English translation — דברים א

Talk 1<pg>1</pg>

A.

In the verse¹

"See, I have given before you the land; come and possess the land, etc." Rashi quotes from the verse "See, I have given" and explains "With your own eyes you see; I am not telling you from conjecture or hearsay."

The intention of Rashi in plain meaning is,

that what is written "See" does not mean

(as we find in many places)

"language of understanding"²

(like Rashi's commentary on the verse³

"See, You say to me, bring up this people" — "See, set your eyes and heart on your words"),

that the children of Israel need to set their eyes and heart on the words of the Lord "I have given before you the land" — rather "with your eyes you see — I do not tell you from estimation and hearsay",

that the intention is seeing in its simple sense,

seeing with physical eyes⁴.

And one must understand:

Since at that time Bnei Yisrael had not yet come to Eretz Yisrael,

it forces, seemingly, the simple meaning of the verse,

that what is written "See, I have given before you the land" — the intention is to understanding and giving of the heart⁵

[For how is it possible to say "with your eyes you see" — that Bnei Yisrael see with their eyes that Hashem gave them the land,

when they had not yet come there⁶

!]

— And how is it said that it is forced in the simple meaning of the verse to explain "See" in this verse that its intention is to physical sight?

There are commentators⁷,

"that it was intended regarding the killing of Sichon and Og, who were the kings that were confident about themselves, and nevertheless Yisrael conquered them easily",

and thus Yisrael saw with their eyes a conquest that is the beginning of the conquest of the land.

But at first glance, this explanation has no place

(according to the simple meaning of the verse)⁸

— for this verse, its content,

the words of Hashem to Bnei Yisrael at Chorev⁹

("Hashem our G-d spoke to us at Chorev, saying: 'Turn and journey for yourselves, etc. See, I have given before you, etc.'"¹⁰),

and not after the conquest of the land of Sichon and Og;<pg>2</pg>

And as explained by Rashi here,

on the words "then after" "you came and possessed" — "Had they not sent spies, they would not have needed weapons",

meaning that the discussion is about the entry into the land

(as it should have been)

before the sending of the spies.

And the difficulty returns to its place: how can it be said, and especially in simple interpretation of Scripture,

that at Horeb the children of Israel saw with their own eyes — and not "from conjecture and hearsay" — that "I have placed before you the land"¹¹?

2.

Also, the lengthiness in Rashi's language needs explanation "

(in your eyes etc.)

I do not say to you from conjecture and hearsay",

at first glance:

a)

"In your eyes you see" means tangible sight,

And why was Rashi compelled to also add the negation — "I do not tell you from estimation and from hearsay"

[And as in Rashi's commentary on the verse¹²

"See that the Lord gave you the Sabbath" — "See,

in your eyes that the Lord in His glory warns you about the Sabbath, for a miracle was performed every Friday etc.",

that Rashi writes only the positive

("See in your eyes")

and did not add a term of negation]?

b)

In this very thing, Rashi used two expressions — "from estimation and from hearsay"?

[And even though the source of

(language)

Rashi is in the Sifri on the spot — however, as discussed many times, it is not Rashi's way in the Torah to copy the homilies of the Sages, but rather to explain the plain meaning of the verse,

and as we find in Rashi's commentary on this same verse,

that in the discussion afterwards,

even though the entirety of his commentary originates in the Sifri,

Rashi changes from the language of the Sifri,

as below section 4].

3.

Afterwards Rashi quotes from the verse "Come and possess" and explains: There is no disputer in the matter and you do not need war,

If they had not sent spies they would not have needed weapons.

In the commentaries¹³

they wrote,

that Rashi's necessity to explain thus is — "for otherwise, how could he say to them 'come' when it is not yet conquered before them"

(or — "for otherwise¹⁴

'come' why is it needed,

let him write only 'inherit,'

but 'when you come you shall inherit immediately without a challenger'").

