[Par-reg] Devarim - Questions for self study

Mon Jul 24 15:39:15 EDT 2006

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

THE TANACH STUDY CENTER  www.tanach.org

 In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag

Questions for self study - by Menachem Leibtag

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

                     for SEFER  DEVARIM

[The first battery of questions will deal with the book of Devarim;
questions on Parshat Devarim will follow.]

PART I - WHAT IS (or ISN'T) SEFER DEVARIM?      

INTRODUCTION -

      It is commonly understood that Sefer Devarim is a review or
repeat of Chumash, the following set of questions will help you
determine if this assumption is indeed correct, while preparing you
for your study of the book.

      If indeed Sefer Devarim is a review of Chumash, then we would
certainly expect that it would review both the main stories as well as
the primary mitzvot that are found in the books of Breishit, Shmot,
Vayikra, and Bamidbar. 

      To ascertain if this is indeed true, let's review the main
topics of each book of Chumash, and see if they are discussed anywhere
in Sefer Devarim.

1.  In Sefer Breishit, we find the story of Creation, the Flood and
the story of the Avot, etc.  Are any of these stories repeated in
Sefer Devarim?  If so, which story and where it is repeated? 

      Which stories are 'missing'? 

2.  In Sefer Shmot we find the stories of Moshe's birth, the Ten
Plagues, the Exodus, matan Torah, chet ha-egel, and building the
mishkan.  Can you find any of these stories in Sefer Devarim?  If so,
where?  

      Which stories in Shmot are definitely not in Devarim? 

      What "mitzvot" are recorded in Sefer Shmot?  Are any of them
repeated in Sefer Devarim?

3.  Recall how the second half of Sefer Shmot discusses the Mishkan in
great detail (parshiot Teruma, Tetzaveh, first half of Ki Tisa,
Vayakhel & Pekudei).  Is any of this detail repeated or summarized in
Sefer Devarim?  If so, where?

      Is the Mishkan itself ever mentioned in Sefer Devarim?  Is the
Bet ha'Mikdash and/or korbanot ever referred to?

     If so, where? 

4. You may have noticed that stories of Matan Torah and chet ha-egel
are found in Sefer Devarim chapters 5 and 9 (respectively). In what
context are these stories presented in Sefer Devarim - as part of an
ongoing review of Bnei Yisrael's history?  If not, why are they
recorded, and why are some of the details different?

5.  Recall from Sefer Vayikra that it contains numerous mitzvot, most
of which deal with the mishkan and korbanot.  Are any of these mitzvot
repeated in Sefer Devarim?  If so, which mitzvot, in what context (and
where)? 

      Are there any categories of mitzvot in Sefer Vayikra that are
not mentioned at all in Sefer Devarim?  If so, can you explain why?

6.  Recall from our study of Sefer Bamidbar how it contains both
'narrative' and 'mitzvot'.  While the narrative focused on the story
of Bnei Yisrael's journey from Har Sinai towards Eretz Canaan
[including the preparation for that journey], most of its mitzvot
seemed to have 'belonged' in Sefer Vayikra. 

      To the best of your recollection, which stories from Sefer
Bamidbar are repeated in Sefer Devarim?  Are these stories presented
in an orderly fashion?  If so, where in Sefer Devarim and in what
context?

      Can you identify which stories are missing (and why)?  For
example, do we find a review of the stories of Korach, Bil'am, and the
"mei meriva" incident?  If so, are they presented as part of a
complete review, or are they mentioned just in passing? 

7.  The story of the meraglim is indeed 'repeated' in chapter one of
Sefer Devarim.  Can you explain why specifically that story receives
so much detail and is one of the first stories of Chumash to be
repeated in Sefer Devarim (even though it didn't take place until the
second year in the desert)? 

      The story of the conquest of Sichon & Og is also quite detailed
in Parshat Devarim (see chapters 2-3), more so than in its original
account in Sefer Bamidbar (see 21:21-35).  Can you explain why?  In
your answer, relate to the final psukim of Parshat Devarim (i.e.
3:20-22)! 

