Parshat HaShavua
Yeshivat Har Etzion

This parasha series is dedicated
in memory of Michael Jotkowitz, z"l.

PARASHAT RE'EH

This shiur is in memory of Dr. William Major z"l.

*********************************************************************

This shiur is dedicated in memory of Captain Benaya Rhein HY"D.  
May his parents Shimon and Chagit, and the entire Rhein family, be comforted among the mourners of Tzion and Yerushalayim.
May HaKadosh Barukh Hu have mercy upon His people and upon His land.

*********************************************************************

Of Names and Places

By Rav Chanoch Waxman

*********************************************************************

The VBM wishes a very warm mazal tov to Rabbi Yaakov Blau and Sara Silverstein on their engagement!  
Yehi ratzon she-tizku livnot bayit ne’eman be-Yisrael.

*********************************************************************

I

            The opening of Parashat Re'eh initiates a turn in the plot of the book of Devarim. In Rabbinic literature and in the Jewish exegetical tradition that follows in its wake, Sefer Devarim is known as Mishneh Torah, the repetition, or review of the Torah. While the book does contain some recapitulation of the narrative portions of the Torah, the primary topic of the book and the primary repetition consists of a review of the commandments.

            As the text itself puts it in the introductory verses of the book, establishing the setting and purpose of the book (1:1-5), Moshe "spoke to Israel" (1:1), exactly "as God had given him to command them" (1:3). He "expounded the Torah" (1:5). Taken together, the ideas of "speaking," "commands" and "Torah" imply that we are about to encounter a legal narrative. The repeated usage of the stem d.b.r., meaning speak or word, in these verses (1:1,1,3), highlights this theme. This stem is often associated with command and divine law (see Bamidbar 19:1-2, Devarim 5:4-5, 19). The "devarim," the words mentioned prominently in the standard title of Sefer Devarim, are in fact "the words of God," i.e. His commandments. As the Ramban formulates it in his introduction to the book, it is Moshe's legal instructions to the generation about to enter the land, the teaching and re-teaching of the necessary laws for inhabiting the land, that constitute the primary motif of the book. Not surprisingly, throughout the book, Moshe refers to his teaching of "laws," "statutes" and "mitzvot" to be kept upon entering the land (see 4:5,14, 40, 5:1, 7:11, 11:31-2, 26:16, 27:1).

            Yet surprisingly, except for the Ten Commandments (5:6-18) and a few scattered references to the prohibition of idol worship and accompanying related commands or prohibitions (see 6:13-14, 7:3-5, 7:25-26), the first eleven chapters of the book contain barely any formal commandments whatsoever. In point of fact, even these segments deviate from the normal form of legal narrative. They are more a part of religious exhortation, of a general imperative of loyalty, of reproof, or of history and historical consciousness than of legal teaching per se (see 5:1-30, 6:10-15, 7:1-11, 7:17-26). While the first eleven chapters speak often of the importance of laws, statutes and the like, very little of these forms is contained therein.

            All of this changes as of the beginning of Parashat Re'eh. Following a brief reference to the covenant ceremony to be contracted at the mountains of Gerizim and Eival upon entering the land (11:29-32), and yet another reference to the "laws" and "statutes" to be observed in the land (12:1), the Torah states the following:

You shall utterly destroy all the places in which the nations whom you are to inherit served there (sham) their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every leafy tree. And you shall overturn their altars, and break their monuments and burn their asheira trees by fire, and efface the images of their gods, and destroy the name of them (shemam) from that place.                 (12:2-3)

In a command style reminiscent of the legal portions of the Torah, the text mandates a series of mitzvot. Upon entering the land, the Children of Israel are to eradicate the "places" of worship of the former inhabitants. This refers not so much the physical locale, but as the second verse of the passage (12:3) indicates, to the altars, monuments and various cultic objects located in those particular places. Furthermore, in what may be just rhetorical emphasis or perhaps a separate command, the Children of Israel are commanded to eradicate the very name of the various idols, cults and forms of worship from "that place."