But this explanation is not understood: regarding this language — "and you shall come and inherit the land etc." — we find later in Parshat Va'etchanan¹⁵,

and there¹⁶

it is impossible to explain "there is no challenger in the matter etc. had they not sent etc.",

for the discussion there is in the words of Moses after the decree of the spies,

to the generation that entered the land

(who needed weapons and wars)

;

And it must be said that the phrase "And you shall come and inherit" can be interpreted — that you will inherit the land after its conquest

(And there is no necessity to interpret it "When you come you will inherit immediately",

without contest)¹⁷.

<pg>3</pg>

Moreover: above in the portion of the spies¹⁸

it is said

(in the words of Caleb to the people)

"We shall surely go up and inherit it" — for there too one can ask "How did he say to them 'We shall surely go up and inherit it' when it is still not conquered before them",

and nevertheless Rashi did not explain there that the intention is "There is no contest in the matter and you do not need war".

[And on the contrary: there this explanation was most fitting — "There is no disputant in the matter and you do not need war" — for the words of Calev came as a response to the claim of the spies&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;

"But the people who dwell in the land are strong, and the cities are fortified, very great, etc.; Amalek dwells, etc.",

And to this he answered them "We shall surely go up and possess it, for we can surely do it",

For at first glance there is no response here to their claim

(For he did not deny their words about the strength of the inhabitants of the land, etc.)&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;,

And if so, Rashi should have explained the intention of Calev in his saying "We shall surely go up and possess it" — "There is no disputant in the matter and you do not need war"

("When you go up immediately you will inherit it")].

And it is proven from this,

that in this expression

("We shall surely go up and possess it")

in and of itself there is no necessity to explain "When you go up immediately you will inherit it" — and the difficulty returns to its place: what is the necessity in our case to explain "There is no disputant in the matter, etc."?

4.

And behold, the source of this explanation is in the Sifri on the verse,

but there it is stated briefly: "When you enter the land, you do not need weapons"²¹.

Whereas Rashi elaborates in his language and brings three details —

(a)

No one disputes the matter,

(b)

And you do not need war,

(c)

Had they not sent spies, they would not have needed weapons.

And behold, that Rashi needed to add "had they not sent spies" is understood,

so that it should not be difficult from reality,

that Bnei Yisrael needed weapons and wars,

therefore Rashi explains that the intent of the verse is in the manner of conquering the land "had they not sent spies"²².

But it is difficult:

a)

Why does Rashi not suffice with the language of the Sifri, but rather adds "there is no objector in the matter and you do not need war"?

b)

from that Rashi changes his language,

that at first he writes "and you do not need war" and afterwards he concludes "if they etc. would not have needed weapons",

it implies,

that his intention in the conclusion is not

(only)

to explain his words before this,

that this that "you do not need war" is because "if they had not sent spies they would not have needed weapons"²³

— but rather this is another matter,

that in addition to this that "you do not need war",

behold this additionally,

"if they had not sent spies they would not have needed

(even)

weapons"²⁴,

that is,

<pg>4</pg>

that they would not need even weapons in order to cast fear and dread upon the inhabitants of the land²⁵

[and in the manner that we find in Rashi's commentary later²⁶

regarding Moab,

that although He forbade them "war",

nevertheless "they feared them and appeared to them as if they were armed"].

But according to this, the order in Rashi's language is perplexing: at the beginning he says "there is no objection in the matter",

meaning that even an objection of words

(merely)

will not be,

and it must be said that Rashi's words were said in the language of "this and it is unnecessary to say that" — "there is no objection in the matter and

(it is unnecessary to say that)

you do not need for war"; and then Rashi continues in the way of "not only this but also this" — that not only are "you do not need for war" but "they did not need

(even)

for weapons"!

c)

Seemingly, Rashi should have begun "If they had not sent spies, there is no objection etc." — for in practice the conquest of the land was through wars

(and all the more so there would be objections),

and if so, why does Rashi say "If they had not sent spies" only at the conclusion of his words regarding "weapons",

and not before this regarding "there is no objection in the matter and you do not need for war"&lt;sup&gt;*26&lt;/sup&gt;?

