Deuteronomy

As stated earlier, Moses’ main objective in Deuteronomy had been to review those commandments that
had been broached earlier in the Torah, but were needful of clarification. Nonetheless, the prophet had
other goals as well. One was inculcating belief in divine reward and punishment.

“Therefore you shall love God your Almighty, and keep His charge, and
His statutes, and His ordinances, and His commandments – always.”

Abravanel shows how Deuteronomy 11 covers divine reward and punishment. Instinct told Moses that
his audience did not need abstract proof when it came to believing in divine consequence. This is
because the prophet was not addressing a generation who had not seen God’s methodology with their
own eyes. Indeed, up close they had seen the fate of those who violated God's will. Consider the fate
that plagued idolatrous Egypt, “and His signs, and His works, which He did in the midst of Egypt unto
Pharaoh the king of Egypt, and unto all his land.” True to their incorrigible form, surviving Egyptians
defied the Maker, provoking Him to plunk the Red Sea down on them, drowned to the last charioteer –
“and what He did unto the army of Egypt, unto their horses, and to their chariots; how He made the
water of the Red Sea to overflow them as they pursued after you, and how God had destroyed them…”

In the desert, the generation, too, experienced His wrath first-hand. Literally. How often, owing to their
sins, had He struck them with His outstretched arm? God's fury practically proved a fixture in the
wilderness, in response to non-compliance. To list a few:

•  Aftermath to the Golden Calf
•  Fire of Taberah
•  Venomous snakes

In all of these episodes and up to their present encampment, the Hebrew campers could vividly recall
divine wrath as if current affairs.

By the same token, that generation had been eyewitnesses to God's kindnesses, favors, and wonders.
Consider, for example manna from heaven, and a ready water source in an arid desert. All in all, the
surviving Jews would have no problem making the very simple calculation: love-based Torah compliance
pays handsomely; noncompliance hurts – fostering fear.

Interestingly, Abravanel points out, when our verses recap the desert punishments, they leave out Korah
and his co-conspirators. Why? This is due to an unexpected development: ringleader Korah's sons did
not meet their father’s demise for they abandoned the revolt. Out of respect for them, Moses edited
out the entire nasty narrative. In contrast, Dathan and Abiram brought their families to complete ruin:
“and what He did unto Dathan and Abiram…how the earth opened her mouth…”

To sum up, Abravanel holds that these last verses find Moses addressing his brethren, goading them to
mentally replay what their eyes had seen: open miracles. Their eyes saw more. Like, wild successes.
Wonders. Indescribable deeds had the Maker wrought for His people. On the other side of the ledger,
they also witnessed divine punishment meted out to those who openly defied Him.

As for the takeaway: "Therefore shall you keep all the commandments…” The prophet encouraged his
co-religionists to observe positive or proactive commandments, those injunctions that promote service
to the Maker out of love. See Abravanel’s World for more on divine reward/punishment.

Deuteronomy 11 closes one Torah portion (Ekev) and opens another (Re’eh). Abravanel asks about the
timing and venue of this Torah portion, as an upcoming verse may confuse readers. “And it shall come
to pass, when God your Almighty shall bring you into the land whither you go to possess it, that you shall
set the blessing upon mount Gerizim, and the curse upon mount Ebal.”

“Consider. I place before you today blessing and curse.”

If, Abravanel asks, this is instruction for what will transpire after the Hebrews cross the Jordan River,
why does our lead verse say: “I place before you today blessing and curse?” At that moment in time,
Moses and his brethren had still not crossed the Jordan.

Before Abravanel answers, he stresses something we have already said elsewhere. Moses’ main
intention in Deuteronomy was to fully explicate to the people those commandments that needed a
follow-up. That is, the prophet wanted to comprehensively cover certain directives that until now were
only glossed over. "Moses began to explain this Law saying" is the operative or supportive verse.

However, before the prophet tutored his co-religionists, he prefaced by retelling some desert narratives
that served to set the scene, in a manner of speaking. Thus, each of Deuteronomy’s first three portions
(Devarim, Va'etchanan, and Ekev) do just that, Moses creates conducive ambience – each with their own
poignant lesson.

With those three Torah portions behind him, Moses sets out to accomplish his express goal, as we shall
see in our portion plus the following ones (Shoftim, Ki Tetzei, and part of Ki Tavo). Packed into those
three portions are all of the commandments of which Moses will deal, without digressing for narrative
or moral instruction. Subsequent to them, he will deliver words of the covenant, including delivering a
heaping dose of encouragement for the Hebrews to fulfill Heaven’s commands. In addition, the prophet
will infuse blessing and curse into the conversation (portions Ki Tavo, Nitzavim, Vayelech, and Haazinu),
as we shall see.

Moses' introduction to our portion, therefore, commences "Consider. I place before you today blessing
and curse."Importantly, the blessing/curse he broaches at this juncture is not the same proclaimed on
Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal, for they had not been given on this particular day in history. To wit, our
opening verse writes,"I place before you today." Besides, Moses had not intended the verse here
regarding the Gerizim/Ebal blessing/curse to effectuate the upcoming event in Canaan. To be sure, later
in Deuteronomy (portion Ki Tavo), when Gerizim/Ebal are fully discussed, that’s where the prophet sets
the future stage. Here rather, the prophet will begin to speak of those commandments he deemed
crucial for his brethren to hear.

Interestingly, Moses refers to these particular commands as blessing and curse. Legitimately, readers
wonder how something can be a blessing and curse simultaneously. Are they not opposites?
Contradictory?

These points would pique man's curiosity had Moses not elaborated. But he did. Blessing comes as a
result of heeding commandments. For those who defy them, though, malediction follows.

Abravanel explains further. Divine commandments, to state the obvious, are intrinsically good. Things
get murky, shall we say, when we consider the perspective of the individual vis-à-vis the commands. For
him, commandments bear blessing – in the event he performs them. Yet, they curry curse – when he
ducks duty. Add another demerit to the man who flouts directives; they detonate, as if he wandered
into a minefield.

Think about nutritious foodstuff, Abravanel suggests. Take bread or meat or wine. Everyone knows that
these products are good for you. When a healthy man eats (or drinks) them, he derives benefit. In
contrast, should someone with food allergies to these staples ingest them, they inflict harm. In the
extreme, he may suffer anaphylactic shock and die. It is not the nutritious food that sends him reeling,
but instead his dire reaction occurs because of an impaired immune system.

Deuteronomy 13 opens with a warning: don’t be taken in by prophets or dreamers. Charlatans of all
stripes spell trouble for a faithful nation. But, let us call this scam artist, Abravanel says, by his real
identity; he’s a false prophet, though our verse merely describes him as “a prophet.” However, since the
verse categorizes him no differently than “a dreamer of dreams”, we understand that he is a faker.

“If there arise in your midst a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and he
gives you a sign or a wonder…”

Abravanel adds another proof to show that, indeed, our subject is a con, and certainly not who he feigns
to be. “If there arise in your midst” implies that this pretender comes to the Jewish people on his own
volition or initiative. That is, God hadn’t communicated with him, let alone sent him on a mission.

“And the sign or the wonder comes to pass, whereof he spoke unto you saying: Let us go after other
gods, which you have not known, and let us serve them.” God imposes the death penalty: “And that
prophet or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death…”

The subject of the false prophet, Abravanel says, is puzzling. How can it be that “the sign or the wonder
comes to pass?”Finally, Abravanel asks about the whole point of this commandment: “For God your
Almighty puts you to the test, to know whether you do love God Almighty with all your heart and with
all your soul.”

Abravanel learns as follows. "If there arise in your midst a prophet, or dreamer of dreams…” refers to a
phony. While the fellow pawns himself off as a prophet who heard God's speaking to him, he is a sham.
"…Or a dreamer of dreams…" accurately depicts the man. He did not attain full-fledged prophecy, but he
did get some message in his sleep from Above. "And he may present you with a sign or wonder". To
clarify, we are not talking about an earth-shattering sign, a "wow" that mocks nature.

To the point, the Creator does not put nature at a nogoodnik's disposal – to flip the world on its head.
How unconscionable for Him to be party to evildoers! Instead, God revealed to the sleeper future
events. Our man, in turn, discloses to others what he heard in order to validate this exalted title.

For our purposes, "a sign" suggests a low-level event. On the other hand, "a wonder" describes
something that delivers more spunk. Our recipient, perhaps, came to his newfound knowledge through
sophisticated, astrological/astronomical plotting. We also can't rule out that our guy is an accomplished
magician or sorcery. Thus, "And he may present you with a sign or wonder" (read: amateur act) because
he lacked the ability to pull off more than an average stunt.

Let us compare our little guy to true prophets, men of giant stature. Real seers performed acts that
toyed with nature. Thus, the verb used to describe major happenings is not "to give", but rather "to do."

Abravanel brings four Scriptural samples to back his supposition: 1) "See all the wonders I put in your
hand. Do them in Pharoh's presence” (Exodus 4), 2) "And he performed the signs before the people's
eyes” (Exodus 4), 3) "To Him Who alone does great wonders" (Psalms 136), and 4) "Show a wonder for
yourselves" (Exodus 7).

