Rabbi Sara started off by saying that this is a very difficult section of the Torah. We should keep in mind that the Torah is talking about a hierarchical society which does not value individualism.

Verse 16 implies that a kidnapper, a “person stealer”, is not the only guilty party – that the person who receives the stolen goods (i.e. the stolen person) is also guilty and will surely be put to death. The meaning of the Hebrew is a bit unclear, hinging on the translation of the letter “vav”. The passage might also mean “whether the kidnapper has sold him or is still holding him” as the JPS states.

Rabbi Myra mentioned that kidnapping makes us think of the Joseph story and cautioned against the idea that stealing another human being is part of God’s plan.

We had a long discussion about the Biblical conception of slavery and how it differs from chattel slavery as practiced in the US before the Civil War. We concluded that slavery in the Torah could perhaps best be described as a kind of indentured servitude. It was time-limited, often engaged in to repay a debt or to ensure that children a family could not afford to support would be fed and taught a useful skill or trade. As such, the system could be mutually beneficial and socially advantageous. We kept in mind that women could be slaves for life, but that they belonged to men anyway, just as children belonged to their parents.

In verse 17 we discussed the translation of the word “to insult” one’s parents. It could also mean curse, dishonor, repudiate, etc. The Hebrew word has a huge semantic field and certainly does not mean insulting one’s parents in a casual way. Later Rabbis made the circumstances of the offense so narrow that the punishment of death would never be carried out.

We had a long discussion of the ways that the Rabbis operated within the larger secular society. They could not, for example, condemn anyone to death. The Torah was written for an autonomous society where the priests did have ultimate authority. Orthodox Jews today refer to the Talmud and the Mishnah to interpret the Torah and define terms. In some sense, the Rabbis rewrote the Torah. But to the Orthodox, every word in the Torah is still “true” because the Rabbis had divine authority.

Verses 18 and 19 describe civil, not criminal penalties. We are dealing with punishment for a quarrel, an unpremeditated conflict, a more nuanced situation even though it is violent.

Verse 20 makes it clear that although a slave is his master’s property, he is not an animal. His owner cannot kill him. We do not know exactly what is meant here when the Torah says if a man kills his slave, “he must be avenged’. Rabbis disagree as to whether it means the master himself should be killed or whether he should be otherwise punished. Rabbi Myra pointed out that the ultimate owner of any human being is the Almighty. However, if the slave dies later after being struck by his owner (verse 21) he reverts to being just property!

We discussed how Orthodox rabbis today disagree amongst themselves just as the medieval ones did. A contemporary Orthodox Jew can “rabbi shop” (like “judge shopping”) to find a community with certain ways of interpreting laws as opposed to other interpretations.

Verse 22 can be used to illustrate the Jewish view of personhood. The punishment for causing a miscarriage is paying a fine equal to the monetary value that the husband places on the lost fetus. On the other hand, in the very next verse, we see that “other damage” to the woman (i.e. life outside the womb) is assessed “life for life.” You cannot atone for killing a woman merely by paying a fine. Thus, we can see from this passage that a fetus is not a person. (If a fetus were a person, capital punishment would apply for destroying it.)

When does an infant become a person? There are three different views in Judaism: when the baby crowns, when the baby takes the first breath, or when the baby reaches the age of 30 days. (I can’t find in my notes when each applies…)

We discussed the famous “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth…” passage. It has been quoted so much out of context. None of us realized that it came in the context of accidentally striking a pregnant woman! Rabbi Myra pointed out that ONLY reciprocal punishment could be enacted; there could not be unlimited vengeance. Furthermore, the Rabbis later negated all of this by circumscribing when the sentencing applied. The result was that the punishments would essentially never be carried out. Edna read an interesting passage from Everett Foxx contrasting this passage with the Babylonian law codes, under which the rich could buy their way out of punishment regardless of the crime.

Verses 26 and 27 truly illustrate how slavery in the Torah differs from U.S. chattel slavery. A slave owner in the Torah could not abuse his slave in even the smallest way, such as by knocking out his tooth. If he harmed his slave physically, he would be forced to let his slave go free. He would lose a very valuable commodity.

Slavery in the American South was uniquely cruel, and the legacy of that system is very recent. As we enter the Passover season, we are called to imagine that we ourselves were enslaved.

American Jews must fight alongside American people of color to rid the country of that evil legacy.