And the meaning of the matter is,

that this that they were protesting and wars is not because of the sending of the spies

(and Rashi does not even need to explain why Israel did not merit this),

and only regarding weapons did Rashi need to specify that the need for them is because of the sending of the spies.

4)

What is the precise language of Rashi "had they not sent spies" — for seemingly it should have said "had it not been for the sin of the spies" and the like,

for the very sending of the spies was "according to your knowledge" of Moses²⁷,

and "by the word of the Lord"²⁸

— with the permission of the Holy One, blessed be He.

5.

And one must say the explanation of all this:

The intention of Rashi in his commentary is to resolve a general difficulty in this verse: This verse comes in continuation of what was written before this: "Hashem our G-d spoke to us at Chorev, saying: 'You have dwelt long enough at this mountain. Turn and journey, and come to the mountain of the Amorite and to all its neighbors in the Arabah... the land of the Canaanite and the Lebanon, as far as the great river, the river Euphrates'"

(That is,

in all the land of Israel to all its borders²⁹).

And if so, it is puzzling,

after He had already commanded them that they should come to the land,

what does the subsequent verse add: "See, I have given before you the land; come and possess the land..."?

And even though in this verse it adds regarding the promise of giving the land,

so that the Children of Israel would not fear to come into the land — still it is difficult that it should have begun with the verse

(this)

regarding the promise of the land³⁰

— "See, I have given before you the land; come and possess it, etc.

(and afterwards to continue with the details of the command)

Turn and journey for yourselves, and come to the mountain of the Amorite, etc., in the Arabah, etc., until the great river, etc."

And therefore Rashi explains,

that the intention of the verse is not<pg>5</pg>

To inform simply the plain meaning of the verse about the promise of giving the land — for it was known and publicized long ago among all Israel

(And as Bnei Yisrael sang at the time of the splitting of the Red Sea³¹

"You will bring them and plant them on the mountain of Your inheritance"),

But there is here a novelty

(Regarding this promise)

that they did not know until now;

And on this Rashi explains,

that there are here two novelties:

(a)

"See, I have given" — that Bnei Yisrael see tangibly

("with your own eyes you see")

that the land of Israel is already given to them

("I have given" in the past tense³²).

For until then, the promise of the land was only in the manner of "hearsay" or "estimation": first in Egypt, Israel was promised "I will bring you up from the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanite, etc."³³,

"And I will take you out, etc., and I will bring you to the land, etc."³⁴

— "and the people believed"³⁵

(being believers, children of believers³⁶),

this is only in the category of "hearsay"

(acceptance of words³⁷)

alone; and afterwards,

after the miracles of the Exodus from Egypt,

and especially at the time of the splitting of the Red Sea, when "all the inhabitants of Canaan melted,

terror and dread will fall upon them, etc."³⁸

(the song of Israel),

then Israel could estimate

(in the way of "estimation")

that surely God will give the kings of Canaan into their hands and they will inherit the land in a miraculous way;

but not so now — "See, I have given,

with your own eyes you see,

I am not telling you from estimation and from hearsay"

(as below, section 6).

(b)

"Come and inherit" — since

(already)

"I have given before you the land"

(not only by way of promise,

but)

in a manner that they can see this giving "with your eyes",

it is understood,

that their entry into the land will be without delay³⁹

("when you come you will inherit immediately"),

"no one contests etc."

6.

But still an explanation is lacking: what is the connection of this promise specifically to the journey from Mount Horeb

(therefore it was said here specifically),

and also — what is the reason that Moses repeated it now,

after forty years?

