Parashat Ki* Te’tzeh (“when you go out…”),
consists of lists of commandments, some of which we have encountered earlier on
in the Torah, others are repeated in a modified form, while quite a few are
mentioned here for the first time. It should be noted that even though at first
glance the various injunctions seem to be placed randomly, a closer study
reveals them to be organized in clusters wherein there is a common theme, or
some other link which ties together each respective group. One such example,
where the rulings almost form a story line, is right at the beginning of the
Parasha (21:10-23). The first one is a case of a man desiring and marrying a
foreign woman taken captive in war, but losing interest in her at a later
stage. The next ruling focuses on the rights of the firstborn son of (again) an
unloved wife, whose husband has another, favored, wife. From the firstborn son
we are taken to a command regarding a rebellious son, whom some of the sages
believe to be the offspring of the foreign wife mentioned above. This son’s behavior
makes him a ‘candidate’ for stoning, while the following statute deals with a
criminal who is sentenced to hanging. At
the very end of the Parasha (in 25:13-16), to mention another example, we read
about unjust weights and measures which are detestable in YHVH’s sight (v. 16).
The concomitant ruling is a reference to the Amalekites, who are to be
completely wiped out because of their ill treatment of Yisrael during the
Exodus, which also places them under the category of: “Anyone doing these
things is hateful to YHVH your Elohim, everyone acting evilly” (v. 16 again),
even though “these things” is actually in reference to using unjust weights.
Parashat Ki Te’tzeh illustrates the extent of YHVH’s involvement in every
aspect of the Israelites’ life - the individuals as well as the community. In
turn, Yisrael is to live life in a manner that is worthy of Him.
The stubborn and rebellious son described in 21:18,
20, according to his own parents’ admittance “will not listen to his father's
voice or his mother's voice; even though they discipline him, he will not
listen to them”. “Stubborn and rebellious” is “sorer u’moreh”; “sorer”
is of the root s.r.h (samech, resh, hey) and means “turn aside,
defect, or withdraw”. “Moreh” is of the root m.r.h
(mem, resh, hey) meaning, “contentious, defiant, or rebellious”.
The type of attitude displayed here issues from the heart and so in Yirmiyahu
(Jeremiah) 5:23 we read: “To this people there is a revolting/defiant
and a rebellious – sorer u’moreh – heart”. This son is further described
as “a glutten and a drunkard”. The
latter noun is “soveh”, the root being s.v.a. (samech, bet/vet, alef),
recalling, “sovah” (sin/shin, vet, ayin) which is not only close in
sound but also in meaning (albeit employing a different spelling). In
Parashat Va’yera (see Gen. 21:28-33) we examined this root and found that
“satisfaction”, or to “have had enough” (especially in reference to food) is
“sovah”, relating to the number "seven" – “sheva”. By calling the week "shavua" the
language points to the fullness and completeness of what Elohim has achieved. "In Your presence there is fullness
("sova") of joy; I will be satisfied ("es'be'ah") with Your
likeness when I awake" (Ps. 16:11; 17:15). Thus, if one is not ‘satisfied’
- “sa’veh’ah” - and chooses to overindulge, he becomes a “soveh”. By making use
of similar sounds Hebrew typically points to life’s fine demarcation lines. The
rebellious son was to be executed by stoning (ref. 21:21), which is the
verb “ragom”, one of several Hebrew terms used to denote this action.
Another stoning was to occur in the event of a
young woman who upon marriage was found not to be a virgin (ref. 22:20-21), as
well as when “a girl that is a virgin, betrothed to a man, and a man finds her
in the city, and lies with her” (vs. 23-24). In these cases the stoning is “sakol”
(s.k.l, samech, kof, lamed), which means not only to “hurl rocks”, but
also to “gather rocks” such as in Yishayahu (Isaiah) 5:2: “My Beloved
has a vineyard in a fruitful horn. And He dug it, and cleared it of stones”
(italics added). This illustrates again the close proximity between apparent
contradictions, of which we shall see another example later on.
Following the prodigal son in 21:20, the text goes on to
speak of “a man [who] has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to
death, and you hang him on a tree” (v. 22), appending, “he who is hanged is
accursed of Elohim” (v. 23). This, of course, is how Yeshua “redeemed us from
the curse of [pronounced in] the Law [for breaking] its laws [or having
redeemed us from the “laws of sin and death”], having become a curse for us”
(Gal. 3:13).
The next set of injunctions, in chapter 22, focuses
on concern for the property of one’s fellow man and his welfare, as well on
sensitivity toward YHVH’s creation. “You shall not see your brother's ox or his
sheep driven away, and hide yourself from them. You shall surely turn them back
to your brother” (v. 1). “You shall hide” here is “hit’a’lamta”,
of the root a.l.m (ayin, lamed, mem), and means “hidden or concealed”,
and in this context also “disregard, neglect” or “pretend not
to see”. It is from this root that we obtain “olam” or “ad olam” which in
Biblical Hebrew speaks mostly of “eternity” (future but also past), being
indeed concealed and uncharted from man’s vantage point (Deut.
