Who was Enslaved in Egypt/2

Who was Enslaved in Egypt?

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Overview

Commentators disagree regarding who was enslaved in Egypt and this impacts their understandings of the nature of the bondage as a whole.  While the majority of exegetes assume that the entire nation were slaves and view the experience as being extremely oppressive in both scope and intensity, not all agree.  R"Y Bekhor Shor asserts that the Israelites worked in shifts.  Each worked for Paroh for a period of weeks and then returned home.  As such, individual Israelites were not always enslaved and had time for themselves and their families.  Ralbag presents a third possibility, that Paroh had instituted a monetary tax and only those who could not pay it labored for Paroh instead.  Thus, someone who was wealthy might have never worked for Paroh.

Rotation

The Israelites worked for Paroh in a rotation.  Each labored for several weeks or months at a time and then was free to go home until the next shift.

Sources:R. Yosef Bekhor ShorShemot 1:11-14About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RambanShemot 1:10-14Shemot 5:4About R. Moshe b. Nachman

וַיָּשִׂימוּ עָלָיו שָׂרֵי מִסִּים – These commentators understand this to refer to a labor tax rather than a monetary one.¹

Biblical parallels – R"Y Bekhor Shor compares this labor tax to that of Shelomo when building the Beit HaMikdash where the people would work for one month and then return home for two,²  while Ramban instead compares it to Shelomo's taxing of the foreigners in his land.³  According to both, Paroh's actions were not all that different from that of other monarchs who forced certain segments of the population to work for them for set periods of time.

Were the Israelites the only ones taxed? R"Y Bekhor Shor asserts that the rest of the Egyptians also paid a tax to Paroh, giving a fifth of their crops to the king.⁴  Precisely because the Children of Israel were exempt from this, they were instead forced to build the storehouses for this wheat.⁵  Even R"Y Bekhor Shor agrees, however, that the forced labor later intensified and extended to other types of work including sowing and irrigation.

Own homes and possessions – R"Y Bekhor Shor explains that since the Israelites were not always working for Paroh, they had their own homes and possessions⁶ and the time to support their own families as well.⁷  In fact, Hashem's command that the Israelites request vessels "מִגָּרַת בֵּיתָהּ", suggests that they might even have had Egyptian tenants.⁸

Freedom of movement – This position could explain that Aharon had the freedom to meet Moshe in the desert because he was not working at the time.  Aharon would not have been unique; many others at any given time might also have been able to leave the country for a short period.

"לְכוּ לְסִבְלֹתֵיכֶם" – After Moshe and Aharon request leave for a three day holiday, Paroh refuses and then tells then "לְכוּ לְסִבְלֹתֵיכֶם", suggesting that even Moshe and Aharon were among those who were enslaved.  Ramban explains that when Moshe and Aharon had come to Paroh, they were accompanied by some of the laboring Israelites, and it was them that Paroh was telling to return to work.

Did women and children work as well? Though these sources do not address the question, they would likely posit that the building was limited to men as in other cases of conscripted labor.  This would explain how Yocheved and Miriam⁹ appear not to be enslaved in Shemot 2.

Payment to Yocheved – According to this position many Israelites might have worked when not laboring for Paroh so Paroh's daughter's offering of money to Yocheved for nursing was simply a  normal transaction made between free citizens.

Relations with other Egyptians – This position allows for the possibility that some lay Egyptians and Israelites might have been on neighborly terms as the Israelites were not necessarily viewed as particularly degraded members of society.¹⁰  As such, this position might explain that the word "רֵעֵהוּ" in Hashem's command "יִשְׁאֲלוּ אִישׁ מֵאֵת רֵעֵהוּ וְאִשָּׁה מֵאֵת רְעוּתָהּ" refers to friends.¹¹

Harshness of the enslavement – R"Y Bekhor Shor and Ramban learn from the phrase, "וַיַּעֲבִדוּ מִצְרַיִם אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּפָרֶךְ" that the conditions during the periods of forced labor were unusually harsh and that the slaves were given no time to rest.  Ramban also posits that in a second stage of the bondage, Paroh allowed individual Egyptians to enslave Israelites to work for them personally when desired.