To zoom in on the fourth instance, Pharoh asks Moses for a wondrous display. The king, of course, didn't
want Moses to set into motion plague and pestilence, in practice. Rather, Pharoh requested the prophet
to tell him something that would transpire in the future, or alternatively to reveal a concealed thing.
That sufficed to affirm Moses’ prophetic capabilities.

"You shall not heed the words of this prophet or dreamer of dreams…." It is not enough to turn down
their requests and advances. Jews must refrain from giving them an audience. Given these divine ground
rules, Hebrews should not grow despondent if the charlatan's predictions prove true. Jews should,
however, get their heads around these matters.

Why didn't the Maker intervene and spoil the false prophet's forecast? Why does He allow nature to
obey the rat, resulting in Heaven’s tacit approval? Is it a stumbling block before the blind (read:
spiritually unsophisticated)? These are subjects that will be discussed at length later.

Few commandments promote such a salubrious effect on a man’s fear of the Maker as the Torah’s
agricultural laws. Deuteronomy 14 deals with one type of tithing – the second tithe. Abravanel notes
that the topic of tithing has been broached earlier in the Torah. Here, the treatment is different, he
writes. How? Elsewhere the Torah discusses the different types of tithes together. Yet here, this chapter
leaves out Teruma and the first tithe, and proceeds directly to a third category – the second tithe.

“You shall surely tithe all the increase of your seed, that which is brought
forth in the year by year. And you shall eat before God your Almighty, in
the place He shall choose to cause His name to dwell there…that you
will learn to fear God your Almighty all your days.”

Herein does our verse supply an answer for allocating agricultural alms. Namely, even though a grower,
together with his son, daughter, servant and maidservant shall partake of the second tithe, no
differently than his other crops, notwithstanding, a Jew shall not misconstrue its import. He should not
doubt the fundamental distinction between both products (second tithe and non-tithes) nor given the
identical outward result (the farmer partakes of both), he should not question why a separate second
tithe is set apart in the first place.

In fact, Abravanel puts forth, an observant farmer's deed accomplishes wonders. The acts of designating
the second tithe and transporting it to Jerusalem in order to eat it there – for the sake of a
commandment before God – fosters fear of the Creator. Moreover, it instills that desirable trait within
him. Fear follows from faithfully fulfilling the injunction of the second tithe. Similarly, and in a more
general sense, fear is instilled when Jews observe divine directives. Religious routine works marvelously
to subjugate a soul to the Maker, leading to fear of the One Above.

How apropos, then, that the second tithe takes place in the warm embrace of the holy Tabernacle, in
the company of the priests! Could there be a more inspiring ensemble of mind and spirit, awe-inspiring
infusion of heart and soul to tap into fear of Heaven!

"And if the way be too long for you that you will not be able to carry it on account of the place being too
distant which God your Almighty has designated to set His name there, when God your Almighty blesses
you." The verse contains four repetitions of the word we translate as "if" or "when". What do they all
convey?

For starters, we learn about two dispensations so far as the second tithe is concerned. An arduous
journey serves as a practical deterrent or obstacle. Second, a Jew opts out of the undertaking if he
cannot manage the ponderous load of the gifts. God's blessing, Heaven's boon may have increased the
grower's output exponentially. A lumbering wagon drawn by overburdened animals reeling under an
unruly mountain of fruit douses a man's aspiration. Alas, he deems it impractical to ascend the Holy
Mountain. Essentially, the verse describes a confluence of factors (distance plus bumper crop) that
frustrate even the best of intentions.

The Torah relays a ready remedy in the second tithe cases involving ginormous agricultural yields, as we
have been describing. "Then you shall turn it into money and bundle the money in your hand…." A quid
pro quo redemption – market value of the produce for money – is arranged. Duly valued crops get
converted into their cash equivalent, which is then brought to Jerusalem, "...unto the place which God
your Almighty shall designate."

Sabbaticals, coming every seven years, have two aspects. One is agricultural, the other financial.
Deuteronomy 15 conveys information regarding the financial feature of the sabbatical year.

“At the end of every seven years, you shall have a sabbatical year.”

Abravanel lends important context. After the Torah taught in the previous chapter that growers need to
transport and eat their second tithes in Jerusalem, it now presents Jews with a new giving opportunity.
This commandment rates more difficult than tithing since it requires loaning money, albeit with an
expectation of getting repaid. Commonly, however, loans become delinquent and never get collected.

Here, in the verses focusing on the sabbatical year, we find guidelines for lenders. Namely, a
longsuffering lender (after a Torah-ordained "gracce period" must relate to the loan as an outright gift
insofar as he may not hound or otherwise pursue the borrower for his money. Actually, he may not even
kindly coax the debtor to pay up.

Giving tithes, to be clear, doesn't present Hebrews with the same quality of challenge as extending
loans. Consider, from the time of harvest, a grower separates tithes from the remainder of his haul. In
his mind, a transfer of sorts has transpired; he no longer relates to that portion as his own. On the other
hand, a loan is something that a creditor hopes to get back. When the stark realization sinks in and he
confronts the specter of losing his hard-earned money, he feels pain, distress.

Returning to the sabbatical year, note that it has two facets. The first one relates to Land of Israel,
marked by a complete cessation of agricultural activities for the duration of the seventh year. In
Leviticus 25, we encounter verses highlighting this command. The second aspect of the sabbatical year
covers financial matters. Specifically, all personal loans – whether they come about as a result of written
or oral contract – are forgiven. In Leviticus, only a vague inference to the money aspect of the sabbatical
year appears. "And the land shall rest a sabbatical to God", meaning that the seventh year's ban on field
work goes into effect, resembling the creation's first sabbath day of rest. Clearly, that sabbath witnessed
zero planting or harvesting. Similarly, at that juncture (the very first sabbath) there were no lenders and
borrowers. Thus, Leviticus states: "a sabbath to God."

Importantly, we find precious little with regards to the sabbatical year's financial feature of nullifying
loans. Our chapter's lead verse only offers a teaser, if you will. "At the end of every seven years you shall
have a sabbatical year." The cease-and-desist trait relates to the cessation of agricultural activities, but
leaves off at that.

"And this is the thing concerning the sabbatical year." The phrase, “and this is the thing” brings us into
new territory; we speak of the sabbatical year as it solely relates to releasing loans. Though mainstream
commentators write that our chapter's lead verse alludes to both facets of the sabbatical year,
Abravanel takes issue with their interpretation. Instead, he asserts that a new and previously
unexplored sabbatical year regulation is rolling out: forgiving debt. "Lenders need to absolve all their
borrowers."

When a man borrows money from his friend, he undertakes to repay the loan by a pre-designated time.
Typically, he will extend his hand, intending to consummate a promise to prepay with a handshake. The
borrower's gesture bespeaks his good faith to pay back on time on penalty of forfeiting his hand,
symbolically of course. In that context, God cautions: "Lenders need to absolve all their borrowers". The
Maker demands creditors to forgive those who extend their hands (borrowers) upon taking loans.

"That which he has lent his neighbor, he shall not exact it of his neighbor…." The key term is "exact it."
No manner of collection stratagem may be applied to the borrower on behalf of the lender for purposes
of recouping the loan. But, if the borrower on his free volition pays the lender in the sabbatical year, the
latter may receive it. The main thing is to forbid strong-arm tactics to retrieve loans.

Here in Deuteronomy 16, Moses recounts the three festivals. He does not place emphasis on the
command that describes holidays themselves (as the Torah earlier lists them), but rather shows how
central a role the Temple played in them. Consider, Moses does not refer to the obligation to take a
palm branch on the Feast of Tabernacles. Similarly, he omits mention of the Eighth Day of Assembly
besides ignoring the New Year and the Day of Atonement altogether. Not a word about holiday
sacrifices is to be found – this despite the key festival component featuring daily and additional
offerings.

“Three times in a year shall each man appear before God your Almighty
in the place which He shall choose: on the Feast of Unleavened Bread,
and on the Feast of Weeks, and on the Feast of Tabernacles. And they
shall not appear before God empty.”

Moses depends on readers to glean that information from Leviticus 23 and Numbers 28,29. Clearly, here
the prophet focuses on the thrice-annual obligation to visit the Temple, as per our verse. "Three times a
year shall each man appear before God your Almighty in the place He shall designate…And they shall not
appear before God empty."

The upshot of this chapter’s final section comes down to the prophet's desire to impart two points
previously not covered adequately. One establishes the religious imperative to ascend to Jerusalem
thrice annually,"Three times a year…." Two instructs Jews to fulfill whatever sacrificial pledges or peace
offerings they had committed to throughout the year. "And they shall not appear before God empty."

Temple gifts vary, depending on a man's means. "Every man shall give as he is able…." Unequivocally,
the verse is not probing man's heart and saying that a man's generosity determines the size of the gift.
Rather, "According to the blessing of God your Almighty which He has given you." Presents to the
Temple are progressive, meaning they follow a sliding scale. The more a farmer produces, the more he
offers to the One Above.

Abravanel asks two questions. First, why did God give the Jews three festivals, no more no less? It is
because the Creator presented them with three colossal acts of kindness. They are: 1) passage out of
Egypt, 2) transmission of the Torah, and 3) an eternal deed to Israel. Thus, the Maker commands them
to ascend the Holy Mount and visit the Temple three times a year. On Passover, they thank God for the
Exodus. On the Festival of Weeks, they praise Him for transmitting the Torah. And on the Feast of
Tabernacles, Jews show appreciation for having received Israel, a fertile and blessed land.

