PARASHA DEVARIM
DEUTERONOMY 1:01-3:22
RABBI ARTHUR SEGAL
Via Shamash Org on-line class service
Jewish Renewal www.jewishrenewal.info
Jewish Spiritual Renewal
Jewish Spirituality
Eco Judaism
Hilton Head Island, SC, Bluffton, SC, Savannah, GA
"Jive Talkin'  "
SYNOPTIC ABSTRACT:
Who wrote the Book of  Deuteronomy? What can we learn from its inconsistencies with the first Four of  the Five books of Moses? Was King Og really a giant who survived the great  Flood? Did the Second Temple really get destroyed over a party invitation? Were  Moses and the Israelite soldiers really allowed to eat pork? Are we causing  blindness if we do not share Jerusalem? To learn these answers, and even more,  we
invite you to read further.
As we move into the final months of our  summer we begin the last of the five books of Moses. The Hebrew title "Devarim"  means "words." An older Hebrew name for this book was "Mishna Torah" which means  "the repetition of the Torah." The English language title of this book is  Deuteronomy which is derived from Greek and Latin and means "second  law."
As the Jews are camped on the east bank of the Jordan River ready  to cross over into the promised land under Joshua's command, Moses begins his  final discourses. In this parasha, Moses reviews the journey from Sinai to  Kadesh and gives a veiled rebuke with an "exhortation to obedience" to God's  laws, as Rabbi J. Hertz writes. The laws of the court system of judges are  reviewed. Moses retells of the spies' mission but blames Israel for sending  them. In the original story Moses makes the
decision to send the spies. The  encounters with the tribes of Esau, Seir, Moab and Og are reviewed. The  inheritance of the
tribes of Reuben, Gad and half of Manesseh, who will live  in what is now known as Jordan, are recounted.
Any honest reading of this  last book will lead to difficulties, as there are so many inconsistencies with  wordings and historic details as told in the first four books of Moses. Not only  are laws reviewed with new wordings but more than 70 new laws are introduced.  Modern critical biblical theorists conclude that this text was written at a  different time, perhaps even in Ezra's era, after the return from exile in  Babylon. Traditionally these problems are handled  differently.
Traditionally these inconsistencies are answered by saying  that Moses held back laws dealing with farming until we were ready to conquer  the land of Israel. Even the Talmudic sage Abaye , when trying to explain God's  different rebukes in Leviticus chapter 26 and Deuteronomy chapter 28, says that  Leviticus' rebuke is God's words and that Deuteronomy's rebuke is Moses's words  (Tractate Megillah 31B). The Vilna Gaon (genius Rabbi Eliyahu Zalman of the  eighteenth century) says that the first four books were heard directly from God  on Sinai by Moses and that Moses quoted God's words to Israel.
This fifth  book was heard by Moses on Sinai and told to Israel 40 years later in Moses's  own words. This is why, according to the Vilna Gaon, there is inconsistency.  Onkelos in his 90 C.E. Aramaic translation of the Torah (the Targum) calls this  book a "copy" of the Torah, but not an exact copy. He explains that where in the  first four books we read the phrase repeated so many times "God spoke to Moses  saying...," we read in
this fifth book the phrase "God spoke to me  saying...." The Talmudic rabbis go further. They say that these 70 new laws were  really part of the Oral Law and that Moses decided to select these 70 and write  them down as it was a good time to do this. This is how the rabbis allowed  themselves permission 1,700 years later to redact and write the rest of the Oral  Law in what is called the Mishna and its Gemorra (discussions).
Those two  combined eventually  formed the Talmud. The rabbis never write that if in  just 39 years laws could get reworded by even Moshe Rabbanu (Moses our Teacher)  perhaps the Oral Law--which they claim is also the word of God--may also be  reworded 1,700 years later as well.
The sages teach that the Book of  Deuteronomy was taught by Moses during the last five weeks of his life. They say  he died on Adar 7 (Tractate Kiddushin 38A). Moses started teaching this book,  the rabbis say, on the first of Shevat. This leads to a voracious debate about  who wrote the last eight verses of Deuteronomy. They agree that Joshua did but  that Moses, who could foresee the future, told him what to write. 
