Rabbi Freedman’s Shabbat Message

​Parashat Mishpatim (lit. Judgments) marks a pivotal transition in the Torah, moving from the dramatic, theological revelation of the Ten Commandments at Mt Sinai to the concrete, detailed civil and criminal code that governs daily life. It serves as a foundational text in Jewish history, demonstrating that halakha (Jewish Law) is not merely about abstract belief or ritual, but is a comprehensive system designed to structure a just, moral, and holy society.
Mishpatim establishes that laws which safeguard us from others and establish legally acceptable norms in society (בֵּין אָדָם לְחָבֵרוֹ) are as divine in origin as ritual laws, such as Kashrut or Shabbat, i.e. laws that demonstrate our devotion and relationship with the Divine (בֵּין אָדָם לְמָקוֹם).
Rashi (France, 1040-1105) explains in his opening comment on the week’s sidra:
וְאֵלֶּה הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים אֲשֶׁר תָּשִׂים לִפְנֵיהֶם
And these are the laws which you should set before them. (Exodus 21: 1)

כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר “אֵלֶּה” פָּסַל אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, “וְאֵלֶּה” מוֹסִיף עַל הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, מָה הָרִאשׁוֹנִים מִסִּינַי, אַף אֵלּוּ מִסִּינַי

If the opening word of the section would have been written simply with the three letters word אֵלֶּה – meaning ‘these’ – then this would have demonstrated the beginning of a new and separate section disconnected from what had gone before. But where the word אֵלֶּה ‘these’, is written together with the conjunctive letter, the letter vav, (i.e. וְאֵלֶּה – ‘And these’) this demonstrates a relationship and connection with what was written previously. As a result, one can apply that principle here: that just as the Ten Commandments, found in the previous section of the Torah, were given by God to the Children of Israel at Mt Sinai, so all the laws written in Parashat Mishpatim (as well as all those included in the rest of the Five Books of Moses) can be said to have been handed down by God to the Israelites at Sinai.

