BY: Jessica Gross
Parshat Eikev comes in the middle of Moshe’s final narrative to the nation before his death. The parasha begins by relating the many good things that will come as a result of following the laws that have, and will continue to be enumerated throughout the Torah. The future conquest of the Land of Israel is described as including the anticipation that the nation may fear the nations they are coming to conquer, but God, through Moshe, reassures them that they will successfully conquer and settle the land. This section is a detailed description of the conditions of the brit, the covenant between the nation and God. We were given the Torah and its mitzvot, are expected to observe the laws, and as a result will be rewarded with the land and a good life in it.
What seems to be the climax of this parasha, the retelling of the giving of the Torah at Sinai, the subsequent sin, Moshe’s prayer on behalf of the nation, and the forgiving of the nation and the giving of the second luchot, is found at its center. However, while on the one hand it appears to be the climax, it also seems to just be an interruption in the flow the parasha, with the rest of it dealing with the covenantal relationship between God and His nation. Following this anecdotal interruption, the narrative seems to pick up from exactly where it had left off before the story, returning to the different aspects of the covenant. Again, the expectations of observance are explained along with the brachot that will follow from successful observance, and the potential disasters that can come as the result of a lack of adherence to the laws of the Torah. Included in this section is the second perek of Kriat Shema, which contains all of these elements of mitzvot, rewards, and punishments.
When looked at from up close this parasha is rich with many details about different aspects of the covenant, presenting a picture of the various paths the future of the nation may take upon entering the Land of Israel. Taking a step back, however, and looking at the progression of topics in the parasha it becomes clear that there is a clear chiastic structure, with the center being the retelling of the Sinai story.
The very beginning of the parasha states: ב וְהָיָה עֵקֶב תִּשְׁמְעוּן, אֵת הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים הָאֵלֶּה, וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם וַעֲשִׂיתֶם, אֹתָם--וְשָׁמַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְךָ, אֶת-הַבְּרִית וְאֶת-הַחֶסֶד, אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע, לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ. “And if you do obey these rules and observe them carefully, the Lord your God will maintain faithfully for you the covenant that He made an oath with your fathers” (Deuteronomy 7:12) This is clearly parallel to the beginning of the last section of the parasha in where we read: כב כִּי אִם-שָׁמֹר תִּשְׁמְרוּן אֶת-כָּל-הַמִּצְוָה הַזֹּאת, אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם--לַעֲשֹׂתָהּ: לְאַהֲבָה אֶת-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם, לָלֶכֶת בְּכָל-דְּרָכָיו--וּלְדָבְקָה-בוֹ. “If, then, you faithfully keep all this Instruction that I command you, loving the Lord your God, walking in all His ways, and holding fast with Him” (Deuteronomy 11:22)i The following section tells the nation not to be afraid, because just as God performed miracles in Egypt and took them out, so too He will guide them into the land and make the conquest a possibility. Towards the end of the parasha there is a similar discussion of the many miracles God had performed to save the nation previously, and the many miracles that could be a part of the future of nation assuming they properly follow the mitzvot.
The covenantal relationship between God and the Nation and its impact on success of life in the Land of Israel is seemingly explained at length, and then repeated after the Sinai story. However, it is not simply a retelling of the same narrative. The chiastic nature of the presentation and the fact that the Sinai story and the sin of the golden calf appear in the middle are significant as well. The chiastic structure emphasizes the parallel between the two accounts, and pushes the reader to look for differences between the two. Additionally, the giving of the Torah at Sinai and the sin of the golden calf were major transitional events in the history of the Jewish people, and their impact on this covenant cannot be ignored. Further proof for the significance of the retelling of the Sinai story is that the story has already been discussed in Devarim, only several perakim earlier in Va'etchanan, specifically there the retelling of the Aseret HaDibrot. The fact that it is repeated here yet again can be seen as emphasizing its significance as a transitional moment in Jewish history, and it must be assumed that things are not simply the same afterwards.
Rashi comments on the first pasuk after the story of the sin at the beginning of the restatement of the brit (Devarim 10:12). He writes: עתה ישראל - אף על פי שעשיתם כל זאת, עודנו רחמיו וחבתו עליכם, ומכל מה שחטאתם לפניו אינו שואל מכם כי אם ליראה וגו':“Even though you did all of this, I still have mercy on you and affection for you, and and even though you did this sin all I ask is for you to fear...”ii Rashi feels that the covenant is repeated to show that despite the sin, God still loves his nation, and all he demands from the people is to fear Him and to do the mitzvot. As Rashi explains it, the chiasm really does just reflect a repeating of similar ideas to show that despite the traumatic nature of the sin in terms of the relationship between God and the nation, the deal had not totally been destroyed, God forgave the nation, and was willing to maintain the covenant, assuming that going forward the nation properly observed the mitzvot.