8.  Recall that Sefer Bamidbar also contained many mitzvot (e.g. -
sota, nazir, birkat kohanim, challa, tzitzit, para aduma, tmidim
u-musafim etc.).  Are any of those mitzvot repeated in Sefer Devarim?
If so, where?  If not, can you explain why they aren't? 

9.  Do we find any mitzvot in Sefer Devarim that were never mentioned
earlier in Chumash?  If so, name a few examples. 

      If Sefer Devarim is indeed a review of Chumash, would it make
sense that it would contain mitzvot that were never mentioned earlier?

10.  Based on your answers to all the above questions, would you still
say that Sefer Devarim is a review or repeat of Chumash? 

      If not, then what is it? 

      [In case you can't answer that question, it is recommended that
you continue with Part II.]

====

PART II - A BOOK OF SPEECHES

1.  If you have ample time, take a few minutes to browse through Sefer
Devarim, noting how most of the book is written in the first person
(i.e. as though Moshe himself is talking).  Can you explain the reason
for this style? 

      Do we find this style in any other Sefer of Chumash? 

2.  Be sure that you understand the difference between 'first person'
and 'third person'.  Then, go the beginning of Sefer Devarim and start
reading the first few psukim, and determine if they are in first
person or in third person (and explain why).  

     Note that even though the Sefer begins in third person, after
several psukim we find a switch to 'first person' - and that style
continues for several chapters. 

      In what pasuk does this switch to first person occur?  Can you
explain why? 

      Until where does this 'first person' style continue? 

      [If you give up, scan until [towards the] end of chapter 4.]

      In case you didn't notice, you just identified a speech, the
first of many speeches found in Sefer Devarim.  Quickly scan these
four chapters (i.e. 1:5-4:40) and see if you can identify the main
topic (or topics) of this first speech? 

      Attempt as well to understand its flow of topic.

3.  Next, carefully read the opening psukim of chapter 5, trying once
again to identify a speech and if so, where it begins.

     [This speech should be a bit easier to identify.] 

      Scan this speech that begins in 5:1 and attempt to find where it
ends (i.e. where is that next time that we find that Chumash returns
to 'third person' form).  As you scan through this speech, looking for
when it ends, see if can identify its primary topic(s). 

[You will probably give up after a while, since this speech continues
on and on, all the way until the end of chapter 26!  If you have ample
time, try to verify this by yourself.  If you have even more time, see
if you can identify any other speeches in the remainder of Sefer
Devarim (i.e. between chapters 27 and 34).  If you find a section that
is not another speech, see if you can identify what it is, and how it
relates to the rest of the book.] 

4.  Review 4:41-49, noting how it forms a short narrative (i.e. it's
written in third person), the bridges between the first speech in
chapters 1 thru 4, and the next speech that begins in chapter 5. 

     In what manner does this narrative relate to either of these two
speeches.  Be sure that you can explain 4:44-45.

     [The pasuk 4:44 should sound very familiar!]

     For an interesting explanation of the connection between 4:44-45
and Devarim 1:1-5 (and Devarim 5:1-2), see Ramban on Devarim 1:1.
You'll only understand this Ramban if you first study these psukim in
relation to these two speeches.] 

5.  Now that we have determined that chapters 5 thru 26 form a long
speech - we'll refer to it as the 'main speech', as it will form the
primary section of the entire book.  To understand the purpose of this
speech, we'll need to take a careful look at its opening few lines.

     Carefully study 5:1 - the opening pasuk of this speech - noting
how it serves as an introduction.

     Based on this introductory pasuk, what should be the primary
topic of this lengthy speech?

     Then read 5:2-3, and try to understand how these two psukim
relate to the short introduction in 5:1.  [In other words, how does
the 'covenant at Sinai' relate to the mitzvot that will be taught by
Moshe Rabbeinu in his speech?]

     Then read 5:4-5, and try to understand how these two psukim
relate to the short introduction in 5:1.  

     In your opinion, does the statement made in 5:4 contradict the
statement made in 5:5?  If so, can you resolve this contradiction?

6.  Note how a 'review' of the Ten Commandments follows immediately
afterward in 5:6-18; and how this review is followed by a story in
5:19-31.  Be sure that you understand how and why that story follows
the Ten Commandments, and how it relates to mitzvoth that will follow
in the main speech.  [Make sure that you understand how 5:28 (and 6:1)
relate to 5:1.]

