Mishpatim
29 Shevat 5773 / Feb.
8-9, 2013
This week’s portion, Mishpatim,
is full of rules for the Israelite nation to adopt and follow, from how to
treat one’s parents, to the punishments for murder and thievery, to not
collecting interest on loans to fellow Israelites. A concept repeated more than once in the
portion is: “You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him for you were
strangers in the land of Egypt.”
Surprisingly (to me), a significant portion of Mishpatim’s
rules deal with how to treat one’s slaves.
For example, we learn that while you can’t kill your slave
outright, you can beat him. But, if in
doing so you poke out his eye or knock out his tooth, he gets to go free.
The Israelites had just been enslaved for hundreds of years
in Egypt. How could they possibly think
about enslaving others so soon after their exodus into freedom?
Some rabbinic commentators argue that the verses here don’t
deal with slavery as we’ve come to know it, but rather, indentured servitude
(I’ll note as a refutation to the concept that the word “eved” is used in the verses here to describe such a slave – just as
we say “avadim (plural of eved) hayiinu” on Passover when retelling the story of our own
enslavement).
The notion of indentured servitude is an interesting
one. Is such servitude any better than,
or any different than, slavery?
How does indentured servitude arise? In the Torah, it comes about when you owe
restitution to another, but don’t have the means to make the payment. For example, in Mishpatim, we learn that if a
thief is caught in the act during daylight hours, he must make
restitution. If he lacks the means, “he
shall be sold for his theft.”
While there is a distinction between a restitution payment
and a debt obligation payment, and while the notion of “working off a debt”
certainly makes more sense in agrarian societies where there are all manner of
field labors that need to be performed (and can be performed by everyone), can
we imagine a contemporary society where indentured servitude for unpaid debts
is the norm?
If you had no way of paying outstanding debt and defaulted
on a loan, would you go work for the lender or lending entity until you’ve paid
your debt off? Would you feel a sense of
responsibility for your outstanding obligation?
We jokingly see this in movies sometimes in the form of
washing dishes at a restaurant in order to pay off your check (think Mighty
Ducks 3). But as a more serious example,
there are many people currently defaulting on their student loan payment
obligations. In Biblical times, the
result of such defaults might have been indentured servitude (which in today’s
world might actually be deemed positive, as you could put a line on your resume
saying you “worked” at a bank, for the government, etc., assuming that one of
the primary reasons for default is lack of income due to under or
unemployment). Can you imagine some sort
of contemporary indentured servitude arrangement for those who default due to
an inability to pay what they owe?
My guess is that due to the personal autonomy we have in
America, coupled with laws that make slavery in its myriad forms illegal, it
would be quite a challenge to suggest that individuals serve as indentured
servants in order to pay off their accumulated debt. But it seems evident that the prospect of indentured
servitude as the potential consequence of failure to pay what we owe would
certainly make us a bit more cautious as it relates to how we treat others,
their property, and any debt we might willingly acquire.
I find it a struggle to stomach the notion that the rules of
enslaving others were given so shortly after securing our own freedom from
Egypt. However, if such rules can help
us place a value on treating others and their property well, borrowing modestly,
making timely payments, and honoring our debt obligations, those lessons ring
true and hold value for us today, despite societally no longer (thankfully) allowing
slavery in its myriad forms to legally exist.
No comments:
Post a Comment