<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16481" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial
size=2>*************************************************************<BR>
THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]<BR> In Memory of
Rabbi Abraham Leibtag<BR> Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem
Leibtag<BR>*************************************************************</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>PARSHAT SHOFTIM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>PART I - QUESTIONS FOR THE 'SHABBOS
TABLE'</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>"TOV V'YASHAR" – WHO DECIDES WHAT'S
RIGHT?<BR>1. Parshat Shoftim ends with the phrase: "ki taase ha'YASHAR
b'einei Hashem" – should you do what is 'straight' [correct?] in the eyes of
God. Carefully study this pasuk (21:9), while relating to its
context (in 21:1-9). In your opinion, how does this phrase relate to the
first half of this pasuk? [In other words – how would your translate the
word "ki" in 21:9?]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. Before looking at the various commentaries
to 21:9, take a quick look at three ealier instances when this phrase is found
in Sefer Devarim – 6:18, 12:25-28, and 13:19. In each of these
instances, does this phrase refer to something specific or something very
general?<BR> In your opinion, how is someone supposed to know what is
considered "yashar b'einei Hashem"? Does it refer only to something that
the Torah had already mentioned, or is there someway of knowing what is "yashar
b'einei Hashem" – without having to be told explcitly what specific action it
refers to.<BR> In your opinion, how was the generation of the Flood
supposed to know what was 'right & wrong'? If they had no way of
knowing, how could God have punished them? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. See Rashi on 21:9. How would Rashi
answer question one above? [See also Seforno, noting how he advances
a similar approach.]<BR> Next, see Ibn Ezra; read his
commentary carefully, noting how he presents three different ways to understand
this phrase in its context. Be sure that you understand the logic behind
each interpretation. <BR> In your opinion, why do you think that Ibn Ezra
prefers the third opinion (which begins with "v'hanachon b'einei")?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>4. Finally, see Rashi, and then the Ramban on
Devarim 6:18. Read every word of this Ramban very carefully, for he
explains a very important principle about how our Torah study can help us
improve our behviour, even in regard to cases that are not discussed explicitly
in the Torah!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>"MATZEVOT" - ARE THEY ALWAYS BAD?<BR>1.
Review 16:21-22, noting how these prohibitions relate the psukim that precede
them, as well as to the psukim that follow them. Can you find any logic
behind this progression of topic?<BR>[For an interesting insight - see Ibn
Ezra's commentary on all the psukim from 16:18 through 17:1 - noting how he
attempts to tackle this question, especially his introductory remarks in 16:18,
as they explain the underlying reason behind his approach to certain parts of
his commentary!]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. According to 16:22, it is forbidden to
erect a "matzeyva".<BR>Can you explain the 'technical' difference between a
"mizbeyach" [altar?] and a "matzeyva" [monument?], and based on your definition
- can you explain more precisely what is prohibited in 16:21 &
16:22?<BR> Review Devarim 12:3, noting how the Torah uses two different
verbs to describe what must be done to destroy the "mizbachot" and matzeyvot"
dedicated to other gods. [See also 7:5, noting how to get rid of an
"ashera" as well!]<BR> Can you explain how these two verbs
relate to the definition of each? In general, for what purpose would
someone build a "mizbeyach" and for what purpose a "matzeyva"?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. Review Breishit 28:18-22, noting how and why
Yaakov Avinu erects a "matzeyva". Does he build a "mizbayach" as well as
Avraham Avinu had done several times? [e.g. Breishit
12:6-8]<BR> Relate this to your definition of each, as discussed in the
above question. <BR> Note as well, that Moshe erects twelve "matzeyvot" in
preparation for the ceremony at Har Sinai (when Bnei Yisrael will declare
"naaseh v'nishma" / see Shmot 24:3-7!). Can you explain the purpose of
those matzeyvot? Did Moshe Rabeinu build a mizbeyach as well at that
time? Can you explain he needs to build both?<BR> Again, relate this
to your definition of each, as discussed in the above question. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>4. Review Devarim 16:22 once again, noting the
'trailer' phrase: "asher soney Hashem Elokecha" -<BR> i.e. 'Do
not erect a matzeyva THAT GOD DESPISES' <BR> In your opinion, does this
phrase describe WHICH matzeyva the Torah forbids, or WHY the Torah forbids all
matzeyvot?<BR> Relate your answer to the above question concerning the
matzeyvot built by Yaakov Avinu and Moshe Rabeinu!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>5. For an interesting insight on these
questions, see the commentaries of Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ramban & Seforno, noting
how each commentator understands this pasuk in a different manner. Attempt
to explain each approach based on your answers to the above
questions!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> SHEVET LEVI<BR>1. Chapter 17 opens with
guidelines for court cases that must be presented to a highest magistrate.