In  verses 1-5 Moses mentions places but not the events that took place there. The  sages teach that Moses, not wanting to embarrass the Israelites, did not mention  their sins directly but only the locations of the sins. This is why these first  five verses are labeled the "veiled rebuke." Yet the Talmudic rabbi Yochanan  says he "has reviewed all of the scriptures but has not found any place named  Tophel or Laban" (Deut 1:01). His colleagues answer that Tophel can be rendered  "tephel" (complaint) and that Laban means "white." Therefore,
Moses was  secretly rebuking the Israelites for complaining about the manna. Yet another  rabbis posits that Tofel refers to the sin of the  golden calf (ha Egel).  The rabbis cannot decide where Arabah is. They decide it means the plain where  the Midianite women seduced the Israelite men. And the unknown place of Di-zahab  refers to the gold (Hebrew zehav) that God let the Jews take with them from  Egypt. The rabbis agree that Paran is mentioned to remind us of the sin of the  spies as they began
their journey from Paran.
The rabbis learn from  this rebuke that "any leader who does not chastise his community is held  responsible for their sins" (Tractate Shabbat 54B). They go on to say that  properly criticizing a person is a lost art and that "in the days preceding the  arrival of Moshiach...there will not be any criticism" (Tractate Sotah 49B).  Rashi says that this means that no one could criticize another now, as we all  sin to one degree or another, so no one has the right to point fingers. On the  other hand, we are to "love criticism, for as long as there is criticism in the  world, pleasantness comes to the world, good and blessing come to the world, and  evil is removed from the world" (Tractate Tamid 28A).
In Deut. 01:6-8 we  are told of Israel's boundaries, which are in
conflict with the boundaries  given only days before in the last parasha of Numbers. Our land now extends to  the Euphrates River in modern Turkey or Iraq. Rashi tries to explain that this  means that Israel will have this land when the Messiah comes. No one dared to  ask Rashi why we would need any land borders during the messianic age if we were  all to be at peace. Perhaps some lions will miss the message and want to eat  lambs instead of sleeping with them.
In Deut. 01:9-18 the laws of judges  are reviewed. I invite you to turn to Exodus 18:13-26 and compare the two  sections. When the Torah repeats these laws it adds and subtracts details.  Jethro is not mentioned. Jethro was a Midianite. Forty years before, the  Midianites were our allies. Even Moses's wife was a Midianite . Now they are  painted as idol worshippers and seductresses. In Exodus Jethro gives Moses the  idea for the use of judges. The parasha in Exodus is named for him. In  Deuteronomy it is God
who gives this law. Did Moses forget about his  father-in-law Jethro? Or was Deuteronomy composed 800 years later?
When  you study Devarim this summer please keep a lookout for
inconsistencies. Note  how the story of the spies in Deut. 01:19-46 is retold with subtle twists. Moses  blamed the Israelites for sending the spies when it is clear in Numbers that God  left the choice to Moses. And what is even more amazing is that Moses in 01:37  blames Israel for his own punishment of not being allowed to go in to the  Promised Land. But we were just told that Mt. Nebo is within the borders of the  Promised land and that Gad and Reuben are living there. 
Note also that  in verse 01:44, the story of the battle with the Amorites is retold. This battle  took place after the Jews' moxie returned after they first lost faith while  listening to the spies . The text says that the Amorites pursued the Israelites  "as the bees would do." What is the Hebrew word for these flying stinging  insects? "Devarim!" Is the author trying to say (as we learned about the  "grasshopper eyes" [Num. 13:33]) that our own words defeated us?
The  defeated King Og, given only a few words in Numbers, is now described at a giant  with an "iron bed" nine cubits in length and four cubits in width measured by  "the cubit of that man" (Deut. 3:11). Targum Yonatan  (another Aramaic  translation of the Torah by a student of Rabbi Hillel)
writes that Og was one  of the race of giants that survived the flood. The Rashbam (Rabbi Shlomo ben  Meir, Rashi's grandson, of twelfth-century France) says that when Og was a baby  he was so big he broke his wooden cradle. Does Deuteronomy differ with the Noah  story as well?
The rabbis had a tough time with reconciling the different  wording of the histories in Deuteronomy and the rest of the Chumash (Five Books  of Moses). The battles and the spoils of war are described differently. In  Talmud Tractate Chulin 17A, when comparing Numbers 31:3-14 and 31:31-41
to  Deuteronomy 3:01-11, the rabbis go so far as to say that God gave permission  during the war with King Sichon and his Amorites for the Jews to eat "katlei de  chaziri--dried pork rinds." 