      As you review the story in 5:19 thru 6:3, be sure to note how
this story records how and when an entire set of mitzvot were once
given (at Har Sinai) and how this story relates to the main speech.
Be sure as well that you understand why Moshe begins this 'main
speech' with this story?

7.  Review once again 5:27-28, noting how these psukim relate directly
to 6:1.  Also, as your review 5:28 thru 6:4, be sure that you
understand when Moshe is quoting from what happened forty years ago,
and what he is stating now [or adding on] in his present speech to the
people. 

      Note again how 5:28 describes a set of mitzvot that God gave
Moshe to teach Bnei Yisrael.  When were these mitzvot first given to
Moshe Rabbeinu, and when (in your opinion) did he first teach them to
Bnei Yisrael?

     In your answer, relate to Shmot 34:29-32, noting the context of
those psukim.

8.  Review 6:1 once again, in its context.  Which mitzvot does the
word "v'zot" (in 6:1) refer to?  How does your answer relate to what
will now follow in the main speech?  [If you have time, browse thru
chapters 6 thru 26 to verify your answer.]

      Can you explain why this 'main speech' of Sefer Devarim is
commonly referred to as 'ne'um ha-mitzvot'? 

9.  Carefully review once again Shmot 34:27-33!

     Note how they describe how Moshe taught Bnei Yisrael -"all of the
laws that God had instructed him on Har Sinai". 

     In your opinion, what specific laws does 34:32 refer to?  [Note
that the commentators offer various opinions.] 

     Does it make sense that Moshe, after he came down from Har Sinai
with the second luchot, would have taught Bnei Yisrael all of the laws
that God had given him on Har Sinai?  [Was there any reason why he
shouldn't?]

      Are all of those laws - i.e. that Moshe received on Har Sinai
and taught Bnei Yisrael when he descended - recorded in Sefer Shmot?
If so, where? 

[In your answer, relate to Shmot 35:1-5, i.e. why Sefer Shmot does
record the laws of the mishkan.]

      If these mitzvot are not recorded in Sefer Shmot, then where in
Chumash are they recorded? 

      In your answer, relate to Devarim chapter five (and the above
questions), and the speech that it introduces. 

10.  Next, carefully study 6:1-8.  [Some of these psukim should sound
very familiar.]  Try your best to understand how these psukim relate
to chapter five (and the above questions). 

      As you translate 6:6, explain what the word 'devarim' in the
phrase 've-hayu ha-devarim ha-eileh' refers to!  Relate to 5:1!

     How does this phrase - 've-hayu ha-devarim ha-eileh' - relate to
the story in chapter 5 and the mitzvot that follow in chapters 6 thru
26?   [How does it relate to the word "devarim" in 1:1?]

11. In 6:7, we all find the commandment of 've-shinantem
le-vanecha...'.  How did you translate the verb 'leshanen' in this
pasuk?  How is the meaning of leshanen different than the verb
'lelamed' [to teach], as was used in 5:1, 5:28, and 6:1?  

      Based on the context of this pasuk, which mitzvot require
'shinun' [repetition]?

      Based on this question, why do you think that Chazal refer to
this sefer as Mishneh Torah - because it contains a repetition of
laws, or because it contains laws that require repetition? 

     Before you prepared these questions, how did you understand the
meaning of the name: "mishneh Torah"?  Based on these questions - how
would you now translate the phrase mishneh Torah? 

     Relate to the use of this phrase in Devarim 17:17-19!

      From what 'shoresh' does the word mishneh stem from?  

        [Relate this to the meaning of mishneh as in 'mishnayot'.] 

12.  Now, read Devarim 1:1.  In the opening phrase 'eileh ha-devarim'
- what does the word 'devarim' refer to?  [Note how almost every
commentator offers a different opinion.]

     Can you relate the word devarim in 1:1 to the same word in 6:6?
Can you relate this to this same word in Shmot 34:27? 

     Be sure to note the explanations of Ibn Ezra and Ramban on the
meaning of Devarim in 1:1, and be sure you understand how their
conclusions relate to the above questions.