As you review 17:1-10, note how these psukim 'take for granted' that the
"kohanim" & "leviim" as most likely to be those judges (see
17:8-9). Can you explain the logic behind this assumption?
<BR> Then, review Sefer Bamidbar chapter 18, and relate its context and
detail to your answer.<BR> See also Devarim 21:5-6, noting their context in
21:1-9. Based on these psukim, for what purpose was shevet Levi
chosen? Relate as well to Vayikra 10:8-11.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. In Devarim chapter 18, we find some additional
laws regarding shevet Levi (see 18:1-8). Relate these laws to your answer
to the above question. <BR> Recall as well that the tribe of Levi did
not receive its own "nachala" (inheritance), instead, they received 48 cities
scattered among the other tribes (see Bamidbar 35:1-8). Furthermore,
Bnei Yisrael are commanded to pay a 10% tax of their 'agricultural income' (see
Bamidbar 18:21 /i.e. "maaser rishon") to support the tribe of Levi.
<BR> Based on the above sources, can you explain the
underlying reason for these laws?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. Note how the laws about the rights and
obligations of shevet Levi in Devarim 18:1-8 are presented immediately after the
laws that regulate the rights and obligations of the King of Israel (i.e. their
political leader). Attempt to explain the logic behind this
juxtaposition. Explain as well why this topic in general is recorded
specifically in Sefer Devarim (and at this point of the main
speech).<BR> In your answer, relate to Moshe Rabeinu's blessing to shevet
Levi in Devarim 33:10.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>4. Review I Divrei Ha'yamim chapters 23 thru 26,
noting how David ha'melech organized the kohanim and leviim into groups that
would work in the Mikdash! Considering that most kohanim and leviim worked
only one week out of 24 in the Bet Ha'Mikdash, and based on the above questions,
what would you assume that the Torah expects for the kohanim & leviim to do
with their 'spare time' (i.e. when they are not officiating at the Bet
ha'Mikdash)? <BR> In regard to the responsibilities of Shevet Levi, see
also Devarim 33:10 and II Divrei Ha'yamim 35:3.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>5. Based on all of the above sources, how do
these laws that concern the tribe of Levi help Am Yisrael become a "goy kadosh".
Relate your answer to Devarim 26:16-19 and Shmot 19:5-6, and the underlying
theme of Sefer Devarim.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>GATES OF JUDGEMENT<BR>1. Parshat Shoftim opens with
a command to appoint judges 'in all your GATES' ["sha'arecha"]. <BR> In
your opinion, does the Torah mean 'gates' literally?<BR> If so, why do the
gates of the city have to do with judges? If not, why does the Torah use
the word 'gates'?<BR> Where else in Tanach do we find 'gates' in connection
to actions that require a legal court?<BR>[In case you don't remember, see for
example Breishit 23:10,18 & 34:24; Devarim 21:19; 22:24; 22:15; Rut 4:1-11;
and II Shmuel 15:2.]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. Review Breishit 19:1 in regard to Lot sitting at
the gate of the city. Note Rashi's commentary on this! Can you explain how
and why Rashi arrives at this conclusion?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. See Shmot 32:26 and its context in relation to
punishment of those who sinned at "chet ha'egel" by the tribe of Levi. Can
you explain why Moshe commands them to 'go from gate to gate' in order to
execute those who were responsible for the sins of the nation? <BR> In your
opinion, can this pasuk provide a basis to assume that the three thousand who
were killed were first 'tried' by a rabbinical court?<BR> <BR>4. Based on
the above sources, can the Hebrew word "sha'ar" [gate] also carry more general
meaning? In your answer, relate to the following additional sources:
Devarim 14:21,28,29 15:22; & 16:14. <BR> Based on these examples,
what meaning of the word "sha'ar" fits most closely to its use in
16:18?<BR> Finally, note the navi's use of the word "sha'ar" in Zecharya
8:16! How does this pasuk and its context relate to the opening pasuk of
Parshat Shoftim?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>5. If you have ample time, glance through the
first two chapters of Parshat Shoftim (from 16:18 thru 18:8), noticing how often
the Torah uses the word "shaar", especially when introducing certain
