Musings on Parshat Devarim

Following are some of the ideas, insights and interpretations that emerge from our weekly Chumash learning group at the Young Israel of Oceanside, Long Island. We cite sources when possible. Some of our interpretations may derive from ideas we may have seen elsewhere, possibly without attribution. Or we may simply have forgotten the source. For this we apologize. We invite your comments, observations and participation.

Overview

Introduction to Moshe’s Final Discourses; First Discourse: review of Israel’s travels from Sinai to Jordan; appointment of assistant leaders; travels from Sinai to Kadesh Barneya; repetition of the Spies story; avoiding war with Seir; No warring on Moav because it is for the offspring of Lot; Crossing the brook of Zered; Ammon is not part of the Jewish inheritance; Sichion , King of Heshbon refuses to allow passage through his land; Victory over Sichon; Jews are victorious after Og the King of Habashan attacks them; Allotment of conquered lands East of the Jordan River to the offspring of Reuvain, Gad and half of the tribe of Manasseh.

Compression of history in the word Eicha

This Parsha is read on the Shabbos before Tisha B’av. The word Eicha—“oh, how can I; how did it happen”—appears in the Parsha when Moshe moans to Hashem about his inability to be the sole leader of the Israelites (because of their rapid population growth). It appears in the Haftorah where the prophet Isaiah describes “Alas (how did it happen that) the faithful city (Jerusalem) has become a harlot.” And the book of Eicha—Lamentations—is read on Tisha B’av. It is a the linkage of different periods of woe in Jewish history that reinforce one another and confront us during the Nine Days of Av period of sadness and mourning.

On the name and structure of the Book of Devarim

Devarim means words so this is the Book of Words. It is also referred to as Mishne Torah, the repetition or the learning of the Torah. The Greeks translated it to mean “second Law” as is the Latin translation for the Book, Deuteronomy.

The Book contains a series of farewell speeches by Moshe as he prepares Israel for their entry into the Promised Land. It is a Last Will and Testament in which he pleads for the Jews to ‘keep the faith’ when they populate and inhabit their homeland. It is filled with narrative, historic retrospect, poetry and laws (100 Matzos).

In his Meditations on the Torah, Rav B.S. Jacobson cites a number of interesting observations:

Rabbi David Zvi Hoffman (1843-1921) divides Dvorim into three main addresses. The first one is admonitory as Moshe reviews the Israelites’ behavior in the preceding 40 years. The second address, which covers most of the Book is legislative and the third is covenantal describing the nature of Hashem’s Covenant between Himself and His people the Israelites.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) draws our attention to the fact that in Devarim (more than in the other Books of the Torah) Moshe is presented as speaking in the first person, suggesting perhaps that Moshe was the Book’s author. Rejecting this approach, Abravanel opines that after hearing Moshe’s stirring words, Hashem concurred, then dictated and arranged the words. When Moshe heard these words he recorded them.

The Vilna Gaon (1720-1797) suggests that the three- time reference to “Moshe’s speaking” that appears in the opening five verses are meant to be part of a preface to a tripartite division of Devarim, in which each section also corresponds to one of the three previous Books of the Torah. The Book of Devarim symbolically encompasses the entire Torah as presented in the preceding three Books. (Beraishes is the root of all of this.)

The opening verse ”Ayle hadvorim…”  (these are the words)…” sounds like the opening verse in Exodus, “Ayla Shmos…these are the names”. And it is the first section of Devarim  that deals with the Israelites, their names and their behavior during the preceding 40 years.

Verse 3’s   “debayr Moshe  (Moshe spoke)”  hearkens back to the verses of Sefer Vayekra  “…and Moshe spoke … to the priests…unto all Israel”. Interestingly, it is the second section of Devarim that is filled with Mitzvos, corresponding to Vayekra’s extensive list.

The third section of Devarim that deals with blessings and curses is anticipated in the verse ”…took Moshe to expound the Torah ” , which is similar to  ...”and he (Moses) spoke …and the priests…and all Israel” that appears in Bamidbar.

Rabbi Menachem Leibtag’s approach

Mishneh Torah, the name for Sefer Devorim, cannot mean a repeat or review of the Chumash because no mention is made of the Breishit stories in it; because there are few details of the Exodus and nothing about the Mishkan; because only a few of the Book of Vayikra Mitzvos or stories are mentioned; because many of the Bamidbar stories and Mitzvos are omitted. Furthermore, the fact that Devarim introduces many new Mitzvos prevents it from being characterized as a summary only of the Torah.

