“Dvarim” is the book of Deuteronomy and lends its name to our Parasha. “These are the words which Moses spoke to all Israel beyond the Jordan…” (1:1). “D’varim” (singular - “davar”), of the root d.v/b.r (dalet, bet/vet, resh), which is also the root for “midbar” that we encountered in the opening Parasha of the book of Bamidbar - Numbers - refers to “words”. Thus, the names of the books of Bamidbar and Dvarim (as well as their respective contents) are connected by the root d.v.r, alluding to the Word (“davar”) spoken in the desert (“midbar”). Dvarim is also known as “Mishneh Torah”, mentioned in Dvarim 17:18 as part of the instructions for a future monarch. This term suggests copying since “mishneh” originates in the root sh.n.h, (shin, mem, hey), meaning to “repeat” (and hence copy). However, “mishneh” also means “secondary” (with “two” – “sh’na’yim” - sharing the same root, thus being related to “second”). This may indicate that the book at hand is a “secondary Torah”, as it is a kind of synopsis of the three previous tomes (not including B’resheet).
In 1:5 we read:
“On the other side of the Jordan Moses began explaining this law”, but more
literally it says that Moshe was “willing to undertake” (“ho’eel”
of the root y.a.l, yod, alef, lamed) to expound – ba’er -
the Torah”, thus summing up the essence of this fifth book of the Pentateuch.
Referring to this summary as… “expounding the Torah” lends (once
again) a broader meaning to this term (i.e. Torah}. The Theological
Wordbook of the Old Testament sheds more light on “ho’eel”: “The primary
meaning of this root is ‘to make a volitional decision to commence a given
activity…’ This volitional decision to begin an act clearly indicates the
function of one’s mind to initiate… The verb concentrates on the volitional
element rather than on emotional or motivational factors. It stresses the
voluntary act of the individual’s will to engage in a given enterprise, not
what may have brought him to that decision… Theologically, this verb strongly
supports the concept of man’s free will, for man can make decisions to initiate
any given action (within human control), but God holds him responsible for that
volitional decision”.[1] This is not the first time that the verb “ho’eel” is
‘attached’ to Moshe. After having rescued Re’u’el’s (Yitro) daughters at the
well and accepting their father’s invitation, it says that “Moses was content –
va’yo’el – to live with the man, and he gave Zipporah his daughter to Moses”
(Ex. 2:21. Another example is found in 1st Samuel 12:22, where
for “ho’eel” the translation is “pleased”.
Back to the
present. Moshe is exercising his will, resolving to “ba’er” (expound) the Torah
to the People of Yisrael. “Ba’er” (b.a.r. bet, alef, resh) is to “make
distinct, declare, make plain”, and shares its root
with “be’er” which is a “well or cistern”. Although it
is not altogether certain whether there is an etymological connection between
“making plain” and “well”, the fact that the word for “eye” and “water spring”
is one and the same in Hebrew (“ayin”), indicates that while water is connected
to the act of seeing, it may also be related to ‘understanding’, which is
another form of ‘seeing’. By expounding on YHVH’s words, Moshe was certainly
providing the Israelites with clear, thirst-quenching, well-drawn living water
in the dry desert.
In 1:9,12,
Moshe uses the familiar verb “nasso”, to “carry, lift, bear
a burden”, which has been used particularly in Bamidbar (Numbers), with
even a Parasha by that name (Num. 4:21…). From Moshe’s speech, we learn how
heavy a burden this people was for him at times, although the One who had truly
carried and cared for them was their Elohim. Thus, Moshe himself admits, in
1:31, that, "in the wilderness… you saw how YHVH your Elohim carried you,
as a man carries his son, in all the way that you went until
you came to this place" (emphases added).
When Moshe
stresses just judgment (in 1:17) he says: “You shall not respect persons in
judgment…” which in Hebrew is, “you shall not acknowledge, or know, or
recognize [anyone’s] face in judgment” (ha’ker panim), as “recognizing” one
person above another does away with impartiality which is indispensable for
meting out justice. Thus, one is not to prefer one’s relatives, friends, or
associates over strangers. “Recognize a face” - as
presented here – appears in other places as “carry a face” (having the same
meaning as recognizing a face), such as in Vayikra (Leviticus) 19:15, regarding
the prohibition to show partiality to the poor. Yet despite the usage of the
theme of “carrying” used in the present passage (as we saw
above), when ‘carrying out’ justice is mentioned (in 1:17), this common idiom
of “carrying/lifting a face” (that is, being partial) is strangely omitted, and
instead “recognizing a face” is the idiom of choice.
