[Par-lite] for Parshat Nitzavim

[Menachem Leibtag]

**********************************************************
***

     THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]

          In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag

     Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag

**********************************************************
***

 

                PARSHAT NITZAVIM

 

     Can man return to Gan Eden?

     Even though Parshat Breishit may have left us with
the

impression that the Garden's gates (guarded by the
"keruvim"

and a fiery sword /see Breishit 3:24) remain inaccessible
to

man forever, Parshat Nitzavim may allude to the
possibility of

'return'.

     To explain how (and why), this week's shiur discusses
the

significance of the speech delivered by Moshe Rabeinu in

Parshat Nitzavim, and how it fits beautifully into the
rubric

of Sefer Devarim.

 

INTRODUCTION

     In case you hadn't noticed, Parshat Nitzavim contains
yet

another speech given by Moshe Rabeinu, the last of his
four

speeches in Sefer Devarim.  In fact, this final speech

actually began at the end of Parshat Ki-tavo (see 29:1-8,

noting how 29:1 forms the introduction to this speech).

     In the following shiur, we first discuss how this
final

speech relates to the "tochacha" (in Parshat Ki-tavo);

afterwards we fill focus on what's so special about its

'finale'.

 

FOUR SPEECHES

     The following table will help clarify the location of

Moshe's Rabeinu's speech in Parshat Nitzavim in relation
to

the rest of Sefer Devarim, as it summarizes his four
speeches:

 

 CHAPTERS      TOPIC

1)  1->4     Introductory speech (why 40 years have
passed)

2)  5->26    The main speech - the "mitzvot" to keep in
the land

3) 27->28    Brit Har Eival and the Tochacha

4) 29->30    The final speech = Parshat Nitzavim

 

     Even though our shiur will focus on the 'final
speech'

(#4), to appreciate its content, we must first review the

primary topic of speech #3.

      Recall how chapter 27 described a ceremony that Bnei

Yisrael are instructed to conduct on Har Eival, upon
entering

the land.  That ceremony was to include both the teaching
of

the laws (i.e. those of the main speech) and some
festivities.

The Torah's description of that ceremony continued in
chapter

28 with the "tochacha", i.e. the 'blessing and the
curses', as

they were to be read in public at the conclusion of that

ceremony.

  Hence, the order of Sefer Devarim up until this point
makes

perfect sense.  Speech #2 details the laws that Moshe
taught,

while speech #3 explains how these laws were to be taught
once

again when Bnei Yisrael enter the land, at a special
ceremony

that concluded with a public warning of both the reward
and

punishment should Bnei Yisrael obey/or disobey these laws.

     However, when one reads the fourth speech, it appears
to

be superfluous, for in it we find once again Moshe's
rebuke of

Bnei Yisrael - in a manner which doesn't differ much from
the

numerous rebukes in his earlier speeches. [For example,

compare 29:11-14 with 5:2-3; 29:4-5 with 8:4; and 30:1-3
with

4:26-29.]

     However, if we take a closer look at its content, we
can

explain its function and the reason for its location.

 

THE STARTING & FINISH LINES

     Our first step is to delineate more precisely where
this

speech begins and ends. Note how it begins at the end of

Parshat Ki-tavo in 29:1 and concludes at the end of
Parshat

Nitzavim (as indicated by the sudden shift to third-person

narrative right at the beginning of Parshat Vayelech
(31:1).

   Using a Tanach Koren, note as well how it contains five

distinct 'parshiot': 29:1-8; 29:28; 30:1-10; 30:14 &
30:15-20.

     Let's take a look at each one of these parshiot, and

explain what is problematic about each.  Afterward, we
will

explain the logic of their internal progression, and how
each

of these parshiot relates to the previous speech, and
overall

theme of covenant in Sefer Devarim.