So it is that in these two sidrot, Yitro and Mishpatim, we find the foundations of all Jewish Law – known universally as halakha.
As usual, terminology in Hebrew is fascinating and this case is no exception, for the word halakha means neither Jewish nor Law – this being the case, it is reasonable to ask – what then is its meaning and why was this word chosen to describe the entire Jewish legal code?
In attempting to answer this question, I recall a story about someone sitting in a kosher restaurant, perusing the menu. It read סטייק בקר עם חמאת שום – כל הכבוד which seemed to have been written by someone who knew a little Hebrew but clearly not enough. To help those who couldn’t understand the Hebrew text there was an English translation, which read – “Beef steak in garlic sauce – Well done.” The first part of the line in Hebrew was fine but the last two words were incorrect.
The words כל הכבוד Kol Hakavod are used in conversational Hebrew in a congratulatory way – “Well done!” or “Congratulations!” But here the restaurateur was not trying to compliment himself or the chef on the nature of the steak. That is not what was meant at all – the correct Hebrew would have made that obvious, namely –
סטייק בקר עם חמאת שום – מבושל היטב
i.e. that the steak was going to be cooked ‘well-done’ as opposed to rare or medium rare.
Let me return to the Hebrew for Jewish Law – הֲלָכָה (halakha). The word is a noun derived from the verb הלך (or in its infinitive form – לָלֶכֶת) meaning ‘to go’. Hence the word הֲלָכָה could be translated as ‘a going’, which is all well and good but does not seem to correspond at all with our normal translation – ‘Jewish Law’. While the verb is found hundreds of times in the Tanakh – הֲלָכָה as a noun never appears – it is a creation of post-Biblical Hebrew conjured up by the sages.
We find its use in the Mishna on a number of occasions. For example, in Mishna Eduyot 1:5 the Mishna asks why a minority opinion is recorded since וְאֵין הֲלָכָה אֶלָּא כְדִבְרֵי הַמְרֻבִּין the halakha always follows the majority opinion. Or there is the discussion in Mishna Peah (2:6) regarding the origin of a certain practice which the rabbis defined as הֲלָכָה לְמשֶׁה מִסִּינַי Halakha Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai i.e. a law for which there is no biblical reference or source, but, according to tradition, one that Moses received directly from God at Mt Sinai.
To give one more example – in Pirke Avot (The Ethics of the Fathers 6:3) the rabbis insist –
הַלּוֹמֵד מֵחֲבֵרוֹ פֶּרֶק אֶחָד אוֹ הֲלָכָה אַחַת אוֹ פָסוּק אֶחָד אוֹ דִבּוּר אֶחָד אוֹ אֲפִלּוּ אוֹת אַחַת צָרִיךְ לִנְהוֹג בּוֹ כָבוֹד
He who learns from another person one chapter of Mishna; a single halakha (i.e. one Jewish law); one verse from the Bible; a single word within a sentence; or even a single letter within a word – such an individual should show their regard and appreciation to their ‘teacher’ for what they have learnt.
These are just some examples from the Mishnaic period how the term הֲלָכָה is employed – but the question remains – what is the real meaning of the word and what is its relationship with the verb לָלֶכֶת to go?
There are a number of answers to this question but the first and most obvious one is that הֲלָכָה when translated literally, simply means ‘the way to go’ indicating some form of journey – for in religious terms it defines the direction in which Jews should travel and includes within it a system of instructions and decrees that are intended to guide the day-to-day life of every Jew.
A second idea reverses the first. Instead of הֲלָכָה directing the Jew – it is the Jew who directs הֲלָכָה. Halakha, by definition, is never static; it cannot be indifferent to changing circumstances, attitudes, social mores, scientific progress or other technical / political developments. All forms of law must adapt or they will become irrelevant. Nathan Roscoe Pound (1870-1964), universally recognized as one of the most important legal minds of the early twentieth century and considered by many to be the dean of American Jurisprudence famously said: “Law should be stable yet not standing still.” The word הֲלָכָה denotes this element of movement precisely – its success depends entirely upon its constant updating and reformation by the greatest rabbinic minds in every generation.
There is a third view that I would like to share with you. In his book, Not in Heaven: The Nature and Function of Halakha, Eliezer Berkovits proposes that there is a different kind of ‘movement’ that is required within Jewish Law and that is the shift from theoretical to practical.
Halakha is the bridge over which the Torah moves from the written word into the living deed. Even such an apparently easily understood commandment as לֹא-תַעֲשֶׂה כָל-מְלָאכָה Thou shalt do no kind of work on the Sabbath day requires lengthy explanation. There is an obvious need to define what is meant by “work.” As soon as one undertakes that task, one is involved in the confrontation between a real-life situation and a text. There are innumerable possibilities for human behaviour and action, innumerable human needs and problems arising from them. How to apply to them the specific definition of “work” requires further explanation and interpretation.
Halakha is therefore, the interpretation and application of Torah to life – and since there is no such thing as life in general, since it is always a specific form of life at a precise time in history, in a particular situation, Torah interpretation and application involves the journey from theory to practice, from uncertain and indefinite to unambiguous.
The result of this process is Halakhic Judaism.
Finally, a fourth view. It was pointed out by American scholar Rabbi Saul Lieberman (1898-1983) that the word הֲלָכָה may be related to a word found only once in the Tanakh in the Aramaic section of the Book of Ezra – a word that seems to refer to a special kind of tax.
כְּעַן יְדִיעַ לֶהֱוֵא לְמַלְכָּא דִּי הֵן קִרְיְתָא דָךְ תִּתְבְּנֵא וְשׁוּרַיָּא יִשְׁתַּכְלְלוּן–מִנְדָּה-בְלוֹ וַהֲלָךְ לָא יִנְתְּנוּן וְאַפְּתֹם מַלְכִים תְּהַנְזִק
Furthermore, the king should know that if this city is built and its walls are restored, no more taxes, tribute or duty (הֲלָךְ) will be paid, and eventually the royal revenues will suffer. (Ezra 4:13)
Rabbi Lieberman suggested that הֲלָךְ was a form of land tax to be paid to the sovereign and the amount was dependent on the area of land contained within the boundaries of the property. As such Rabbi Lieberman concluded that halakh – or its longer form halakha – refers to a ‘boundary fence’ and is derived from Aramaic rather than Hebrew.
Lieberman’s idea fits in very well with the principle objectives of Jewish Law – that every action performed in Judaism is either מוּתָּר mutar, ‘permitted’ or אָסוּר asur, ‘forbidden’.
The difference may be miniscule, but like a ball landing on the line or just inside the line during a tennis match which is then called ‘in’ and wins a point for the player, so an action that is determined by the rabbis to be within the ‘boundary lines’ of permissibility is acceptable in law and will gain the individual Jew a credit before God or man.
By contrast, how often have we seen in tennis a crowd gasp with disappointment when their favourite player loses a rally by putting the ball ‘out’, sometimes by just a millimetre? In law, such boundary lines also exist. Imagine if the speed limit on a particular stretch of road is 60 kilometres per hour and the police can prove that the driver is going 61. The difference seems miniscule and in a sense it is – but in legal terms the driver is in breach of the law and could face a fine or some other form of punishment.
Law is about remaining within the permitted limits – hence הֲלָכָה halakha, according to Rabbi Lieberman, originally indicated a boundary line or marker of some sort. Hence, the role of every Jew, who wishes to live according to Jewish Law, is to be aware of what is permitted and what is forbidden, and where the line is drawn between them. Observing Jewish Law means placing oneself inside that line – i.e. inside the court, so that no infringement takes place and every action is considered legally permissible or acceptable.
Perhaps each of these views can help us understand the nature of halakha – its centrality and continued importance to the character and psyche of the Jewish people.
Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits, quoted earlier, tried to explain why halakha exists and what it has done for our people since the days of Moses. Here is what he said:
The Torah is all-inclusive. It comprehends the entire life of the Jewish people. Halakha, therefore, has to interpret the intention of the Torah for all the areas of Jewish existence, spiritual, ethical, economic and socio-practical. It also has to define the functions and powers of the teaching and implementing authority envisaged by the Torah.
Halakha is Judaism’s attempt to bring God’s word down from heaven to earth. For here on earth, we know that perfection cannot be realized – the gulf between heaven and earth, between the spiritual and the material, is frankly too vast. But what halakha is valiantly struggling to achieve, is a narrowing of that gap to one as small as possible. Halakha is a series of signposts, to draw the Jew ever closer to immortality through spirituality and that alone is a valid reason for Jews to embrace and cherish Halakha. Through its observance, it offers Jews countless opportunities to merge the finite with the infinite and it advances the age-old dream of mankind that mortality can be extended, for when we observe halakha we are informed that our actions will be remembered long into the future – and when that happens we will be able to endure beyond the grave.

Shabbat Shalom
Rabbi David Freedman