Devarim is about speeches: the main, very important and very long speech by Moshe before his death is preceded by introductory, shorter speeches and is followed by concluding statements. Most of the text is written in the first person (i.e., Moshe speaking) in contrast to the third person used in the previous Books of the Torah. By examining the places where the text changes from the third person to the first person, Rabbi Leibtag comes up with the following structure:

SPEECH #1 (introductory)                              Chaps. 1-4

SPEECH #2 (main speech)                              Chaps. 5-26

SPEECH #3 (tochahca and Covenant)          Chaps. 27-28

SPEECH #4 (teshuva)                                      Chaps. 29-30

Moshe  opens his main Speech with “Listen Israel to the Chukim and Mishpatim…” But before he begins, he prefaces with …

·       Why everyone is obligated to keep the laws

·       The recollection of the Mt. Sinai experience

      some 49 years earlier  

·       The reminder that the obligation to follow the laws is rooted  in the Covenant with Hashem, part of which is the Ten  Commandments

·       The idea that the Mitzvot that will be taught are the same laws first given at Mt. Sinai

The  main speech will consist largely of Mitzvot received at Mt. Sinai with some additional comments relating to the experiences of the 40 year desert trek. And the Mitzvot cited largely will relate to those that will be applicable when the Israelites enter the Promised Land. All the Mitzvot were given at Sinai, but not all were already recorded in the Torah

The theme of Devarim is repetition. ”Veshenatam” is from the root “to repeat” rather than from the root word “to teach”. Moshe hammers home time and again the message that not only must the Mitzvos be learned but they also require constant repetition. The word Mishne, says Rabbi Liebtag, is also from the root word “leshanen”, to repeat. Mishne Torah is then the (special) set of rules and laws included in Sefer Devarim that require constant repetition.

The  opening verse “Ayle Hadvorim” (these are the Devorim) refers to the Mitzvos that later  will be described in Moshe’s main speech that already had been repeated over and over again in the places listed and were also taught during the 11 day journey from “Har Chorev to Kadesh Barnea”. (This, in addition to teaching them at Mt. Sinai.) Then in the 40^th year Moshe will again teach these laws one last time “after the defeat of Sichon…”

The reference to the 11 day journey draws our attention to the older generation’s final preparation to conquer the Land. But because of their lack of faith, as manifested in their need to send Spies, they were destined to wander and die.  Now this generation of  Israelites finds themselves in a similar situation. Moshe gathers and repeats the Mitzvos to the people one last time to bolster their faith and prevent a recurrence of their parents’ mistake.

Variances in the incident of the Spies

The 40 year desert wanderings were caused by the spies’ incident. But why the need to repeat this now and not, for example bring up the Golden Calf incident? And why are there some glaring variations between the ways the story is told here compared to how it was initially reported in Parshat Shelach?

·       Here it states that the Israelites approached Hashem; earlier it seems that the desire for spies came from Hashem.

·       Here it states that twelve men were chosen for the mission. Earlier these people are described as prominent heads of the children of Israel.

·       Here the spies say “good is the land”. In the original account they go into a detailed description “…it is truly a land flowing with milk and honey.”

·       Here the Israelites are described as “murmuring in their tents”. The original story makes no mention of this behavior.

·       Here the people are described as asking how they can possibly go up to fight. In the original version they unequivocally state that they cannot go up against a people that are stronger!

Nechama Leibowitz, in her Studies in Devarim, provides some answers. The new generation of Israelites, like their parents who eventually sinned and died in the wilderness, were given the opportunity to enter the Promised Land. It was at this point that the first generation Israelites hesitated, doubted and demanded spies to bolster their confidence and faith. This was the crucial time and event that Moshe emphasized to see if this generation had the faith in Hashem or if it, too, would want to turn back.

Rabbi Hoffman notes the difference in style. In Bamidbar Moshe was an historian recording the events but here he is exhorting the people to learn from the lesson of history. Here Moshe is interpreting the incident to highlight how every person is responsible for his own behavior, how we must resist evil and how we must realize that citing the behavior of a superior or leader or colleague  is no excuse for one’s behavior. We are each responsible for our own actions.

The incident as reported here reflected Moshe’s admonition of the Israelites and the details provided are meant to drive home the message. Here Moshe emphasizes the direct responsibility of the ancestors for their actions. They wanted to send spies and, therefore, it was their responsibility for what happened afterwards.

It was for this reason that the Torah now referred to the selected spies as just twelve men (and not exalted leaders) to prevent  excusing the behavior of their parents (and their own) who might argue  in their own defense that they did no wrong. They were merely following the behavior of their leaders!

Moshe wants to emphasize the guilt of the generation so he purposely avoids quoting the report regarding the size, ferocity of the people of Canaan and their protected cities. He focuses on the Israelites behavior, on their private murmurings, again demonstrating their lack of faith in Hashem.

Moshe’s goal is to encourage the current generation not to follow in the ways of their parents. He emphasizes the individual’s responsibility and culpability. De-emphasizing the role of the Spies, Moshe wants to impress on his audience…and on us… the role the Israelites  played by not having faith in Hashem.

Rabbi H. L. Berenholz