mitzvot. [If you have less time, then you can 'cheat' by just noting
16:18, 17:2,5,8 and 18:6] <BR> Note as well how this
word "shaar" if found in the context of "ha'makom asher yivchar
Hashem"!<BR> In what manner should "ha'makom asher yivchar
Hashem" have an affect on what takes place at the gates of every
city?<BR> <BR>6. In ancient times, walled cities were usually quite
small, while most of the people lived outside those walls, while the king and
important official lived inside the walls. Therefore, the gates of the
city often became to the best spot for 'market place'. [In regard to the
daily activities that usually took place near the city gate - see for example
Nechamya 8:1-5 and 13:9-22.] <BR> In your opinion, who would the
people in the market area go to should a dispute arise? <BR> Taking this
into consideration, how would this help explain why the Torah commands the
establishment of court by the city gates? <BR> In your opinion, do you
think it would be 'permitted', or possibly 'imperative', that courts be set up
in cities that don't have gates as well? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>7. If you have any books at home on archeology in
Israel, look at the pictures of the city gates from the first Temple period
uncovered in either Chatzor, Megido, Lachish, Yerushalayim, etc. <BR> Can
you find an suitable area within the gate where the "shoftim" could judge the
people?<BR> Relate you answer to the above questions.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>THREE, SIX, OR NINE [CITIES OF REFUGE]<BR>1.
Review 19:1-10, noting the commandment to set aside three cities of refuge,
followed by a clause (see 19:8-9) that should the borders of Israel become even
greater, then there would be a need to separate and additional three
cites.<BR> In you opinion, is this commandment in regard to these 'extra'
three cities (described in 19:8-9) the reason why Moshe had 'already' set aside
three cities of refuge in Transjordan, as described in Devarim 4:41-43?
<BR> If so, why doesn't Moshe Rabeinu mention at this time
(i.e. in chapter 19) the fact that these cities had already been separated,
rather than stating: 'should God widen your borders...'?<BR>
If not, why doesn't Moshe Rabeinu mention anything (at this time) in regard to
the three cities in Transjordan; and how does the separation of those cities
relate to the commandment to set aside a 'third' set of three cities when even
more land will be captured?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. Before you study the commentaries that
deal with these questions, see the other sources in Chumash that deal with
"arei miklat" - Shmot 21:13-14, Bamidbar 35:11-14 and Devarim
4:41-43. <BR> Afterward, study the commentaries of
Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Rashbam, Ramban, and Seforno on Devarim 4:41 and 19:1-2, noting
how they relate to the above sources and questions.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. Recall our explanation (in our introductory
shiur to Sefer Devarim) that the mitzvot that Moshe teaches to Bnei Yisrael in
the main speech (i.e. chapters 6 thru 26) were first given by God to Moshe at
Har Sinai, during the first forty days (see 5:21-28, and 6:1). Now, forty
years later, Moshe Rabeinu is 'repeating' these laws, and teaching them one last
time.<BR> If indeed Moshe is quoting these laws (i.e. of "arei miklat" as
they were originally given at Har Sinai, how could that consideration answer the
problems raised in our opening question! How would this explain what Moshe
Rabeinu does in 4:41-43, before he begins this speech (in chapter
5)?<BR> <BR>4. Based on our earlier shiur regarding the 'expandable
borders' of the land of Israel [on Parshat Masei], and the distinction between
"eretz canaan" and "ha'aretz" [from the Nile to Euphrates] - attempt to explain
the difference between these two sets of 'three cities'. Relate to the
opening phrases of each section: "asher Hashem notein lachem et artzam" (see
19:1 & 19:2) in contrast to: "im yarchiv Hashem et gvulcha kaasher nishba
la'avotecha..." (see 19:8)!<BR> Compare 19:8-9 with Devarim 11:22-25,
noting the borders and conditions for when these borders can be
achieved!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> =========</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>PART II - QUESTIONS FOR PREPARATION (for weekly