23:3; Gen. 17:7; Ex. 12:24). One of the Biblical terms for young man is “elem” (and
“
At the other end of this cluster of injunctions we
read: “If a bird's nest happens to be before you in the way in any tree, or on
the ground, with young ones, or eggs; and the mother is sitting on the young,
or on the eggs, you shall not take the mother with the young. But in every case
you shall let the mother go, and take the young for yourself, so that it may be
well with you, and you may prolong your days” (22:6,7 italics added).
This somewhat obscure command holds a great promise, like that of the 5th
Commandment of the Decalogue, which says: “Honor your father and your mother, as
YHVH your Elohim has commanded you, so that your days may be prolonged” (Ex.
20:12, Deut. 5:16). The fact that this promise is common to both these
injunctions has puzzled the sages all the way back to Talmudic days. Some of
them concur that YHVH’s ways are higher than ours, and therefore various
precepts are “passed finding out”, while others maintain that one should not
even try and discover whether the Divine commands have reasons or not. On the
other hand, Professor Yitzchak Heinemann contends that “it is incumbent on us
to detect the finger of God in the wonders of nature and the events of our
life, though they will still remain unsolved mysteries, so we must endeavor, as
far as possible, to appreciate the wisdom and justice of His commands”. [1] The
identical reward for honoring parents and for shooing the mother bird before
taking her young, may serve as a clue to a principle which applies to every
word spoken in the Torah: “kala k’cha’mura”, meaning that each precept (and/or
word), whether insubstantial or weighty, is to be treated equally. Thus, all
the way from the weightiest precept to the least esteemed, through those that
are ‘in between’, obedience is equally required, with the result (of so doing) and
the rewards being at times identical. Our Parasha, to cite another such
example, also exhorts us to “have a perfect and just ephah [a measurement]; so
that they prolong your days in the land” (25:15 italics added). Applying
this principle to YHVH’s commandments, each one is to be ‘weighed’ by the same
scale, not denigrating one and estimating another.
Right in between the lost ox and sheep and the
nesting bird, is the oft-quoted verse: "A woman shall not wear anything
that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman's garment, for all who
do so are an abomination to YHVH your Elohim” (22:5). This injunction is
especially used in order to “prove” the Bible’s disapproval of women wearing what
is thought to be strictly male clothing. However, this is not what the Hebrew text is
expressing. The literal meaning of “lo yi-hi-ye kli gever al isha” is “there
shall not be a tool/implement of a man upon a woman”. This implies that she is
not to carry or wield a tool or any implement which is characteristic of man’s
responsibilities. In this case, therefore, Scripture is not concerned with apparel
or fashion but with certain types of activities that are to distinguish between
men and women! As for the men, in their case they are indeed commanded,
plain and simple, not to wear women’s garments.
In 23:7-8 we read: “You shall not despise an
Edomite, for he is your brother. You shall not despise an Egyptian, for you
were an alien in his land, sons of the third generation that are born to them
may enter into the assembly of YHVH”. This directive is in contradistinction to
the one relating to the Ammonites and Moabites, who were not to enter the
assembly of YHVH even after ten generations, that is, never. Da’at Mikra
ponders: “Why is it that the Torah deals this way with the Edomites, not
demanding from them what was demanded of the Moabites and Ammonites, which was
to greet
There are several commands regarding the purity of
Before
examining the next cluster, let us pause and inspect a certain term which
appears in 23:20: “…that YHVH your Elohim may bless you in all that you set
your hand to in the land where you go to possess it” (emphasis added). “Set
your hand to” is literally the “sending of your hands” – “mish’lach yadeh’cha”.
In the past we saw that one’s work or occupation was called “m’la’cha” (of the
root l.a’a.ch - “to send” and hence “messengers, angels, mal’a’chim, sent out
ones”), which by its very definition conveys the idea that one’s work or task are
more of a goal or an accomplishment outside the confinement of one’s own
vicinity. It is something rendered or performed as a mission (for the greater community),
and therefore was not to be considered incidental or self serving.
Two weeks ago, in Parashat R’eh, we discussed the
noun “makom” – “place” - and the verb “kum” – “to rise or go up”, which shares
the same root. In our Parasha we encounter other derivatives of this root (kof,
vav, mem). In 23:25 we read: “When you come into your neighbor's standing
grain, then you may pluck heads with your hand; but you shall not wield a
sickle in your neighbor's standing grain”. The “standing grain” is
the ripe sheaves ready for harvesting called “
The next chapter (24) takes us to a broken
relationship between husband and wife. “When a man has taken a wife and married
her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found a thing
of uncleanness in her, and he writes her a bill of divorce and puts
it in her hand, and sends her out of his house” (v. 1 italics added). “A bill
of divorce” is “sefer k’ritut”, literally “a book of cutting off”.