 

PARSHIA #1 (29:1-8)

     Moshe's opening statements in this 'parshia' raise

numerous questions. To understand these difficulties,
let's

take a look:

   "Moshe called together Bnei Yisrael and said to them:
You

   have seen with your own eyes what I did to Pharaoh in
the

   land of Egypt... YET, until this day, God has not given
you

   a 'heart to know,' 'eyes to see,' or 'ears to listen.'
I

   led you for forty years in the wilderness...[Therefore]

   observe faithfully the words of this covenant [DIVREI

   HA'BRIT HA'ZOT] in order that you succeed in all that
you

   now undertake."  (see 29:1-8)

 

     First of all, why is he talking to this generation as

though they themselves left Egypt? Granted, some of the
elder

members of the nation may have been under the age of
twenty at

the time of the Exodus (and hence not included in the

punishment). However, the vast majority of the current

generation did not witness those events. But even more

puzzling is 29:3. How can Moshe possibly say, "Until this
day,

God has not given you a 'heart to know,' 'eyes to see,' or

'ears to listen'"? To what could Moshe Rabeinu possibly be

referring?

     Finally, why does Moshe conclude these comments by
once

again reminding Bnei Yisrael of the "brit" (see 29:8)? Was

that not the topic of his previous speech? [See 5:2-3!]

 

PARSHIA #2 - see 29:9-28

     In this section, Moshe reiterates the purpose of this

gathering - i.e. to establish the covenant through which
Bnei

Yisrael are to become God's nation.  He then emphasizes
the

eternal nature of this covenant, i.e. its mandatory

application to all future generations as well (see
29:9-14).

  But once again we must ask, is this not the same point
that

Moshe Rabeinu had already stated in the opening remarks of
his

main speech? (See 5:2-3, read carefully.)

     Furthermore, why does Moshe suddenly raise the

possibility that an individual, family, or possibly an
entire

tribe may consider 'breaking out' of this covenant (see
29:17-

25)?

 

PARSHIA #3 - see 30:1-10

     Moshe now 'comforts' Bnei Yisrael, telling them that
even

in the event of exile, there will always remain the

possibility for "teshuva" and the nation's return to the

Promised Land. Why would Moshe, while addressing the
people

prior to their entry into the land, prematurely inform
them of

their return to the land from exile?  They haven't reached
the

land yet, and already they are being promised the ultimate

gathering of the Diaspora? Furthermore, why aren't Moshe's

earlier comments on this topic (see 4:25-31 & Vayikra
26:41-

45) sufficient?

 

PARSHIA #4 - see 30:11-14

     Here we find Moshe Rabeinu's famous insistence that

keeping the Torah is 'not as hard' as it seems. Again,

although this constitutes a most critical message, the

question remains: why now and why here in Sefer Devarim?

 

PARSHIA #5 - see 30:15-20

     As we will explain in Part Two, these soul-stirring

psukim depict life in Eretz Yisrael as comparable to the

ideal, spiritual environment of Gan Eden. But once again,
why

is this topic mentioned specifically in this speech, and
at

its conclusion?

 

POTENTIAL 'CONCLUSIONS'

     To resolve these questions, we must consider the

centrality of the concept of 'covenant' ["brit"], which
has

emerged thus far as a primary theme in every speech thus
far

in Sefer Devarim.

     Recall that Moshe Rabeinu began his main speech by

underscoring the relevance and application of the covenant
of

Sinai to the present generation:

   "The Lord your God made with you a COVENANT at SINAI.
It

   was not [only] with your fathers that God made this

   covenant, but with US, those of us who are HERE, ALIVE

   TODAY..." (see Devarim 5:1-3)

    [Notice that the opening phrase of that speech (5:1)
is

    identical to that of ours (29:1), thus suggesting a

    thematic connection between the two.]

    

     In both his main speech and finale, Moshe Rabeinu

addresses the new generation as though THEY themselves
left

Egypt and stood at Har Sinai. He emphasizes their
inclusion in

the covenant of Har Sinai. Yet, in his third speech Moshe
had

instructed Bnei Yisrael to enter into a similar covenant
at

this time (see 28:69 - the final pasuk of that speech!).
Why

is another covenant necessary if 'everyone' was considered
to

have participated in the covenant at Har Sinai?