Second, Abravanel asks why does the Torah place a stress on pilgrimage, suggesting something of an
invaluable benefit? At root, it implanted within the pilgrims the ability to perceive Heaven's
countenance, as it were, three times a year. Below, Abravanel details five lasting favors, legacies.

• An opportunity to praise the Creator for all kindnesses shown to Israel: The Exodus, Torah at
  Mount Sinai, and bringing the Hebrews into Israel. Psalms extols "I beseech you, O God, for I am
  Your servant…For His mercy is great toward us…."
• Through the Temple visits, Hebrews internalize Torah principles. Chief among them is belief in
  God's omnipotence. The commandment to bring first-born animals comes with a
  complementary confessional. "And you shall speak and say before God your Almighty: A
  wandering Aramean was my father…."Carefully crafted text helps Jews relive events full of
  divine providence God performed in Egypt, at Sinai, and in granting the Holy Land to the Jews.
• Visiting the Temple offered Jews a close-up viewing of open, recurring miracles. Moreover,
  pilgrims could freely watch Temple service being performed as well as catch glimpses of the
  officiating priests and Levites in their respective Temple stations and capacities.
• In full pageantry the Shechinah shone in all its splendid sanctity.
• Fraternity and wellsprings of love gushed forth from the Holy Mount. Palpably, solidarity flowed
  from one pilgrim to the next, manifested by bounteous sharing. Open arms, extending hands
  exuded warmth and created human capital. In a dark chapter of Jewish history, evil kings sought
  to dash Jerusalem's magic. Desiring to sow discord between Jews in the north and those living in
  the south, King Jeroboam forbade his subjects to celebrate in Jerusalem. The dastardly monarch
  understood that the Holy Mount radiated love, love that touched – and infected – all visitors,
  and so he avowed to ban festival pilgrimages.
• Jerusalem shares traits of a spirited classroom. Charged, pilgrims participated in Torah study. If
  throughout the year, Hebrews raised questions or issues about the performance of this
  command or that, the holy haunt put doubt to bed. Clarity triumphed there, the spot where
  Torah and its directives were revealed plainly. Also, in another sense lapsed Jews sought out the
  Great Assembly where answers and explanations flowed forth. Justice and Jerusalem walked
  lockstep, arm in arm. Of course, courts dotted the entire land, but the supreme court sat in
  Jerusalem. It fielded the toughest cases and issues. Just as surely as Jerusalem was the right
  place, the holiday was the right time. Eager Jews lined up at the Great Assembly's door, waiting
  to speak with the great sages. On occasion the wise men expounded on topics of law, other
  times they dispensed sound counsel, encouragement, or otherwise helped smooth rough
  patches in people's daily lives. During those heady and dynamic days, the Torah lifted those who
  came to learn it, and brought them to heretofore unattained heights and understanding. Is it
  any wonder that the adjoining chapters in Deuteronomy pick up the topic of jurisprudence?

Abravanel makes clear that the Torah portion Re'eh, for Moses, had one focus: elaborating on those
commands pertaining to the Temple, beginning by relaying laws concerning it. Next, we read about the
laws warning Hebrews against adopting any rite or ritual used in idol worship. A section on false
prophets and religious incitement followed, all laws falling within the province of the Great Assembly
whose chamber lie in the Temple confines.

Deuteronomy 16 straddles two Torah portions. The last few verses in the chapter begin the Torah
portion of Shoftim, meaning judges: “Judges and officers shall you make in your gates…” Abravanel
states unequivocally that they play a vital role in a community's well-being, a bellwether. If courts are
professional and efficient, towns will run peacefully and orderly. Conversely, if they are incompetent or
corrupt, towns will go to pot. For that reason, tribes were wise to take great care in appointing worthy
men.

“Judges and officers shall you make in your gates, which God your
Almighty gives you, tribe by tribe. And they judge the people with
righteous judgment.”

Tribal heads serving on search committees, per se, were cautioned against toadying, meaning kissing up
and advancing candidates who lacked proper credentials. "You shall not pervert justice. You shall not
show favoritism. You shall not accept bribes."

For Abravanel, these warnings are not aimed at justices, cautioning them against perpetrating these
despicable acts and betraying their profession, as other commentators have written. Instead, the
Torah's instructions are leveled at men sitting on search committees. Tribal representatives must not be
moved by base motives. Certainly, they must not show partiality to candidates, "show favoritism."
Similarly, accepting graft from perspective interviewees keen on getting municipal court jobs is
unconscionable. As sure as the sun rises, appointing crooked judges will make shambles of any legal
system. "For bribery blinds the wise." In our context, a committee member who accepts graft will be
blinded from seeing an ill-fitted candidate's shortcomings. "And pervert the words of the righteous." An
interviewer on the take forfeits his objectivity. Against his former better judgment, he will now push for
hellish candidates, as a pall of confusion replaces his once good reasoning.

The Torah, obviously, shudders from such monkey business. Anyone acting along those abominable lines
is an embarrassment. And no one should abuse power by stooping so low, our verses warn. "Justice,
justice you shall pursue."Judicial search committees need to be guided by crisp morals and
uncompromised principles.

Indeed, upon sound legal proceeding will a state stand or fall. "So that you shall live and inherit the
land…." Fair law ushers in calm to its citizens. Call it a trickle-down effect. Furthermore, it promises
continuity – generation to generation.

On this very subject, Ethics of our Fathers, propounds forcefully: "On three pillars does the world exist:
law, truth, and peace." All three categories look to law, take their cue from righteous judges. If the
interviewers fail in their task, lawless magistrates will incriminate the innocent, and have them
executed. In short shrift, a country will wither and fold, fault of unscrupulous judges. Swiftly will the land
God Almighty granted to the Hebrews slip away.

In sum, this Torah portion’s lead verses issues dire warnings to men entrusted with appointing judges, as
Abravanel has argued. The subject is not the judges themselves. And what guidance does the Torah
provide for the “select committee”, shall we call it?

In succession, the Torah delineates three disqualifiers for a candidate, paralleling three surefire ways to
undermine a sound judiciary. For brevity, we only list the first one. "You shall not plant for yourself an
Asherah [or any other] tree next to the altar of God your Almighty." Abravanel believes this describes
the recklessness displayed by Jews in an altercation who take their legal gripe before pagan courts. The
affront resounds as egregiously as replanting an Asherah used for idol worship next to the steps of the
holy altar. Even if the heathen magistrate strictly follows Jewish law, the thing grates.

To sum up, Abravanel lays out what determines kosher judges, basing judicious traits on the verses in
our chapter.

Deuteronomy 17 closes with verses concerning establishing a monarchy. Abravanel deliberates, asking:
Is a king a good thing? Is it a religious imperative? His enlightening essay follows, really an introduction
to our verse regarding monarchies.

“When you come unto the land which God your Almighty gives you, and
you shall possess it, and shall dwell therein and you shall say: I will set a
king over me, like all the nations that are round about me.”

Political thinkers have pondered the question, some asserting that monarchies are best from of
government. They posit that the service a king offers his subjects something akin to the role a heart
plays within an organism's body. In a cosmic sense, they submit, a king can be likened to God, the Main
Cause. Just as God relates to His subordinate universe, so too do they subscribe to the divine right of
kings.

Furthermore, these philosopher's absolutist position presupposes three assumptions about a king's
mandate. One, signals an innate a oneness, an utter lack of partnership with anything else. Two suggests
something enduring and an absence of mutability. Three implies omnipotence.

Based on these political scientists' three aspects of kings, their answer to our query is obvious. They will
argue vigorously that establishing a monarchy isn't just a good idea, it's a must. To them and to their
hypothesis one word suffices: hooey.

Abravanel has harsher words: It’s all lies, and more lies. There is no compelling reason, he writes,
whatsoever to assume that a body politic cannot get along just fine with a number of leaders sharing
and exerting power. He speaks about a cohesive body of officials banding together, pooling ideas before
deciding on the best direction for their fellow countrymen. Call this deliberative government, one based
on good men forging a consensus. Without hesitation, he believes that such a deliberative body can
lead, and administer justice. This sentiment is a rebuttal to the first point made above (a king's innate
oneness). And why can't such a power-sharing system have term limits, rotating annually? Reasonably, a
term could even last longer, say three years, no differently than labor contracts, or agreements for
shorter durations of time.

Here are the main points. When the pre-agreed upon term concludes, the sitting dignitaries vacate their
chairs to make room for others. Not only can power sharing work, but it must also be fully accountable
to the people. That is, after a new government comes into office, their first order of business will be to
audit the outgoing decision makers' policies. If it is determined that they committed high crimes or
misdemeanors, damages must be assessed. The guilty, outgoing party then must pay for its misconduct.
That evaluation clause, per se, is an answer to the second point (a king's endurance and absence of
mutability).

Now to the third assumption advanced by poly sci hacks regarding how kings are omnipotent. Really?
And must they reign ad mortem? Why can't we limit their time in office, their authority, and clip their
powers so to only allow them to apply local religion and custom? Makes sense. Logic dictates that when
an issue is contested, and opposing representatives present their respective opinions, the matter should
be decided by a vote. Majority rules.