            This detailed positive command, or series of positive commands, is followed in the Torah by a pithy negative command. In contradistinction to the previous material, the text informs the Children of Israel that:

Such you shall not do to the Lord your God.     (12:4)

Rather:

But to the place which the Lord your God shall choose from amongst all of your tribes to put His name (shemo) there (sham) to dwell; and you shall seek Him and come there (shama). And you shall bring there (shama) your burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and the offerings of your hand, and your vows and the firstlings of your herds and flocks. And you shall eat there (shama) before the Lord your God, and you shall rejoice in all that to which you put your hand, you and your households wherein the Lord your God has blessed you. (12:5-7)

In sum, the Torah gets down to business. From this point on, command follows command and imperative follows imperative. For the next fifteen chapters, until the beginning of the buildup to the contracting of a covenant and the resumption of the Mount Gerezim and Eival story (26:16-27:8), the Torah contains nothing but commandments. In other words, these fifteen chapters (11:26-26:15), commencing with the beginning of Parashat Re'eh and the turn it initiates, comprise the heart of the devarim, the commandments promised at the book's outset.

            While the issue of deferral alluded to here, the pushing off for eleven chapters of the main body of mitzvot that comprise the central topic of Sefer Devarim is certainly intriguing and has much to teach us regarding Moshe's method and agenda, our analysis until this point should raise another and different set of intriguing set of issues that we must confront. Realizing the structural point stressed here means understanding that in some sense, the mitzvot mentioned at the outset of the lengthy "parashat mishpatim" (12:1-26:15), the legal segment that commences with the opening of Parashat Re'eh and comprises the middle and main body of Sefer Devarim, are in some sense the "first" commandments taught in the book. By logic, if the topic of the book is the teaching and re-teaching of the commandments to the generation about to enter the land, these commandments seem central to that agenda. To put this in a more textual fashion, when the Torah introduces these commands as "these are statutes and judgments which you shall observe to do in the land" (12:1), it means this in the most concrete sense. The following commands are to be done in the land, upon entering the land and as the key to success in the land. But what is central about these particular commands? In other words, why are these commands chosen to introduce the main body of Sefer Devarim?

            In addition, as should already have been grasped, the series of commands cited above should be understood as a single unit (12:1-7). Its two central parts, the imperative to eradicate the "places" of idol worship (12:2-3) and the "pilgrimage" commandment – the imperative to travel to a particular "place" while bringing along ones' offerings – and to consume and to rejoice (12:5-7), are united by the terms and concepts of "place" and "name." One eradicates the "places" of idol worship (12:2) until the point where the very blasphemous "name" has been erased from that "place" (12:3). In a dual parallel, the latter part of the passage dictates that one must travel to "the place" where God has chose to set His "name" there (12:4).

            Moreover, in another possible link between the two segments, in the original Hebrew the term for "name," the word shem, or any of its various conjugations, sounds quite like the term sham, the word for "there," another method of specifying place and location. In the passage outlining the two commandments, taken together, the terms "shem" and "sham" appear seven times. Place and name clearly link the two passages. But this seems obscure. On the thematic level, it remains unclear what exactly constitutes the thematic connection between the two commandments.

            Furthermore, in addition to the word imagery linking the two halves of the passage, the Torah provides a specific mechanism linking the two halves of the passage. In between the positive "eradication command" and the positive "pilgrimage command" the Torah tucks in a negative formulation, the command "not to do so to the Lord, your God" (12:4). But again we do not understand. What exactly is it that one is not supposed to the Lord your God?

            Finally, the negative formulation of "not to do so" is in turn followed by the word "but" at the beginning of the "pilgrimage command (12:5). As emphasized in citing the passage above, the connotation intended is "rather," that of opposition. One is not supposed to "do so" to the Lord your God, but rather to engage in the "pilgrimage command." The two halves of the place/name parasha stand in opposition to one another. Yet the contents and meaning of the opposition of the two positive commandments remain obscure. In sum, what is one not supposed to do to God, and in what sense are the two place/name commandments opposites?

            To put this together, we face not only an "external" problem, the problem of structure and the centrality of the place/name narrative in Sefer Devarim, but also an "internal" problem, the meaning of each particular command found in the narrative, the linkage between them, and the relation of "opposition" clearly defined by the Torah.

II

            Until this point, we have maintained a narrow focus, confining our discussion to the seven verses that comprise the story of place and name found at the beginning of chapter 12 (12:1-7). In point of fact, these verses are part of a larger "parashat makom," a "place narrative," that runs on for quite a few more verses. A simple glance at the written text of the Torah hints at this point. The next setuma, the traditional, i.e. masoretic, device for dividing the text of the Torah into parshiyot is found only after another twelve verses, at the end of Devarim 12:19.

