SALT FOR PARASHAT DEVARIM

by Rav David Silverberg

MOTZAEI

            The opening verses of Sefer Devarim have given rise to some confusion and considerable debate among the commentators.  The first verse appears to introduce the sefer by proclaiming, “These are the words that Moshe spoke to all Israel across the Jordan, in the wilderness, in the arava, opposite Suf, in between Paran and Tofel…”  At this point one would expect to read about what Moshe said to the people in the areas mentioned.  In the very next verse, however, rather than presenting the content of Moshe’s discourses, the Torah relates the geographical fact that a distance of eleven days’ travel separated between Mount Sinai and Kadesh Barnea, the site from where Benei Yisrael sent the spies.  Then, in the third verse, we find yet another introduction to Moshe’s discourse: “It was, in the fortieth year, in the eleventh month, on the first of the month, Moshe spoke to the Israelites all that the Lord had commanded him regarding them.”  The Torah then emphasizes that Moshe began this discourse after Benei Yisrael’s triumphant battle against the Emorites which resulted in their capture of the Emorite lands.  How are we to understand this progression?

            Shadal suggests that the Torah here wishes to draw a contrast between two discourses which Moshe delivered to the people.  First, it makes mention of Moshe’s brief words of rebuke which he conveyed at certain points during the forty years of travel.  At each of the locations listed in the first verse of the sefer (“in the arava, opposite Suf…”), Moshe pithily remarked to the people, “There is an eleven-day distance from Chorev [Sinai]…to Kadesh Barnea.”  Shadal suggests that these were all places where Benei Yisrael’s travel through the wilderness was delayed.  In each instance, Moshe briefly reminded the people how close they were to entering Eretz Yisrael, that in just eleven days they journeyed from Sinai to Kadesh Barnea, the border point from which they were to have entered the land.  It was as a result of the people’s complaints when the spies returned from their excursion that their entry into Eretz Yisrael was delayed for so many years.  At every point when travel was delayed, Moshe made this brief observation to remind the people that they, and not the Almighty, were the cause of the delay.

            The Torah then proceeds to introduce the series of much lengthier lectures recorded in Sefer Devarim, when Moshe spoke to the people in much greater detail and elaboration about their mistakes in the wilderness which resulted in the forty years of wandering.  During the forty years, Moshe would make occasional, brief comments about the people’s mistakes, but now, as the nation stood at the brink of entry into Eretz Yisrael, he spoke to them in far greater detail.  Shadal presents the following explanation for why Moshe spoke to the people this way:

This was the reproof that Moshe would deliver to them obscurely in all the places where they were delayed, but he would not explain to them matter in detail, lest they resent his reproof and sin even more.  However, in the fortieth year, in the eleventh month – that is, when their days of calamity ended and they would soon enter the land, Moshe then explained to them that comment and “Moshe spoke to the Israelites all that the Lord had commanded him regarding them.”  For even beforehand he was commanded to chastise them and remind them that it is due to their sins that they are delayed there, and he mentioned this to them obscurely, but now he explained the matter to them [more fully].  This occurred after he defeated Sichon, the Emorite king…after their sin had been completely atoned, and God was with them and had them defeat two powerful kings and did not plan to leave them in the wilderness but rather to capture the land before them immediately, and even they knew this and would therefore not reject his rebuke.

During the forty years of travel, Moshe knew that belaboring the point of Benei Yisrael’s sin which led to their delayed entry into the land would be counterproductive.  He had no choice but to remind them that it was their wrongdoing that caused the delay, but he ensured to do so briefly and without elaboration.  Only after the delay, as Benei Yisrael encamped along the Jordan River and prepared to cross into the land, Moshe felt it appropriate to elaborate and explain the matter more clearly, knowing that the people would accept his criticism and take the lessons to heart.

            When it comes to criticism, the questions of when and how are essential.  Moshe knew that when spirits are low and frustration is high, criticism had to be kept brief and succinct, or else it will invite hostility and resentment.  Later, when the people felt upbeat and enthusiastic about their imminent entry into Eretz Yisrael, Moshe saw an opportunity to deliver and more thorough discourse reviewing the people’s mistakes and urging them not to repeat them.  Only at this point was such elaboration appropriate.  But during the years of wandering, amidst the aggravation and fatigue of travel, brevity was crucial, in order not to ignite the flames of resentment over the harsh conditions.