And the explanation of this — simply:

This speech of Moses comes in continuation of the words of rebuke at the beginning of the portion⁴⁰

— "Eleven days from Horeb by way of Mount Seir until Kadesh-barnea",

And as Rashi explains there "Moses said to them: See what you have caused. There is no shorter way from Horeb to Kadesh-barnea than the way of Mount Seir, and even it is a journey of eleven days, and you traversed it in three days..

And so much was the Divine Presence agitated for you to hasten your entry into the land, and because you corrupted [it], He turned you about etc. forty years".

That is: in this journey from Mount Sinai, Israel went with miraculous speed

(which came about through that "the Divine Presence was agitated for you"),

in order to hasten their arrival to the Land.

And after Moses said his words briefly and with a hint⁴¹,

he later returned to recount about this journey in detail and more — "The Lord our God spoke to us at Horeb, saying: Enough of your dwelling at this mountain,

Turn and journey for yourselves and come etc."; and this is also what he added "See, I have placed before you the<pg>6</pg>

the land you have come to and possessed, etc."

one can say that in this he hinted to them the wonders they saw during this journey⁴²,

that when they saw the miraculous speed,

that the Holy One, blessed be He, hastened their coming to the land,

this is a tangible proof of how

(from the side of the Holy One, blessed be He, indeed)

the land was already given to them in actuality⁴³,

without any delay or hindrance,

and only the actual entry into the land was lacking

(but that through their sins,

as recounted in the continuation of the verses,

they caused that they were delayed in the desert for another thirty-eight years⁴⁴).

7.

Based on the above, the specific expressions of Rashi in the phrase "you have come and possessed" will also be explained:

Just as in the verse "eleven days from Horeb" Rashi emphasizes the opposite from one extreme to the other that was caused by the deeds of Israel,

that not only was it only a short way from Eretz Yisrael

(a way of eleven days until Kadesh Barnea,

which is on the border of Eretz Yisrael⁴⁵),

but furthermore,

that this short way itself they went with miraculous speed

(in three days)

— and in exchange for this miraculous speed in which the Shechinah "exerted itself" to bring them to the land,

they were delayed in the desert until the end of forty years,

Likewise in these verses

("Hashem our G-d spoke to us at Horeb, 'Turn and journey, etc. See, I have given, etc.'")

which were also said as a rebuke,

Rashi emphasizes the greatness of the speed in the content of the matter

(i.e., the absence of hindrances and delays of all kinds)

that should have been in their entry into the land.

Explanation of the matter:

"I have given before you the land" includes two things:

(a)

Giving of ownership in law,

for although the land was at first in the possession of Canaan and they can claim that the land is theirs,

behold

(in the language of Rashi at the beginning of his commentary on the Torah⁴⁶)

"All the land of the Holy One, blessed be He, is; He created it and gave it to whomever is upright in His eyes, by His will..

He took it from them and gave it to us."

(b)

Giving of the land in actuality,

by means of the Holy One, blessed be He, driving out the nations from before the children of Israel and they inherit it and settle in it in actuality.

And this is the two matters in Rashi —

(a)

"No one contests the matter",

(b)

"And you do not need war" — that in these two matters there will be no hindrances or delays from the nations:

"

(No)

one contests the matter" means — a contestation in law,

that the nations will claim that according to law the land is theirs.

And one could say,

that this includes also a contestation from the children of Edom

[that the path to Eretz Yisrael "from Horeb..

to Kadesh Barnea" is "the way of Mount Seir",

and as Rashi explains⁴⁷

that "had they not sinned they would have passed through the way of Mount Seir to enter the land"],

that they too are children of Isaac; and as we find that Bnei Yisrael needed to emphasize in their mission to the king of Edom to pass through his land — "You have no⁴⁸

right to stir up the inheritance of the land of Israel just as you did not pay the debt";<pg>7</pg>

And regarding this, the Holy One, blessed be He, promised them,

that "See, I have given before you the land",

that it will be seen tangibly that "the Shechinah is exerting Herself for you to hasten your coming to the land",

behold, it will no longer enter the minds of the nations to contest⁴⁹

the ownership of the Jewish people over the Land of Israel.