            Reading the text would make this even clearer. Apparently, the Torah is not content to mention the "pilgrimage command" only once. In an almost exact word for word repetition of its original formulation to bring one's sacrifices, tithes and various offerings to the "place that the Lord your God will choose" (12:5-6), the Torah repeats the pilgrimage command another two times. Both Devarim 12:11 and Devarim 12:17-18 refer yet again to one's sacrifices, tithes and offerings and the necessity to bring them to and/or eat them in front of God at "the place that the Lord your God will choose." In other words, in the span of Devarim 12:1-19 both the pilgrimage command, the requirement to travel, sacrifice, tithe and offer in a particular place, and its formulaic marker of "the place that God will choose" appear three times (12:5-6, 11, 17-18) 

            Another little bit of counting gives us the final piece of the structural puzzle. In the span of the "pilgrimage" part of the narrative (12:4-19), the term "makom" appears five times. But factoring in the positive "eradication command" (12:2-3), the commandment that prefaces and links to the first mention of the "pilgrimage command" (12:4-7), yields a different number. As emphasized above, the anti-idol worship command that begins the narrative and prefaces the "pilgrimage" part of the narrative consists of the requirement to destroy the places of idol worship (12:2) and eliminate their very name from that place (12:3). In other words, by no surprise, in the larger "place narrative" (12:1-19) consisting of the "eradication command" (12:2-3) and the threefold repetition of the "pilgrimage command" (12:4-19), the term "place (makom)" appears the ever significant seven times (12:2,3,4,11,13,14,18).

            This theme of place constitutes not just the central theme of the first segment of Parashat Re'eh (11:26-12:19), but also a recurring motif found throughout the parasha. The Torah returns to the phrase and theme of "the place that God will choose" quite a few more times throughout Re'eh. Our "place narrative" (12:1-18) is immediately followed by a detailed segment permitting the consumption of meat not brought as a sacrifice and outlining the prohibition to consume blood (12:20-28). Along the way, the Torah manages to twice mention "the place that God will choose" (12:21, 26), as well as to once again outline the need to bring one's sacrifices to a central place.

            Similarly, the latter part of Parashat Re'eh contains two  segments of the Torah colloquially know by their first two words, Aser Ta'aser, a section outlining the laws of tithes (14:22-29), and Kol Ha-bechor, a segment detailing the laws of first born animals (15:19-23). Each of these sections once again returns to the theme of a central place. In giving us the details of the laws of tithes and firstlings already alluded to in the original formulation of the "pilgrimage command" (12:6,11,17), the Torah stresses the need to bring tithes and first born animals to a particular location and repeatedly refers to the "place that God will choose" (14:23,24,25, 15:20).

            Finally, Parashat Re'eh closes with yet a fifth segment mentioning the "place that God will choose" and emphasizing the theme of a central locale. The end of Re'eh (16:1-17) consists of a review of the holiday cycle made up of the holidays of Pesach, Shavuot, and Succot. By no surprise, the Torah repeatedly refers to a requirement to carry out the various holiday rituals and celebrations "in the place that God will choose" (16:2,6,7,11,15,16) and chooses this particular point in the Torah to outline the specific holiday pilgrimage requirement know in halakhic terminology as aliya la-regel (16:16).

            What we should realize is that the term and idea of place constitutes not just the link between the "eradication command" (12:2-3) and the "pilgrimage command" (2:5-7), but also the marker of a larger "parashat makom" (12:1-19). What we should realize is that the term and idea of place constitutes not just the hallmark of our larger "parashat makom," but also a template for the central concern of Parashat Re'eh. Over and over, the Torah returns to the idea of a central location, the requirement of pilgrimage and "the place that God will choose."

III

            Quite possibly, we may have already done most of the conceptual work necessary to resolve the difficulties raised above. As our analysis until this point should have demonstrated, "place" and the idea of a central location constitute major motifs as of the turn in the text found at the outset of Parashat Re'eh. To put this in the terminology developed earlier, the move to delineating the "devarim," the commandments that comprise the centerpiece of preparation for entering the land, is accompanied by a shift in focus to the notion of place and the idea of a central location. This point can be slightly reformulated in light of the mention of Har Gerizim and Har Eival, the mountains of Gerizim and Eival, just prior to our "parashat makom" (12:1-19) - at the very outset of the shift in Sefer Devarim.

