Rabbi Eliakim KoenigsbergA Lack of Faith

In Parshas Mishpatim, the Torah outlines many of the basic halachic principles of civil law. But interestingly enough, it concludes its discussion with a brief mention of the mitzvos of shemitah and Shabbos. What do shemitah and Shabbos have to do with monetary matters?

The parsha begins, "And these are the laws that you shall place before them. (21:1)" Rashi quotes from Chazal that the letter vav (and) of "V'eileh hamishpatim" is meant to add to the previous parsha, to teach that just as the aseres hadibros were given at Sinai, so too, the rules of civil law were given at Sinai. Why must the Torah reinforce the fact that even the mitzvos of Parshas Mishpatim were given at Sinai? Would we think otherwise?

At the end of the parsha, the Torah seems to describe the events of matan Torah a second time. Moshe Rabbeinu goes up to Hashem on har Sinai, he comes down and tells the people about the mitzvos, and the people say na'aseh v'nishma. Why was it necessary to repeat the story that was already described in Parshas Yisro?

The Ramban (24:1) explains that the Torah is not simply rehashing the story of old. But rather, it is revealing the actual sequence of events. Before matan Torah, Hashem told Moshe to inform Klal Yisrael that He wants to give them the mitzvos and to designate them as a mamleches kohanim v'goy kadosh. The people accepted Hashem's request and they said na'aseh v'nishma. At matan Torah, Bnei Yisrael heard the aseres hadibros, and immediately afterward, they were given the monetary laws of Parshas Mishpatim, and they accepted all of these mitzvos and said na'aseh v'nishma a second time. Then Moshe wrote down all of these mitzvos and consummated the bris between Hashem and Klal Yisrael over these mitzvos. After completing this process, Moshe went up to Hashem on har Sinai and remained there for forty days, at which time he received the luchos and the rest of the Torah. (See Rashi who suggests differently that the account of matan Torah at the end of Parshas Mishpatim simply fills in some details that were omitted previously.)

According to the Ramban, there seems to be a link between the aseres hadibros and the monetary laws recorded in Parshas Mishpatim, and that is why they were given together to Klal Yisrael. What is that connection? Rav Moshe Feinstein (Darash Moshe) suggests that one who acts unscrupulously in monetary matters is not only transgressing mitzvos bein adam l'chaveiro; he is denying, in a sense, the very existence of G-d. He is kofeir b'Ikar. If a person were to fully internalize the reality that his livelihood comes from Hakadosh Boruch Hu and his yearly income is predetermined on Rosh Hashana (see Beitzah 16a), he would never violate a halacha related to monetary matters because he would realize that no financial gain will ever come from such behavior. It is only because a person thinks that his strength and his intelligence (kochi v'otzem yadi) bring him success, that he engages in unfair business practices, he cheats and steals and acts dishonestly, he refuses to give his fair share of tzedakah, and he is insensitive to the feelings of the convert, the widow and the orphan. In a sense, both a lack of integrity in monetary matters and a lack of concern for a fellow Jew stem from a lack of faith in Hashem.

Rav Moshe adds that this idea can help explain the comment of Chazal about the vav of "V'eileh hamishpatim". What Chazal meant to say is not simply that the vav implies that the monetary mitzvos of Parshas Mishpatim were also given at Sinai just like the aseres hadibros, but rather that the mitzvos of Parshas Mishpatim were given immediately after the aseres hadibros to demonstrate that there is a crucial connection between the two. The aseres hadibros begin with the mitzvah to believe in Hashem ("Anochi Hashem Elokecha") and the prohibition of avodah zara. By juxtaposing the monetary rules of Parshas Mishpatim with the aseres hadibros, the Torah is teaching that having a proper sense of emunah in Hashem can protect a person from financial impropriety or any other violation of mitzvos bein adam l'chaveiro. What's more, the very fact that the aseres hadibros themselves are split evenly between mitzvos bein adam l'Makom and mitzvos bein adam l'chaveiro may highlight this concept as well.

It is not surprising that after its discussion of civil law in Parshas Mishpatim, the Torah makes reference to the mitzvos of shemitah and Shabbos because both of these mitzvos are designed to strengthen our emunah in Hashem and to reinforce the notion that Hashem is in control of a person's financial well-being (see Sefer HaChinuch 32, 84). We rest every seven days and abstain from working Eretz Yisrael every seven years to show that we understand we are not in control, so taking a break from work will not affect our bottom line. By concluding its discussion of civil law with the mitzvos of shemitah and Shabbos, the Torah is giving a subtle hint that internalizing the message of shemitah and Shabbos - having a proper sense of emunah in Hashem - should naturally lead a person to act with greater integrity and sensitivity in his business practices as well.

The Torah's placement of the monetary mitzvos of Parshas Mishpatim between the aseres hadibros and the mitzvos of shemitah and Shabbos reveals a new perspective on mitzvos bein adam l'chaveiro. We tend to think that mitzvos bein adam l'Makom and mitzvos bein adam l'chaveiro are two separate and distinct parts of the Torah. But the precise placement of the monetary laws of Parshas Mishpatim demonstrates that the two actually have a strong connection to each other.

More divrei Torah from Rabbi Koenigsberg

More divrei Torah on Parshas Mishpatim