However, even if there will be no contestation "in law",

still this does not negate "prevention and hindrance" on the part of the inhabitants of the land,

that even though they know that the Children of Israel are justified in law,

nevertheless they will not want to leave their land and homeland etc. for the sake of Israel,

and they will not allow Israel to enter the land.

And therefore Rashi continues "and you do not need war" — because the nations will turn away from before the children of Israel&lt;sup&gt;50&lt;/sup&gt;

(like the Girgashite who stood and turned away from before them&lt;sup&gt;51&lt;/sup&gt;).

8.

And behold, since the journey from Mount Horeb to Kadesh Barnea was with miraculous speed that is above nature,

it stands to reason,

that also in the continuation "See, I have given... come and possess" there is a matter of a miracle above nature.

And therefore Rashi was not satisfied with this that "you do not need to go to war",

because this could also be in a natural way,

that when they will see Bnei Yisrael with weapons ready for war, a dread and fear will fall upon them and they will flee from before Bnei Yisrael,

rather he adds — "if they had not sent spies they would not have needed weapons",

that is,

there is no need for any action on the part of Israel to cast dread and fear upon the enemy,

even not to show themselves armed.

And such conduct — that they need no action in the natural way to drive out the nations from Eretz Yisrael — was denied to Bnei Yisrael immediately upon the sending of the spies

(even before Bnei Yisrael sinned,

after the spies returned from spying out the land).

For the very thing,

that Bnei Yisrael came and said "Let us send men before us and let them search out for us the land etc."⁵²,

showed that their opinion was that the conquest of the land would be in a natural way

(therefore they needed to send spies to know "the way by which we shall go up"⁵²

etc.)

; and since Bnei Yisrael⁵³

did not rely on the Holy One, blessed be He, that He would bring them to Eretz Yisrael in a manner above nature

(and consequently there is no need for any natural action),

this caused that even when the Holy One, blessed be He, performed miracles for them in driving out the nations from the land,

they needed a natural action⁵⁴,

at least for weapons,

in order to cast dread and fear upon the enemy⁵⁵.

And this is the intention of Moses' rebuke — how the conduct was reversed from one extreme to the other,

that instead of this that they did not need any action in natural ways,

not even "weapons",

behold the nations contested the inheritance of the land

(And as we find that the king of Edom did not allow Israel even to pass through his land and succeeded⁵⁶),

and moreover that the children of Israel needed to fight with the kings of Canaan in order to inherit the land.

9.

And from here a lesson for our time now:<pg>8</pg>

The Scripture spoke a full expression⁵⁷

"As in the days of your exodus from the land of Egypt, I will show him wonders,"

And thus it can be said,

that also the promise of the redemption of the entire land to its borders in our final redemption is similar to "as in the days of your exodus from the land of Egypt,"

that from the side of the Holy One, blessed be He, it will be in a manner of "there is no disputer of the matter and you do not need war" and even not for "weapons."

But this depends on the children of Israel,

that when they trust properly in the Holy One, blessed be He,

and all the more so that they do not refrain from saying

(even before the nations)

that the land is an eternal inheritance of the people of Israel,

because the Holy One, blessed be He, who "the entire land belongs to the Holy One, blessed be He,"

"took it from them and gave it to us" — then it is clear that "there is no disputer of the matter,"

and furthermore,

that "you do not need war" heaven forbid,

and even that you do not need "weapons,"

And they merit quickly of "wonders" for the redemption of the entire land,

that the building of the Holy Temple and the ingathering of the exiles — all this in a manner of "I will hasten it",

speedily in our days, literally.

(From talks of Shabbat Parshat Mattot-Masei 5737,

Shabbat Parshat Devarim 5742)