Recently we
have been noticing that the word used for “tribe/s” has
been “ma’teh/matot” (“rod/rods”), in contrast to the more common word
shevet” (sh.v.t, shin, vet, tet, which also means “rod, staff, club, scepter”
and also a live branch). The “rod and staff [which] will comfort
me” (of Psalm 23:4) are, respectively, “shevet” and “mish’e’net” (which is a
staff specifically for leaning on). In chapter 1 the references to the tribes
(vs. 13, 15) are couched in the term “shevet”. “Shevet” is also the rod
that if a father spares, may earn him the reputation of one who hates his son
(ref. Prov. 13:24). The usage of “shevet”, refers to didactic reproof (as
preparation before entering the land and starting out a new life), is therefore
quite appropriate in this 5th book of the Pentateuch! ("I
will make you pass under the rod..." in Ezekiel 20:37, where “shevet” is
used, is a key verse regarding Yisrael’s restoration.) But what is so striking
about this monologue addressing the younger generation, most of whom would not
have participated in the events Moshe mentions, is that he speaks to his
audience in the second person, as though all of them had been responsible and
had participated in those events. It seems that at this particular juncture
Moshe is using this as another educational tool (even with the view of its
relevance for future generations).
Continuing in
chapter 1, we see that one of the lessons that Moshe wishes to draw from is the
story of the spies (v. 22ff). “Why did he not also refer to the sin of the Golden
Calf? “Why did he select the sin of the spies and omit all the other historical
experiences?” These are questions posed by Nechama Leibowitz. She then goes on
to cite Hoffman, who “illuminatingly points out that Moses wishes to refer to
an exactly parallel situation. The children of Israel were once again on the
threshold of the Promised Land, just as their ill-fated parents had been,
thirty-eight years previously. Let them not forfeit the Land once again…”
Moshe, therefore, issues a warning to “the children of Israel against once more
forfeiting the land by their lack of faith…” [2]
The spies’
story accurately illustrates the Israelites’ skepticism. In 1:22 we read: “And
you came near to me, every one of you, and said, 'let us send men before us,
and they shall search out the land for us…'” It is significant that the request
for a surveillance report of the land by “every one of you… coming [or drawing] near” is
interpreted (in the above quote) as a lack of faith. (This is in contrast to
the original story in Parashat Sh’lach Le’cha, Bamidbar – Numbers: 13:1-2;
32:8, where YHVH is presented as the initiator of the plan). Another “drawing
near” is mentioned in the next Parasha, when Moshe recalls the scene at Chorev
(Horeb). “And it happened, when you heard the voice out of the midst of the
darkness, while the mountain burned with fire, you came near to
me, all the rulers of your tribes, and your elders, and you said… ‘If we hear
the voice of YHVH your Elohim anymore, then we shall die. For who of all flesh
that has heard the voice of the living Elohim speaking out of the midst of the
fire, as we have, and has lived? You go near and
hear all that YHVH our Elohim may say, and you shall speak to
us all that YHVH our Elohim may speak to you…’” (5:23-27, italics added). We
see that at the time of the giving of the Torah, the elders and leaders of
Yisrael had a real concern about “drawing near” to YHVH, and instead “drew
near” to Moshe and asked him to act on their behalf. If this
was the leaders’ attitude, it is no wonder that sometime later the entire
nation (“every one of you”) displayed a similar apprehension regarding YHVH’s
promises, which is why that whole generation was condemned to die in the
wilderness.
Moshe goes on
to recount the sad episode, all those years back, recalling that the ones who
had displayed unbelief and later insisted to go up and fight the enemy (ref.
1:41) against YHVH’s wishes (as if to make up for their former attitude). YHVH
declared, therefore, that they would be “struck” before their enemies (ref. v.
42). The word used for “struck” is “tinagfu” of the root n.g.f
(noon, gimmel, fey). “Negef” and “mage’fa” mean “plague or pestilence”,
and are usually divinely ordained for the purpose of discipline, such as in the
case before us. In Bamidbar (Numbers) 16:46, 47 we read about the plague
(“magefa”) which followed the rebellion of Korach and his band. Later, in
Vayikra 25:8,9, mention was made of the “magefa” that plagued the Israelites in
the wake of the Baal Pe’or episode and the daughters of Mo’av, whereas in
Sh’mot (Exodus) 12:13, it was the Egyptians who were “struck” while the
Israelites remained untouched.
Back to our
chronology as is recounted by Moshe: Despite YHVH’s warning, Yisrael “rebelled
and … acted proudly and went up into the hills” (Deut. 1: 43). “[you] acted proudly”
reads here (va)taz’du" (root zayin, dalet). Back in B’resheet
(Genesis) 25, in Parashat Toldot, Ya’acov was seen “cooking a stew”,
which in Hebrew is “va'ya'zed na'zid" (v. 29). We learned there that
although “stew” is “nazid”, the root "zed” also means “pride,
rebellion or presumptuousness”. Thus, Ya'acov was cooking
up a non-too-healthy stew for his brother, and according to the present
passage, his progeny’s conduct even surpassed that of their forefather's.
The ensuing
result of this failed attempt to go to battle is reported in Dvarim 1:44: “And
the Amorites who lived in that hill country came out to meet you and they
chased you, as the bees do, and drove you back from Seir to Hormah”. In
Shmot (Exodus) 23:28 it says: “And I will send hornets before you which shall
drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite before you”. However,
because of disobedience and rebellion, the Israelites incurred defeat,
and they were chased by so many (proverbial) bees, being
“driven back” all the way from Se’ir and Chorma. The latter
happens to stem from the root ch.r.m (chet, resh, mem), rendered “cherem”
which in this case means “destruction”. In Bamidbar (Numbers)
21:1-3, we read: “And the king of Arad the Canaanite… heard that Israel had
come… and he fought against Israel, and took some of them captive. And Israel
vowed a vow to YHVH, and said, ‘if You will indeed deliver this people into my
hand, then I will utterly destroy [(ve)he’cheramti] their cities'. And
YHVH listened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites, and they
utterly destroyed [(va)yacharem] them and their cities, and the name of
the place was called Hormah [Chorma]” (italics and emphasis added).