     In fact, this 'extra' covenant at Arvot Moav, as
detailed

in chapter 27 in Parshat Ki-tavo, could easily lead Bnei

Yisrael to several incorrect conclusions:

 

 1)  The necessity of a new covenant for this generation

implies that the covenant at Har Sinai does not bind all

future generations. Why else would they require a 'new'

covenant at Arvot Moav?

     Evidently, one could conclude, the laws of the Torah
are

binding only upon a generation (or individual) who
formally

accepts this covenant, but not upon subsequent generations

(unless formally accepted)!

 

 2)  An individual (or possibly even a larger group) may

decide that he doesn't want either side of the covenant -

neither its reward NOR its punishment! Some people may
gladly

forego any potential reward for keeping the mitzvot of the

"brit", so long as in turn they would not be bound by its

strict demands or threatened by the harsh punishment for
its

neglect.

     In other words, Bnei Yisrael may conclude that each

person or family in any generation has the 'option' to
either

be part of the "brit" or to 'back out' ("chas veshalom"!).

 

 

 3)  Just as any given individual may reserve the right to

'back out' of the covenant, God as well may be enabled to

exercise His right to 'retract' His covenant should He see

fit. In other words, Bnei Yisrael could potentially infer
from

the closing section of the Tochacha in Ki-tavo that exile

signifies the very annulment of this covenant.  In other

words, if exile is understood as God 'nullifying' His side
of

the covenant, then Bnei Yisrael (once in exile) could
reach

the logical conclusion that their 'special relationship'
with

God is over (chas veshalom!).

    [See Yechezkel 20:32 and its context, where Bnei
Yisrael

    in the Babylonian Exile raise this very possibility!]

 

PUTTING THE PIECES TOGETHER

     With this background, let's now take another look at
the

various components of Moshe's final speech in an attempt
to

explain why they from this 'finale'.

     In PARSHIA #1, Moshe Rabeinu first explains WHY this

'new' covenant (as described in the third speech) is

necessary. True, a covenant had already been made with the

previous generation. However, because of their sins and

subsequent demise in the desert, it is only now that the

original intention of BRIT SINAI becomes applicable.

     To emphasize upon this new generation that THEY must

fulfill the destiny originally planned for their parents,
God

recreates the 'atmosphere' of Har Sinai, allowing the new

generation to 'relive' the experience. Although most of
them

were NOT at Har Sinai, it is important that this entire

generation feel as though they actually stood at the foot
of

the mountain. They will soon enter the land and face the

challenge of establishing God's special nation, and they
must

therefore bring with them the Sinai experience and
covenant.

     As Seforno on 29:3 explains, it is only NOW that Bnei

Yisrael are finally ready to, for the first time, fulfill

God's covenant. Moshe thus explains to this generation
that

'this is THE day' for which He has been waiting.  Now, God
has

a nation that can truly KNOW, SEE, and LISTEN (see 29:3,

Seforno and Rashi).

     Thus, there is nothing 'new' about this covenant. In

fact, it serves an opposite function: i.e. to reaffirm the

relevance and application of the original covenant at Har

Sinai.

     With this in mind, we can now explain the need for
the

second parshia.

     Once this 'renewed' "brit" becomes necessary, Moshe

Rabeinu must disaffirm the possible conclusion that every

generation and every individual has the option of
accepting or

refusing the terms of the covenant (as we explained
above).

Therefore, in PARSHIA #2 Moshe reminds Bnei Yisrael of the

purpose of that covenant (to become God's nation, see
29:9-14)

and then threatens severe punishment for any person or
group

considering the option of 'backing out' (see 29:17-25).

     Afterward, in PARSHA #3, Moshe Rabeinu reassures Bnei

Yisrael that just as this covenant is binding upon Bnei

Yisrael for ALL generations, so is it eternally binding
upon

God Himself.  Therefore, even in the advent of exile, God
will

(sooner or later) ensure Bnei Yisrael's return to their
land

to keep His mitzvot and become His nation. [Note that
other

religions (which evolved from Judaism) reject specifically

this point!]

