to play in guaranteeing our ongoing appreciation for our religion. And from a curricular perspective in terms of Jewish day schools, when one considers that at Sinai the aim was to influence the Jews to make a commitment to God and their people, we desire the same result for our children. Consequently it is important that their Jewish learning include elements designed to enhance and develop their Jewish identities, familiarize them with Jewish law and the philosophical conceptions that underlie it, and recognize that serious consequences can result from a way of life that is taken seriously and wholeheartedly.

              

 

(1) According to the Talmudic metaphor appearing in Shabbat 88a and Avoda Zara 2b, in which God “suspended” Mt. Sinai over the people and threatened to drop it on them unless they accepted the Tora, it would appear that whatever was said to them leading up to their acquiescence was irrelevant. Even were one not to take the Aggada literally, it could be understood to suggest that as a result of all of the plagues and miracles that the people had witnessed, there was no way that they could refuse to go along with God’s Demands. But according to Jewish tradition, there are “seventy faces to the Tora”, i.e., there are varied and even contradictory approaches for understanding the Tora’s words, at least with respect to the portions of the biblical text that are devoted to stories, as opposed to the Tora’s legal passages. The concern of the biblical commentators to clarify what was said, written, and read suggests that from their perspective, that the presentation did make a difference, and that the people had to be won over before they would agree to become God’s Treasure, a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation.

(2) Midrash Halacha on Sefer Shemot.

(3) The seven Noachide commandments are listed in Sanhedrin 56a—The Rabbis taught: Seven commandments were commanded to the descendents of Noach—the establishment of law courts to assure order within society, and prohibitions against blasphemy, idolatry, sexual promiscuity, murder, thievery and removing the limb from a living animal. R. Yochanan claims that these seven laws are derived from Beraishit 2:16, implying that the laws preceded even Noach, and originated with the beginnings of human civilization.

(4) From the phrase “…Sham Sam Lo Chok U’Mishpat…” (there He Gave to him [the Jewish people] a statute and a law…) the Rabbis in the Mechilta (see (1) above) and in Sanhedrin 56b posit that prior to the revelation at Sinai, the Jews were introduced to a representative sampling of commandments: Shabbat, Para Aduma (the Red Heifer), the need to establish law courts (this is in contrast to the requirement for courts that is part of the seven Noachide commandments. Since the actual laws that apply to Jews as opposed to non-Jews are different, even if there is an identical responsibility to establish courts for Jews and non-Jews, the laws that will be judged in these courts will be different, resulting in Dinim constituting a different commandment for each group), and respecting one’s parents.

(5) According to RaShI’s view with regard to the nature of the report that made Yitro decide to reunite Moshe with the rest of his family (RaShI on Shemot 18:1), i.e., that it was the accounts of the splitting of the Sea of Reeds and the war with Amalek, events that took place prior to the giving of the Tora at Sinai, then Chapter 18 would have been included in the material that Moshe wrote and read to the Jews. (According to those who maintain that the chapter discussing Yitro is out of order and in fact takes place following the giving of the Tora, this being the event that piqued his interest and drove him to seek out the encampment, then the Sefer HaBrit would conclude with Chapter 17.)

(6) The terrifying nature of the verses led to the custom for them to be read quietly and quickly. One of my teachers, R. Joseph Lookstein, Z”L, was fond of saying that it is for this reason that this section of the Tora should be read that much more slowly and loudly than any of the others, so that it can have maximum affect on those who are listening to the Tora reading!