They  are forced to this conclusion because in Deut. 6:10-11 God says that the Jews  can use the houses that they did not build and the food and supplies found  within them when they conquer
the land. Since King Og's and King Sichon's  land is listed as part of the inheritance of the Jewish people, everything we  took from them, including their non-kosher foods and utensils was able to be  eaten or used "as is." It was only after these wars that Elazar gave the rules  about koshering pots and pans. 
For millennia no rabbi was able to state  publicly a critical theory of this book's authorship. Tractate Sanhedrin 90A  warns that "one who says Torah is not from heaven is a heretic and will have no  share in the world to come." The fact that this was written shows that some  rabbis must have thought about what we have the luxury today to call "the  critical theory of biblical authorship." The Ramban (the thirteen-century  Spanish Nachmanides) was forced to conclude that non kosher food captured while  conquering Israel was permissible based on his reading of Deuteronomy. The  Rambam (the twelfth-century Spanish and Egyptian Maimonides) says that non  kosher food is only allowed if the Israelites are hungry. Conquering a land can  certainly build-up one's appetite for pork rinds.
The authors of  Deuteronomy--and perhaps the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings as  well--emphasized centralization of worship and governance. In 622 BCE the High  Priest Hilkian found the book of Deuteronomy while the Temple was undergoing  restoration. This prompted King Josiah to undertake a major religious  reformation. He purged Israel of paganism and centralized all sacrifices in  Jerusalem. He also re-instituted Passover, which had been neglected since the  days of the
Judges (2 Kings 22:23).
Rabbi Jeffrey Tigay writes that  some scholars thought that Deuteronomy was written during King Josiah's reign.  He suggests that it was written in King Hezekiah's term a century or two before.  Hezekiah also was antipagan. There is a vigorous monotheistic antipagan theme in  Deuteronomy. However, much of this book dates back to the ancient times of  farmers and herders. There are no city-type laws for merchants, artisans,  commerce or even real estate. Tigay believes that some sections
of this book  go back to the united monarchy in David's time of 1000 B.C.E. 
Because  Deuteronomy places emphasis on rituals taking place on Mt. Gezirim and Ebal,  near Shechem, Rabbi Tigay believes that it was written in the north, and not  written in Jerusalem. He believes that refugees from the northern kingdom  of
Israel fleeing to the south during the Assyrian invasion brought this book  with them. The fall of the northern kingdom lead to some serious soul-searching  in Jerusalem and Tigay believes that King Hezekiah used the text with its  rebukes of paganism in order to reform and centralize worship in his southern  kingdom of Judah. 
Regardless of its authorship, we can agree that this  book of Deuteronomy was inspired divinely and we can learn much from it. This  parasha is always read in coordination with the fast day of Tisha B'Av. This is  the ninth day of Av. The fast is in
commemoration of the destruction of both  Temples. It is recorded that other sad events also took place on this same date  in history, such as the date the Jews were ordered to leave Spain during the  1492 Inquisition. (Columbus in  his diary complains of the unusual amount  of traffic in the harbor on the day of his departure due to the expulsion.)  
The Talmud teaches that the Second Temple was destroyed because Jews  hated each other over petty things. The rabbis tie this teaching into this  week's Torah portion with the veiled, non-embarrassing way that Moses rebuked  B'nai Israel.
They  tell the story in Tractate Gittin 57A of Bar Kamtza. Just before the Temple was  destroyed in Jerusalem a certain man
made a large wedding feast. He hated Bar  Kamtza because of some petty matter. Somehow the "postal service" got the mail  mixed up and Bar Kamtza got an invitation. He thought it was a peace offering of  friendship and attended. The host, however, had no wishes to restore their  friendship and tried to eject Bar Kamtza from the party. Bar Kamtza offered to  pay for his meal to avoid the embarrassment of ejection. The host  refused.
Bar Kamtza offered to pay for half of the cost of the party. The  host also refused. Bar Kamtza offered to pay the entire feast's expenses and the  host still said "no!" 