            Immediately following a brief reference to notions of "listening to the commandments," "not listening to the commandments" and the possibilities of "blessing or "curse" found in the first verses of Parashat Re'eh (11:26-28), the Torah states the following:

And when the Lord your God brings you to the land that come into to inherit; And you shall put the blessing upon Mount Gerizim and the curse upon Mount Eival. Are they not on the other side of the Jordan, by the way where the sun goes down, in the Land of the Canaanites, who dwell in the Arava…besides Eilonei Moreh. For you are passing over the Jordan to go into, to inherit the land that the Lord your God gives you and you shall possess it and dwell in it.  (11:29-31)

The brief and opaque mention of the ceremony at Gerizim and Eival seems quite out of place. In point of fact, the details of the Gerizim/Eival ceremony to be contracted upon entering the land will not be given until a full fifteen chapters later (see 27:1-26). Effectively, the strange mention of the ceremony at this point divides Sefer Devarim into three parts, that prior to the first mention of the ceremony at Gerizim and Eival (1:1-11:25), that in between the brief mention and the detailed instructions (11:26-26:19), and that following the detailed instructions for the ceremony (27:1-34:12). This rough, three-part division and its textual and thematic contents can be charted as follows:

Apparently, the mention of the Gerizim/Eival ceremony serves as an introduction to the main body of commandments that comprises the heart of Sefer Devarim. But it also serves to telescope us forward in time and space to an actual point in time where the Children of Israel will actually enter the land. While in the first part of the book Moshe speaks of an abstract future, in the second part of the book Moshe speaks of a concrete reality, of possessing the land, living in the land and keeping the commandments in the land.

            In other words, the shift to the concrete context of being in the land and the commandments to be fulfilled in the land is accompanied by a shift to the idea of place and a focus on the idea of a central location, "The place that God will choose." By no accident, the concrete context of being in the land begins with our "parashat makom."

            This seems to mean something like the following: Every society requires organization, a political, social and religious center. While in the desert, the society of the Children of Israel revolved around the Mishkan, the abode of God (Shemot 25:8) and the place to which each individual brought their sacrifices (Vayikra 1:2-3). In addition, or perhaps in consequence, the Mishkan constituted the social and political center of Israelite society. The Children of Israel encamped around the Mishkan, and assemblies of the community took place at the Mishkan (see Bamidbar 10:3, 16:19, 25:5-7). Needless to say, this arrangement would no longer exist upon entering the land. The people would spread out, and in the process of inheriting the land would dwell throughout it. Social cohesion would be lost; so would religious and political unity. By no accident, the Torah mandates the "pilgrimage command" multiple times and places our "parashat makom" (12:1-19) precisely at the seam between life in the desert and life in the land. Entering the land necessitates establishing a new center that functions as the Mishkan did in the desert. Entering the land means defining a place that will serve as the religious, social and political center of the developing Israelite society. Entering the land means focusing on a central locale and the "place that God will choose."

            By no accident, the Torah first identifies the place that God will choose with the term le-shikhno, as the place He will "dwell" (12:5). The term is based on the root sh.kh.n. and constitutes a clear play upon the "dwelling" of God in the Mishkan (Shemot 25:8), and the very name Mishkan. Similarly, in listing the various objects to be brought to the chosen place, the first pilgrimage command (12:5-7) places sacrifices in the first position. The "place that God will choose" constitutes both a substitution for and continuation of the religious and social role of the Mishkan during the desert journey.

            In this reading, our "parashat makom," our segment about "place" (12:1-19) is about exactly that, the idea and function of place. It is about the concept and role of Mishkan or its substitution, and the religious and social unity of Israelite society. In this light, the twin positive commands of eradicating the places of idol worship and pilgrimage to the "place that God will choose" (12:1-7) constitute the opening of a larger discourse about place, cohesion and religious unity. The requirements of "place," cohesion and unity dictate that no other "places" can exist. As such, the segment opens with the requirement to destroy all other "places" where religious worship, especially of the idolatrous kind, has taken place (12:3). Even the very memory of another or different "place," of a possible alternative holy site, runs the risk of generating alternative centers and undermining cultic and socio-religious unity. It can even lead to idol worship itself.