     Moshe then proceeds to repudiate another likely

conclusion of one who hears the terms of this covenant
(and

its almost innumerable obligations), the claim that it's

simply 'impossible' to be an 'observant Jew.' Moshe
Rabeinu

explains in PARSHIA #4 that in truth, it's not as hard as
it

may seem. For if one has the proper attitude of "ahavat

Hashem" (the opening theme of the main speech), then the
'way

of life' which the Torah demands lies well within his
reach.

     Finally, in PARSHIA #5, Moshe concludes his speech
with

the axiom of "bechira chofshit" (freedom of choice), the
God-

given ability to choose the 'path of life' [or 'death'],
which

will now be discussed in Part Two.

 

     ===========

 

PART TWO  - Between Gan Eden and Eretz Yisrael

     Before we begin Part Two, review 30:15-20, and notice

that this 'parshia' forms the concluding section of this

speech. As you read, note how Moshe Rabeinu summarizes in
this

conclusion some of the primary themes of the main speech

(which we have discussed in previous shiurim):

   "See, I set before you today CHAYIM (life) and TOV

   (prosperity), MAVET (death) and RA (adversity).

        For I command you today to LOVE God and walk in
His

   ways [referring to the MITZVAH section/ 6->11] and to
keep

   His CHUKIM u'MISHPATIM [referring to the 2nd part of
the

   main speech/ 12->26)] that you may thrive and increase
and

   that God will bless you in the Land that you are about
to

   conquer...

        Should you turn your heart (not listen)... I
declare

   today that you shall certainly perish and not endure on
the

   Land... that you are to conquer."    (see 30:15-18)

 

     Clearly, Moshe refers once again to the two sections
of

the main speech.  However, these verses may relate as well
to

a fundamental theme in Sefer Breishit, as suggested by
several

key phrases in this section. Let's explain.

     Recall the usage of the terms 'CHAYIM and TOV' and
'MAVET

and RA' in 30:15, cited earlier. Let's identify the
precise

definition of these expressions in the final two psukim:

   "I call Heavens and Earth to testify that I am
presenting

   you the CHOICE of CHAYIM or MAVET - the "bracha" or

   "klalla" - and you should choose CHAYIM in order that
you

   live... on this Land that I promised to your
ancestors..."

   (30:19-20)

 

     In this beautiful finale, the Torah equates the
concept

of BRACHA & KLALA, as detailed by the "tochacha" (see
28:1-

7,15-20!), with CHAYIM & MAVET:

     BRACHA = CHAYIM (life); KLALLA = MAVET (death).

Recall however, that the concepts of CHAYIM & MAVET as
well as

TOV & RA were first introduced in the story of Gan Eden:

   "And God brought forth from the ground every tree...
and

   the ETZ HA'CHAYIM

        [the Tree of Life] in the middle of the garden,
and

   the:

   ETZ Ha'DAAT TOV V'RA

        [the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil...]

   and from the ETZ HA'DAAT TOV v'RA do not eat, for on
the

   day you eat from it - MOT TA'MUT - you will surely
die!"

                     (see Breishit 2:8-9, 2:15-17)

     This textual parallel is strengthened by yet another

resemblance to the story of Creation. Note that the
Heavens

and Earth - SHAMAYIM v'ARETZ - are called upon as
witnesses to

this covenant (see 30:19, as well as 31:28 & 32:1).

     This special call upon "shamayim" and "aretz" to
witness

the "brit" may relate not only to the introduction of the

story of Creation (Br. 1:1), but also to the opening pasuk
of

the Gan Eden narrative in Breishit - see 2:4!

 

A GAN EDEN CLOSE TO HOME

     This textual parallel suggests a conceptual
relationship

between life according to the Torah's ideals in the Land
of

Israel and existence in Gan Eden. In fact, the spiritual

environment of Gan Eden strongly resembles the spiritual

environment that Sefer Devarim wishes to create in the
Land of

Israel.

