[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/20130829/1959c403/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- 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/20130829/1959c403/attachment-0001.pdf>