            In addition, unlike the idol worshippers, who in accord with their corrupt cult worshiped their deities "upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every leafy tree" (12:3), i.e. in every place they wished, proper religion, the service of God, demands a centralized location. As the Torah states in linking the positively formulated, yet essentially anti-free worship "eradication command" and the "pilgrimage command": "Such you shall not do to the Lord your God" (12:4). A proper deity demands obedient, rule-following and unified worship. It only takes place in His place, in the place that He will choose (12:5) (see Rashbam on 12:4). In other words, in return to one of our earlier issues, the "eradication" and "pilgrimage" commands present opposite modes of worship: the decentralized, essentially unbounded and religiously chaotic worship of false deities, and the centralized, bound and religiously unifying worship of the Lord in the place that He will choose. Needless to say, the Torah's preference is very clear.

IV

            By this point, we should no longer be troubled by the problems we began with. The socio-religious unity reading posited here can quite account for the location of the particular "eradication" and "commands" at the outset of the second segment of Sefer Devarim. As pointed out above, the transition to life in the land demands a system that fulfills the role of the Mishkan during the desert journey. Hence the centrality of one place implicit in the "eradication" command, and the focus on place in the repeated "pilgrimage command." In addition, as just pointed out, the reading can handle the internal relation between the two commandments. The opposite relation between the two commands serves again to negate a certain kind of worship and demand a centralized and unified mode of worship (Rashbam, ibid.).

            Nevertheless, while the "unity" interpretation may handle our difficulties, much else, or even something wholly different, may be going on in the text. An interesting parallel between our text and the aftermath of the first revelation at Sinai should help point to an alternative approach.

            Immediately following the giving of the Ten Commandments, God tells Moshe to inform the Children of Israel of the following:

You have seen that I have talked to you from Heaven. Do not make with me gods of silver; neither shall you make for yourselves gods of gold. An altar of earth shall you make for me, and you should sacrifice on it your burnt offerings…in every place (bekhol ha-makom) that I make my name mentioned (azkir et shemi), I will come to you and bless you.    (Shemot 20:19-21)

In the aftermath of the revelation of the Ten Commandments and the people's overwhelming fear of God (Shemot 20:16-17), God takes the opportunity to make a few crucial points. First, the people should remain loyal to God, they should not engage in any form of idol worship, or even something that smacks of idol worship. Even "gods of gold," the term Moshe uses to describe the Golden Calf (Shemot 32:31) are strictly forbidden. Second, on the positive side, the people should worship God in a particular fashion. They should construct an earthen altar and bring sacrifices in "every place" that God's "name" is present. To put this together, fear of God and loyalty to God are manifested in the dual commands of the negation of idolatrous forms of worship and sacrificing in the place of God's name.

            Needless to say, the echo of this passage found in the "eradication" and "pilgrimage" commands of Sefer Devarim (12:1-7) should be readily apparent. Like God's words in Sefer Shemot, Moshe's words in Sefer Devarim open with an anti-idol worship, or anti-idolatrous forms of worship command. Just at the Children of Israel are forbidden "gods of silver and gold" in the aftermath of the Ten Commandments (Shemot 20:20), so too they are forbidden worship upon the mountains, hills or trees, and the altars, monuments and images of the idolatrous cults (Devarim 12:2-3). Similarly, just as Sefer Shemot in the latter part of the loyalty/worship story demands sacrifices in "the place (ha-makom)" that God's name is found (Shemot 20:21), so too the "pilgrimage" command found in Sefer Devarim demands sacrifices in the "the place (ha-makom)" that God's name is found (Devarim 12:5-6). In other words, the "eradication" and "pilgrimage" commands are primarily about loyalty to God, the negation of idol worship and the positive attachment to His name and the place associated with His name.

            This parallel should force us to restructure not just the overall thematic message of our "place and name" passage (12:1-7), but also the technical relationship between the "eradication" and "pilgrimage" commands. On a certain level, God's words in Sefer Shemot are not really about place. In fact, in a strange locution, God refers to "kol ha-makom" (Shemot 20:21), translated above as "every place." Yet this is not precisely it. God refers to "ha-makom," the place, only to modify it with "kol," implying "any" or "every." The point seems to be that any place that God "makes His name mentioned" (20:21) can become "the place." The focus is not on any particular place, but on the choice of God and the consequent connection of some time and place nexus with God's name. It is God's name that constitutes the essence of holiness and the rationale for worship in that particular place. But if such is the case in Sefer Shemot, so too must be the case in the "eradication" and "pilgrimage" commands of Sefer Devarim.