shiur)<BR>1. Using a Tanach Koren (or similar), scan from chapter 12 thru
chapter 21 (i.e. Parshiot Re'ay & Shoftim), noting its division into many
'parshiot'. <BR> As you review these chapters, attempt
to compose a concise 'one line' title to summarize the main topic of each
individual 'parshia', and record them in a 'vertical' list. <BR> When you
have finished, study your list, and attempt to follow the thematic flow from one
parshia to the next. Also, attempt to organize your list into
several general groups, i.e. turn your list into an outline.<BR>[If you need
help (or if/when you give up) – read this:<BR> Note how there are a group
of parshiot that deal with "ha'Makom asher yivchar Hashem" [as discussed in our
shiur on Parshat Re'ay], followed by parshiot that deal with:<BR> the
shmita cycle, and then the chagim cycle; <BR>followed by parshiot that deal with
various types of leadership; <BR>and concluing with parshiot that deal with
going to war. <BR>That just gave away most of the answers, but it is still
worthwhile to figure this out on your own!]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. Considering that these mitzvot form a important
part of the CHUKIM & MISHPATIM section of the main speech in Sefer Devarim,
attempt to relate this thematic flow to the purpose of these mitzvot (i.e. to
the underlying purpose of "brit Sinai" as detailed in Shmot 19:5-6).
Relate this as well to the fact that Bnei Yisrael now prepare to conquer the
land and establish a nation.<BR> As usual, relate your answer
to the key psukim which we have discussed in the earlier shiurim on Sefer
Devarim, especially to 4:5-8, 5:1, 5:28, 6:1, and 26:16-19.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. Notice how the first half of Parshat Shoftim
contains several 'parshiot' that discuss different examples of national
leadership. After you identify each category, attempt to define the
responsibilities (and need) for each type of leadership. In your opinion,
what should be the ideal inter-relationship between these different realms of
leadership? Should there some type of hierchy among them, and if so, who
should be 'in charge'?.<BR> Afterward, see Seforno on 19:2. Did you
find the four examples of leadership that he noticed? Note as well how
Seforno relates these four types of leaders to the mitzvot that follow afterward
in Parshat Shfotim! </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>4. In your opinion, what should the ideal
relationship between the King and the "shoftim"; the King and the "Leviim"; and
the King and the "neviim"? <BR> What are their respective
responsibilities, and how is each type of 'leadership group' supposed to be
chosen? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>5. The parshia from 17:14-20 discusses the laws of
a 'king'. In your opinion, do these laws define what a king CAN do, or
CAN'T do, or both? If so, what can or can't he do?<BR> Can you think
of anything else that the King is supposed to do, in addition to what is listed
in this section? If so, can you explain why those details are
omitted?<BR> In your opinion, why then does the Torah focus on only one
specific commandment concerning what the King must do, i.e. 17:18 20? How
does this specific mitzva relate to all of the other mitzvot in Sefer
Devarim? <BR> What does the word 'torah' in 17:18-20
refer to? In your answer, relate to Devarim 4:44-45 and 27:3. Relate
as well to Yehoshua 1:7-8 (in its context)! [Based on those psukim, could
one conclude that Yehoshua was considered a 'king'?]<BR>
<BR>6. Compare the laws concerning the king in 17:14-20 with Shmuel I chapter 8,
where Shmuel informs the people in regard to the numerous rights of the King
(note especially 8:9-17 / better known as "mishpat ha'melech").
<BR> In your opinion, does this list (that Shmuel warns the
people) include things:<BR> that the King may do, even
though he is not allowed to; <BR> or,<BR>
that the King truly have the right to do!<BR>
<BR> If the King does have these rights, are they permitted
even for his own wealth, or only for the needs of the nation? If the latter, who
decides 'what are the needs of the nation'?<BR> <BR>7. In your
opinion, is it necessary for Am Yisrael to have a 'king', or only an
'option'? From your understanding of 17:14 20 and its context, does it
seem obligatory that Bnei Yisrael appoint a king, or does this mitzvah only
apply should Bnei Yisrael voluntarily choose to appoint a king?