How did rotating laborers accomplish Paroh's goal? R"Y Bekhor Shor claims that Paroh hoped to tire out the people so they would not have the energy at night to have relations and reproduce.¹²  This, however, is difficult, considering that they could do so during the months that they were free from work totally.  One might explain instead that Paroh was not mainly concerned about the size of the Israelite population, but about the potential that they would fight against him in periods of war.  Having a decent portion of the nation enslaved at any one time reduced this concern.

Purpose of punishment

• This depiction of the slavery raises the possibility that Paroh was not being punished for extremely cruel treatment of the Israelites but rather for not recognizing Hashem and granting the Israelites leave to worship Him. 
• Ramban might suggest that it was not the State sponsored slavery that was being punished but the expanding of the bondage to individuals.

"בֵּית עֲבָדִים" – The description of Egypt as a "house of bondage" is somewhat difficult for this approach, especially if one posits that such labor taxes were common elsewhere.  These sources might respond that Egypt was unique in enforcing the tax for hundreds of years and for the unusually harsh conditions during the periods of labor.

Needy

The Israelites were expected to pay a monetary tax to Paroh; only those who could not afford it worked instead.

Sources:RalbagShemot Beur HaMilot 1:11-14Shemot Beur HaParashah 1:11-22About R. Levi b. Gershom, HaKetav VeHaKabbalahShemot 1:11Shemot 1:13About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg¹³

"וַיָּשִׂימוּ עָלָיו שָׂרֵי מִסִּים" – These sources understand "מִסִּים" to refer to a monetary tax.¹⁴

"וַיִּבֶן עָרֵי מִסְכְּנוֹת לְפַרְעֹה" – Those who did not have the finances substituted a labor tax, building store houses for Paroh.  Ralbag implies that much of the nation fell into this category, as it was possible that Paroh collected money from the people every day.

Biblical parallels

• The concept that a foreign minority might have to pay a tribute to the controlling majority occurs often when one country subdues another.  In Egypt, however, the Israelites had not been conquered by Egypt but rather come to live peacefully.
• The idea that a person without monetary means might substitute work for payment, finds its parallel in the laws of slaves, where a person can sell himself if he finds himself in debt.  In Egypt, however, the Israelites had no real control over being in "debt", as the tax stemmed from Paroh as well.

Freedom of movement – According to this position, those who could afford the monetary tax had no responsibilities to Paroh and were free to go where they pleased.  This could explain Aharon's ability to meet Moshe out of Egypt.

Own homes and possessions – Ralbag implies that after finishing their daily labor quotas the Israelites would return to their personal homes, suggesting that even those who worked did not live on site.

Did women and children work as well?

Relationship to other Egyptians – This position might assert that those Israelites who could afford the monetary tax and were not enslaved were not looked down upon by the neighboring Egyptians.  However, since a significant portion were, the nation as a whole held a degraded status.

How was this to accomplish Paroh's goal? According to Ralbag, Paroh allowed his officers to force the people to work beyond the limits of the law and gave them back-breaking types of labor which required much effort because this would ruin the people's health, lessening their seed.  Thus, even though some Israelites were exempt and did not physically suffer, Paroh hoped that the significant portion of Israelites who worked would be weakened and propagate less.

Harshness of the slavery – While Ralbag focuses on the physical burdens the Israelites were forced to bear,  HaKetav VeHaKabbalah points to emotional pain as well. He understands the root "פרך" to mean "stop"¹⁵ and explains that the Egyptians would constantly stop the Israelites mid-project to work on another one.  This moving from job to job without ever seeing their labor come to fruition was just as painful to the soul as the hard toil was to their bodies.