13.  If indeed the phrase "eileh ha-devarim" refers to the same
"devarim" as in 6:6, how would this help you understand the first
several psukim in Sefer Devarim? 

      In other words, had Moshe ever taught these laws before, and if
so when (and where)?  If so, why was it necessary to have taught these
laws so many times? 

      Have these laws ever been recorded in Chumash before?  Can you
explain why they may not have been?

14.  Based on the above questions, what in your opinion is the primary
topic of Sefer Devarim, and what is the purpose of this Sefer?  [Keep
this question in mind as you study the book!]

15. Review 27:1-4, simply to verify that this begins a new section of
the book, and hence, proving that the main speech concluded at the end
of chapter 26.

      If so, then 26:16-19 forms Moshe Rabeinu's concluding words of
this lengthy speech of "mitzvot" and rebuke.  

      With this in mind, carefully study 26:19, while comparing its
content to Shmot 19:3-6 (and its context)  and to your study of these
questions thus far.  Be sure that you understand as well how 26:16
relates to 5:1.

      Based on this 'finale' of the main speech, answer question 14
(above) once again!

16, If you have time, review 27:1-11, noting how the topic of this
commandment also relates to the content of the main speech.  Attempt
to explain why this 'ceremony' on Har Eival is necessary, considering
that forty years have elapsed since Matan Torah.

      Note as well the primary topics in the remainder of Sefer
Devarim, and attempt to construct a very general outline for the
entire book.  As you study Sefer Devarim, your outline should become
more detailed; but it should also help you understand how all the
parts of this book are thematically connected.

[Note:  This topic, i.e. how the main speech of Sefer Devarim relates
to the topic of the first speech  - continues (in greater detail) in
our questions for Parshat Devarim  below. ]

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

for PARSHAT DEVARIM

PART ONE - THE OPENING PSUKIM PARSHAT DEVARIM

1.  After completing the questions on Sefer Devarim, begin your study
of Parshat Devarim by noting once again how it records a speech given
by Moshe Rabeinu to the Bnei Yisrael in the fortieth year.  In other
words, verify how the opening psukim (1:1-5) form the introduction to
this first speech, which continues from 1:6 thru 4:40.

2. As you review 1:1-5, note how 'cryptic' the first two psukim of the
book (1:1-2) appear to be.  Before you study the various commentaries
on these two psukim, try your best to understand them on your own.  If
possible, attempt to relate them to your conclusions from the
questions above on Sefer Devarim. 

     Now, let's discuss the commentators.

3.  See Ramban and Ibn Ezra on Devarim 1:1 in regard to the meaning of
the word "devarim".      

   Are these two interpretations the same or different?

      If they are different, in what manner are they similar?

      If they are similar, in what manner are they different?

      How do these two opinions relate to the questions in Part Two
above?

4.  See Emek Davar [the Netziv] on Devarim 1:1.   How does his
interpretation relate to the above questions?    In what manner is his
interpretation different than Ramban & Ibn Ezra?

5. Rashi, Ramban, Rashbam, Ibn Ezra, Seforno, and Chizkuni all present
different approaches to explain the flow of topic in these two opening
psukim.  First, read and attempt to understand each 'parshan' on your
own). Afterward (or when you give up), continue below:  

A.  In the classic commentators, we find two basic approaches that
explain what these psukim are talking about. 

     The first approach, advanced by Rashi & Seforno [also by Chazal
in the Sifri], understands that the phrase 'eileh ha-devarim' refers
to Moshe Rabeinu's rebuke ['tochacha'] of Am Yisrael for their
behavior in the desert.  The fact that we have never heard of many of
these places is simply because these names reflect what happened at
each site (and not the real name of that site). 

      The beauty and simplicity of Rashi's interpretation is that he
explains not only the meaning of each name, but he also explains why
the psukim are so ambiguous: 

      "lefichach satam et ha-devarim, ve-hizkiram be-remez mipnei 

      kvodam shel yisrael..." 