SUNDAY

            In Parashat Devarim, Moshe reviews a number of incidents that took place during Benei Yisrael’s years of travel from Sinai to their current encampment along the Jordan River.  Among the events recounted in this parasha is God’s command that the people refrain from initiating hostilities against the nations of Edom (2:5), Moav (2:9) and Amon (2:19).  God explained to Moshe that these lands have been allotted for these three nations, and Benei Yisrael must therefore not make any attempt to seize this territory.

            The Rambam, in the introduction to his Sefer Ha-mitzvot (shoresh 3), writes that these commands issued to Moshe should not be classified among the 613 Biblical commands.  He explains that when the Sages spoke of 613 commands, they referred to obligations or prohibitions that applied for all time, and not instructions that related to a temporary situation.  Therefore, the Rambam asserts, the commands forbidding waging battle against Edom, Moav and Amon should not be listed among the 613 Biblical commands.

            The Ramban, in his critique of Sefer Ha-mitzvot, raises the question of why the Rambam assumed that these commands applied only temporarily.  God speaks of the lands of Edom, Moav and Amon as having been designated as a “yerusha” (“inheritance”) for these three nations, seemingly indicating a permanent status.  What led the Rambam to believe that at some later point it would be permissible for Benei Yisrael to seize this territory?  In fact, the Ramban adds, a number of Midrashic sources tell that King David was criticized for waging battle against these nations, and he justified the campaigns by explaining that they were defensive wars fought in response to these countries’ aggression.  This appears to prove that the prohibition indeed applied even during the time of King David, who was permitted to fight these nations only as a defensive response to their aggression against Benei Yisrael.  Why, then, did the Rambam view it as a temporary provision?

            Rav Chayim Soloveitchik of Brisk (as cited in Rav Avraham Yitzchak Sorotzkin’s Rinat Yitzchak) explained the Rambam’s view on the basis of a comment in the Midrash (Bereishit Rabba 44:23) cited in Rashi’s commentary to Sefer Bereishit (15:19).  The Midrash notes that in God’s promise to Avraham, He lists ten nations whose lands would ultimately come under the control of Avraham’s descendants, but in reality, the territory of only seven of those nations fell into Benei Yisrael’s hands.  To resolve this difficulty, the Midrash identifies three of the nations listed (Keini, Kenizi and Kadmoni) as Edom, Moav and Amon, whose lands Benei Yisrael will possess during the Messianic era.  The Midrash cites a verse from Yeshayahu (11:14) that speaks of the Mashiach ruling over these nations, implying that these territories will eventually come under Benei Yisrael’s control.

            Clearly, then, according to the Midrash, the command that forbade waging war with these nations will not apply during the Messianic era.  From the outset, it appears, this prohibition was issued as a temporary measure.  Since the Rambam stipulates that the 613 Biblical commands include only those laws that apply eternally, he felt that these prohibitions, which will no longer be in effect in the Messianic age, cannot be included in this list.

            This approach is also suggested by Rav Yitzchak Simcha Hurewitz of Hartford, in his Yad Halevi commentary to Sefer Ha-mitzvot (published in Jerusalem, 5686).

MONDAY

            In Parashat Devarim, Moshe recounts the tragic incident of cheit ha-meragelim, the sin of the spies, which resulted in God’s decree that Benei Yisrael would remain in the wilderness for forty years.  Moshe relates that the nation approached him and requested that scouts be sent ahead to Canaan to help devise a strategy for the land’s conquest.  After hearing the nation’s request, Moshe recalls, he thought it was a good idea: “Va-yitav be-einai ha-davar” (“The matter was good in my eyes” – 1:23).  Rashi, citing the Sifrei, comments, “In my eyes – but not in the Almighty’s eyes.”  In other words, Moshe informs the people that he, like them, thought it wise to send ahead spies, but God, even from the outset, did not look favorably upon the idea.

