Behar: The Torah’s Double Standard for Slave Labor (Part 1: Questions)
Behar: The Torah’s Double Standard for Slave Labor (Part 1: Questions)
The Egyptians oppressed us with a harsh form of labor called "avodas parech." We are prohibited from oppressing Jewish debt-slaves with such labor, but NOT non-Jewish slaves. Why not?
The Torah content from now through Lag ba'Omer has been generously sponsored by Malky M. June is less than a month away which means that I'll soon be transitioning into "summer writing mode," with more substack articles and fewer recorded shiurim. The bulk of these articles will remain free. However, if you would like to support my Torah AND gain access to additional spicy written content, consider becoming a paid subscriber today!
Click here for a printer-friendly version of this article.
Due to some unforeseen circumstances — and due to the inordinate amount of time it took me to finish yesterday’s article on magic — I will not be able to complete today’s article in time for Shabbos. Instead, here’s Part 1 which presents the facts and the questions. God willing, I will publish the completed version of this article early next week.
Behar: The Torah’s Double-Standard for Slave Labor (Part 1: Questions)
Note: This article will not address the more basic question of why the Torah permits slavery. For a concise explanation, read the short excerpt from Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks zt”l at the beginning of last year’s article, Behar: The Prohibition to Free a Canaanite Slave. For my general approach to answering such questions, check out my recent shiur, How the Seemingly Outdated Elements of Torah Are Evidence of Its Perfection.
The Torah’s presentation of the laws of an eved Ivri (Jewish servant) concludes with a prohibition:
If your brother becomes impoverished with you and is sold to you, you shall not work him with slave labor. Like a laborer or a resident shall he be with you; until the Jubilee Year shall he work with you. Then he shall leave you, he and his children with him; he shall return to his family, and to his ancestral heritage shall he return. For they are My servants, whom I have taken out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold in the manner of a slave. You shall not subjugate him b’farech – you shall fear your God. (Vayikra 25:39-43)
The paragraph continues with the laws of an eved Canaani (a non-Jewish slave), but concludes similarly:
Your slave or your maidservant whom you may own, from the gentiles who surround you, from among them may you purchase a slave or a maidservant. Also from among the children of the residents who live with you, from them you may purchase, from their family that is with you, whom they begot in your land; and they shall be yours as an ancestral heritage. You shall hold them as a heritage for your children after you to inherit as a possession, you shall work with them forever; but with your brethren, the Children of Israel – a man with his brother – you shall not subjugate him b’farech. (ibid. 25:44-46)
It is clear from the Written Torah that we are forbidden to work an eved Ivri with avodas parech, but this prohibition does not extend to an eved Canaani. What is avodas parech? Rambam (Hilchos Avadim 1:6) explains:
It is prohibited to work any eved Ivri b’farech. What is avodas parech? This is labor without a set limit or labor which [the master] doesn’t need, but rather, one’s intent is just to keep him working so that he’s not idle.
From here the Sages said that he shouldn’t tell him, “Dig under these vines until I come back” – for he didn’t give him a limit; rather, he should say to him, “Dig until such-and-such a time” or “until such-and-such a place.”
Likewise, he should not say to him, “Dig this spot,” but he doesn’t need it. Even to warm up a cup of water or cool it for him, if he doesn’t need it – this is prohibited, and one transgresses a Torah prohibition, as it is stated, “you shall not work him b’farech” – you are only permitted to make him do something with a set limit that you need.
Similarly, if [a Jewish slave] were sold to a non-Jew, if the non-Jew worked him b’farech, [every] Jew is commanded to prevent [the non-Jew from doing this], and if [the Jew] leaves him [without intervening], he transgresses a Torah prohibition, as it is stated, “he shall not subjugate him b’farech in your sight” (Vayikra 25:53). [However,] we are not required to enter the non-Jew’s property to check after him that he is not working [a Jew] b’farech, as it is stated, “in your sight” – meaning [that this prohibition only applies] when you see.
The question is: Why the double standard? If it is wrong to work a Jewish slave b’farech, why isn’t it wrong to do the same to a non-Jewish slave? Moreover, shouldn’t we Jews be especially opposed to avodas parech, given our experience in Egypt? The only other time in Torah where the term parech is mentioned is in the description of our Egyptian slavery: “Egypt enslaved Bnei Yisrael b’farech, and they embittered their lives with harsh labor – with mortar and bricks and all work in the field – all the work that they worked them with was b’farech” (Shemos 1:13-14). The bitterness we experienced from the avodas parech was so intense that we were commanded to memorialize it through the mitzvah of maror. How can we oppose avodas parech when it is done to our own people but subject our non-Jewish slaves to this form of slave labor?
I thought these were powerful questions. To my shock, I have not found a single explicit answer in the writings of Chazal, the Rishonim, or the Acharonim. Nevertheless, I have three approaches that I’d like to share … next week!
How would you answer these questions?
Like what you read? Give this article a “like” and share it with someone who might appreciate it!
Want access to my paid content without actually paying? If you successfully refer enough friends, you can get access to the paid tier for free!
Interested in reading more? Become a free subscriber, or upgrade to a paid subscription for the upcoming exclusive content!
If you've gained from what you've learned here, please consider contributing to my Patreon at www.patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss. Alternatively, if you would like to make a direct contribution to the "Rabbi Schneeweiss Torah Content Fund," my Venmo is @Matt-Schneeweiss, and my Zelle and PayPal are mattschneeweiss at gmail. Even a small contribution goes a long way to covering the costs of my podcasts, and will provide me with the financial freedom to produce even more Torah content for you.
If you would like to sponsor a day's or a week's worth of content, or if you are interested in enlisting my services as a teacher or tutor. Thank you to my listeners for listening, thank you to my readers for reading, and thank you to my supporters for supporting my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone.
-----
Substack: rabbischneeweiss.substack.com/
Patreon: patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss
YouTube: youtube.com/rabbischneeweiss
Instagram: instagram.com/rabbischneeweiss/
"The Stoic Jew" Podcast: thestoicjew.buzzsprout.com
"Machshavah Lab" Podcast: machshavahlab.buzzsprout.com
"The Mishlei Podcast": mishlei.buzzsprout.com
"Rambam Bekius" Podcast: rambambekius.buzzsprout.com
"The Tefilah Podcast": tefilah.buzzsprout.com
Old Blog: kolhaseridim.blogspot.com/
WhatsApp Content Hub (where I post all my content and announce my public classes): https://chat.whatsapp.com/GEB1EPIAarsELfHWuI2k0H
Amazon Wishlist: amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/Y72CSP86S24W?ref_=wl_sharel
Really important topic, yashar koach for taking it up.
A small point, I don't think that Eved Ivri should be translated as a debt slave since a Jew cannot be sold to pay a debt (and may not use the money from selling himself to pay debts), in the case of a ganav who can't pay, he is sold by the court as a punishment not merely because he has a debt .
Possible answer that came to my mind based on how the pesukim present the prohibition (the first group you quoted):
The guidelines of how to treat a Jewish slave seems to tied to a unique quality of a Jew: his ancestors were slaves in Mitzrayim.
If the ta’am of the mitzvah is not about cruelty but rather to avoid a reenactment of the slavery in Mitzrayim, then it makes sense - the issue isn’t a Jew inflicting עבודת פרך, but a Jew experiencing עבודת פרך. In other words, although the Torah obviously objects to the cruelty of עבודת פרך, this mitzvah is not about that; rather the mitzvah is designed to preclude the possibility of a Jew re-experiencing the slavery of Mitzrayim.