Karen Erlichman considers the contrast of Elul, a time for reflection on our behavior during the past year, and the last line of the preceding parashah, which “ushers us into Ki Tavo”—when we are granted safety in the promised land, we are to blot out the memory of Amalek. She comments on the conundrum of blotting out a memory and a time to not forget our past.
Ilana Kushan comments on the similarities between the curses in the parashah and the Plagues of Egypt, in particular, as asked by Rabbi Yose that “…you will be afflicted with madness, blindness, and dismay. You will grip at noon as a blind man gropes in the dark…”. Why is it necessary to specify that the blind man is [again] in the dark? She cites Megillah 24b, wherein the rabbis question whether a blind person may lead the congregation in the Shema.
The ceremony of First Fruits is described in rich detail, the fruits, the ox with the horns overlaid with gold, the ceremonial greetings from the authorities…Yet the declaration made by each individual was not praise of God, as might have been expected, but the recollection of the sojourn in Egypt and subsequent redemption by God. Knowing one’s history was essential to being part of a faith community.
Dr. Bloch considers the historical precedent for tzniut in the Jewish community. He cites Torah passages that equate immodesty with nudity—male or female—that violates the sanctity of a sacred space, while traditional interpretations equate it with female sexuality as seen through the lens of the heterosexual male. Although progressive Jews tend to reject the concept of tzniut, he observes that it still has relevance today. He cites Deuteronomy 23:15, which requires us to maintain holiness in our camp because God moves amongst us.
ACHAT SHA’ALTI (Duet for Elul) – אַחַת שָׁאַלְתִּי – Lea K & Rabbi T feat. Coleen Dieker
Rabbi Sacks addresses the statement in Deuteronomy 24:16, that a person shall only be put to death for his own sin, not for the sins of their children or parents. This law clearly excludes vicarious punishment that was common at the time; for instance, if a man rapes a virgin, his wife shall be ravished, who then must stay with the father of the victim. Yet, it is seemingly contradicted by the principle that children may suffer for the sins of their parents. Rabbi Sacks observes that the latter law reflects the difference between human justice and Divine justice, yet the problem is more complex.
his parashah opens with a series of verses regarding the roles and limitations of the Levites. However, up until now, there has been no differentiation among the Levitical clans. Now, there appears a distinction for the “kohanim Leviim”, which is ambiguous. It seems that the priest is “the one who serves”, not the Levite.
Dr. Laitman reminds us that the Torah was given to every person for the purpose of self-correction; every person would be aware that s/he is filled with the evil inclination. In Shoftim, the judges represent the decisions that a person makes in advance; they are the premeditation concerning how to work with one’s ego, turning evil inclinations into fair towards others. Officers are what we need to establish over ourselves, to preclude deviations from the way.
The parashah writes about the cancellation of debts in the seventh year. However, the text is understood to cover the laws of charity, or “distributive justice, equity.” However, as Rabbi Sacks observes, the laws also incorporate the restoration of self-respect. In other words, anonymity in the giving is essential.
Rabbi Staub explores the challenge of the “black and white” nature of the text – “I set before you a blessing and a curse.” He observes that the text also states that our ancestors were given the land to possess conditionally, along with the commandment to destroy all places of worship of the people whom we would dispossess.