EE & R, 3_15: Between the Torah and the Prophets: In Praise of Slavery
← Prev | Table of Contents | Next →
3. Between the Torah & the Prophets – Can Man Truly Know Hashem?
We have now completed our detailed and comprehensive analysis of the philosophical difference between Moshe and the prophets. Moving forward, we restate this divide in its simplest terms: Moshe maintained that Hashem cannot be known, while the prophets asserted that He can be.
Moshe teaches the value of sacrificial worship, rooted in unknowing; the prophets, by contrast, oppose this practice and advocate for knowledge in its stead. The prophets take their inspiration from the Exodus, which promises freedom through knowledge: To know Hashem is to be at ease and tranquil, free from all bondage and toil. Their writings consistently interweave these three themes – opposition to sacrifice, the pursuit of knowledge, and a foundational identification with the Exodus.1
If this pattern holds, then it follows that Moshe, as the teacher of unknowledge and the value of sacrifice, would take not the Exodus as his model, but its opposite – Exile. One would naturally expect Moshe to extol the virtues of slavery, suffering and exile in place of freedom, tranquility and redemption – and indeed, this is precisely what we find.
We shall soon identify the specific Mosaic oration praising the benefits of bondage. But first, we turn to the foundational narrative of slavery in the Torah, which serves as the root inspiration for Moshe’s singular teaching.
The Bondage Narrative
Exodus chapters 5-6, which recount the brutal oppression of the Israelites in Egypt and their subsequent redemption, touch on many of the key themes we have explored: servitude and freedom, knowing Hashem and being ignorant of Him, sacrificial worship, and the incomprehensibility of undeserved suffering. These themes unfold vividly through the Israelites’ relentless labor and Pharaoh’s cruel decrees:
Afterward Moshe and Aaron came to Pharaoh and said, “Thus said Hashem, God of Israel: ‘Let my people go…’”
Pharaoh said, “Who is Hashem, that I should heed His voice and let Israel go? I do not know Hashem, nor will I let Israel go.”
Then they said, “… let us take a three-day journey into the wilderness to offer sacrifices to Hashem our God…” But the king of Egypt said, “Moshe and Aaron, why are you taking the people away from their tasks? Get back to your burdens!”…
That same day Pharaoh gave this order to the slave drivers… : “You shall not add by providing straw for making bricks… let them go and gather their own straw. And the quota of bricks that they were making in the past you shall impose upon them, you shall not detract from it… Let the work be harder for the people”…
The people scattered all over Egypt to gather stubble for straw. The slave drivers kept pressing them, saying, “Complete the work required of you for each day, just as when you had straw… Why have you not met your quota of bricks?” … and he said: “You are idle! Idle! ... and now, go to work, and no straw will be given to you, but the quota of bricks you will give.”… “You are not to detract from the number of bricks required of you for each day”…
Moshe returned to Hashem and said, “Lord, why have You done evil to this people? Why have You sent me? Ever since I came to Pharaoh to speak in Your Name, he has done harm to this people, and You surely have not rescued Your people.”
Then Hashem said to Moshe, “Now you will see what I will do to Pharaoh, for through a mighty hand he will let them go, and through a mighty hand he will drive them from his land.” And God spoke to Moshe and said to him, “I am Hashem. And I appeared to Avraham, to Yitzchak and to Yaakov as El Shaddai, but by My Name, Hashem, I was not known to them… Therefore, say to the children of Israel, ‘I am Hashem. I will bring you out from under the burdens of Egypt… and I will redeem you… I am Hashem.’”
Moshe spoke thus to the children of Israel, but they did not listen to Moshe because of shortness of breath and hard bondage.
Moshe was stunned by the disastrous turn of events. He had expected that his mission – delivering Hashem’s Name to Pharaoh – would lead to Pharaoh’s recognition of Hashem and His people’s immediate liberation. Instead, the opposite occurred: Pharaoh denied Hashem outright, saying, “I do not know Hashem,” and intensified the Israelites’ suffering. Unable to grasp why his divine mission had led to evil instead of good, Moshe challenged Hashem, saying: “Why have You done evil to this people? Why have You sent me?” The question is a powerful one, the problem quite vexing: Why would a mission in the Name of God lead to increased suffering and harsher bondage?
Nor does Hashem’s cryptic response yield immediate clarity: How does His appearance to Avraham, to Yitzchak and to Yaakov as “El Shaddai” explain the unexpected course Moshe’s mission took?