More than that, there is a clear-cut advantage when a multiplicity of views is freely circulated, far
preferable to rule by one. When government consists of a sole autocrat (and his choir), what checks and
balances will there be when he acts foolishly or falls prey to unchecked passion – animal exuberance –
or uncontrollable tirades?

This, in a nutshell, outlines Abravanel’s political opinions, as he applies them to verses in our chapter.

Among other things, Deuteronomy 2 gives a shout out to the territorial integrity of nations in general,
and the lands belonging to the peoples of Esau, Moab, and Ammon in particular. Regarding these three
nations, the Hebrews received clearcut instruction. Three distinct commands don’t leave room for
ambiguity:

• Esau – “Contend not with them…”
• Moab – “Be not at enmity with Moab…”
• Ammon – “Harass them not, nor contend with them…”

“And God said to me. You have spent sufficient time around this
mountain. Turn northward.”

Non-belligerence, then, is Heaven’s express desire concerning Esau, Moab, and Ammon. Abravanel puts
these commands into focus. Adopting a passive posture toward these three nations had nothing to do
with weakness on the Maker's part. Patently ludicrous. Abravanel makes plain the real reasons behind
Heaven's instruction. Here we will break down some of the rationales.

The land of Seir (Esau) had not been targeted by the Hebrews. This does not imply that they lacked
gumption or feared a fight. To the contrary. Jews were eager to take the offensive. Actually, Seir citizens
cowered to think that the Children of Israel would attack them. The Torah dictated détente, per se.
Why? The Maker deeded title of Seir to Esau. He insisted that His people contain themselves and not
incite Esau, since they are kin.

More instruction followed. "Do not vex them". Waging war was out of the question. If the Hebrews still
didn’t get the message and were hankering for a fight, Heaven suggested they take a deep breath, per
se. Deprived of a full-fledged war, some highly spirited troops wondered, Abravanel ventures, if it might
be possible to pillage a bit. God nixed even small-scale skirmishes."Because I gave Mount Seir to Esau
for an inheritance." The Jewish nation heard that any outright taking of the land was prohibited. Even
extending hegemony over Esau’s territory, with the local citizens staying put but paying a tribute to their
Jewish overlords, would not be condoned.

God was unequivocal about the Hebrews taking advantage of Esau. "Food you shall buy from them for
fair consideration, and then you can eat."Though animal fodder grows in the wild, the nation was
instructed to pay cash for it."And also, water you must purchase from them with money, and then you
may drink."While water is a natural resource, Jewish campers heard that it made no difference. They
could not take an ounce of it without paying retail.

God schooled His people in the facts of life. "Because God your Almighty blesses you in your every
endeavor. He knows your sojourns… you have not lacked for anything."That is, the bounty and wealth
they now possessed was not a function of having inherited bundles from their parents. Blessing comes
from Above, the Maker pointed out.

Hebrews also heard that battling Moab and Ammon were out of the question, as our chapter writes
explicitly. Both peoples descended from Abraham’s nephew Lot. “And God said unto me: Be not at
enmity with Moab…for I will not give you of his land for a possession, because I have given Ar unto the
children of Lot for a possession.”

The same territorial ban extends to Ammon, God demands. “…and when you come nigh over against the
children of Ammon, harass them not, nor contend with them; for I will not give you of the land of the
children of Ammon for a possession; because I have given it unto the children of Lot for a possession.”

Abravanel stresses the reasons for Heaven’s adamancy. Esau is family. God rewards him for having
honored Isaac, his father. “Do not vex them.” There is another angle – world order and territorial
integrity. Abravanel explains, that from the dawn of time, nations have been allotted a homeland. Esau's
descendants, especially, held a place close to God's heart insofar as they hailed from Abraham, the
Maker's beloved. This effectively put a kibosh on Jewish designs to snatch it away. "You are passing
through your brethren's, the children of Esau's, borders "they are Abraham's seed. And we passed by
our brethren, the children of Esau, who dwell in Seir…" Divine kindness for Esau was a direct by-product
of their distinguished lineage, and link to the patriarch.

Protection from Above also went out to Ammon's and Moab's progeny. Both share a common
progenitor – Lot – Abraham's disciple manqué. The Jews were ordered to keep their hands off of
Ammon's and Moab's territories.

Axiomatically, divine providence watches over each nation. As an auxiliary to that principle, it provides
that each nation shall dwell in peace and security within its above-designated territory. Crucially, there
is one condition: the nation must conduct itself in accordance with basic, inalienable human rights and
obligations. Despite the fact that the Gentile nations do not have Torah, they are not exempt from
promulgating fair laws. Common sense and decency are inherent to man.

Abravanel probes deeper: What happens if a nation tosses its responsibilities and acts injudiciously?
Under those circumstances, it is apt that they will forfeit the right to their lands; others will occupy
them. In sum, God Almighty judges His world, sure to punish those who betray their destinies through
treachery. The Canaanites are a case in point. They polluted their land, at their peril. “And the land
vomited out its residents."

In overview, Abravanel advances two reasons to explain why the Jews were forbidden to infringe upon
Esau's, Ammon's, and Moab's lands' integrity. One, these nations benefitted from their illustrious
forebears, Abraham and Lot. Two, these peoples acted decently and oversaw well-run states. Hence,
Jews were told to avoid confrontation with them – for now. What the future will hold, well, that’s a
topic for another blog as the major prophets foresaw.

The second half of chapter 7 starts a new Torah portion, and lays out three categories of God’s blessings
to the Hebrews: 1) population growth and wealth, 2) health and rehabilitation, and 3) respect among
the Gentiles. Here, we will examine the third blessing and see how Abravanel clarifies the relevant
verse: “And you shall consume all the peoples that God your Almighty shall deliver unto you. Your eyes
shall not pity them; neither shall you serve their gods, for that will be a snare unto you.”

“And He will love you and bless you.”

To preface, Abravanel writes that God's love and blessing mentioned here does not appear as a promise to
the patriarchs. Instead, the Creator is making a separate arrangement with His people. That is, on top of
Heaven's commitment to the pledge of divine kindness to the patriarchs, there is more in store. He offers
an additional oath to their seed, apart from the one extended to their forebears: “And He will love you and
bless you.”

“And you shall consume all the peoples that God your Almighty shall deliver unto you…” God places a
victory wreath or halo, as it were, over the nation as a whole. Given God's vigilance for His people,
Israel's enemies face sobering options: sue for peace or get whacked.

Destroying enemy forces should not be interpreted as a divine commandment. It isn’t. Rather, it is a
prophecy, a reward. Convincingly, victory is as assured for Hebrews, as a lion’s prowess over jungle
beasts, as a lioness among a flock. Just as naturally, the Jews will crush and annihilate their foe. A
smashing victory will not come about by dint of their might or brawn. Into their hand will the Maker hand
deliver the enemy.

In the annals of military history, Abravanel finds, there have been occasions where victorious armies have
treated the vanquished with largesse. Moved by compassion, let us say, they spare enemy troops,
supposing they are the more noble for it, and the more honorable. Virtue signaling. Summarily, the
invading Hebrews are disabused of applying misguided fancies here. "Your eyes shall not pity them."

Not to give the wrong occasion, compassion rates most admirable, a bedrock value and Jewish
imperative. The Torah, it goes without saying, does not inculcate cruelty, anger, or malice. The
uncompromising stance adopted here with Canaanites has something else in mind; it is an expedient.
"And you shall not serve their gods for that will be a snare unto you."  Should the Hebrews extend an olive
branch to them, assimilation will ensue. Undoubtedly and in lightning speed, Jews will be professing
paganism – hook, line and sinker. A seductive lure. "Your eyes shall not pity them." Misplaced sympathy
sows seeds of sacrilege. Exodus 23 minces no words. "They shall not dwell in your land, lest they cause
you to sin."

"And you shall consume all those nations…." Bible students need to familiarize themselves with the word
choice, "consume." Balaam borrowed the same term, "[God] shall consume His enemy nations." In riling
up the troops, Joshua and Caleb, too, invoked gastronomic imagery, "And you shall not fear the nations of
the land because they are our repast." Thus, “consuming enemies” is literary license, and certainly not
referring to cannibalism.

In sum, Abravanel explains one aspect of God’s blessing, one that instilled fear in the hearts of the
Canaanites.

These verses bring us to the conclusion of our Torah section, with God’s open profession of affection for
His nation. “God did not set His desire upon you, nor choose you, because you were more in number
than any people – for you were the fewest of all peoples…” Abravanel probes: What does population
size have to do with anything? Clearly, not only populous nations can properly serve the Maker, or wage
His battles. But, if God did not select the Jews because of population size, why did He?

“For you are a holy people unto God Almighty. God your Almighty has
chosen you to be His own treasure, out of all people that are upon the
face of the earth.”

Abravanel understands that God, “set His desire upon you”, to mean something other than strong
interest or affection. Instead, God’s “desire” here refers to His pining to settle the Shechinah in the
Tabernacle, among the Jews. This proposal to foster closeness, to understate, stunned Moses.

To the point, the Creator does not forge intimate ties to the Jews owing to their strength in numbers,
though admittedly, advantage accrues to large assemblies of people as wise Solomon writes. "And in the
presence of grand gatherings, the king's majesty receives glory." Size, though, had not played a part in
Heaven's choosing the Jews, a modest clan in comparison with other nation-states.

