The Torah implores us to serve G-d and describes the blessings of food, water, and health (23:25). However, the word used to describe G-d’s service is plural, while the benefits are all singular. What is the significance of the different pronouns?

Chatam Sofer suggests that through communal interaction, we achieve the most extraordinary form of personal benefit. In fact, many commandments can only be done as a community, such as returning lost objects, loving our neighbors, etc. If we work to help others with their struggles, the Torah attests that our personal needs will be satisfied. Helping others not only improves their lives but benefits ours as well.

Among the laws discussed in Mishpatim is the mandate not to oppress a widow or orphan (22:21). The Torah continues that if one oppresses them, G-d’s wrath will be kindled, G-d will kill the culprit, and his family will then be widows and orphans (22:22-3). G-d’s consequence seems paradoxical to the law itself; why would the family, in turn, be punished [oppressed] for the person’s actions?

Rabbi Yochanan Zweig suggests that someone’s insensitivity to a widow or orphan is an indication that the familial unit had a breakdown, and that the family should assume responsibility for that very breakdown of the family support network. Failing to understand the importance of every family member’s role may lead that person to be insensitive to someone who has lost a core family member. Expressing how important our loved ones are to us helps them build proper self-esteem and shows them how valuable and important they are to their family, community, and people.

This week’s Parsha, Mishpatim, details many of the laws that the Jews are to follow. This is followed by the famous declaration by the people that they will “do and listen” (24:7) to all these laws. What’s less well-known is the fact that they had already accepted to follow these laws twice before and in this very Parsha. The differences between the first declarations and this third famous one are that 1) the people in unison declared the first two. In contrast, the third was not, and 2) the first two declarations only involved following the laws and not hearing them. What is the reason for these differences?

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks offers a beautiful explanation. While the first two declarations involved strict adherence to a unified code of conduct and behavior, there was no room for individuality or divergence. That’s why the Jews’ confirmation was in unison. However, understanding of those edicts is very personal and varied, as everyone connects, appreciates, and understands them at their level. While everyone affirmed that they would listen to the laws, they did so at their level because Judaism leaves room for such individuality, and that is what makes us unique, as people and as a nation. While our actions unite us, embracing our uniqueness makes us stronger.

Parshat Mishpatim lists many of the laws that govern Jewish living and also contains hidden treasures. One example can be found when the Torah describes the punishment for killing another person. Passuk (verse) 12 (21:12) says that when a person kills another he shall be put to death. The next Passuk offers an exception to that rule: When someone accidentally kills, they flee to a safe haven city which was established for those circumstances (21:13). The next Passuk (21:14) seems to go back to explain the first scenario of killing with intent. Why does the Torah restate the same law, seemingly out of order, adding the instruction to “take him” to die for his actions.

One possible explanation could be that the 3 Pessukim (verses) discuss 3 different scenarios. The first scenario is when someone kills another with intent, the second scenario is when intent is not there, and the third is where intent is there but no action is taken. What do you do with someone that tries to hurt another but doesn’t? You take them out to punish them, but taking them out to punishment is their actual and full punishment, possibly invoking fear, or helping them visualize the punishment to dissuade future actions.

This set of laws highlights intent as an integral aspect of not only our behavior, but in evaluating others’ actions. And when intent is unclear, don’t judge.

This week’s Parsha, Mishpatim, starts “and these are the laws which you shall set before them (21:1).” Rashi points out that G-d told Moshe that it’s not enough to just teach the Torah, and that Moshe should present it to the Jews like a set table from which one is ready to eat, which is done by explaining the reasons for all the Mitzvot (commandments) as well. As Rabbi Zweig asks, why is this true and what does the analogy to a set table from which one could readily eat mean?

Rabbi Zweig answers that the Torah is presenting one of the most important underlying principles of Judaism. There are two purposes in eating: nutrition and pleasure. When G-d tells Moshe to give the Torah to the Jews as a set table, He is referring to the presentation of the Mitzvot, which is a focus not to the nutritional aspect but rather to the pleasurable aspect. G-d is telling Moshe that it isn’t enough to just perform the Mitzvot; the people are also meant to enjoy them. The laws are to be presented in such a way that we should understand them, thereby deriving pleasure from them and have a desire to repeat them.

The lesson is that the Torah must be transformative; For example. it isn’t enough to give charity, one must become a charitable person. A charitable person feels good and derives pleasure from helping others. It isn’t enough to keep Shabbos, one must connect to the spirit of Shabbos and take pleasure in everything it has to offer. One can only accomplish this by having an understanding of the reasons for the Mitzvot, something worth all of our efforts in improving.

