Mishpatim: Which Gerim Shouldn’t We Oppress?

We're familiar with the Torah's repeated warnings about how we treat a ger. We assume that "ger" is one who converted to Judaism. But is this necessarily true? R' Avraham ben ha'Rambam begs to differ.

Feb 09, 2024

Article voiceover

1×

0:00

-8:02

The Torah content for this week has been sponsored by Isaac, out of Hakaras HaTov to Hashem for giving him a new job that will enable him to continue to learn and to grow.

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this article.

Artwork: *The Stranger in Israel*, by DALL-E 3 (OpenAI), based on my prompt co-written with ChatGPT4: “detailed oil painting that vividly depicts ancient Israelite society interacting with strangers, with clear visual differentiation between the two groups. Portray the Israelites in traditional attire such as tunics with fringes, head coverings, and sandals, using warm earth tones. Strangers should stand out, depicted in distinctly different attire, possibly in cooler tones or styles indicative of foreign lands. Set the scene in a lively marketplace of an ancient Israelite town, featuring stone buildings and a desert landscape. The interaction is key, showing a blend of hospitality and wariness, such as an Israelite extending a gesture of kindness to a stranger, with onlookers expressing a range of emotions. This oil painting should capture the nuanced dynamics of acceptance and skepticism, highlighting the themes of hospitality, mistrust, and the universal human experience of encountering the 'other,' all rendered with the rich textures and depth characteristic of oil paint.”

Mishpatim: Which Gerim Shouldn’t We Oppress?

Among the many mitzvos presented in Parashas Mishpatim is, “Do not mistreat a ger and do not oppress him, because you were gerim in the land of Egypt” (Shemos 22:20). Until this week, I assumed that the word “ger” (lit. “sojourner”) in this pasuk referred to a ger tzedek (lit. “righteous sojourner” or what we call a convert to Judaism). This is certainly the mainstream view. The Rambam identifies our pasuk as a source for two Biblical prohibitions: verbal maltreatment of the ger (Sefer ha’Mitzvos: Lo Taaseh #252) and monetary maltreatment of the ger (ibid. #253). He cites an example of this verbal abuse from Sifra: “You shall not say to him, ‘Yesterday you were an idolater, and now you have entered under the wings of the divine presence?!’” (Sifra Kedoshim 8:32). Elsewhere (Bava Metzia 59b), Chazal ask: “For what reason did the Torah issue warnings in 36 places – and some say in 46 places – with regard to [mistreating] a ger?” They answer: “mipnei she’suro ra,” which Rashi (meyuchas l’Rashi on Horiyos 13a) explains to mean that “the yetzer ha’ra of a ger is inclined to evil” from his upbringing. We are concerned that if a ger is mistreated, he may defect from Judaism and return to his former way of life. It is clear from these and other sources that Chazal held that the term “ger” in our pasuk refers to a Jewish convert.

Yet, there are a few commentators who understand the term “ger” in this context to extend beyond gerei tzedek. Ibn Ezra (Peirush Rishon to Shemos 22:20) writes: “The meaning of do not mistreat a ger is in reference to a ger toshav” – a non-Jew who formally accepts the seven mitzvos of Bnei Noach and resides in Israel – “for he has no help from his family.” Saadia Gaon[1] (Tafsir on Shemos 22:20) renders the term ger as “one who is not from the local population.” R’ Avraham ben ha’Rambam’s view (Shemos 22:20) is a hybrid of the two. He explains as follows:

[The word] “ger” is derived from hisgorerus (sojourning) in a foreign land. Its principal meaning is “a stranger vis-à-vis his dwelling.” [This term] was later extended to a ger tzedek, who entered the religion, as in, “when a sojourner sojourns among you and does a Pesach” (ibid. 12:48), because the common case [of a ger tzedek] is a stranger vis-à-vis his dwelling. The pshat (straightforward meaning) of the verse intended by “ger” here is a stranger vis-à-vis his dwelling, in accordance with the statement, “for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.” [However,] the transmitters [of the Oral Tradition] explained this as a reference to a ger tzedek. It is possible that this refers to both [meanings]: a regular stranger and a ger tzedek, and Chazal explained that this [refers to] verbal harassment and monetary extortion.

In other words, the pshat of the term “ger” is “an outsider who enters a non-native land.” From this usage was derived the secondary meaning: “an outsider who enters Judaism, a non-native religion.” R’ Avraham acknowledges that Chazal interpreted our pasuk in accordance with the second usage, but he nevertheless maintains that the message of the pasuk applies equally to the pshat, since it wouldn’t make sense for the pasuk to say: “for you were righteous converts in the land of Egypt.” Rabbi Moshe Maimon, editor of the critical edition of R’ Avraham’s commentary, elaborates in a footnote (224) on the implications of this approach:

Rabbeinu [Avraham ben ha’Rambam follows] his position that even the straightforward understanding of the pasuk has validity, and its prohibition is a [real] prohibition – even though it was not enumerated among the negative commandments, and even if we are not liable for such an individual like we would be liable for a prohibition that is explained by the kabbalah (received tradition) and the mesorah (transmission of the Oral Torah) … And since this is the case, Rabbeinu [Avraham] takes the side of saying that even a mere stranger vis-à-vis his dwelling – no matter who he is, whether a Jew or a ger toshav – is prohibited to be mistreated according to the implications of the pasuk.