Answering his question, Abravanel says that Heaven’s choice had to do with His love for them. The
prophet Malachi corroborates. “I have loved you God says…” Well, then, what was at the core of this
love affair that segued into sending the Shechinah to reside among the Jews?

A second element explains why the Maker picked the Jews. Enter the patriarchal covenant."And in
keeping with His oath that He swore to your forefathers…." Both factors taken as a whole – perfect or
Platonic love plus an ancient promise – "did God take us out with a strong hand and redeemed us from
the house of slavery." Exodus expedited, and enabled the adoption of the people as His portion.

Abravanel elaborates on this second factor, the merit of the patriarchs. A tendency may arise among
some to try and cap God's favor for the patriarchs. They may suppose that, with the passage of time, His
commitment to them cooled, and hence the promise to the patriarchs’ descendants is a dead letter. Not
so. "Know therefore that God your Almighty, He is God; the faithful God, Who keeps [the] covenant and
mercy with them that love Him and keep His commandments to a thousand generations.”

Abravanel clarifies. He states that God’s desire and love for the Hebrews come with responsibility. "To
those who observe His commandments." For the Torah observant, the merit of the patriarchs assures or
propels the endurance of the covenant. Compliance with the commandments cements Divine kindness.

Remission of the Jews’ ancestral merit, let us call it when the magnanimous force is neutralized, occurs
should the Hebrews turn their back on the Creator, should they abandon their love of and fealty to Him." And He will pay back His adversaries in his face to wipe him out."; For the Jews, a breach in compliance carries catastrophic consequences.

Our Torah portion concludes with Moses’ goading and encouragement, to fend off disaster. “You shall
therefore keep the commandments, and the statutes, and the ordinances, which I command you this
day, to do them.” Perpetuating the nation’s golden tradition, then, provides a lifeline and boon.

By all accounts, forty years was an awfully long time to wander in the desert. In Deuteronomy 8,
Abravanel provides three reasons for the testing trek.

“And you shall remember all the way which God your Almighty has led
you these forty years in the wilderness, that He might afflict you, to test
you, to know what was in your heart – whether you would keep His
commandments, or not.”

Here is the backstory. Moses anticipated that his co-religionists would try to shirk their Torah
responsibilities, claiming the commandments too burdensome. They might, the prophet figured, point
to negative health repercussions for arduous Torah study. Moreover, Moses calculated, the people
might seek to evade their religious responsibilities, asserting that the time commitment would sap their
energy to earn fair wages; they’d slip below the poverty line.

Moses prepared rebuttals about an alleged impairment or quality of life, let us call them. "And you shall
remember all the way which God your Almighty has led you these forty years in the desert." Should the
truth be told, at God's hand, wandering Jews had suffered not a little during the wilderness trek. "He
sent hardships to test you, to know what is in your heart…."

Forty years of tribulation in a merciless wasteland is, of course, no picnic. Snakes, scorpions, parched
throats, hostile landscapes incapable of supporting fig trees and vineyards and pomegranates – the trek
had been grueling.

Yet still, the "madness" of the wandering in the desert was not without its method – three methods to
be exact. One, forty years of "hardships" is apt payback for a people who exited Egypt laden with
egregious sin, baggage aplenty. To wit, they had irreverently spoken out against the Creator and the
prophet. A laborious slog would wear out ornery and incorrigible campers, men with an attitude.

Two, "to test you" should be viewed as an open ended, obstacle course. In Egypt, Hebrews were used to
construction work, toiling in bricks and mortar. Still, they had not undergone any other types of pain or
difficulty. They needed the hellish experience of the journey through the wasteland to break them.
Dismal desert conditions would probe and push them to their limits.

Three,"to know what is in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not." To start
with, this verse does not suggest that God lacked foreknowledge about the people's intent, and thus He
devised a test to gain clarity. Before His heavenly throne there are no gaps in knowledge. Similarly, we
reject the notion that He desired, by putting Hebrews to the test, to impart the results to those
undergoing the test, as one commentator puts forth. The key to understanding our verse lies with the
verb "to know."That is, the Hebrew letter prefix here does not come to teach causality or "for the
purpose of knowing"

Rather, here is the upshot. The Maker marched them up, down, and around sand dunes, exposing them
to dust storms for forty years precisely because He knew "what was in your heart, whether you would
keep His commandments or not." He understood His campers all too well. Plumbing their mischievous
minds, God found much ill. They would jettison the commandments in the Holy Land at first chance. For
that reason, He marshalled them to a barren hellhole, where an expendable generation perished.

But for our purposes here, at the end of God's experiment, He would select the best and most stout of
moral rectitude to bring into the land. They would cling tenaciously to Torah observance – through thick
and thin.

"To know what is in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not" – the Maker
accurately evaluated fair weather Hebrews' potential for leading upstanding lives, winnowing out chaff.
Interesting, this message lurks hidden within the phrase (but does not jump out of it), "whether you
would keep His commandments or not." It reflects God's concern for the people's honor, and not
trumpeting their lack of commitment. Similarly, and out of heightened sensitivity, "He sent hardships to
test you to know what is in your heart" should be understood as if said in an undertone.

In sum, Abravanel ascertained God’s rationales for causing the Jews to wander decade after decade.

In Deuteronomy 9, Moses sharply rebuked his brethren. A swollen national ego had gotten out of hand.
But before delivering the brusque message, Moses provided a military briefing.

“Hear, O Israel. You are to pass over the Jordan [River] this day, to go
disgorge nations greater and mightier than yourself, cities great and
fortified to heaven.”

The people heard that Canaanites were “greater and mightier” than the Jewish army. More discouraging
still, Canaanite cities were “great and fortified to heaven.” And if that wasn’t enough, the defenders
were gigantic, “a people great and tall, the sons of the Anakim…”

For Abravanel, the assessment of Canaan’s impregnable defense positions had been overstated. In
either event, city walls did tower. Military strategists, Abravanel imparts, analyze three factors when
gauging an enemy: 1) the belligerent's troops (How is their training and preparedness?), 2) defense
positions and city buttresses (Are they walled, fortified?), and 3) military top brass (Are the officers
gutsy?).

Our verse and the following one returned these answers: "greater and mightier", "cities great and
fortified to the heavens"and "a people great and tall, the sons of the Anakim." The latter verse may be
seen as a throwback to the olden days, when there were goliaths, although not too many. That said,
these ornery ogres did fight obdurately. That was in yesteryear. Today there were many more Godzillas
with whom to contend. Worse still, they inhabited Canaan. Just who had apprised the Hebrew campers?
Knowledge had been disseminated forty years earlier a la Hebrew spies. From them, the young
generation had heard it with their own ears.

Moses felt certain that his words were making headway with his flock. He believed that they understood
the nature of the upcoming war to liberate Israel. "And today you know that God your Almighty will pass
before you." The Creator would deck the enemy, while the Jews would watch in awed silence. As for the
Hebrew soldier' heroism, well that would contribute little.

The prophet felt secure that his co-religionists fully comprehended Heaven's upcoming role in
decimating Canaan. His word had seeped in. However, the ensuing verses marked Moses’ gruff remarks.
Here is where the prophet was less sure of himself, on their account.

“When God your Almighty pushes them out from before you, do not delude yourself saying it is because
of my righteousness God brought me to inherit this land. It has to do with the evil of these nations that
God disgorged them from before you." Moses would lay his concern on the table. How would the
prophet correct their gross misconceptions about the Maker's imminent move and motivation for
bringing them to Israel? Moses put two points into focus: How Canaanites lost the Holy Land and how
the Hebrews gained it.

The Jews assumed, conveniently enough, a connection between the two. Namely, on the one hand,
Canaanites forfeited the Holy Land due to their egregious misconduct. Two, the land transferred to the
Jews, and not to others, because of their probity. They deserved the Holy Land. "It is because of my
righteousness God brought me to inherit this land. It has to do with evil of these nations that God
disgorged them."

Moses understood psychology, Abravanel informs us. Man is quick to attribute success to himself for
any number of reasons. Perhaps, he will overstate his fortitude. Alternatively, he might chalk up good
happenings to earnestness, fancying himself as a driven chap who knows not indolence. Should he find
that prosperity exceeded expectations, he'll suppose that his good fortune came about as a result of his
merit and piety.

In Deuteronomy 1, Abravanel launches a study of governance or polity for the Hebrew nation. Moses
acknowledges his inability to care for a nation, that “God Almighty has multiplied….as the stars of
heaven for multitude.”He states the obvious when he laments: “How can I myself bear your cumbrance,
and your burden, and your strife. Get you from each one of your tribes, wise men, and understanding,
and full of knowledge, and will make them heads over you.”

“And I spoke unto you at that time saying. I am not able to bear yourself
alone.”

For Abravanel, Moses raised a question of statecraft. One of the pressing issues on the prophet’s mind
as he was about to die and hand the levers of leadership to Joshua was governance: What would be the
best way to form a political/administrative apparatus that would best serve a burgeoning nation
consisting of twelve tribes, each of which is vast and unique in its own right?

Mindful not to overstep his authority and invite another Korah-style mutiny, Moses delegated: “Get you
from each one of your tribes, wise men….”The prophet sought broad, tribal corroboration and
participation. And he got it: “And you answered me and said: The thing which you have spoken is good
for us to do.”