     Recall how the Gan Eden narrative described a special

environment between man and God, with an emphasis on
"schar

v'onesh" [reward and retribution].  God promises Man a

prosperous physical existence [CHAYIM] should he OBEY,
while

threatening death [MAVET] should Man DISOBEY (see Br.
2:15-

17).  In a very similar manner, the "tochacha" describes a

parallel reality in the land of Israel:

     Should Bnei Yisrael keep the mitzvot, God will reward

them with prosperity (see 29:1-14); if they sin, God will

punish them severely (see 29:15-26).

    [Note as well Devarim 11:13-20 (from daily kriyat
shma).]

    

     Furthermore, EXILE emerges in both settings as the
most

severe punishment. Adam is banished from the Garden as a

consequence of his sin (see Br. 3:22-24). Similarly, the

"tochacha" threatens that should Am Yisrael continue to
sin

they will driven from the land by their enemies (see
28:64-68)

and remain in Exile until they perform proper Teshuva

(repentance / see Devarim 30:1-10).

   [Interestingly, God's original death sentence for
eating

   from the Tree was translated into Adam's EXILE from the

   Garden (3:23) when he actually partook of the Tree's
fruit.

   Considering that Gan Eden reflects an ideal spiritual

   environment, exile may be accurately equated with
death.

   Whereas the biblical purpose of LIFE is to develop a

   connection with God, biblical DEATH refers to life
without

   any such connection, an exile into an environment

   characterized by God's absence.]

 

     This parallel takes on additional meaning when we

consider the location of these two sources: at the
BEGINNING

of Chumash and towards the very END of Chumash.

     One could suggest that in this manner Chumash
underscores

the basic nature of man's relationship with God. First, we
are

told of God's creation of Man and his placement in Gan
Eden -

the ideal spiritual environment. As punishment for his
sin,

God expels man from Gan Eden, appointing the "keruvim" to

guard against any attempt to return (see Br. 3:24).

     Nonetheless, the presence of the "keruvim" who guard
the

'way to the Tree of Life' does not necessarily indicate
the

permanent closure of this path. To the contrary, it
becomes

man's duty to STRIVE to return. The "keruvim" do not
restrict

entry; rather they protect the Garden from the intrusion
of

those undeserving of return. But once man proves himself

worthy, the DERECH ETZ HA'CHAYIM - the PATH to the Tree of

Life - no matter how formidable it may at first appear,

suddenly opens and invites man inside.

     Correspondingly, Sefer Devarim describes Eretz
Yisrael as

both a physical and spiritual environment where Am Yisrael
can

rebuild this spiritual connection with God.

     For example, Parshat Ekev illustrates how the climate
of

Eretz Yisrael contributes to this environment:

   "...always, God's EYES are upon it [the Land], from the

   beginning of the year until the end of the year."

                       (see Devarim 11:10-12)

 

FROM GAN EDEN TO 'JERUSALEM'

     But perhaps the most meaningful parallel between Gan
Eden

and Eretz Yisrael arises in the CHUKIM & MISHPATIM
section.

Recall that Parshiyot Re'ay, Shoftim, and Ki-tavo present

numerous mitzvot relating to HA'MAKOM ASHER YIVCHAR
HASHEM,

the Bet Ha'Mikdash, which will be built on the site chosen
by

God. As explained in our shiur on Parshat Re'ay, Sefer
Devarim

demands that every Jew frequent that site regularly, be it
for

"aliyah le'regel" on the holidays, to offer korbanot or

bikurim, to eat "ma'aser sheni," to appear in court, etc.

     Situated at the focal point of that site [i.e. the
Bet

Ha'Mikdash] is the KODESH KEDOSHIM, the permanent location
of

the ARON, covered by the KAPORET and protected by KERUVIM,

both on the KAPORET and on the PAROCHET! [See Shmot
25:16-22 &

26:31-34.]

