Professor Tucker addresses the challenge of laws that appear to be less uplifting than others, such as laws about a father selling his daughter into servitude, when it is permissible to beat a slave, and so forth. He refers to David Hartman z/l, who wrote that “Halacha should be engaged as an open-ended educational framework rather than a binding normative one”.
Rabbi Richman informs us that the nature of the text changes in Mishpatim, from storytelling to laws. In fact, the Torah interrupts itself from the Revelation to insert the long list of 53 laws, implying that they are attributes of the Law; details that God taught Moshe on top of the mountain.
Rabbi Sacks cites Rashi, stating that “you shall set before them” implies that you shall teach them the laws so that they understand them, not to simply memorize them. Furthermore, just as the Decalogue was given at Sinai, so were the details.
Rabbi Cohen informs us that Yitro, Shu’ayb in the Druze culture, is revered as both a prophet and a foundational figure. Yitro’s tomb, which is in Hittin, near Tiberias, is a site of pilgrimage, prayer, and study. The message of shared reverence for a single biblical figure demonstrates the potential for mutual respect and understanding
Rabbi Pardo was born in Amsterdam in 1626 and emigrated to Jamaica, at a time when Jews were gradually re-adopting religious practices after persecution in Spain and Portugal. His gravestone bears a quote from 2 Kings 22:2 – [he] “never turned right or left from the path of G-d.” That is a message that is particularly relevant today.
Rabbi Sacks writes that the Revelation at Sinai was unique in history. God spoke to an entire nation of individuals, not one individual. It had political significance, as well as religious significance; a new society was formed. The covenant with God superseded any political entity of power. Any king who violated Torah could be challenged.
Ariel Wernick observes that the text repeats the phrase about the Israelites crossing the Reed Sea. He refers to Targum Yonatan Uziel, which wrote that 2 Jews, Datan and Aviram, were happy in Egypt and refused to leave. When they were forced to leave against their will, the second phrase refers to the splitting of the sea a second time for them.
After all of God’s miracles and wonders, the Israelites seemed ready to leave. Yet, when they arrived at the Reed Sea, they had serious doubts, and berated Moses. Rabbi Simmons compares this to the Stockholm Syndrome, wherein the captives began to praise their captors.
The sages debate how exactly the people sang the Song of the Sea – repetitive, following along, responding with a standard conclusion for each verse. The manner in which it was sung depends on whether the song leader leads as a king, a person in authority, a parent. According to Rabbi Eliezer ben Taddai, Moses led the song like a father.
Devorah Abenhaim considers the fact that Moshe’s lineage in not mentioned at all until this parashah, despite the importance of lineage throughout the Torah. She cites Rabbi Hirsch, who stated that Moshe was not successful in his mission until this time. God reassured him of his coming success, which required that Moshe be perceived as a human being, rather than supernatural.