Here, we put forth one of the points Abravanel makes, when analyzing verses in our chapter.
Specifically, how should we understand: “So I took the heads of your tribes, wise men, and full of
knowledge, and made them heads over you – captains of thousands and captains of hundreds and
captains of fifties and captains of tens and officers, tribe by tribe?”

Moses established, according to Abravanel, political procedure that would fit the contours of different
situations that would arise throughout the land, be it in a context of a smaller population unit such as a
city or the larger tribal state. Consider a sliding scale. If, for example, an issue rated as major, then more
of that population’s enlightened and altruistic leaders would need to convene and weigh in, or in Torah
parlance, the matter would require the advice and consent of “captains of thousands.” In contrast, if the
people faced something of minor or lesser importance, say in the range of a civic misdemeanor, then
“captains of tens”would handle it. That is, a committee of ten administrators could resolve the issue.

Of course, some municipal or state concerns were midsize, per se. In those instances, all parties
concerned would be best served by gathering “captains of hundred and captains of fifties”,
implementing their conclusions.

Bear in mind, Abravanel writes, this practice would be put into effect for each of Israel’s twelve tribes.
He also asserts that in military matters, so too would officers rise to different ranks, so that generals
would be “captains of thousands”; whereby a major would take charge of smaller military units –
“captains of hundreds” etc.

Moreover, Abravanel believed that Moses utilized the same governing principle when organizing Israel’s
judicial branch. Namely, a tribal supreme court, if you will, would adjudicate as “captains of thousands.”
Smaller jurisdictions or magistrates would suffice with allowing “captains of hundreds and captains of
fifties” to assure people had adequate arbiters to settle legal differences.

Abravanel, before concluding this piece on government, military, and judicial methodology provides a
historical tidbit. He writes that this sliding-scale and decentralized system is extant in sixteenth century
Venice, where he lived.

Again, in this Torah portion, we find verses that instruct Hebrews how to handle paganism, upon
encountering it in the Holy Land. In fact, Abravanel notes, divine commandments requiring the Jews to
obliterate any trace of idolatry have been mentioned in the last two Torah portions. If so, why repeat it
here in Deuteronomy 12 for a third time? Will reiteration better assure its observance, he queries?

“You shall surely destroy all the places, wherein the nations that you are
to dispossess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the
hills, and under every leafy tree.”

Abravanel takes the position that our verse (and the ones following it) does not come to outlaw pagan
practices. Instead, he understands that Moses intended to convey laws regarding the Holy Temple. This
makes perfect sense since the Temple stands head and shoulders above all other Torah directives.
Paramount, it breathes life into the other ones.

To be fair, Temple directives have been promulgated in Exodus 20. "You will fashion for Me an altar of
earth, and you will slaughter upon it your burnt offerings and your peace offerings…” In Exodus, note,
the subject had only been treated topically. Moses elaborates here.

The prophet wanted to disabuse his brethren of potential religious pitfalls. In case they hoped that after
liberating the land they could simply spruce up, what had formerly been pagan temples, and use it for
their own holy purposes, the prophet nixed their plans - unequivocally.

On the subject of "Temple zoning" let us call it, the people heard more. They would need to remove the
heathen's abominations and statues. In addition, they were forbidden to "upgrade" Canaanite places of
worship.

The Hebrews were set straight. That is, though it is the wont of other cultures and religions – when they
conquer enemy lands – to "convert" vanquished people's shrines and use it for their own, Judaism
opposes it. Consider, Jews may reason that when belligerent pagan peoples battle, even though their
faiths differ one from the other, still and all they make themselves comfortable in their enemies’ place
of worship. After all, this is the long-established custom of Christians and Muslims, Abravanel adds.

Why shouldn't Jews do the same, they mused? Enter Canaanite holy places. Renovate a bit. Voilà. Moses
had words for the nation. Actually, just one word: No! He taught them that those places were a scourge,
defiled. For God's part, He wanted nothing to do with them.

"You shall surely destroy all the places where the nations served…their gods." Location-wise, they are
"on the high mountains and on the hills and under shady trees." It is implausible, of course, to destroy
mountains or hills. Edifices, however, are a different story. All structures that housed idolatry were set
to be demolished.

Also slated for the wrecking ball, were "their altars" made of stonework and "sacred pillars" consisting of
one single large stone. As for the former, "And you shall tear down their altars" whereas for the latter,
"you shall shatter their high columns." The pulpy artifacts – "And you shall torch their Asherim", but "the
statues you shall smash to smithereens." If Canaanites called their holy places by name, Hebrews were
obliged to “blot out their names from that place." In our context it refers to desisting from mentioning,
let alone adopting those tainted names.

Regarding the location for the Temple, the Torah cannot be clearer. It is God’s call, as revealed by a
prophet. This, too, is in contradistinction to liberties taken by the Gentiles. "In the place God your
Almighty shall choose…among your tribes."

After the pick process concludes, an invitation ensues: "And you shall go there." Thrice annually, to be
specific. Ascending the Holy Mount was a joyful experience with plenty of good cheer.

Indeed, the Temple was a place of celebration and merriment – for the whole family. It bespoke God's
material blessings to His beloved nation. In this way, Abravanel teaches about the Holy Temple.

Words cannot adequately express Moses’ burning desire to cross over into Israel. His repeated requests,
however, were met with God’s repeated refusals. This pattern resurfaces in the final verses in chapter 3.
Abravanel asks: What was the prophet thinking? What gave Moses a glimmer of hope? Abravanel gets
into Moses’ head.

“And I pleaded to God at that time saying…”

Moses sensed wiggle room in the Maker’s decree banning him from entering Canaan. Perhaps, the
prophet reasoned, Heaven’s ban could be narrowly constructed. How? Maybe Moses would not lead all
of the Jewish warriors in the quest to conquer the Holy Land, but he might lead a small combat unit or
team. Alternatively, Abravanel asserts, maybe in the grand political-military constellation, Joshua would
be on top, Moses would retire and join the emeritus ranks.

Moses’ plea continued. “O God Almighty, You have begun to show Your servant Your greatness, and
Your strong hand…” Abravanel explains. Moses referred to God's request to spare Esau, Moab, and
Ammon, preventing the Hebrews from armed conflict with those nations. Heaven’s stand down order, if
you will, reflected territorial gifts to the children of Esau and Lot. The commands bespeak God's
grandeur, invoking His largesse to ancient non-Hebrew patriarchs (Esau and Lot). Moses bowed in
deference, "God Almighty, You have begun to show Your servant Your greatness…"

As for God’s “strong hand", Moses had in mind the Creator’s obliteration of two powerhouses, Sihon
and Og. God's hand cannot be deflected let alone be deterred; it defeats His enemies at will. By
extrapolation, Moses understood that, shortly, Joshua would summarily defeat the Canaanites, courtesy
of the Creator’s “strong hand.”

At some juncture, Abravanel surmises, Moses understood that there would be no subservient role to
play in Joshua’s imminent conquest. Still, something else preoccupied him. "May I please pass over and
see the goodly land?" Moses wasn't expressing an interest to fight Canaanites nor conquer vast swathes
of the land. Similarly, he had not ruminated about defeating mighty foes or divvying up Israel between
his co-religionists.

Moses' sights were lower, much lower. He asked God for nothing more than to walk side by side with
the Hebrews when they traverse the Jordan and behold the Holy Land. Joshua would march in the
vanguard, valiantly marshalling the troops and parceling out the land. As for Moses, he was content to
lag behind, loitering among the anonymous rank and file – “May I please pass over.”

As in earlier instances toward Moses, God hadn’t budged. He did get angry. “And God's wrath burned
towards me on your accounts." As Abravanel already explained, Mose's fate had been sealed by divine
edict. The prophet, under no circumstances, would step foot in the land. At root stood his association
with the nasty spy affair. It dealt the evil decree. More specifically, when the Jews reacted waywardly by
heaving heresy upon the One Above, repercussions rippled. Ultimately, Moses was implicated.

Irreparably, the people bad-mouthed the Holy Land. Ill-judgment on the prophet's part caused the
theological rift."And you shall see the land" Moses directed the spies. After their visit, the spies
published their report. The Jews panicked. Faith in God faltered. Thus, when the seer begged,"May I
please pass over and see the goodly land" – he was sorely rebuffed. Anger greeted him."And God's
wrath burned towards me."

“But charge Joshua, and encourage him, and strengthen him; for he shall go over before this people, and
he shall cause them to inherit the land which you shall see.” Because of a score to settle with Jewish
scoffers, Moses suffered. “And He did not listen to me.”

“Enough [of this].” Moses heard that God had extended more favor than He should have. Hadn’t God
allowed him to lead troops in a string of storied victories over Sihon and Og? God's grace went further.
Moses personally oversaw divvying up the territories gained in those wars, allocating them to the tribes
of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh.

God granted His prophet more dispensation. “Ascend the mountain peak and feast your eyes to the
west, north, south, and east. Take in the sights.”God promised a bird's eye view of vistas far off in the
horizon. Moses would see far-flung parts of the land, as if he strode upon it. God intended something
else.

Moses had not received the full brunt of divine punishment, something the backsliding generation had.
"And all those who provoked Me will not see it". The prophet was not of their ilk. Freely, his eyes
delighted in the view.

In this manner, Abravanel explains this Torah portion’s opening verses, beginning with Moses’ plea.