     Given that the concept of KERUVIM arises nowhere else
in

Chumash outside of these two contexts - the Mishkan/Bet

Hamikdash and Gan Eden - a thematic connection between the
two

is implied.  Just as the KERUVIM of Gan Eden protect the
path

to the ETZ HA'CHAYIM, so do the KERUVIM of the Mikdash
guard

the path to true CHAYIM: i.e. they protect the ARON which

contains the LUCHOT HA'EIDUT - the symbol of the TORAH and
our

covenant with God at Har Sinai.

     By placing the LUCHOT - a powerful symbol of MATAN
TORAH

- at the focal point of our lives in Eretz Yisrael, Sefer

Devarim urges us to strive to return to the environment of
Gan

Eden by observing the laws of the TORAH.

     This interpretation is supported by the famous pasuk
in

Mishlei, recited each time we return the SEFER TORAH to
the

ARON HA'KODESH:

   "ETZ CHAYIM HI - She is a Tree of Life - for those who
hold

   on to her, and whoever holds her is fortunate."
(Mishlei

   3:18)

    [Even though this pasuk seemingly refers to wisdom in

    general (see 3:13), in the overall context of the
perek

    "wisdom" refers specifically to Torah (see 3:1-8!).]

 

     Thus, Chumash 'ends' with a theme which quite
parallel to

the theme of its opening narrative.  God's original
intention

may have been for man to enjoy a close relationship with
Him

in Gan Eden.  Even though that goal seems to have 'failed'
in

Sefer Bereishit, Sefer Devarim concludes with the
possibility

that the Nation of Israel can indeed return to such an

existence, in the Land of Israel.  [For a similar
explanation,

see Seforno's introduction to Sefer Breishit!]

     To better appreciate our discussion, I highly
recommend

that you study the Ramban on 30:19. His explanation of
what

man should learn from his contemplation of "shamayim
v'aretz"

(what we call 'nature') that surrounds us will definitely

enhance your appreciation of Parshat Nitzavim.
Furthermore,

it is a most fitting Ramban to study in preparation for
Rosh

Ha'Shana - the day marking God's creation of "shamayim

v'aretz."

 

                              shabbat shalom,

                              menachem

 

=================

FOR FURTHER IYUN - on Part One:

 

A. The Midrash Tanchuma in Parshat Nitzavim relates that

during the time of Yechezkel, a delegation of "elder

statesmen" came to Yechezkel and challenged the obligation
to

abide by the Torah. They asked the prophet, "If a kohen

purchases a servant, does the servant partake from the
kohen's

teruma?" When Yechezkel answered in the affirmative, they

inquired as to what would happen if the kohen then sold
the

servant to a Yisrael. The prophet replied that, of course,

once the servant is no longer under the authority of the

kohen, he has no further rights as far as teruma is
concerned.

"We, too," they said, "have already left His authority and
we

will no be like all the gentiles."

     Yechezkel responds (20:32-33), "That which came to
your

mind shall not be at all; in that you say, 'We will be as
the

nations, as the families of the countries, to serve wood
and

stone.' As I live, says Hashem, surely with a mighty hand
and

an outstretched arm and with fury poured out I will be
king

over you!"

     Explain the relevance of these psukim and their
general

context to Parshat Nitzavim and the above shiur.

 

B. One critical question we did not address concerns the

'legal' mechanism by which the covenant of Har Sinai
becomes

binding upon all generations. It would seem that one
cannot be

born into a binding agreement - he must first express his

consent to the terms thereof!      This question was posed
by

the "scholars of Aragon," as recorded by the Abarbanel.
See

his comments in our parasha, and contrast with the
Maharal,

"Netzach Yisrael" 11. According to the Abarbanel, this
eternal

obligation evolves directly from Bnei Yisrael's privilege
of

settling the Land. Needless to say, this beautifully
explains

the context of Parshat Nitzavim: the reenactment of brit
Sinai

on the eve of Bnei Yisrael's entry into Eretz Yisrael.