However, a different approach can be taken as well. The chiastic structure of this parsha can be seen as highlighting the differences in the iterations of the covenant before and after the giving of the Torah and the sin of the Egel. The differences are significant, because they reflect the fact that what we have here is not simply a repeat of the same covenant, but rather the introduction of an entirely new covenant, redefining the relationship between God and the nation.
However, a different approach can be taken as well. The chiastic structure of this parsha can be seen as highlighting the differences in the iterations of the covenant before and after the giving of the Torah and the sin of the Egel. The differences are significant, because they reflect the fact that what we have here is not simply a repeat of the same covenant, but rather the introduction of an entirely new covenant, redefining the relationship between God and the nation.
This approach can be enhanced by a major point introduced by Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik. In his essay “Kol Dodi Dofek” (Listen-My Beloved Knocks), the Rav explains that he believes God made two different covenants with the nation in the early course of its history. The first of these covenants is the Covenant of Egypt, which the Rav calls the Covenant of Fate. The second is the Covenant of Sinai, first given with the Torah and then repeated again in Arvot Moav at the end of the Torah, which the Rav names the Covenant of Destiny.
The Covenant of Fate, as the Rav describes, is one of compulsion, and one in which a national identity was developed of “clinging to the community and feeling alienated from the outside world.”iii As an outgrowth of this covenant and the formation of a national identity comes several things. From this covenant arise: shared experience, shared suffering, shared obligation and responsibility, and cooperation. The Covenant of Destiny, the covenant forged at Sinai was of a different nature. Destiny, unlike fate is an existence that an individual chooses out of free will. It is an active, elective, experience, not one of coercion. In that sense the covenant at Sinai was contractual, agreed upon by the nation when they said “naaseh v’nishmah”.iv
The Covenant of Fate, as the Rav describes, is one of compulsion, and one in which a national identity was developed of “clinging to the community and feeling alienated from the outside world.”iii As an outgrowth of this covenant and the formation of a national identity comes several things. From this covenant arise: shared experience, shared suffering, shared obligation and responsibility, and cooperation. The Covenant of Destiny, the covenant forged at Sinai was of a different nature. Destiny, unlike fate is an existence that an individual chooses out of free will. It is an active, elective, experience, not one of coercion. In that sense the covenant at Sinai was contractual, agreed upon by the nation when they said “naaseh v’nishmah”.iv
These two covenants can be seen as the basis of differences between the two sections of the parasha. This is most clear in the sections immediately surrounding the retelling of the Sinai story. The last section immediately before story reminds the nation that the success of their conquest depend less on their own virtue and more on the Divine Will and the evil of the nations they are coming to conquer. This can be seen as a clear representation of the Covenant of Fate. The Jewish people were taken as God’s nation as if out of coercion, and their fate is controlled by God, their actions have minimal impact, their future is planned. In contrast, the parshiah right after the story also explains the future of the nation, but focuses instead on the active observance of the mitzvot.
Twice in the first half of the parasha Moshe reminds the nation to not get haughty, because their successful conquest of the land will be hinged not on their own strength or righteousness, but rather will be due to a larger plan, either based on the brit that had been made with the forefathers or due to the wickedness of the nations they are coming to conquer. While there was mention of the clear link between righteousness and success in conquest in the first half of the parasha, it is much more pronounced in the second half, emphasizing the active nature of the Covenant of Destiny.
Unlike the way Rashi presented it, the covenant is simply repeated again after the giving of the Torah and sin of the Egel. Rather, this historical encounter lead to a fundamental shift in the existence of the nation, their relationship with God, and the conquest and subsequent life in Israel. At Sinai, the relationship shifted from one of Fate, where the people were taken as God’s nation and their future was dependent on God’s plan from the covenant with the forefathers, to one of Destiny, where they took control of their future, and their success or failure hinged on their observance of the mitzvot.
However despite this huge shift and the introduction of this second covenant, the first covenant, the Covenant of Fate is not simply nullified after the giving of the Torah. The compulsion that comes from the covenant made with the forefathers remains significant. Rather the introduction of the Covenant of Destiny added an additional layer to the Jewish experience, enhancing the relationship between the nation and God. As a result of the giving of the Torah and the Sin of the Golden Calf, the Jewish people were forced to take an active role in their existence. It is a combination of these two covenants that made possible the dynamic relationship between God and the Jewish people as seen throughout the Torah and the rest of Jewish history.
_____________________
iJPS Translation.
iiTranslation of Rashi is author's.
iiiSoloveitchik, Y.D., “Kol Dodi Dofek” p. 53.
No comments:
Post a Comment