      According to Rashi, the Torah intentionally made this pasuk
difficult to understand!  Even though this pasuk rebukes Am Yisrael,
it does it in sort of a hidden way, so that only one who knows how to
'read between the lines' understands the rebuke.  However, in a simple
reading of the text, it would go unnoticed - in order not to publicly
embarrass Am Yisrael. 

      See also Seforno, Tirgum Unkelos (who leaves his normal style of
literal translation for this pasuk), and the first few lines of the
Chizkuni. 

B.  The second approach, advanced by Ramban, Ibn Ezra, & Rashbam,
understands that the phrase "eileh ha-devarim" refers to the mitzvot
which are recorded later in the Sefer; and hence has nothing to do
with rebuke.  Then, the obvious question is: what are all these
places? 

      Rashbam understands that all of these places simply describe one
place, i.e. the place where these mitzvot are now being said by Moshe
to Bnei Yisrael in the 40th year.  The use of so many names is simply
to pinpoint the exact location.  He brings other examples in Chumash
(like in the beginning of Parshat Re'ay) where a location is described
in such a manner.  

[Thus according to Rashbam, Yam Suf must mean the Dead Sea which is
near Arvot Mo'av and not the Red Sea!]  

      In contrast to Rashbam, Ibn Ezra & Chizkuni explain that each
place describes a different site during Bnei Yisrael's journey through
the desert, and at each of these various sites Moshe had already
taught Bnei Yisrael these mitzvot.  Now in the 40th year on the first
day of the eleventh month, he is going to teach these mitzvot one last
time at a national gathering at Arvot Mo'av - even though he had
already taught these laws to them in the Midbar & Arava & "mul suf",
etc. 

      Ramban agrees that "eileh ha-devarim" refers to the mitzvot, but
he doesn't explain why all of the different places are listed and what
happened at each.  At the end of his peirush, he quotes the Sifri,
similar to Rashi (above) and Tirgum Unkelos  - explaining how the
names of these places reflect a certain rebuke.

     It seems that Ramban may be trying to combine both of these
approaches.  Surely, ha-devarim refers to the mitzvot which follow,
but the places which are mentioned may be a subtle manner of tochacha.
Note also how Ramban explains '11 days from Chorev...' as a type of
tochacha. 

      In contrast, Ibn Ezra would disagree with Ramban's explanation
of '11 days from chorev...', as he suggests that Moshe had taught
these laws ["devarim"] to Bnei Yisrael during their original eleven
day journey from Har Sinai to Kadesh Barnea, as they were marching to
the land of Israel - the site where these laws would need to be
fulfilled.  

      In your opinion, which of these interpretations makes the most
sense?

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

PART TWO - THE FIRST SPEECH

1.  Recall our earlier discussion of how chapters 1 thru 4 form a
speech (in contrast to Moshe Rabeinu's main speech in Sefer Devarim
that covers chapters 5 thru 26). 

     To help you understand what this speech is about, and its purpose
- scan its entire content, and attempt to construct an outline.  In
regard to chapter one, it would be especially helpful if you would
divide it into paragraphs, giving a title to each one.

     See if you can follow the logic behind the flow of topic in this
speech. 

2.  As you review the primary topics of this speech, note how chapter
one begins with the story of how (and when) Bnei Yisrael left Har
Sinai to conquer the land and continues with the story of the spies;
followed by the story of the conquest of Transjordan (in chapters 2
&3), followed but what appears to be some words of guidance and rebuke
(in chapter four).

      Can you explain why Moshe chose to include specifically these
details of Jewish History, while 'skipping' many others?

     Based on its content, attempt to explain how and why this speech
can serve as a fitting introduction to the mitzvot that Moshe plans to
teach Bnei Yisrael in his main speech.

3.  Clearly, 1:6-8, forms the opening 'paragraph' of Moshe's speech.
Similarly, 1:12-17 clearly forms a distinct paragraph. 

     Therefore, review 1:9-11 once again, and attempt to determine if
they form an independent topic, or do they form the thematic
introduction to 1:12-17 or conclusion of 1:6-8?

     Attempt to understand the flow of topic between these three
paragraphs!  [What event/time does "ba'et ha'hi" refer to in 1:9?]

     Note as well the thematic and textual parallels between to 1:6-11
and Breiishit chapter 15 [i.e. "brit bein ha'btarim"].