            The obvious question arises as to why God did not instruct Moshe not to send spies.  If He disapproved of the plan and foresaw its disastrous outcome, why did He not intervene to prevent it from happening?  Why did He allow Benei Yisrael to send the spies rather than telling Moshe not to allow the spy mission?

            Rav Motel Katz of Telz remarked in the context of this incident that from an educational standpoint, one should not say “No” to children and students each and every time they do something unwise or inappropriate.  In the case of the spies, God apparently felt that Benei Yisrael were not quite ready to head toward a military campaign with full faith in God without any preparations and strategizing.  Although they were wrong in requesting the scouting mission, God could not tell them not to go ahead with it.  Rav Katz advised that parents and educators take note of God’s response – or non-response – to the people’s request, and apply this lesson when dealing with their children and students.  Not every wrong mode of conduct can or should be stopped.  Sometimes, students must be allowed to make mistakes; not always is it wise for parents or educators to intervene.

            This educational message should be applied to all interpersonal relationships, as well.  As much as we are disturbed at times by what we see around us, it is not always appropriate to criticize.  Constant criticism and correcting one another – even if the criticism is in place – is unhealthy for any kind of relationship.  If the Almighty felt it unwise to intervene to stop the scouting mission, then apparently not every situation of wrongful conduct warrants intervention, and careful discretion must be exercised before stopping others from incorrect behavior.

TUESDAY

            In the prophecy read as the haftara for the Shabbat preceding Tisha B’Av, the prophet Yeshayahu bemoans the moral deterioration of what was once an exemplary society in the city of Jerusalem: “How has the faithful city become a harlot?  It was filled with justice; righteousness would sleep there – but now they are murderers!  Your money has become counterfeit; your wine is diluted with water…” (Yeshayahu 1:21-22).

            Commenting on the phrase, “tzedek yalin bah” (“righteousness would sleep there”), the Midrash (Bamidbar Rabba 21) explains that this refers to the atonement that the residents of Jerusalem earned in the merit of the sacrifices offered in the Beit Ha-mikdash:

A person never slept in Jerusalem with a sin on his record.  How?  The morning tamid offering atoned for the transgressions committed at night, and the afternoon [tamid] offering atoned for the transgressions committed by day.  Thus, a person never slept in Jerusalem with a sin on his record…

According to the Midrash, the prophet’s description of righteousness “sleeping” in Jerusalem refers to the clean slate that the city’s residents received each morning and afternoon with the offering of the daily tamid sacrifice.

            The Midrash’s comments become most ironic when we consider the context of the verse under discussion.  Earlier in this prophecy, Yeshayahu expresses to the people God’s sharp rejection of the nation’s sacrifices.  Addressing the Jewish people unflatteringly as “the officers of Sedom” and “the people of Amora,” the prophet, in the name of God, exclaims:

What need to I have for your abundant offerings… I am satiated with the burnt-offerings of rams and the fat of sheep, and I have no desire for the blood of bulls, sheep and goats.  When you come to be seen in My presence, who asked this of you – the trampling on My courtyards! (1:11-12)

Several verses later, we learn that the people’s preoccupation with sacrificial offerings came at the expense of their fealty to far more basic and elementary Torah values: “Learn well – seek justice, right the wrong; judge on behalf of the orphan, wage the battle of the widow” (1:17).  The people of Yeshayahu’s time were clearly devoted to the Beit Ha-mikdash and the sacrifices, but they neglected basic norms of social justice.

            And yet, oddly enough, it is precisely from this prophecy that the Midrash infers the power of the sacrifices, which have the capacity to earn atonement for sins.  Whereas Yeshayahu warns the people of the consequences of their injustice despite their commitment to the Temple offerings, the Midrash conveys the precise opposite message – that the Temple offerings were capable of atoning for all the nation’s sins!

            The answer, of course, is that the Midrash seeks to underscore the extraordinary benefits that the nation forfeited as a result of their wrongdoing.  At the time when Jerusalem was a “faithful city,” when it was committed to the basic teachings and values of the Torah, then “righteousness would sleep there” – its residents earned atonement for occasional mishaps through the sacrificial order.  But once Jerusalem became a “harlot,” once it betrayed its most basic commitments to God, then it lost its right to this power of the Temple sacrifices.