            To put this slightly differently, it is "name" rather than "place" which should be viewed as the central motif of the passage. One must wipe out the very "name" of the various pagan deities and the idolatrous cults associated with their worship (12:3). The total eradication (abeid te'abedun) of the places of idol worship mentioned at the opening of the "eradication command" (12:2) finds its rationale and meaning in the parallel closing demand to "eradicate their names (ve-ibadetem et shemam)" found at the closing of the command (12:3). Of course, one should not do so to the Lord, your God (12:4), as the "pilgrimage command" mandates, rather one should travel to the place where He has "set His name to dwell" and "seek Him" (12:5). In other words, the connection and opposition between the two commands revolves around the issue of attitude to "name." While the name of idolatrous deities and their worship must be destroyed, i.e. completely negated, such is not the case with the name of the Lord, God. Rather, one should seek His name, travel to the place where He has set His name, and worship there. Affirming and seeking God's name constitutes the central message of the story (Ramban 12:4)

V

            Interpreting Devarim 12:1-7 as a story about loyalty, about the duality of negation of idol worship and attachment to God's name, should help us integrate the story into one of the major motifs of Sefer Devarim. In point of fact, the twin themes of idolatry negation and attachment/attitude to God's name crop up quite often in the book. For example, in the Ten Commandments, where the prohibition of idol worship, the second command (5:7-10), is followed by the prohibition to take God's name in vain, i.e. to abuse and disrespect the holy name of the Lord (5:11). Proper attachment to God's name and proper respect for God's name demands not uttering it in vain.

            Or, consider Devarim 6:13-14. In a reversal of the normal order of things, Moshe demands the following of the Children of Israel:

You shall fear the Lord your God, and serve Him, and shall swear by His name. You shall not go after other gods of the gods of the peoples around you.

While the textual ordering is different, the fundamental ideas and the conceptual relation between idolatry and the name of the Lord are the same. One should remain loyal to God. One should not engage in idolatry, but serve, i.e. worship, the Lord. Be attached to His name and swear by it.

            A parallel passage in the Book of Yehoshua may help to sharpen things further. Like his teacher Moshe, towards the end of his life Yehoshua gathers the people, instructs them regarding the future and provides them with religious guidance. At a certain point, he warns the people not to stray after the nations around them and states the following:

…Neither make mention of the names of their gods, nor swear by them, nor bow down/serve them. But rather to the Lord your God you shall cleave (tidbakun) as you have done to this day.          (Yehoshua 23:7-8)

The names and service of foreign gods are off limits. One should not mention them, swear by them nor serve them. By implication, as Sefer Devarim teaches, one should mention, swear by and serve the Lord your God (6:13-14). In summing up this negative-positive relation and in a new formulation of the positive side of the equation, Yehoshua states that one must "cleave" to the Lord your God. The overall imperative is that of "deveikut," cleaving, or adhesion to God. In other words, the religious virtues of loyalty, clinging and attachment that are concretely manifested in the negation of idolatry, respect for God's name, swearing by God's name and proper divine service may in fact constitute the Biblical doctrine of deveikut, the act of "adhesion" to God.  

            In this light, the story of name and place, the twin "eradication" and "pilgrimage" commands constitutes but another example of the numerous "deveikut" narratives found throughout Sefer Devarim (see 4:3-4, 10:17-21, 11:22-25, 13:2-5). To be a bit more precise, it constitutes an intensification of the normal themes associated with deveikut. The Children of Israel must not just negate idolatry, or just swear by God's name and serve Him. They must wipe out the very name of idolatry. They must actively seek and pursue God's name and God Himself.

VI

            To conclude, let us try to integrate some of the themes outlined until this point. Returning to the aftermath of the Ten Commandments and an apparent contradiction between Sefer Shemot and Sefer Devarim should be of assistance.

            As cited earlier, in foreshadowing our "name and place" passage (12:1-7), Shemot 20:21 refers to the necessity of sacrificing in ha-makom, the place. Yet strangely enough, despite the grammatical formulation for the definite article implying a singular place, the inclusion of the modifier "kol" and the continuation of the passage indicate that "the place" can be just about anywhere. In contradistinction, Sefer Devarim clearly refers to a very particular and fixed place. The term "ha-makom," the place, is just that; the singular and unique place that God will choose (12:5). Moreover, in another apparent tension, the "worship code" found in Sefer Shemot refers to God's "coming" to the Children of Israel and blessing them (Shemot 20:21). In marked contrast, the very notion of pilgrimage found in Sefer Devarim implies the Children of Israel's "coming" to God. As the text states: "…and you shall come there" (12:5).