The Torah’s descriptions of Og, king of Bashan nearly defy reason. Yet, there can be no escaping it: the
king and his warriors were true to life. Deuteronomy 3 chronicles their last stand at the hand of the
Jews. Abravanel helps us better understand the events and aftermath, providing salient takeaways.

“Then we turned, and went up the way to Bashan. And Og the king of
Bashan came out against us, he and all his people, unto battle at Edrei.”

Contextually, this section comes on the heels of the Hebrews’ war and defeat of Sihon. Our lead verse
identifies the aggressor: “And Og the king of Bashan came out against us…”Just as ornery as his
compatriot Sihon, Og pooh-poohed the prophet's peace overture. An unprovoked attack ensued.

What can be said about Og, king of Bashan? First of all, the lighting speed with which he assembled his
troops attests to a topflight fighting organization. Second, we note that the monarch was stouthearted.
Though he watched his stalwart ally (Sihon) get flattened, it didn't faze him; Og was a force to be
reckoned with.

In efforts to bolster Moses, the Maker bade: "Do not fear him." The prophet heard that in spite of Og's
alacrity in mounting his army, nothing will come of it. Angst dissipated, as God informed Moses that
mighty Og would soon be toast, vanquished by the Hebrews. And He told Moses, “…for I have delivered
him, and all his people, and his land, into your hand…”

Our verses convey how everything played out exactly as the Creator promised. Og and co. went down,
down to the last man. As for his all of his cities, they were sacked. And those cities had not been
haphazardly built, maintained, or manned. "All of the cities were fortified to the hilt, securely-locked
entrance gates", records the Torah.

Abravanel relays three aspects of a victory most impressive and astounding. One, Og had been defeated,
though a fearless king and plucky commander. Uncommonly do kings fall to enemies' hands. Two, the
victory had not been partial, meaning that some of the troops had been routed, and others escaped.
The resounding win resulted in Og’s total ruin. Three, not only were enemy forces destroyed on the
battlefield, but even those defending the celebrated citadels got clobbered. The likelihood of conquering
each and every fortress is, well, nil. They are, after all, designed to repel enemy attacks. Yet here, not a
single one held out for days, let alone weeks or months. "And all of his cities were captured."  In short
order, they fell. "At that time, there was not one city that we had not captured from them." Zero.

For the military annals and to be exact, "Sixty cities." Here are the specs. "All of the cities were fortified
to the hilt, securely-locked entrance gates."A few verses later, Moses provides a debriefing. "And at
that time, we took the lands belonging to the two Amorite kings."

Ancients, after victory, commonly changed the names of places where battles took place. In that vein,
the Torah clarifies. "Sidonians called Hermon Sirion, and the Amorites call it Senir.” In sum, Senir and
Hermon are one and the same, the import being to substantiate the narrative’s authenticity.

Next, verses provide an historical sketch of Og, king of Bashan, Moses’ nemesis. "Of all of the Rephaim,
only Og, the king of Bashan, survived."This biography comes after the Jewish people's storied victory
over Og. It explains why Og wasted no time to saddle up and lead his troops; he hailed from the
Rephaim, fearless soldiers of great repute.

Something else is also going on. It also explains why God earlier needed to prop up Jewish morale. "Do
not fear him." No such bolstering was necessary on the eve of the war with Sihon. In contrast to Sihon,
Og was a different kind of animal. Fierce and driven, Og descended from a long line of ruthless warlords.
The mere mention of his name struck awe in man. Sihon, by no means a pushover, still had not
measured up to Og.

Crediting Og as the verse does teaches just how wily and resourceful the jumbo generalissimo was.
Footnoted for posterity is that Bashan's commander-in-chief remained alive, despite all of his fellow
Rephaim folk having suffered defeat, and death. A living legend, Og mastered the art of warfare. Born to
a nation of soldiers, he surpassed them all.

More about the man. "Behold his bed was made of metal." Generally, people sleep on wooden
bedframes. Not Og. On account of his massive build and weight, wood would not support him. His was a
bed of steel. Our senses themselves testify to Og's superhuman strength. To this very day, Abravanel
adds, there is in Rabbat Ammon a gigantic bed made of iron. Of course, wooden chairs or anything else
made of wood that broke underneath his weight.

A third proof to show how Og's bulging muscles were, in fact, massive may be deduced from the phrase
detailing the dimensions of his divan – "nine cubits length by four cubits wide." Indeed, Og was a
grotesque creature owing to his disjointed body build, one whose height and breadth were wildly out of
proportion. Whereas, most men's breadth is a third of their height, Og's was half his height, thus he
resembled a square block.

Classic commentators write that our verse's depiction of "big Og" is spot on, with nary a hint of
hyperbole. Fact: Og's bed was mucho mucho grande, designed to accommodate him so he could sprawl
out on it, as men are wont to do. In sum, Og's height nearly doubled those of his peers, an aberration by
any stretch of the imagination. Add it to Ripley's Believe it or not.

In Abravanel’s introduction to Deuteronomy, he states Moses’ intention of this fifth and final book of
the Torah. “And now, O Israel, listen unto the statutes and unto the ordinances” succinctly encapsulates
the prophet’s aim: Moses wanted to more fully elaborate the Torah and its commandments. That said,
and before Moses’ Torah seminars commence, Deuteronomy 4 addresses a fundamental tenet of Judaism:
reward and punishment for compliance to (or disregard for) divine commandments.

“And now, O Israel, listen unto the statutes and unto the ordinances,
which I teach you, to do them – that you may live and go in and possess
the land which the Almighty, the God of your fathers gives you.”

In the interest of laying out essential Torah belief, Moses felt certain narratives needed closure. Rationale
for the particular passages that he chose to highlight has also been discussed by Abravanel earlier. At
present, the prophet provides a sharper glimpse into the reward of commandments, or by going afoul of
them, punishment.

"And now, O Israel, listen to the statutes…" After the people had been properly educated with regard to
reward/punishment, and disabused of silly notions they had initially harbored, this much emerges.
Heaven's gift of the land may be understood as pointedly goal-oriented or fine-tuned for purposes of
furthering the Jews’ national agenda and unique role. As such, it behooves them to observe divine
directives, "that I command you to perform"

The Torah stresses that learning is not paramount; performance is. "that you may live and go in and
possess the land which the Almighty, the God of your fathers, gives you." Presented with a mission, the
young generation would not resemble the older one, namely those who perished in the wilderness and
were refused entrée into Canaan.

"....listen unto the statutes and unto the ordinances, which I teach you." Moses emphasized, Abravanel
notes, that the commandments were not a man-made body of dos and don’ts which he had devised.
Had that been the case, then each fellow would be at liberty to add or detract according to his whim.

Instead, the people heard that the divine commandments are inviolable. "You may not add to the thing
which I command to you, nor may you detract from them." The rationale for not editing the Script, if you
will, ensues. "To observe God, your Almighty's commandments that I commanded." Moses stressed that
the commandments came from Above, and were His handiwork – notwithstanding the fact that they
had been transmitted via the prophet.

Driving home the point, Moses turned his attention to the moral meltdown at Peor. God made sure that
all those tainted by the Baal Peor debacle met their demise there. Specifically, Moses had Zimri, son of
Salu in mind. The rapscallion issued a challenge to the prophet on the grounds of the precise nature or
authorship of the commandments: Are they divine or manmade? Conveniently, Zimri belabored under a
false impression, presuming them to be a by-product of Moses’ doing. Zimri could then, guilt free,
fornicate with the Midianite princess.

God had little time for brazen and malicious backsliders, tribal chieftains at that. And so, He settled the
matter and killed Zimri (at the hand of Phinehas). Moses reminded his brethren of the disastrous
outcome that claimed the lives of thousands of errant Hebrews, incited by Zimri, saying "Your eyes
beheld that which God wrought at Baal Peor"

In contrast to those who lapse on account of skewed theological notions leading to unbecoming
conduct, a very different fate greets Torah loyalists."But you who cling to God your Almighty are alive
today." Specifically, Abravanel understands the subjects are those Hebrews who veered not an iota from
the commandments by adding or detracting from them – they reap reward and benison for having
stayed the course. Posed to take possession of Israel, they stand upright and “are alive today.”

Deuteronomy 5 is both vast in scope and chock-full of bedrock concepts for those interested in delving
into the wellspring of the Judeo-Christian value system in general, and Judaism in particular. For all its
profundity and significance, however, Abravanel keeps things as down-to-earth as possible. Here we
shall see how he tackles the first of the Ten Commandments, a chapter that relays the Decalogue.

“I am God your Almighty, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out
of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me.”

God informed the Children of Israel with this first commandment of something broached earlier. That is,
Jews are not subject to the whims of any guardian angel, in the way that Gentiles are. Instead, Hebrews
are answerable only to the Almighty. Bold and underscore: to God and to no other. Since the Almighty is
not a creation, as are guardian angels, this marks Him as different. Absolutely different. The power
exerting influence over the Jews is the Creator of the world. He is the driver or mover behind all
existence. Ex nihilo, He forged the world.

On the ineffable name of the Master of the universe, note that it is never used in conjunction with any
of His other appellations. Often, we refer to it as the explicit name on account of its unique and lofty
stature. The four-letter spelling shares letters with the Hebrew term meaning existence, insinuating that
He brought the world into existence, creating it from scratch.