            The Midrash’s comments, then, are not at all inconsistent with Yeshayahu’s message.  Yeshayahu laments the people’s shameful neglect of the basic values of honesty and concern for the needy, which contrasted with their fervent devotion to the Temple rituals.  The Midrash emphasizes the power of those rituals, which the nation lost because of their failure in the areas of integrity and social justice.

            It may perhaps be worthwhile to examine more closely the analogy drawn by the prophet between the Jewish people and a “harlot,” in light of these comments of the Midrash.  Just as a betrayed husband wonders how his once-faithful wife could become disloyal, similarly, God bemoans Jerusalem’s regression from a “faithful city” to a “harlot.”  As the Midrash indicates, the residents of Jerusalem were not perfect before this regression.  They had transgressed on occasion, but the sacrificial offerings were capable of achieving atonement.  A faithful wife could be forgiven for her occasional mistakes; a husband who acknowledges his wife’s commitment to him will naturally be willing to pardon the mishaps that inevitably occur.  But once Benei Yisrael betrayed God, when they violated the most basic commitments required by their relationship with Him, then they could not longer be forgiven (at least not without repentance).  They have then become like a “harlot,” a wife who violates her most basic commitment to her husband.

            The prophet tells us very clearly and in no uncertain terms which commitments are deemed so basic to our covenant with God that their violation constitutes outright infidelity: “Your money has become counterfeit; your wine is diluted with water.  Your noblemen are cheaters, and groups of thieves – they all love bribes and pursue paybacks.  They do not judge on behalf of the orphan, and the case of the widow never comes before them.”  When the Jewish people became greedy, dishonest and insensitive to the plight of the poor, they breached their most basic commitment to the Almighty.  Other wrongs that they may have committed lent themselves to expiation through sacrifices.  But God treats cheating, lying and abusing the underprivileged as “harlotry,” a fundamental breach of trust.  Our covenant with the Almighty is predicated upon, primarily, the basic values of integrity and compassion for other people, and our neglect of these values thus violates the very foundations of our relationship with God.

WEDNESDAY

            In Parashat Devarim, Moshe recalls God’s commands to Benei Yisrael at various points during their sojourn through the wilderness not to initiate hostilities against other nations.  God first issued such a warning as Benei Yisrael passed near the border of Edom (2:4-5), and then again later as the nation approached the lands of Moav (2:10) and Amon (2:19).

            On the first occasion, when God warns Benei Yisrael not to wage war against Moav, He announces, “You are passing the border of your brethren, the descendants of Esav, who reside in Se’ir.  They will fear you; you shall be cautious – do not start hostilities with them, for I shall not give you of their land…” (2:4-5).  Before issuing the command not to initiate hostilities, God informs Benei Yisrael that the Edomites will naturally be afraid of them as they pass along the border.  The obvious question arises as to why the Edomites would fear Benei Yisrael, and, moreover, why this fear is relevant to God’s warning that Benei Yisrael make no attempt to wage war against them.

            Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch offers the following explanation:

…they fear that they may have to suffer a great deal at your hands; they imagine that you must be starved after your long wandering in the desert where you were deprived of everything, and now when for the first time again come into inhabited regions you will greedily jump on everything.  Contain yourselves, and show them just the opposite of what they fear.

Edom feared Benei Yisrael because they understood the harsh conditions they had endured over the last several decades.  The Edomites anticipated that as Benei Yisrael passed near inhabited territory for the first time in forty years, they would wage a desperate attack to seize Edom’s resources.  God therefore warns Benei Yisrael to prove Edom’s fears wrong, to exercise discipline and restraint, and respect Edom’s divinely granted rights to its land and resources.

            Difficult circumstances must never be taken as license for misconduct.  There is a natural tendency to say to oneself, “I deserve this after all I’ve been through.”  But the Torah teaches us otherwise.  Life quite often presents us with hardships, challenges and frustrations of one kind or another, and we are expected to conduct ourselves with dignity and discipline regardless of the circumstances we endure.  A “bad day” does not justify inappropriate behavior.  Just as Benei Yisrael were to respect Edom’s territorial integrity despite the circumstances they have endured, similarly, we must act with civility and decency even when we are beset by understandable aggravations.