"רָאֹה רָאִיתִי אֶת עֳנִי עַמִּי אֲשֶׁר בְּמִצְרָיִם וְאֶת צַעֲקָתָם" – Ralbag would explain that the verse speaks of the nation as a whole because even if some were not enslaved, the majority were worked beyond their endurance daily.

Everyone

The entire Israelite nation was enslaved.

Sources:RashiShemot 1:11-13Shemot 5:4About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, R. Yosef ibn KaspiShemot 1:11-14About R. Yosef ibn Kaspi, R. BachyaShemot 1:10About R. Bachya b. Asher, AbarbanelShemot 1About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, SefornoShemot 1:11-14About R. Ovadyah Seforno, ShadalShemot 1:11-14Shemot 5:4About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, R. S"R HirschShemot 1:11-14About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch, R. David Zvi HoffmannShemot 1:11-14About R. David Zvi Hoffmann¹⁶

"וַיָּשִׂימוּ עָלָיו שָׂרֵי מִסִּים" – These sources split with some suggesting that this refers to a labor tax¹⁷ and others claiming it points a monetary one.¹⁸  The former understand the phrase "וַיִּבֶן עָרֵי מִסְכְּנוֹת לְפַרְעֹה" to be  a description of the labor tax, while the latter assumes it refers either to a second stage of the oppression¹⁹ or to the work which the people's monies were funding.²⁰

Were the Israelites the only ones taxed? This position assumes that the Israelites were singled out to be oppressed.²¹  This works with the fact that the verses present the oppression as a solution to the demographic problem presented by the Israelites in particular.  See also R. Hirsch²² who asserts that the root "פרך" means to separate²³ and that through the bondage, Paroh separated the Israelites from the rest of Egyptian citizens who still had personal rights.

Freedom of movement – Rashi, following R. Yehoshua b. Levi, explains that Aharon had freedom of movement since the tribe of Levi were not included in the bondage.  The other commentators might explain that the elderly (Aharon was over 80) were exempt from the work tax.²⁴

Did women work as well? This position might suggest that even women were enslaved.  See R. Shemuel b. Nachmani in Bavli SotahSotah 11bAbout the Bavli who suggests that "עבודת פרך" refers to the switching of male and female labor roles.²⁵  If so, it is not clear how Yocheved was free to nurse Moshe for the daughter of Paroh.  This position might suggest that the princess simply took her from a different task to work for her.  The fact that she paid her, rather than simply assuming that the work was expected of a slave, might relate to the princess' own personal conscience and not be indicative of how the larger Egyptian populace would have acted.

Own homes and possessions – If the Israelites were slaves to the State rather than to individuals,²⁶ it is possible that they daily returned to their own homes.  It is not clear, however, how they would have had time or money to amass and care for individual possessions or cattle.  If the enslavement was a gradually worsening process, it is possible that they still owned possessions from the time that they were free or partially free. In addition, it is possible that Paroh's work ended at nightfall, and the Israelites tended to their own after dark.

How was this to accomplish Paroh's goal? With the entire nation in bondage, Paroh hoped that they would be too weak and tired to procreate.  In addition, in their physically and emotionally degraded state it would be hard for them to fight against him in case of war.

Relationship to other Egyptians – If the entire nation was enslaved it is likely that the average Egyptian disparaged them.  R. Hirsch notes that through the enslavement, "הללו הוכרזו כאינם שייכים לגזע האנושי" (these were announced as not belonging to the human race).  Seforno similarly posits that with each degrading action, it became easier to view and treat the Israelites as slaves.

Harshness of the slavery – This position views the slavery as being harsh due to both its all inclusive nature and the cruel conditions.

"רָאֹה רָאִיתִי אֶת עֳנִי עַמִּי אֲשֶׁר בְּמִצְרָיִם וְאֶת צַעֲקָתָם" – This position reads this verse simply to refer to the cries of the entire nation.

Purpose of punishment – This approach might view the punishment as mainly retributive in nature; the country was plagued for the Egyptians' unfair treatment of the Israelites.