However, Moshe’s narration here lets us know that destruction was also the lot
of the Israelites, who at that point “sat and wept before YHVH, but YHVH would
not listen [to them]” (Deut. 1:45) following the episode recounted above (in
verse 44).
Chapter 2
contains Moshe’s reviews of some geographical and historical facts. As part of
preparing the young Israelites for their relocation, he wants them to have a
geographical and historical orientation and perspective. This is
particularly true in 2:9-12, 18-23. Some of the names of the peoples mentioned
are rather revealing. In 2:10 we read about the “Eimeem” (Emims). “Eima”
is “fear, dread or horror” (for example, in the
Covenant Between the Torn Pieces it says: “… and behold a terror – “eima” – of
great darkness,” Gen. 15:12). These “Eimim” are compared to, or regarded as
the Anakim (Deut. 2:11) who are the giants described
by the spies (Num. 13:28). Mention is then made of the “Rfa’eem.” The
root r.f.a. (resh, fey, alef) is used several times to describe the dead, or dwellers
of She’ol. In Yisha’yahu (Isaiah) 14:9 we read: “Sheol from beneath
is excited over you to meet you when you come; It arouses for you the spirits
of the dead (“rfa’eem”)….” The Rfa’eem were also considered among the giants
(and are mentioned in B’resheet 14:5). According to 2:20, the giants were also
called “Zam’zumeem”, and lived in the land that was “considered the land of the
Rfa’eem” (literal translation). This latter fact may have rendered that land
the “land of the dead”, perhaps subtly hinting that
YHVH will “begin to put your dread and your fear
on the face of the people under all the heavens, who will hear your fame, and
will tremble and writhe because of you” (2:25 italics added).
Appropriately
the Parasha ends with the following: “Do not fear them for YHVH your Elohim, He
shall fight for you” (3:22). These descriptions of vanquishing the former
dwellers of the lands of Seir (Edom), Moav and Ammon for the sake of Esav-Edom
(Yitzchak’s son) and Lot’s grandsons (ref. 2:17-23) serve also as encouragement
to the Israelites, as to their awaiting land of
promise.
Before
concluding, let us examine a leitmotif which is repeated several times in our
Parasha and is first seen in 1:8 (and then in 1:21): “See, I have placed the
land before you (lit. “to your faces”) go in and possess
[“r’shu” – wrest it by impoverishing its present residents] the land which YHVH
swore to give to your fathers… and to their seed after them” (italics added).
This repeated declaration is preceded, in verse 7, by the imperative “p’nu”
(turn) which stems from the same root as “face” (see also 1:40, 2:1, 8). It
seems that before YHVH will “give/place” the land before His
people, they are required to make a “turn”. Last week we examined briefly
“yerusha” as one of the words for an inheritance, which is rooted in the verb
“roshesh”, used here by YHVH in its imperative form. YHVH declares that He has
already “given/placed” – “natati” - the land before His
people (1:20, 21, 39), but that it was incumbent upon them to
do their duty. First, they had to “turn” and then “see”. That
is, they had to realize, by exercising faith, what their heavenly Father had
already accomplished. Secondly, they had to go and take/wrest the land, based
upon the former realization and premise, and act, again, in faith. In 2:5,9,19,
respectively, YHVH likewise declares that He “has given Mount Seir to Esau as a
possession” and “has given Ar (Mo’av) to the sons of Lot as a possession”
(“yerusha” – the same term He uses for Yisrael’s inheritance or possession),
and the same regarding the Ammonites. However, “before them” is
significantly missing. Thus, although YHVH is sovereign over all peoples, even
the ones whose possessions He is protecting, He is notably treating His own in
an exceptional manner.
In 2:31, YHVH
declares again to His people (literal translation): “See, I have begun to
give/place – “natati” – Sihon and his land over to you. Impoverishing begin to
impoverish his land”. In the case of Sichon and his people, Yisrael’s Elohim
also announces that it is He who has “hardened his [Sichon’s] spirit and made
his heart obstinate” (2:30), having “mercy on whom He will, and whom He wills
He hardens” (ref. Rom. 9:18).
Thus, as just
mentioned, while YHVH is totally sovereign and controls all people groups, we
notice that He places certain expectations upon Yisrael, who are to apply their
conscious will (like Moshe, at the beginning of the Parasha) and act
volitionally in faith and obedience to their Maker and King, with the Land of
Promise being the venue for such actions. "To whom much is given…"
(Luke 12:48).
1. Theological
Wordbook of the Old Testament, Vol. 1, ed. R. Laird Harris, Moody Press,
Chicago, 1980
2. New Studies
in Devarim, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner Library,
Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc.,
Brooklyn, N.Y.