            But of course the contradiction is only apparent. As argued in outlining the socio-religious unity reading, our story is located at a very particular junction in the text and in the conceptualization of history. It is located at the seam between life in the desert and life in the land. In a certain sense it is located in the future, in life in the land. As pointed out above, life in the desert revolved around the Mishkan, the portable sanctuary located at the heart of the camp. The place of God's name, "ha-makom" in the language of the text, was indeed not fixed. It was wherever God chose it to be at that particular point in time. In contrast, the transition from life in the desert to life in the land involves the choosing of a central point, the locus and unifying point of religious service and society. With the move from a nomadic and tribal existence to a fixed, nation-state like existence, ha-makom, the place of God also becomes fixed.

            But there is more to it than this. With the change in social organization comes a concomitant change in the mode of attachment to God's name, in the conception and meaning of deveikut. In the desert, in the web of miraculous existence and providence woven by divine clouds, fire and manna, cleaving to God, or more accurately actual adhesion to God was in some sense a given. Simply put, in this spiritual womb provided for the sustenance and maturation of the people, it was God who did all the work, who took the initiative and was naturally present to the people. It was He "who came" to the people (Shemot 20:21) and forged the relation of deveikut. But as pointed out, the middle part of Sefer Devarim operates in a different context altogether. Life in the land is not led by divine clouds, and sustenance is not provided by the miraculous manna. It is an existence whose physical, existential and religious burden rests upon the people. It is they "who come," who must travel to the place where God has chosen to place His name. It is they who must seek him out and attempt to cleave to Him.

Further Study

1)      The shiur above attempts to provide two distinct approaches to reading Devarim 12:1-7. As alluded to in the shiur, these two approaches hinge on how to read 12:4. a) Reread 12:1-7. See Rashbam, Rashi and Ramban 12:4. Try to identify the two approaches which form the basis of the shiur. Formulate the two variations of rabbinic opinion found in Rashi. Try to justify each of them in the text. b) Reread 12:1-7 and 12:8-12. Now see Rashbam 12:8 and Rashi 12:5, 12:9 s.v. ha-nachala and 12:11. Is there a problem of repetition in the text. Try to formulate the problem. What is Rashi's solution and the difference between the Rashbam and Rashi? Try to develop an alternative approach of "two aspects" in light of the shiur above. c) See 12:8 and Rashbam, Ibn Ezra, Rashi and Ramban. Explain the meaning of the terms "anachnu" and "yashar be-einav" according to each of the four approaches

2)      Read 11:26-16:17. a) Try to divide Parashat Re'eh into segments. Utilizing 12:1-7 as a template try to figure out the key to the structure of Re'eh. If this is correct, what new insight does this provide into 14:3-21? b) Now see 12:6, 12:11 and 12:17. Also see 14:22-29, 15:19-23 and 16:1-17. Is the commandment of aliya la-regel missing from the various formulations of the general "pilgrimage" command? Now see Rashi 16:16-17. Also see 12:7 and compare to 16:14-17. Try to formulate two solutions to the problem.

3)      See Devarim 4:3-4, 10:20, 11:22, 13:2-5 and Yehoshua 23:7-8. a) Now see Ibn Ezra 10:12 and 11:22 as well as Rashi 11:22 s.v. u-ledavka. What is the common denominator (if any) between Rashi and Ibn Ezra? b) Now see Ramban 11:22. Formulate an additional two theories of deveikut. Note the influence of Ramban's comments on one of the central thesis in the shiur above. c) See Bereishit 34:2-3 and 2:24. Try to connect between these verses and the theories of deveikut advocated by Ibn Ezra and Ramban.

4)      Read 11:29-32. Now see Bereishit 12:1-9. a) Based on 11:30 and Bereishit 12:6, where are Gerizim and Eival? b) Now compare 12:1-7 and Bereishit 12:6-8. Also see Bereishit 13:3. Does this shed any new light on the fusion of place and name that follows after the mention of Gerizim and Eival in Sefer Devarim?