[Par-reg] Parshat Shoftim - questions for self study
Menachem Leibtag
tsc at bezeqint.net
Sun Aug 16 09:27:30 EDT 2009
**********************************************************
***************
THE TANACH STUDY CENTER www.tanach.org
In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag
Questions for self study - by Menachem Leibtag
**********************************************************
***************
PARSHAT SHOFTIM
PART I - QUESTIONS FOR THE 'SHABBOS TABLE'
"TOV V'YASHAR" - WHO DECIDES WHAT'S RIGHT?
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?]
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?
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.
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?
3. See Rashi on 21:9. How would Rashi answer question
one above? [See also Seforno, noting how he advances a
similar approach.]
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.
In your opinion, why do you think that Ibn Ezra
prefers the third opinion (which begins with "v'hanachon
b'einei")?
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!
"MATZEVOT" - ARE THEY ALWAYS BAD?
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?
[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!]
2. According to 16:22, it is forbidden to erect a
"matzeyva".
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?
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!]
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"?
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]
Relate this to your definition of each, as
discussed in the above question.
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?
Again, relate this to your definition of each, as
discussed in the above question.
4. Review Devarim 16:22 once again, noting the 'trailer'
phrase: "asher soney Hashem Elokecha" -
i.e. 'Do not erect a matzeyva THAT GOD DESPISES'
In your opinion, does this phrase describe WHICH
matzeyva the Torah forbids, or WHY the Torah forbids all
matzeyvot?
Relate your answer to the above question
concerning the matzeyvot built by Yaakov Avinu and Moshe
Rabeinu!
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!
SHEVET LEVI
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?
Then, review Sefer Bamidbar chapter 18, and relate
its context and detail to your answer.
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.
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.
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.
Based on the above sources, can you explain the
underlying reason for these laws?
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).
In your answer, relate to Moshe Rabeinu's blessing
to shevet Levi in Devarim 33:10.
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)?
In regard to the responsibilities of Shevet Levi,
see also Devarim 33:10 and II Divrei Ha'yamim 35:3.
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.
GATES OF JUDGEMENT
1. Parshat Shoftim opens with a command to appoint judges
'in all your GATES' ["sha'arecha"].
In your opinion, does the Torah mean 'gates'
literally?
If so, why do the gates of the city have to do
with judges? If not, why does the Torah use the word
'gates'?
Where else in Tanach do we find 'gates' in
connection to actions that require a legal court?
[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.]
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?
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?
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?
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.
Based on these examples, what meaning of the word
"sha'ar" fits most closely to its use in 16:18?
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?
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]
Note as well how this word "shaar" if found in the
context of "ha'makom asher yivchar Hashem"!
In what manner should "ha'makom asher yivchar Hashem"
have an affect on what takes place at the gates of every
city?
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.]
In your opinion, who would the people in the
market area go to should a dispute arise?
Taking this into consideration, how would this
help explain why the Torah commands the establishment of
court by the city gates?
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?
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.
Can you find an suitable area within the gate
where the "shoftim" could judge the people?
Relate you answer to the above questions.
THREE, SIX, OR NINE [CITIES OF REFUGE]
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.
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?
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...'?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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)?
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)!
Compare 19:8-9 with Devarim 11:22-25, noting the
borders and conditions for when these borders can be
achieved!
=========
PART II - QUESTIONS FOR PREPARATION (for weekly shiur)
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'.
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.
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.
[If you need help (or if/when you give up) - read this:
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:
the shmita cycle, and then the chagim cycle;
followed by parshiot that deal with various types of
leadership;
and concluing with parshiot that deal with going to war.
That just gave away most of the answers, but it is still
worthwhile to figure this out on your own!]
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.
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.
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'?.
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!
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"?
What are their respective responsibilities, and how is
each type of 'leadership group' supposed to be chosen?
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?
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?
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?
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'?]
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").
In your opinion, does this list (that Shmuel warns the
people) include things:
that the King may do, even though he is not allowed
to;
or,
that the King truly have the right to do!
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'?
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?
See discussion of this topic in Mesechet Sanhedrin 20b.
Continue with the "parshanut" section which follows
(below).
PART III - PARSHANUT
IS A KING A MUST?
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"]?
Relate to the word "v'amarta..." in 17:14, and the
opening word "ki" of this parshia.
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?
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?
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?
How would this affect your answer to the first
question?
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?
[If you have the time, see the controversy on this issue
in Sanhedrin 20b.]
See Ramban on 17:14.
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].
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"]?]
What is problematic with the phrase "k'chol
ha'goyim"? How does Ramban solve this problem?
4. What difficulty arises when translating the phrase
"asher yivchar Hashem Elokecha" - (who God will choose)?
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?
See Chizkuni, Ibn Ezra, and Ramban!
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!!
In your opinion, does Ramban's understanding of
pshat affect this understanding of "nevuah" or
visa-versa?!
[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.)]
6. See Seforno on 17:14. Relate his pirush to Rasag & Ibn
Ezra.
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?
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?
7. See the Netziv in Ha'amek Davar on Devarim 17:14 20.
How does he solve the problem in pshat of "k'chol
ha'goyim"? How does he solve the problem of "reshut" or
"chova"?
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?
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".
b'hatzlacha,
menachem
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: shofq.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 38760 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-reg/attachments/20090816/0fabf06e/attachment-0001.pdf
More information about the Par-reg
mailing list