As the Torah puts it, “AND these are the laws you shall place before them…” Parshat Mishpatim starts by going right into the social justice code of the Torah, directly following the giving of the Torah itself. In fact, Rashi explains that we start with the word “And” to tell us that just like the last one, this Parsha was given at Sinai as well. Rabbi Yochanan Zweig wonders why there’s a separation between the Ten Commandments and the social laws. Also, isn’t it obvious that all the rules were given at Sinai, since the whole Torah was given then? Furthermore, why would the first rule described be the one about Jewish slaves, when that wouldn’t even be possible for at least 14 years after the Jews settle into their land? Wouldn’t it make more sense to start with more relevant laws?

As Rabbi Zweig answers, there are two understandings of our relationship between man and G-d. We undertake to accept G-d’s Laws, but we also accept a responsibility for the welfare of our fellow Jew. This week’s Parsha is the focus on that second responsibility, that of caring for each other: We don’t steal because the rule in society is that we shouldn’t steal. What makes Jews unique is that we also don’t steal because we need to insure that our fellow Jew has/keeps what’s rightfully theirs. If we don’t care for the welfare of the other, then we’ve failed to maintain our own social justice. We see this difference in laws like our requirements to help another Jew load their animals, even if we happen to hate that person. We also see this difference in laws like our requirement to not ignore any lost objects we find.

With that understanding, if there’s one person who hasn’t realized their responsibility to their fellow Jew… it’s the slave, who stole from another Jew, and gave themselves up to slavery to repay their debt. Not only did they ignore their charge to be only G-d’s servant, but they also ignored the boundaries of their fellow Jew. The Torah is clearly telling us that we have a responsibility to include into society even a Jew that we’d have a reason to exclude, and that’s why it’s the first law described. Last Parsha contained the concept of being G-d’s people, and doing what G-d needs. This Parsha focuses on the concept of being one people, and bringing us all together. A team is greater than its parts, but only if we each do our part for the team.

This week’s Parsha, Mishpatim, starts “and these are the laws which you shall set before them (21:1).” Rashi points out that G-d told Moshe that it’s not enough to just teach the Torah, and that Moshe should present it to the Jews like a set table from which one is ready to eat, which is done by explaining the reasons for all the Mitzvot (commandments) as well. As Rabbi Zweig asks, why is this true and what does the analogy to a set table from which one could readily eat mean?

Rabbi Zweig answers that the Torah is presenting one of the most important underlying principles of Judaism. There are two purposes in eating: nutrition and pleasure. When G-d tells Moshe to give the Torah to the Jews as a set table, He is referring to the presentation of the Mitzvot, which is a focus not to the nutritional aspect but rather to the pleasurable aspect. G-d is telling Moshe that it isn’t enough to just perform the Mitzvot; the people are also meant to enjoy them. The laws are to be presented in such a way that we should understand them, thereby deriving pleasure from them and have a desire to repeat them.

The lesson is that the Torah must be transformative; it isn’t enough to give charity, one must become a charitable person. A charitable person feels good and derives pleasure from helping others. It isn’t enough to keep Shabbos, one must connect to the spirit of Shabbos and take pleasure in everything it has to offer. One can only accomplish this by having an understanding of the reasons for the Mitzvot, something worth all of our efforts in improving.

Aliya Summary: This Aliya continues describing the blessings the Israelites will receive if they faithfully serve G‑d: no miscarriages or barren women, longevity, wide spacious borders and supernatural assistance in their quest to conquer the Holy Land. G‑d warns the Israelites against entering into treaties with the Canaanite natives or allowing them to remain in the land after the Israelite invasion. The Torah now relates some of the events that occurred in the days immediately prior to the giving of the Torah. Moshe went up the mountain and received a message from G‑d which he communicated to the people. The Israelites enthusiastically committed themselves to following all of G‑d’s laws. Moshe transcribed the “Book of the Covenant” and read it to the people. Then, together with the Israelite firstborn, Moshe offered sacrifices and sprinkled the blood on the people, bringing them into a covenant with G‑d. This Aliya concludes with G‑d summoning Moshe – after the giving of the Torah – to ascend the mountain where he would remain for forty days and nights, and would then be given the Tablets.

G-d promises that we will live full satisfying lives and that our enemies will panic before us and will be driven out of the Land – not quickly, but slowly, so that the People of Israel may properly populate the Land. Why not with a quick miracle? The answer is that miracles are nice, but we needed (and need) to get accustomed and in tune with daily miracles that are less obvious, but not less miraculous and necessary.

Aliya Summary: G‑d informed the Israelites that He would dispatch an angel to lead them into Canaan. This angel would not tolerate disobedience. If, however, the Israelites would hearken to the angel, and eradicate idolatry from the Promised Land, then they will be greatly rewarded. Their Canaanite enemies will fall before them and G‑d “will bless your food and your drink, and will remove illness from your midst.”

The Passuk describing the angel sent to lead the Israelites into Canaan is generic enough that it could be referring to anyone, at any time (read 23:20). If so, the Passuk is saying that there is always an angel helping to guide us to where we need to go.