THURSDAY

            Parashat Devarim records the first of Moshe’s addresses to Benei Yisrael before his death, a speech in which he reviews a number of incidents that took place during the people’s sojourn in the wilderness, placing particular emphasis on the tragedy of cheit ha-meragelim (the sin of the spies).

            The Gemara in Masekhet Sanhedrin (104b) famously links the events of cheit ha-meragelim to the Temple’s destruction, which we commemorate each year on Tisha B’Av.  It was on the eighth of Av, the Gemara relates, that the spies returned from their excursion and reported negatively about Eretz Yisrael, and that night, the night of Tisha B’Av, the people wept as they anticipated their imminent annihilation at the hands of the Canaanite nations.  God thereupon declared, “You wept for no reason, and I will establish [this night] for you as [an occasion] for weeping, for generations!”

            How are we to understand this association drawn between the nation’s weeping upon hearing the spies’ report, and the annual weeping on Tisha B’Av?

            Rav Dov Weinberger, in his Shemen Ha-tov (vol. 1, p. 263), suggests that the Gemara viewed the weeping on Tisha B’Av not as a punishment for the nation’s weeping, but rather as the rectification of their mistake.  Benei Yisrael wept that night in rejection of their destiny to establish a nation in their ancestral homeland.  Unwilling to accept the challenges and responsibilities entailed in this destiny, they turned their backs on their covenant with God and announced, “Let us appoint a [new] leader and return to Egypt” (Bamidbar 14:4).  They chose to turn back the clock and abrogate the covenantal process that was begun at the time of the Exodus from Egypt.

            Each year, on Tisha B’Av, we weep for the precisely opposite reason.  We mourn the loss of what Benei Yisrael in the wilderness feared – our nation’s sovereign existence in Eretz Yisrael with the Divine Presence in its midst.  Our crying on Tisha B’Av is, in essence, the reversal of the crying of our ancestors in the desert.  They cried because they did not want to establish a nation in Eretz Yisrael, and we cry because we were driven from Eretz Yisrael.  We mourn the loss of precisely what our ancestors rejected.

            The Shemen Ha-tov adds that our annual weeping on Tisha B’Av rectifies the mistake of the cheit ha-meragelim in yet another sense, as well.  In recounting this incident, Moshe records the people’s accusation that “it is out of the Lord’s hatred for us that He has taken us from the land of Egypt, to hand us over into the hands of the Emorites, to destroy us!” (1:27).  The people transformed God’s greatest expression of love and grace – the Exodus – into an expression of contempt.  God took them from Egypt out of compassion, but they accused Him of acting out of cruelty.  On Tisha B’Av, we lower our heads and humbly accept God’s justice.  We acknowledge that what might appear as an expression of His hatred and disgust for us is, in truth, but a natural consequence of our wrongdoing.  Whereas our ancestors misinterpreted God’s love for hate, we reflect upon God’s anger and view it as a justified response to our betrayal.  This acknowledgement should then motivate us to restore our commitment to the Almighty and His Torah, so that He will once again restore our nation’s previous state of glory in the Land of Israel with the rebuilt Mikdash, speedily and in our days.

David Silverberg

FRIDAY

            We read in Parashat Devarim the first of a series of addresses delivered by Moshe to Benei Yisrael before his death.  In this first address, he briefly surveys the previous thirty-nine years of travel through the wilderness, from God’s command to disembark from Mount Sinai, through Benei Yisrael’s conquest of the Emorite kingdoms east of the Jordan River.  This speech actually continues into the first verses of Parashat Vaetchanan (through the end of the chapter 3), in which Moshe recalls his petition asking God to allow him to enter Eretz Yisrael, and God’s rejection of his request.