R' Avraham’s pshat-driven interpretation of our pasuk is reminiscent of the Rashbam’s pshat-oriented approach, which he spells out in his introduction to Parashas Mishpatim (Shemos 21:1):

Let those who love intelligence know and understand that I have not come to offer halachic interpretations, even though they are the essence, as I explained in Bereishis (1:1) that haggados (homiletical teachings) and halachos can be derived from the superfluities of the Scriptural text; some of these can be found in the commentaries of R’ Shlomo (a.k.a. Rashi), my mother’s father, zt”l. [Rather,] I have come to explain the pshat of Scripture, and I will explain the laws and rules [of the Torah] in a manner that conforms to derech eretz (the natural way of the world). Nevertheless, the halachos are the essence, as our Rabbis said: “Halacha uproots [the pshat of] Scripture” (Sotah 16a).

The Rashbam feels free to give “natural interpretations” of the pesukim, even when these run contrary to the halachic interpretations recorded in the Oral Tradition, so long as we recognize the primacy of the authoritative halachic readings of the text.

In this instance, however, even the Rashbam interprets our pasuk as referring to a convert rather than a non-Jewish stranger, as he explains in his commentary: “do not mistreat [a ger] with words … the same is true for any Jew, but the pasuk speaks of the common case, since it is possible one will mistreat the ger [by bringing up] the deeds of his ancestors or his own deeds from when he was still a gentile” (Shemos 22:20). Rashbam’s reasons for rejecting R’ Avraham ben ha’Rambam’s reading of ger as stranger are not clear.

Now that we have a basis for broadening the Torah’s prohibition against mistreating gerim beyond the maltreatment of converts, we can appreciate the theme underscored by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks zt”l throughout his writings. Rabbi Sacks writes that one of the major contributions made by Judaism to the world is:

concern for the rights and welfare of the stranger. The Mosaic books never tire of this theme – the rabbis pointed out that whereas the Torah in one place commands love of the neighbor, in no fewer than thirty-six places it urges love of the stranger. “Do not oppress a stranger, because you yourselves know how it feels to be a stranger: you were strangers in Egypt” (Ex. 23:9). For the ancient world generally, even for such as Plato and Aristotle, strangers were aliens, beyond the radius of concern, unentitled to civil rights or citizenship. Few things would have been less intelligible to them than the principle that “the community is to have the same rules for you and for the stranger living among you … you and the stranger shall be the same before the Lord” (Num. 15:16). This is the second revolution of the Exodus, and part of Israel’s moral struggle against tribalism and its modern successor, xenophobic nationalism. Strangers, too, have rights and make a legitimate claim on our humanity, for we are all strangers to someone else. This is something Israel is expected not merely to know abstractly but to feel in the deepest recesses of its collective memory. “You yourselves were strangers in Egypt.” (The Jonathan Sacks Haggada: Collected Essays on Pesaḥ, p.32, from Building a Society of Freedom)

In the past, I regarded Rabbi Sacks’s comments about the Torah’s attitude toward “strangers” as largely his own extrapolation. I thought to myself: “Yes, the Torah values kindness, justice, and righteousness for all human beings, but don’t tell me that the pesukim about mistreating converts apply to any and all strangers! While it may be true that the Torah’s regulation of our conduct towards converts helps combat tribalism and xenophobia, let’s not pretend that the thirty-six places in the Torah that warn us about how we treat gerim are actually talking about our attitude towards all strangers.”

Now, after reading R’ Avraham ben ha’Rambam’s commentary, I see that these pesukim can, indeed, be read with a far broader scope and a more universal message. And I can’t help but think that we are most in need of this message at the present time.

[1] according to Rabbi Yom Tov Gindi’s Hebrew translation of Saadia Gaon’s Judeo-Arabic Tafsir (Project Saadia Gaon); the actual Tafsir states וַאלּגַ'רִיבֻּ פַלַא תַּג'בִּנהֻ וַלַא תַּצ'גַ'טהֻ, פַטַאלַמַא כֻּנתֻם גֻ'רַבַּאאַ פִי בַּלַדִ מִצרַ, but I don’t know Judeo-Arabic.

Let me know what you think!

The Rabbi Schneeweiss Substack

Discussion about this post