Emancipating the Slaves/2

Emancipating the Slaves

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Political & Economic Considerations

Tzidkeyahu's decision to free the slaves stemmed from political and economic considerations rather than religious ones.

Sources:opinion rejected by ShadalYirmeyahu 34:8-21About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, MalbimYirmeyahu Beur HaInyan 34:8-21About R. Meir Leibush Weiser,

Historical background – These sources posit that the emancipation of the slaves took place while the nation was under siege by the Babylonians, in the tenth year of Tzidkeyahu's reign.¹

The political-economic incentive – These sources point to two distinct, but related incentives that led the people to free their slaves:

• Political - Malbim suggests that, during the siege, the king feared that the slaves might rebel and side with Nevuchadnezzer in order to free themselves of the yoke of debt² and bondage. Shadal alternatively brings an opinion that Tzidkeyahu freed the slaves since slaves are not particularly motivated to fight their enemies, while a free man will risk much to guard his freedom.
• Economic - During the siege, the slaves were a burden on their owners who had to house and feed them yet received almost no utility in return, as the fields which they normally worked lay outside the city, and were inaccessible due to the siege.

Why did they re-enslave the people? Yirmeyahu 37:5-8 speaks of a short reprieve from the siege, the result of Egyptian intervention.  When the siege lifted, it was no longer politically or economically expedient not to own slaves and so owners re-enslaved them.

"וַתַּעֲשׂוּ אֶת הַיָּשָׁר בְּעֵינַי" – Shadal questions this approach from verse 15 which states that Hashem found the nation's emancipation of the slaves pleasing, suggesting that the deed was done as a fulfillment of the Torah's obligation, and not simply for political benefit. The fact that the decision was accompanied by a covenant made in the Mikdash further suggests that there was a religious aspect involved.³  These sources might explian

"הָעֹבְרִים אֶת בְּרִתִי" – In these words Hashem might be emphasizing to the people that in re-enslaving the people, they were not simply reneging on promises they had made, but also breaking their covenant with Hashem.  Since the nation had not even thought about Torah laws throughout he episode, Hashem reminds them that they should have emancipated their slave not just because it was economically or politically expedient but because it is a Divine ordinance.

Measure for measure punishment

Religious Motives

Tzidkeyahu's emancipation of the slaves stemmed solely from religious motives and a (temporary) desire to abide by the Torah's laws.

Sources:Shadal, Prof. Y. Elitzur⁴

Timing of the story – According to Seder Olam Rabbah26About Seder Olam Rabbah, Tzidkeyau made the covenant to free the slaves in the seventh year of his reign, several years before the Babylonian siege began.⁵
They reach this conclusion by associating Yirmeyahu's rebuke in our chapter with Yechezkel's rebuke to the elders in Yechezkel 20, dated to the "seventh year":

• All the time markers in Sefer Yechezkel refer to the exile of Yeyohachin, which was the same year as the ascension of Tzidkeyahu. As such, an event dated to the "seventh year" would have occurred in the seventh year of Tzidkeyahu's reign.
• In our chapter Yirmeyahu tells the people, "כֹּה אָמַר י"י... אָנֹכִי כָּרַתִּי בְרִית אֶת אֲבוֹתֵיכֶם בְּיוֹם הוֹצִאִי אוֹתָם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם...  לֵאמֹר". Yechezkel similarly says, "וָאִוָּדַע לָהֶם בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם וָאֶשָּׂא יָדִי לָהֶם לֵאמֹר".
• Yechezkel repeatedly mentions how throughout history the nation has not observed Hashem's "Shabbatot".⁶  Though, in context, he appears to speaking about the weekly Shabbat, the word recalls the cycle of Sabbatical years and negligence in the freeing of slaves in the Jubilee years.

The religious incentive – As this approach disconnects the event from the Babylonian siege, it would seem that emancipation had nothing to do with any economic or political incentives related to the siege, but rather a sincere desire to repent.  It is possible that the dire political situation led the nation to reflect on their ways and look for ways to improve.

"וַתִּכְרְתוּ בְרִית לְפָנַי בַּבַּיִת אֲשֶׁר נִקְרָא שְׁמִי עָלָיו" – The fact that the ceremony to free the slaves took the form of a covenant which was made in the Beit haMikdash supports the idea that it was considered a religious deed.

" וַתַּעֲשׂוּ אֶת הַיָּשָׁר בְּעֵינַי " – The fcatthat the emancipation "found favor in Hashem's eyes" also supports that it was sincere and motivated by a desire ot abide by Hashem's laws.