            In order to identify the general theme and purpose of this address, we need simply to compile a list of the topics it covers:

1)    God’s command to Benei Yisrael to take leave of Mount Sinai (1:6-8)

2)    The appointment of a judiciary (1:9-18)

3)    The arrival in Kadesh Barnea, on the border of Canaan (1:19-21)

4)    The sin of the spies and its aftermath (1:22-2:1)

5)    God’s commands to refrain from waging battle against the nations bordering along Benei Yisrael’s travel route (2:2-25)

6)    The successful battle against Sichon and Og (2:26-3:22)

7)    Moshe request that he be allowed to enter Canaan (3:23-29)

Interestingly, Moshe omits most of the major events recorded in Sefer Bamidbar.  For example, he makes no mention of any of Benei Yisrael’s sins during the years of travel – such as the mit’onenim, Kivrot Ha-ta’ava, Korach’s revolt and Ba’al Pe’or – with the exception of the sin of the spies.  Moshe also excludes important events such as his hitting the rock at Mei Meriva, Bilam’s failed attempts to curse Benei Yisrael, and the successful battles against Arad and Midyan.  We should also take note of the fact that Moshe’s survey begins with God’s command to leave Mount Sinai, rather than from the Exodus or from Matan Torah.

            When we consider the events that Moshe chose to include in this address and those which he excluded, a clear pattern emerges.  Moshe’s concern in delivering this speech is to avoid a recurrence of the sin of the spies.  As the nation stands on the brink of entering Eretz Yisrael, Moshe recalls the time when, thirty-nine years earlier, Benei Yisrael were poised to capture the land – until the debacle of the scouts disrupted their plans.  In this address – as opposed to the other speeches recorded throughout Sefer Devarim – Moshe’s intent is not to warn the people about the importance of Torah observance and resisting the idolatrous influences of the surrounding nations.  Rather, he seeks to impress upon the Benei Yisrael the fact that God has guaranteed to help them capture the Land of Israel, and they thus have no reason to fear crossing the Jordan River, as their parents had thirty-nine years earlier.

            For this reason, Moshe begins not with the Exodus or Matan Torah, but rather with God’s command to take leave of Sinai and His promise of victory.  His goal is to remind the people of God’s guarantee that they would succeed in capturing the land.  This also explains why Moshe places so much emphasis on the stories of the spies and the conquest of the Emorite kingdoms, narratives which together occupy more than half of the parasha (a total of sixty verses out of the 105 verses in Parashat Devarim).  Moshe found it necessary to elaborate on the mistake of cheit ha-meragelim and its consequences, as well as on the successful battle against Sichon and Og, which marked the first stage of the conquest of Eretz Yisrael.  By emphasizing that the process of conquest has already begun, Moshe hoped to reassure Benei Yisrael of their ability to dispossess the Canaanite peoples – just as they easily captured the territory of Sichon and Og.

            Moshe also recalls God’s commands to refrain from waging battle against the other nations in the region, to explain that this was not the result of fear or the nation’s military limitations.  As Moshe relates, God granted Edom, Moav and Amon rights to their land in recognition of their ancestors, Esav and Lot.  It was thus not due to Benei Yisrael’s lack of strength that they refrained from fighting against these nations, but rather out of deference to these nations’ ancestors.

            What remains to be understood is why Moshe recalls his appointment of a judiciary in this context.  How did this event help reinforce the people’s faith in their ability to capture Eretz Yisrael and thus avoid a recurrence of cheit ha-meragelim?

            The Ramban (1:9) explained that this discussion serves to emphasize to Benei Yisrael that all arrangements for their life in Eretz Yisrael had been completed.  Moshe introduces his recounting of cheit ha-meragelim by informing the people that they were ready and prepared to enter the land, with a functioning system of leadership in place, but because of the sin of the spies their entry into Eretz Yisrael was delayed for so long.  Abarbanel explains slightly differently, claiming that Moshe here proves to the people that he did not cause the delay.  He emphasizes that he was busy making preparations for the nation’s conquest of Canaan, arranging for a well-established leadership network, and it was thus because of the people’s sin, and not Moshe’s hesitation, that their entry into Canaan was delayed for so long.

            Thus, this address was delivered in the hope of avoiding the mistake made the last time Benei Yisrael stood at the border, ready to enter Eretz Yisrael.  Moshe was determined to fortify the people’s faith in God’s promise and resolve to cross into the land which they are destined to possess and made into their eternal homeland.

David Silverberg