<BR> See discussion of this topic in Mesechet Sanhedrin
20b.<BR>Continue with the "parshanut" section which follows
(below).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>PART III - PARSHANUT</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>IS A KING A MUST?<BR>1. Review 17:14-20.
Based on its context within the entire CHUKIM & MISHPATIM section of the
main speech of Sefer Devarim (i.e. chapters 12-26), would you say that
appointing a king is obligatory ["chova"] or an option
["reshut"]?<BR> Relate to the word "v'amarta..." in 17:14, and the opening
word "ki" of this parshia. <BR> In your opinion, does the word "ki"
(in this pasuk) imply 'when' or 'if'? In other words, does it relate to
the beginning of the sentence or to the middle of the sentence?
<BR> Compare the use of the word "ki" in this pasuk to its use in Devarim
4:25, 6:20, 7:17, 15:7, 19:1, 26:1. What does "ki" imply in those
examples?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. From the grammatical perspective, what (in
your opinion) does the phrase "k'chol ha'goyim" ['like all the nations'] in
17:14 modify the type of KING or the type of KINGDOM?<BR> How would this
affect your answer to the first question?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. See Rasag [in Torat Chayim edition], who
comments on 17:15 - "mutar" - it is PERMITTED, but not obligatory. See also Ibn
Ezra. What do you think leads Rasag to this conclusion?<BR>[If
you have the time, see the controversy on this issue in Sanhedrin
20b.]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>See Ramban on 17:14. <BR> Note that first he
quotes Chazal's opinion [that to appoint a king is a "chova"], and then seems to
offer his own opinion [possibly that it is only a "reshut"(?) - read
carefully].<BR> Now, note Ramban's explanation of "v'amarta" in his
presentation of Chazal's opinion. What problem in "pshat" 'forces' this
interpretation? [Is this problem based on the assumption that appointing a
king is obligatory ["chova"]?]<BR> What is problematic with the phrase
"k'chol ha'goyim"? How does Ramban solve this problem?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>4. What difficulty arises when translating
the phrase "asher yivchar Hashem Elokecha" - (who God will
choose)?<BR> Explain the controversy between Ibn Ezra & Ramban on this?
How does the translation of "lo tuchal" (you are not PERMITTED or you are not
ABLE) affect their respective interpretations of the phrase "asher yivchar
Hashem? <BR> See Chizkuni, Ibn Ezra, and Ramban! </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>5. Read the final section of the Ramban on 17:15
carefully (beginning with "v'al derech ha'pshat amru..."). Note how
radical his interpretation of "asher yivchar Hashem" is! Note also how it
affects his understanding of "ha'makom asher yivchar Hashem" in chapter
12!!<BR> In your opinion, does Ramban's understanding of pshat affect this
understanding of "nevuah" or visa-versa?!<BR>[Could you relate this approach of
Ramban to our understanding of God's "hashgacha" (providence) over historical
events in our own era, even though there is no "navi" today? (An
interesting topic, but for a shiur on "hashkafa", not parshanut.)]
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>6. See Seforno on 17:14. Relate his pirush to Rasag
& Ibn Ezra.<BR> Is his explanation that appointing a king is a "reshut"
based primarily on the "pshat" of the psukim, or based primarily on his
understanding of the institution of a Kingdom? <BR> Why does Seforno
mention the difference between "melech" and "shofet"? According to
Seforno, is the "shofet" a more ideal type of leadership? Why does his
bring down Bamidbar 27:17?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>7. See the Netziv in Ha'amek Davar on Devarim
17:14 20.<BR> How does he solve the problem in pshat of "k'chol
ha'goyim"? How does he solve the problem of "reshut" or
"chova"?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>8. See Rambam Hilchot Melachim 1:1. Note the
Rambam holds that appointing a king is "chova". What do you think leads
the Rambam to this conclusion?<BR> Note how the final two chapters of
Hilchot Melachim discuss "melech ha'Moshiach". Relate this to Rambam's
interpretation of the mitzvah to appoint a king as a "chova".
<BR> b'hatzlacha,<BR> menachem</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><BR></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>