Bar Kamtza, publicly humiliated, went to the Roman  authorities and claimed that the Jews were rebelling. The Romans began an  investigation and found that indeed Jews had not subordinated themselves to  Rome. The Talmud says this marked the beginning of the end of Jerusalem, the  Temple and the Second Jewish Commonwealth. The Talmud goes on to say that  not
one person, not even a rabbi, jumped to Bar Kamtza's aid to shield him  from embarrassment. The Talmud demands that "one ought to jump into a fire  rather than cause someone else embarrassment." The name Kamtza means "small  thing." Bar Kamtza means "son of a small thing" , which is even smaller. We can  learn that the smallest "devar" (word) can sting like a "davar" (bee) and cause  someone emotional embarrassment and harm. I think we also were supposed to learn  this lesson as children when we were read the fairy tale "Sleeping  Beauty."
The Midrash teaches "Great is peace, such that even if Israel  is
worshipping foreign Gods, but all are at peace with each other, God  declares 'I will not defeat them.' As it says in Hosea 4:17 'Ephriam is joined  to idols--let him alone!' However if Israel's hearts are divided against each  other, 'they shall bear their guilt.'" The Talmud records in Tractate Peah 1A  that Rabbi Aba says, "the generations of King David were all righteous but since  they were guilty of infighting, they would go out to war and be defeated.  However the generations of King Ahab were
idolaters, but since they were not  guilty of infighting, they would go out to war and prevail." 
We are all  Jews regardless of whether we think that the Torah was given on Mt. Sinai or it  was written in bits and pieces over the centuries. We are all Jews regardless of  whether we are shomar Shabbat (observant of the Sabbath) or not. We are all Jews  regardless of whether we follow kashrut (the dietary laws) or eat "pork rinds."  As long as we have our petty quarrels over what even traditionalists say that  God calls "Bar Kamtza", it does not matter what part of Jerusalem is given or  not given to the Palestinians. God would rather us be idol worshippers and  forgot about Him if man could live in peace. 
God wants us "to live by  the law, not die from it."  Let me relate the true story of  the  composer Charles Valentin Morhange Alkan. Alkan was a nineteenth-century  contemporary and
friend of Frederic Chopin, Franz Liszt, Ms. George Sand and  Victor Hugo. They entertained each other in and around Paris. Alkan was the  Monty Python of his time. His "Marcia Funebre sulla Morte d'un Pappagallo" for  four singers and chamber ensemble is hilarious. The translation of course is  "Funeral March on the Death of a Parrot." Alkan parodies the religious
and  operatic music of his time. The singers enter with "As-tu dejeune, Jacot?" the  French equivalent to "Polly want a cracker?" 
Anyway, Alkan disappeared from sight for years when he, a  Jew, reclused himself to study Torah and Talmud. According to David Dubal's The  Art of the Piano, Alkan died in 1888 when he "reached for his beloved Talmud,  which was resting on top of a massive bookcase, and the structure toppled over,  crushing the emaciated musician to death at the age of 75." The laws  and
Halacha in the Talmud and Torah are fine for some. But let's not die  fighting with each other over them.
It would be nice if we could remember  that our Temple and the city of Jerusalem was not dedicated only to the Jewish  people. I know this runs contrary to popular perception. In I Kings 8:41-43 King  Solomon specifically asked God to heed the prayers of non-Jews who came to the  Temple. Non-Jews were permitted to bring animal offerings and pray in the  Temple. During Sukkot, 70 bulls were offered as sacrifices. The Talmud explains  that this corresponds to the 70 nations of the world at that time. Isaiah called  the Temple "a house of all nations." The Talmud
further states that the  Romans never would have destroyed the Temple if they knew the benefit they  received from it. In Derek Eretz Zuta it is written that "the world is like a  human eyeball...and the pupil is Jerusalem." We are taught that the world is for  all people. Without the pupil, the eye is blind. We are taught "not to put a  stumbling block before the blind." We are also taught not to blind anyone and  what the penalties are for poking out another's eye. Therefore, can we deny  the  "pupil of this world's eye" to any people? 
If we cannot make  peace among ourselves, how can we ever agree to live in peace with our Arab  cousins? Let us keep the thought of "shalom" in our hearts and minds when we  remember the destruction and suffering of our people--and all people--this Tisha  B'Av.
Shabbat Shalom,
RABBI ARTHUR SEGAL
Via Shamash Org on-line class service
Jewish Renewal www.jewishrenewal.info
Jewish Spiritual Renewal
Jewish Spirituality
Eco Judaism
Hilton Head Island, SC, Bluffton, SC, Savannah, GA
Join Shamash's Groups on Facebook and LinkedIn.