Role played by Yirmeyahu – Though the verses do not explicitly mention that Yirmeyahu encouraged the nation to repent and observe the laws of slave emancipation, it is likely that he played a role.

Combination

Sources:Prof. Y. Elitzur⁷

Historical background – As above, this position maintains that the emancipation of the slaves took place while the nation was under siege by the Babylonians, in the tenth year of Tzidkeyahu's reign.

The religious incentive – Prof. Elitzur maintains that when catastrophe looked imminent, Yirmeyahu attempted to get the people to repent and observe Hashem's commands, telling them that observance could lead to their salvation.  Feeling desperate, the people finally heeded his words.⁸

Why this commandment – It is not clear why, of all commandments, Yirmeyahu chose to focus on the laws of slaves.  It is possible that this was simply one of many acts performed as part of a larger religious reformation, or that this was one of the major societal ills of the time.  Alternatively, the commandment was chose for its symbolic value, reminding the people of the Exodus and how Hashem freed the nation from bondage. As this is the act which provides the basis for all of Israel's obligations to Hashem, it was an appropriate command to have the nation observe as they began to repent.

"וַתִּכְרְתוּ בְרִית לְפָנַי בַּבַּיִת אֲשֶׁר נִקְרָא שְׁמִי עָלָיו" – The fact that the ceremony to free the slaves took the form of a covenant which was made in the Beit haMikdash supports the idea that it was considered a religious deed.

Why re-enslave the people? This approach, like the above, also connects the re-enslavement to the temporary lifting of the siege described in Yirmeyahu 37:5-8:

• Prof. Elitzur suggests that initially the nation attributed the lifting of the siege to the hand of God, assuming that, as Yirmeyahu promised, their observance of commandments brought with it miraculous salvation.  When they learned of the role played by the Egyptians, however, they were disillusioned, concluding that Egypt alone (and not Hashem) was the cause of their salvation.  Not recognizing that Hashem works through natural means, they thought Yirmeyahu ahd lied to them.  Moreover, as Yirmeyahu had constantly advised them not to seek Egypt's aid, they were further convinced that he was totally mistaken in his notions, leading them to return their old ways and re-enslave the people.
• One might suggest more simply that in times of crisis people are often willing to turn to Hashem,⁹ reflect, and change, yet when a crisis passes, they return to their old ways.¹⁰ 

Allusion to Covenant of the Pieces – It is not clear if the verses are intentionally alluding to the Covenant of the Pieces, or if the verses are simply describing the normal mode of cutting a covenant¹¹ in ancient times, which often involved cutting an animal and passing through its pieces. This position might suggest that Hashem intentionally alludes to the Covenant Between the Pieces when the first exile and bondage were foretold, to hint to the people that if they continue enslaving others, they will face a second exile.

¹ See Yirmeyahu 32:1-2 and verses 6-7 of our chapter which suggests that Babylonia had already attacked mucho f Yehuda.

² He assumes that most of those who were enslaved had been poor people who could not pay off their debts.

³ See Y. Elitzur, "מבחן האמונה בירושלים ערב חורבנה" in מחניים מ"ז, תש"כ.

⁴ See Y. Elitzur, "מבחן האמונה בירושלים ערב חורבנה" in מחניים מ"ז, תש"כ.

⁵ According to this approach, our chapter is not chronological, as Yirmeyahu 32:1-2 is dated tot he 10 years, when the siege began and verses 6-7 here imply that the Babylonians have already attacked much of Yehuda.However, since much of Sefer Yirmeyahu is explicitly achornological, this is not necessarily any more of a question here than anywhere else in the  book.  [For a discussion of the book's structure, see Structure – Sefer Yirmeyahu.]

⁶ See verses 13, 16, 21 and 24.

⁷ See Y. Elitzur, "מבחן האמונה בירושלים ערב חורבנה" in מחניים מ"ז, תש"כ.

⁸ N. Leibowitz, Iyyunim in Sefer Bereshit (Jerusalem, 1992): 296-297, further suggests that in times of crisis, when facing an enemy, feelings of solidarity grow, leading the people to view their slaves as brothers and equals.

⁹ See Yirmeyahu 2:26-27, how Hashem chides the people for leaving Him when all is peaceful, and remembering him only when things are bad: "וּבְעֵ֤ת רָעָתָם֙ יֹֽאמְר֔וּ ק֖וּמָה וְהוֹשִׁיעֵֽנוּ".

¹⁰ One might look to Paroh as an example.  During each plague he tells Moshe that he is willing to let the people go, yet as soon as the plague passes he changes his mind.

¹¹ See Treaties in Tanakh and the Ancient Near East for elaboration.