"בֵּית עֲבָדִים" – According to this approach, this term is an apt description of Egypt.

¹ This seems to be the way the word is used throughout Tanakh.  In several places a labor force is explicitly mentioned as part of the "מס", as in Yehoshua 16:10, Melakhim I 5:27, and Melakhim I 9:21. Elsewhere, people are taken as "מס" suggesting that there too labor is referred to.  See, for example, Shofetim 1:28-35 or Yeshayahu 31:8.

² See Melakhim I 5:27.

³ See Melakhim I 9:21.

⁴ See Bereshit 47:13-26.

⁵ R"Y Bekhor Shor implies that the labor tax came at the insistence of the Egyptian people who resented the Israelites' exemption.  This suggests that Yosef's nepotism towards his family ultimately resulted in their enslavement.  See Yosef's Economic Policies for elaboration.

⁶ See Shemot 2:1-2, 9:6, 10:9, and 12:3-4 which speak of Israelite residences and cattle.

⁷ R"Y Bekhor Shor writes: "והא ליכא למימר שהיו תדיר בעבודה, דאם כן, מתי יעשו לביתם ומי יפרנסם."

⁸ See Ibn Kaspi Shemot 3:22.

⁹ It is not clear how old Miriam is at this stage in the story,  If she was but a youngster, she would presumably not have been working regardless.

¹⁰ Nonetheless, as some apparently heeded Paroh's decree to throw Israelite babies into the Nile, there must have been a significant number who viewed the Israelites negatively.  Ramban presents this as the result of Paroh's process of progressively harsh decrees, but also suggests that the decree of genocide only lasted for a short time

¹¹ See Josephus in Reparations and Despoiling Egypt who explains that the Egyptians did in fact willingly give gifts to the Egyptians out of friendship.

¹² In R"Y Bekhor Shor's comments to verse 11, he implies that during the periods of forced labor the enslaved did not return home at all, let alone come home tired at night.

¹³ HaKetav VeHaKabbalah cites Ralbag.

¹⁴ There is not much evidence for this usage in Tanakh, except perhaps in Esther 10:1.  See the Hoil Moshe who points out that in Tanakh a tribute or monetary fine is referred to as a מנחה or מכס.

¹⁵ He points out that the word פרוכת comes from the same root, and functions as a barrier, or stop, between two spaces.

¹⁶ None of these sources say explicitly that the entire nation was enslaved, but that seems to be their working assumption.

¹⁷ See Rashi, Ibn Kaspi, Seforno, Or HaChayyimShemot 1:11-14About R. Chayyim b. Atar, Shadal, and R. D"Z Hoffmann. Or HaChayyim uniquely understands the "שָׂרֵ֣י מִסִּ֔ים" to refer to the Israelites themselves, rather than officers who were in charge of them.  Originally, the Israelites were put in charge of other laborers who were similarly taxed to work for the king.  This, though, was a  ruse, to ensure that whatever work was not complete would be completed by the Israelite "officers" who slowly found themselves burdened with more and more work until they became not officers but simply slaves.

¹⁸ See R. Bachya, Abarbanel, and Rav Hirsch.

¹⁹ See R. Bachya and Abarbanel.

²⁰ See R. Hirsch.  He does agree that eventually the people were enslaved to do hard labor as well, as seen in the verse, "וַיַּעֲבִדוּ מִצְרַיִם אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּפָרֶךְ".

²¹ See, however, Or HaChayyim in the above note who suggests that originally they were not all that different from others who were taxed to work for the state, but eventually they found themselves with a much larger work burden.

²² See also Ibn Kaspi.

²³ He points to the shared root with the word "פָרֹכֶת" whose function is to separate.

²⁴ This might be different form other models of slavery where one is enslaved until death.

²⁵ See also Tanchuma.

²⁶ R. Bachya, Abarbanel, and R. Hirsch disagree and opine that they were also allowed to be taken as slaves by individual Egyptians.  See Nature of the Bondage for more.