 

C. See Rashi's comments on "v'hu yihye lecha lelokim"
(29:12),

and note its relevance to the bilateral quality of the
brit as

discussed in the above shiur. Rashi continues by citing a

Midrash regarding Bnei Yisrael's sense of desperation upon

hearing the curses of the tochecha. Moshe reassures them
by

observing, "Atem nitzavim" - you have survived, despite
many

incidents of wrongdoing. Explain how this, too, relates to

this above shiur. Additionally, how does this Midrash help

explain the seemingly irrelevant historical review
presented

at the end of Parshat Ki-Tavo (29:1-8)?

  Explain how the final clause of 29:5 reinforces the
equation

between this generation and their parents. [See Shmot
6:7.]

 

D. Different mefarshim have come up with different
approaches

to explain 29:3: "YET, until this day, God has not given
you a

'heart to know,' 'eyes to see,' or 'ears to listen.'" In
the

shiur, we mentioned the explanations of Rashi and Seforno.

Other mefarshim explain this pasuk as a continuation of

Moshe's "musar." For example, Abarbanel places a question
mark

at the end of the pasuk. Before you see his commentary
inside

(which I suggest you do), how does his punctuation change
the

meaning of the pasuk? Others understand "ad hayom hazeh"
as

meaning, "even until." What does the pasuk meaning
according

to this reading?

     Other mefarshim, however, try to explain that Bnei

Yisrael arrived at a unique awareness of Hashem's power on

"this day," the conclusion of their sojourn in the
wilderness.

Rav David Tzvi Hoffman explains that the forty years of

wandering and the recent battle against Sichon and Og

magnified this awareness far more effectively than the
wonders

and miracles of Egypt.

 

E. Moshe describes the potential attempt by an individual
or

group to breach the covenant as follows: "Perhaps there is

among you some man or woman. When such a person hears the

words of these sanctions, he may fancy himself immune [JPS

translation; note the difficulty in interpreting these
words]

thinking, 'I shall be safe, because I follow my own
willful

heart'."

     Many mefarshim address the problematic word "ki"

(translated here as "because") in this pasuk. Ibn Ezra
[and

JPS] translate "ki" as "even though," while the Ramban, in
his

first suggestion, interprets the word as similar to

"ka'asher." How may we maintain the standard
interpretation of

"ki" as "because," based on the second erroneous
conclusion

Moshe feared, as we discussed in the shiur? See Ramban's

second interpretation.

 

F. As we saw, the psukim in 30:11-14 remind the people
that

Torah observance is not as hard as it may seem. Nowhere do
we

find such an explicit reassurance to the generation of

Yetzi'at Mitzrayim and Matan Torah. Why would this younger

generation in particular require these words of
encouragement?

 

G. Note the difference between the simple reading of 30:12
and

that of the Gemara in Eruvin, as cited here by Rashi. Show
how

the Midrashic reading of the pasuk addresses the first two

incorrect conclusions that, as we discussed, Moshe feared,
and

contrast this approach with our understanding in the
shiur.

     [Point of methodology: Explain the difficulty

understanding the transition from 30:11 to 30:12 according
to

the Midrashic interpretation. On the other hand, what
other

difficulties does this Gemara resolve? Does the Gemara

necessarily negate the simple understanding? How do your

answers to these questions reflect the general
relationship

between "pshat" and "drash"?]

=============

FOR FURTHER IYUN - on Part Two

A. We mentioned above that the psukim at the end of
Parshat

Nitzavim (30:15-20) that allude to Gan Eden could be

considered the denouement of Moshe's speeches in Sefer

Devarim. Pay careful attention to the literary style from

chapter 31 onward. In which person is the narrative
written

(1st or 3rd)?   What about the previous sections of the
sefer?

Is the style of this concluding section more similar to
Sefer

Devarim or to Bamidbar? Might this unit be considered a

continuation of Sefer Bamidbar?    Explain your answer.

