Shabbat Parshat Devarim

We read parshat Devarim every year on shabbos Chazon, the shabbos preceding Tisha B’Av. There is a sense of hope: Bnei Yisrael are near the Jordan river, on the cusp of fulfilling the conquest and purpose for which they were taken out of Egypt. At the same time, there is a sense of melancholy: there is a recurring mention of our going back into Exile. The sefer creates a sense of ‘radical contingency’ for our remaining in the land.

The sefer begins ‘Eleh HaDevarim’ which refers to the different speeches of rebuke and warning that Moshe has been giving the people as they have been wandering the past 38 years. Here, the content of these speeches is put together as the nation is ready to enter the land. The beginning of Parshat Devarim raises a number of questions, both with the places mentioned and the structure of the psukim in their referring to the 11-day journey from Har Sinai to Kadesh-barnea. These questions were raised at the time of the Midrash and up through more recent commentaries coming to the psukim with a different type of analysis. In the Midrash, for example, there is one opinion that the places mentioned whose names are not to be found elsewhere in the Torah, are actually fictitious places and are really hints to episdoes when Bnei Yisrael sinned. Rav Dovid Tzvi Hoffman has some unedited work on Sefer Devarim where he addresses the beginning of the parsha. [Rabbi Granatstein spoke very highly of Rav Hoffman’s work. He noted that what we have is limited; his work on Devarim is unedited, but it’s so good – you have to address it]. Rav Hoffman sees the verse ‘Eleven days from Horeb, by way of Mount Seir to Kadesh-barnea’ (1:2) as a header of sorts for the rebuke that is to come. Moshe is telling the people: there is an eleven-day journey from Har Sinai until the point of entry to the land – and we made it there. This contrasts with what follows – our arriving across from the Jordan 40 years after leaving Egypt. The references to the different locations are capturing points for the journey from Kadesh-barnea southward and then north, up and around the lands we went past and/or conquered, adding to the contrast of the 11-day journey versus the long one that we travelled. And there is an opinion in the Midrash who says, ‘ these are all real places. I’ve been to them all and I can tell you where they are.’

To help develop this contrast, we can look at the story of the spies – the event that marked our not entering the land from Kadesh-barnea – as it is told in parshat Shlach and contrast it with how it is referred to in parshat Devarim. Parshat Shlach opens with ‘Shlach lecha’ – on which there is a famous debate whether it is a command from God for us to send spies or a choice given to Moshe – ‘it is up to you to send spies if you see fit.’ Rashi presents it as a choice. Ramban argues with Rashi and develops the approach that it was a command – in line with what we would expect for a nation about to attempt to conquer a land militarily [refer to the Ramban in the beginning of parshat Shlach for details such as other examples of conquest where Moshe and Yehoshua send spies]. And Rabbi Granatstein added that we have similar examples of this language in the Torah where it clearly is a command – such as lech lecha, which is clearly a command to Avraham to go; and on a level of pshat, we would read ‘shlach lecha’ the same way, as a command.

But according to the Ramban, we have to address what the sin of Bnei Yisrael was. Ramban says it was in their requesting the spies in the first place and adding Chazal – that we should have had faith to follow the Cloud of Glory without asking for spies [Ramban says the command came following our request – see inside for details]. This is harder to defend after explaining that sending spies and developing a plan of attack was a natural thing to do in these situations, and we had done it before and would do it later.

Rabbi Granatstein addressed this question. Looking at how the story of the spies is recounted in parshat Devarim, the only difference in the text from how it is depicted in Parshat Shlach is Moshe describing the people approaching him to request the spies: All of you approached me and said, ‘Let us send men ahead of us and let them spy out the land, and bring word back to us – the road on which we should ascend and the cities to which we should come' (1:22). Moshe here in Devarim is offering a retrospective look at events in the past; what was it about their request that was wrong? The request made sense to Moshe at the time and fit with expectations, and yet when the spies reported back and said ‘Efes ki az ha’am . . .’ (Bamidbar, 13:28) and there is no hope and then the people give up hope, this reflects back on the original request. They made their request – not out of planning and the like, but out of fear and not trusting in God. And now – in the end of their journeys – Moshe can refer back to that moment when they made the request and point to it as a failure on their part. And Rashi adds regarding this pasuk that they came 'barvuvia' - almost as a mob, perhaps accenting the despair that ran though their request.

The people then failed to act when they needed to, suffered a failure of nerve essentially – and this led to Tisha B’Av. Moshe hightlights this for them saying: we were so close. We had only 11 days to travel and we did! And then we sinned - which led to the next 38 years of travelling and experiences that left us here, now again ready to enter the land. And this has been true throughout our history. When we lack the will to make the decisions called upon us as the Jewish people and to act as we need to, it leads to destruction and exile. And we have the opportunity for redemption and return if we are able to make the choices we are expected to as part of our faith. And this is the ‘radical contingency’ that underlies all of Sefer Devarim and our history.

HG