No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Torah (תורה) call a Jewish servant an "Eved Ivri" rather than using a name that reflects Sinai? The shiur develops that becoming an Eved Ivri reflects a pre-Sinai mentality—a rejection of personal responsibility. The mitzvah (מצוה) of shiluach avadim (sending the servant free after six years) reflects our acceptance of Sinai: we must ensure others embrace freedom and responsibility, not remain enslaved.
The shiur begins with a textual observation: Parshas Mishpatim opens with "V'eileh haMishpatim asher tasim lifneihem" without the usual introductory formula "Vayedaber Hashem (ה׳) el Moshe." This suggests the parsha is a continuation of Shemos 20:19, connecting the civil laws to the prohibition of idolatry at Sinai. Rashi (רש"י)'s comment that going to a non-Jewish court constitutes a form of avodah zarah supports this connection—Mishpatim itself is a detail within the prohibition against idolatry. The primary focus shifts to understanding the opening law: "Ki sikneh eved Ivri" (when you acquire a Hebrew servant). The language is peculiar—one doesn't "buy an eved Ivri"; rather, one buys a person whose purchase makes him into an eved Ivri. With an eved Kenaani (Canaanite servant), you can buy someone already enslaved, but here the transaction creates the status. Rashi offers an alternative reading: "eved of an Ivri" (a servant from a Jew), but rejects it based on other pesukim that clarify the law applies to selling a Jewish person himself, not acquiring someone else's servant.
Looking for the full summary?
Full access is available to members of the TUF Alumni Association or the Yam Hagadol Foundation.
Already a member? Let the admin know!
Dedicate a Shiur in Parsha
L'ilui nishmas a loved one. In honor of a simcha or yahrzeit. As a zechus for a refuah sheleimah. Your dedication helps carry Rabbi Zweig's Torah to learners around the world.
Why does the Midrash connect Pharaoh's expulsion of the Jews to the mitzvah of shiluach hakan? The shiur develops a chiddush that Pharaoh's sin wasn't only drowning the children, but the insensitivity of expelling the parents afterward. The deeper analysis reveals that Pharaoh may have valued the Jews greatly and wanted to control them—making his expulsion an act of tremendous cruelty, not liberation.
Why does Moshe respond to the splitting of the sea with shirah rather than praise or thanksgiving? Rashi's use of "al libo" reveals that shirah is an emotional expression—a response of love to love. When Hashem shows personal care, the only adequate response is "I love You too," not mere gratitude or praise, and this principle applies to all relationships.
Shemos 21:2 (Parshas Mishpatim)
Looking for the full transcript?
Full access is available to members of the TUF Alumni Association or the Yam Hagadol Foundation.
Already a member? Let the admin know!