This bill, therefore, becomes an
instrument of severing the relationship, much like a hatchet. “A thing of uncleanness”
is “ervat davar”, literally “the nakedness/exposure [erva] of
something” (the same term appears also in 23:14 as “unclean thing”). In a
marriage relationship whatever has been covered up is naturally exposed and
revealed just prior to the time of severance. The root of “erva”, literally nakedness,
a.r.h (ayin, resh, hey), also lends itself to the verb to “pour out”. It
is used in this way in Yishayahu (Isaiah) 53:12, in the description of the
Messiah: “And with the strong He shall divide the spoil; because He poured
out [he’era] His soul to death” (italics added). Likewise in Philippians
2:7 it says about Him that, “He emptied Himself and took the form of a bondservant”.
Thus in pouring out or emptying Himself, and in being exposed (desecrated)
Yeshua covered up our nakedness.
In the very beginning of our Parasha we encountered
a different type of man-woman relationship, than the one just discussed. It
involved a man who in the course of war has taken captive a woman whom he has
found desirable. If after having taken her as a wife, if he no longer desires
her he is admonished not to sell her for money, nor “to treat her brutally” (21:14).
Similarly, in chapter 24:7 we are told that, “if a man is found kidnapping any
of his brethren of the children of
Nevertheless, the above precept has caused quite a
stir in rabbinical polemics, since it would hardly seem plausible that this ‘forgotten
sheaf’ could be a source of relief and provision for the needy. Additionally,
this injunction also raises another query. In the Tosefta, Peah tract 3, 8 it
says: “…The Omnipresent has given all the other precepts in the Torah to be
observed consciously. But this one is to be unconsciously observed. Were we
to observe this one of our own deliberate freewill before the Omnipresent, we
would have no opportunity of observing it”. The conclusion therefore is that,
“if a man has no deliberate intention of performing a good deed [and] it is nevertheless
reckoned to him as one… how much more so he who deliberately performs a good
deed!”[3] Verse 20 follows on the heels of 19 (of chapter 24) and is similar to
the former: “When you beat your olive tree, you shall not search the bough
behind you. It shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow”. The
word for “bough” is “pu’ara”, of the root “p’er” (p.e.r, pey,
alef, resh), which is also “beauty or glory”. Yishayahu (Isaiah)
60:21 is very appropriate in this connection, reading as it does: “And your
people shall all be righteous; they shall possess the earth forever, a branch
of My planting, a work of My hands, to beautify [lehit’pa’er]
Myself” (italics added). And although the boughs have been broken, yet the
Olive Tree of Yisrael, when fully redeemed is destined to be glorious unto YHVH
(ref. Is. 44:23), especially if the people of Yisrael, with the Torah inscribed
on their hearts, will follow the above injunction of generosity and kindness to
the alien, orphan and widow. On the other hand, and yet in connection to 24:19
which featured forgetfulness, are the commands in verses 17-18 and 21-22. In both these excerpts one is exhorted to remember
having been a slave in
When dried up and dead - as Yisrael’s stick/tree had
become - the collective outcry went forth: “Our bones are dried, and our hope
is perished; we are cut off to ourselves” (Ez. 37:11). Yet redemption was to
enable resurrection. This principle is captured in the precept delineated in
25:5-10, where if a man dies leaving no offspring, his widow is to marry his
brother and together they are to have a child who will be considered the firstborn
of the dead brother, in order to raise up “… the dead brother's name, and his
name shall not be wiped out of Israel” (v. 6). We have already studied (above
and in other places) the word “kum” (also “makom”, place) - “to stand up, rise”.
Here its usage, as the “raising up” of a name for the dead
brother, connotes “resurrection” and in Modern Hebrew “t’kuma”
(of the same root). In Vayikra (Leviticus) 26:13 it says: “I am YHVH your Elohim,
who brought you out of the land of Egypt, so that you should not be their
slaves, and I broke the bars of your yoke and made you walk erect
– “ko’me’mi’yoot” (once again of the same root). In the following verse (Lev.
26:14), Yisrael is warned lest they “reject My statutes”. Those engaged in such
activities of rebellion and rising against YHVH are called “te’komemim”
in Psalm 139:21. Typically, this one root epitomizes a wide range of situations
that pertain to Yisrael, whom YHVH has caused to rise and who are
therefore to walk uprightly and in circumspection lest they find
themselves rising against Him.
* The conjunction “ki” is used very frequently in
Dvarim. Many sections open up with “if” or “when”, in both cases being a
translation of “ki,” which at times is also translated as “for.”
[1]
New Studies in Devarim, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner Library,
Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc.,
[2] Devarim with Daat Mikrah Commentary, Pub. Mossad
Harav Kook, Jm. 2001.
[3] New Studies in Devarim