 

B.   A famous dispute among the commentators surrounds the

psukim just prior to these that we have discussed. To what

does "mitzvah hazot" (30:11) refer? See 30:11-14, Rashi
(on

pasuk 14), Ibn Ezra (also pasuk 14), Ramban (pasuk 11) and

Seforno (pasuk 11). If we view these pesukim as continuing
the

previous discussion of teshuva, then perhaps the pesukim

discussed in the above shiur (30:15-20) also relate to
this

theme: the choice between "life" and "death" in the
aftermath

of sin. Explain how this enhances our association between

these psukim and the return to Gan Eden. Bear in mind the

Midrash that Hashem banished Adam from Gan Eden only after

having first offered him the chance to do teshuva
(Bereishit

Rabba 21, Bemidbar Rabba 13).

     Furthermore, compare 15-20 with the opening psukim of

Parshat Re'ay. Note the difference in terminology:
"bracha"

and "k'lala" as opposed to "chayim" and "mavet." [Notice
that

Moshe makes a point of associating "bracha/k'lala" with

"chayim/mavet" in 30:19.] Try to explain this difference
in

light of our suggestion that our psukim refer to the
situation

after sin, rather than before sinning. [See Meshech
Chochma.]

What 'choice' is presented in Re'ay, and which does Moshe

present here, in the aftermath of sin? Why is the wrong

'choice' in our context called "death" (perhaps more

accurately, the "curse" translates into "death") while in

Re'ay it's merely a "curse"?

 

C.   The Sifrei in the beginning of Parshat Re'ay (54:27)

associates the psukim there (as we cited in B.) with
Hashem's

comment to Kayin: "Surely, if you do right you will be

forgiven [see Targum, as opposed to Ibn Ezra]; but if you

don't do right, sin couches at the door" (Bereishit 4:7).
Why

would God have to impress this notion upon Kayin
particularly

in the aftermath of Adam's banishment from Gan Eden? Why
must

Moshe repeat this same message to Bnei Yisrael before they

enter the land?

 

D.   In 29:12-14, we find once again the concept of Bnei

Yisrael's destiny to become a special nation. Relate this
to

our entire series of shiurim on Devarim. [Note as well the

reference to God's promise to the patriarchs, and recall
our

shiur last week regarding 'mikra bikkurim' and 'viduy

ma'aser.']

 

E. Read the Rambam's comments concerning the laws of
Hakhel in

Hilchot Chagiga perek 3. Note particularly his remarks in

halacha 6 concerning "geirim." (If you have a chance, read

also the seventh perek of mishnayot Sota.)  How do these

halachot relate to the above shiur?  Why do you think we
skip

from shma to v'haya im shmoa in kriyat shma?  What is the

final word read by the king at Hakhel? How might this be

significant in light of this shiur?

In halacha 6, why does the Rambam emphasize that davka the

"geir" must feel as though he is standing at Har Sinai
during

the hakhel ceremony?

 

F.   Regarding the association of Torah with "life" (end
of

the shiur), see Targum Yonatan on 30:20.

 

G.   We noted the function of Torah as the "Tree of Life,"
the

means by which we "return to Gan Eden." See Midrash
HaGadol in

Bereishit: "That tree from which whoever would eat would
live

- God hid it and gave us His Torah, the tree of life." See

also Tanchuma Yashan, Bereishit 25 that identifies the
"lahat

hacherev" (the "fiery sword"), which guarded the entrance
to

Gan Eden together with the keruvim, as Torah (based on

Tehillim 149:7, which we say in Psukei D'Zimra).

  The parallel between Gan Eden and both the Mikdash and
Torah

study becomes especially apparent in the Midrashim that

interpret Adam's responsibility in Gan Eden of "l'ovda" in

reference to korbanot and Torah study. See Pirkei D'Rabbi

Eliezer 12, Bereishit Rabba 16, and especially Sifrei Ekev
41.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20100901/976eabc4/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: nitz.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 64911 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20100901/976eabc4/attachment-0001.pdf