[Note especially Breishit 15:4-8, 13-14, & 18; and the repeated use of
the word "yerusha", and how this covenant with Avraham relates to
theme of the rest of Chumash!]

     Attempt to explain the thematic connection between that covenant,
and Moshe's primary point in these opening lines of his speech; while
relating to what is about to happen in a few months time.

4. As you review 1:12-18, note how some of these psukim seem to 'ring
a bell' from Parshat Yitro (i.e. Shmot chapter 18).

      If so, be specific regarding which psukim relate to Yitro.

     Is Yitro himself mentioned here in Sefer Devarim?  If not, can
you explain why isn't?

      Are there any other psukim here that remind you of earlier
passages in Chumash?  

      What does the phrase "ba'et ha'hi" refer to in 1:16?  Is the
same time period or event that this phrase refers to in 1:9?

[If / when you give up - see Bamidbar 11:1-20 (noting especially
10-15)!]

     Use this parallel to Bamidbar 11:1-20 to answer the above
question!

5.  In your opinion, why does Moshe bring up the topic of 'judges' at
this point in his speech?  Does this relate in any manner to the
mtizvot that he will teach in his main speech?

6.  Carefully study 1:18!

      Who does "etchem" refer to in this pasuk, the judges or the
people?   Relate to 1:16 when you answer this question!

      Once again, what time does "ba'et ha'hi" refer to in 1:18? When
the judges were appointed, or when you left Har Sinai?

      What does the word "devarim" refer to?  Does it relate to the
word "devarim" in 1:1 (and in 6:6)!  Relate your answer to the
controversy among the commentators in regard to the meaning of the
word "devarim" in 1:1 (see questions above).

7. Note how 1:19-21 forms yet another paragraph, which leads into the
story of the spies in 1:22-45.  How do these three psukim bridge
between the first topic of the speech re: the judges etc. and the
story of the spies?

8.  Can you explain why the story of the spies become the primary
topic of chapter one?  How does it relate to the main speech that
begins in chapter 5, and its primary topic?

9.  In chapters 2 & 3, Moshe Rabeinu explains in minute detail why
Bnei Yisrael did not fight Edom, Ammon & Mo'av and how they did fight
Sichon & Og (i.e. in much greater detail than was recorded in Sefer
Bamidbar (see chapter 20).  Can you explain how and why it is so
important for Bnei Yisrael to hear these details at this time?  [Note
as well 1:4!]

     How does this topic flow from the story of the spies, and how
does it relate to the primary theme of this introductory speech?   

     In your answer, relate as well to why Moshe also explains in
detail how and why the 'ma'apilim' lost their battle (1:41-45).

10.  Review 3:21-22, noting how this section concludes with a mention
of Yehoshua, and God's promise to help Bnei Yisrael conquer the land.
Once again, relate this to the primary theme of this speech.  [See
also Chizkuni on 2:25!]

11. 3. On the web site [www.tanach.org] - there is a link to an
informative '3D' map of Israel, highlighting its key cities and
mountain ranges.  You can view it, or download it at 

www.tanach.org/pics/map3Disr.gif.

      Use that map (or any map of Israel), to help you follow the
details of Bnei Yisrael's journeys and battles, as described in
Devarim chapters 2 & 3.

12.  The story of the spies in Sefer Devarim (see 1:22-45) is in many
ways similar, yet also in many ways different that the parallel story
in Sefer Bamidbar (see chapters 13-14).  After summarizing the primary
differences between these two accounts, attempt to resolve the reason
for those differences based on the primary theme of this speech in
Sefer Devarim 

in contrast to the underlying theme of leadership that develops in
Sefer Bamidbar.

      Note, that once the reader understands that the purpose of
Sefer Devarim is not to provide a summary of the events of Chumash,
but rather it has its own theme and purpose; it becomes much easier to
resolve the discrepancies between the historical accounts in Sefer
Devarim and how those events were recorded in Sefer Shmot and
Bamidbar.

                                    be-hatzlacha, 

                                    menachem   

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dvarq.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 47835 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-reg/attachments/20060724/6c92bd32/dvarq-0001.pdf