The Discipline of Servitude
To understand the purpose of the suffering inflicted on the blameless Israelites in response to Moshe’s mission, we turn to an oration delivered at the end of Moshe’s life. There, in a speech laced with allusions to this very narrative of slavery, Moshe finally articulated the deeper meaning of bondage and suffering.
The speech, recorded in Deuteronomy 3-4, appears disjointed. Yet it reveals its unity upon close analysis, shedding light on the purpose of the affliction that accompanied Moshe’s redemptive mission. We present those parts of the speech that illuminate its central theme:
I pleaded with Hashem at that time, saying: “… Let me cross over and see the good land beyond the Jordan”…
But because of you Hashem was angry with me, and He did not listen to me. Hashem said to me, “Enough for you! Do not add further words to Me regarding this matter… you are not going to cross this Jordan”…
Now, Israel, hear the statutes and the laws I am about to teach you to do, so that you may live, and you may come and take possession of the land that Hashem, the God of your ancestors, is giving you. Do not add to what I command you, and do not detract from it, but keep the commands of Hashem your God that I give you…
See, I have taught you statutes and laws as Hashem my God commanded me, to do thus within the land into which you are entering to take possession of it. And you shall keep and do… What other nation is so great as to have gods close to it like Hashem our God is close to us whenever we pray to Him? …
But as for you, Hashem took you and brought you out from the iron’s furnace, from Egypt, to be the people of His inheritance, as you now are. Hashem was angry with me because of you, and He swore that I would not cross the Jordan and enter the good land Hashem your God is giving you as your inheritance. I will die in this land; I will not cross the Jordan; but you are to cross over and take possession of that good land…
Here, slavery in Egypt is portrayed positively – as an experience that refined and purified the people, much like a furnace purifies iron. Yet we notice a sharp incongruity: While Moshe’s prayer was rejected, he lauds the people’s greatness in Hashem’s closeness to them whenever they pray! And the contrast is underscored in the divergent paths that will be taken by the nation and its leader: They will cross the Jordan in the merit of keeping the commandments, without adding or detracting, while Moshe will not.
How do these themes tie together? The key lies in a verbal parallel between Moshe’s speech and the Exodus narrative.2 We notice the same phrases occurring in both passages:
“You shall not add by providing straw…”
"The quota of bricks… you shall not detract from it”
“You are not to detract from the number of bricks required…”
“Do not add further words to Me regarding this matter”
“Do not add to what I command you, and do not detract from it…”
This pattern reveals that the Israelites’ servitude in Egypt was not merely a period of suffering, but rather a training ground for servitude to Hashem. Through the discipline of bondage, they internalized a mindset of absolute dependence – one that would now find expression in their unwavering obedience to Hashem’s Torah.
Moshe, in his final address, contrasts his own unanswered prayers with the experience the nation should expect. The common people, forged in the crucible of slavery, had mastered the art of servitude; therefore, their prayers would always be heard. In Egypt, they were trained to adhere to a strict quota – “not to add nor detract” – and this same discipline would govern their relationship with Hashem, whose immutable Torah they would observe with the same unyielding precision.
Moshe, however, had not experienced bondage in Egypt. He was born free and remained free, never trained in the slavish discipline that shaped his people. Nor was he bound, as they were, to an eternally fixed Torah, for the Torah was sealed only upon his death. Moshe never tasted the full experience of submitting to a Torah that was beyond his own authorship. The people had an advantage he lacked: refined through suffering, they had acquired the instinct of servitude to Hashem. As slaves, they depended entirely on their Master, whose mercy ensured that their cries would be heard and their needs fulfilled – sometimes even more than those of their own leader, Moshe.
Moshe eventually came to understand the meaning and purpose of the evil his mission had precipitated: It was necessary to inculcate into the nation the quality of unquestioning servitude, which it would channel to Hashem and His service. In that merit, their prayers would always be answered. Those who do “not add to” the Torah will always have their prayers answered, while the great master himself will be rebuffed and told: “Enough for you! Do not add further words to Me regarding this matter.”3
The link between prayer and servitude will be explored in the next chapter. For now, we conclude: Knowledge is indeed freedom – which is why the master of unknowing trained his people in slavery.
← Prev | Table of Contents | Next →
A gezerah shavah. The Hebrew words are לא תוסיפו and לא תגרעו.
How this notion about the purpose of evil is alluded to in Hashem’s cryptic response will be explained in chapter 17.
What starts out as a preposterous thesis proves compelling