The first commandment reads: "I am God your Almighty." It establishes God's credentials, to be crude.
Jews are hereby informed that He goes by His ineffable name, due to His having brought the galaxies
into being, created them. He is the same Who avails Himself to the Hebrews, and shepherds them.

A first order of business, we may say, was bringing them out of Egypt. Technically or mechanically
speaking, He accomplished this feat by subduing the opposing Egyptian forces – guardian angels. On
topic, we find: "And against their gods, God meted out justice (Numbers)."

The Ten Commandment's opening words reveal more; they lay bare the main point of the whole
enterprise. Exodus set the stage for God's role as the nation's Steward. "But God took you and brought
you out from the crucible called Egypt", a verse in Deuteronomy 4 teaches. From that moment onward
and up to this very day, the Jewish people are His lot. Hence,"I am God…" goes on record: The very one
Who communicates with them is none other than the Almighty. He is the Source of all creation, Maker
of it. "…your Almighty" bespeaks the rationale behind the first commandment. For the Hebrews, there
are no other gods; there are no guardian angels, save for the Almighty, may He be exalted. "Who took
you out" for no reason other than so you would be His everlasting portion.

After God created the right backdrop, He proceeded to the second commandment. "There shall not be
for you other gods in My presence." Having drilled into the Hebrews’ heads that they are different than
other peoples, insofar the other nations are subject to guardian angels, it follows that Jews are left only
with God. Hence, it rates unconscionable for them to adopt other gods. More exact, the Torah outlaws
Jews from venerating non-corporeal agents, beings that sit foremost in the Shechinah's presence."…in
My presence"delineates this prohibition, owing to the fact that they reside in His presence, in His
company. Scrolling lower on Heaven's hierarchy than guardian angels are celestials. Regarding them,
"Do not make for yourselves graven images of any form that is in heaven above."

Thus far, we have only been speaking about entities that call the skies home. What about life on earth?
Can nature be worshipped? No. It is patently prohibited to attribute governorship to a thing, because
these creations cannot alter or undo their own innate nature. Axiom: No one nor any thing can uproot
itself. "Or [do not make] that which is on the land below or under sea level, in the water."

Categorically, Abravanel continues, Jews are prohibited to pledge allegiance to those domains in which
man lives. They are: (1) the spiritual world, (2) the heavenly world, and (3) the lower world. In a wide
sweep, "You shall not bow down to them, nor serve them." Broadly this takes into account spiritual,
celestial, and earthly beings. And the prohibition comes for a simple reason: all are creations."For I am
God…" – through the ineffable name, the Creator. He has not placed intermediaries over Jews."For I am
God your Almighty" – in all their comings and goings, the Chosen People are in My hands.

Lest Jews think that God in all His worshipfulness cares little if they bow down to and venerate other
gods, they are quickly disabused from such folly. All the more so, a misguided Jew may presume, God
should play down such puerility seeing that all of these three entities are His creations. It’s not so.

Here, God is not objecting to Jews “elevating” these entities to godlike status. Of course, they are not the
creators. But His objection comes from a different corner, that is, as His role as the Chosen Nation's
divine influence, their Mover & Shaker. Should Jews get their loyalties wrong, their sole Guide will have
been wronged. He will avenge the affront. Compare the relationship between spouses. Precisely
because of a husband’s affection for his wife, he fumes should she wander off with another man. "A
jealous God", captures this sentiment.

Here, in brief form, Abravanel sets the stage for better understanding the first commandment.

“Hear, O Israel. The LORD our God. The LORD is one.”

Tucked inconspicuously within Deuteronomy 6 is, arguably, the Torah’s most famous paragraph, as it is
recited twice daily in Jewish liturgy: “Hear, O Israel. The LORD our God. The LORD is one. And you shall
love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might…”

The importance of Hear, O Israel following last chapter’s Ten Commandments is not, of course, random.
In fact, for Abravanel, the Decalogue has numerous offshoots. Large swathes of the commandments
found in Deuteronomy have a direct relationship with the Ten Commandments, really ten columns of
divine directives. We’ll explain, focusing here on the connection between the first commandment (“I am
God your Almighty…”) and Hear, O Israel.

Moses attached foremost importance to proving to the people that the commandments they just heard
from him were (Deuteronomy 5), indeed, divine. Their divineness differed not one bit from the quality
characterized by the Ten Commandments conveyed by the Holy One, delivered at Sinai.

Additionally, Moses wanted to thoughtfully review the Ten Commandments, one by one, to make sure
that their import and offshoot applications were well understood.

"I am God your Almighty Who took you out of the land of Egypt" needed to be fleshed out, especially “I
am God.”Consequently, the prophet paused to talk about God. Hear, O Israel, Moses said. Three points
emerged:

•  God’s perfect unity – “The LORD our God”
•  God’s “hands-on” or direct rulership of the universe – “The LORD is one”
•  God has no replica – “The LORD is one”

The first point of information concerned God's perfect unity. “The LORD our God” implies that He is
utterly devoid of being "many" – in any respect. Testament to His oneness is explicit: "Hear, O Israel. The
LORD our God. The LORD is one."The verse instructs Hebrews to take note and listen well. All this is
implicit in the verb's imperative: "Hear." Pulsating within the verse (the three short units are considered
one verse) is a poignant lesson, a religious cornerstone. Namely,"The LORD our God"– the same divine
being Who gave the Ten Commandments the first time beginning with "I am God your Almighty…" – be
mindful that He is one.

Abravanel elucidates. God’s make-up, per se, encompasses two aspects of His unity or oneness. First, He
is of quintessentially simple make-up, meaning that there are no sub-parts to Him. Consequently, things
don't "happen" to Him. Nor can He be described in any definitive way. Second, there is an absence of
any duality regarding Him. That is, after we accept His ultimate simplicity, we must then accept that
there is no other like Him; God has no doppelgänger, so to speak. Dispelling any doubt about this, our
verse concludes,"The LORD is one." Two references to God in the verse allude to these two aspects of
His oneness.

God, as in, “The LORD is God” bespeaks His direct rulership over the world. When combined "The LORD
our God" implies that the first aspect of His oneness – His perfect simplicity – sets a backdrop from
where Jews may then experience His providence over them. Next, "The LORD is one" stands alone;
“God” is not in the phrase. As stated, “The LORD is one” alludes to the second aspect of His singularity
(He has no replica.). "One" concluding the verse applies to both aspects (perfect simplicity and no
double).

Abravanel digs deeper on the meaning or nature of God. Observation about the way the universe
operates aids in grasping His perfect simplicity. All existence is composed of interconnecting parts that
form a whole. Think about man's anatomy, specifically how he comprises the sum total of all his parts.
This whole person, in turn, is influenced by the outside forces of the celestials. At root, the celestials and
heavens themselves are driven by something whose existence is an absolute, a constant. Axiom: nothing
that is composed of multiple parts must necessarily exist. Hence, the ultimate Commander of the
universe must be of perfect unity; He cannot made of divisible parts.

This illustration of God’s oneness and unity from the natural world, to be upfront, has shortcomings.
Why? Its line of reasoning does not preclude a possibility of there being another perfectly simple entity
"out there" one that remains aloof and apart from the universe, one who keeps to himself. Thus, the
Torah writes "The LORD is our God", an unqualified statement expressing certainty that there must be a
single indivisible being. His sovereignty over the universe dictates as much, for "our God" refers to His
providence. "The LORD is one" provides that there exists no other comparable likeness, as it were, no
replica indivisible being.

Hear, O Israel’s insights into God, as we have been discussing, are intimated in "I am" if we but scratch
the surface of the first commandment. The fact that "I am God, your Almighty, Who took you out of the
land of Egypt"– is written in the singular – suggests God's unity. Crucially, it is the first commandment
rather than Hear, O Israel that establishes the Torah's source for the obligation to believe that the
Maker is one.

Besides the two aspects of God's unity already considered, Abravanel adds a third one. "One" as applied
to God also connotes His perfect wholeness. Ancient philosophers, too, have articulated this description
of the Divine. So when we apply "One" to Him, we are saying that He is perfect in every way. From this
perspective, His unity and kingship amount to the same quality, for kingship connotes His possessing
every exalted quality. This equation (unity=kingship) has been formulated by Zecharia.

This third application of unity (God's wholeness) allows us to gain a deeper glimpse into a parallel topic
covered in the Torah: the Tabernacle. "And the Tabernacle was one" describes the hallowed compound
as whole, completely self-contained. From that perspective of wholeness, so too does “one” aptly
capture the Maker's infinite capaciousness. He epitomizes the very definition of completeness.

Having delineated three aspects of the Divine: (a) His unity, (b) He has no double, and (c) His kingship,
we note that each individual’s comprehension of all three is uneven. Jewry's rank and file can wrap their
heads around His unity and being non-duplicable. The third aspect, on the other hand, requires super
sophisticated mental prowess, seeing that it's the most marvelous, enigmatic, and exalted. Beyond the
ken of most folks, apprehending His completeness and kingship belongs to the province of kabbalists,
men schooled in the workings of the heavenly realms. Practically, Jewish law takes into account the
varying levels of comprehension of these three aspects of God. That answers why Jews recite aloud
Hear, O Israel, but "blessed is the name of the glory of His kingship eternally" is said under one's breath.