Kommentar zu Dewarim 27:31

שמר את כל המצוה — The word שמור is a frequentative present tense, gardant in old French, keeping in English

AND MOSES AND THE ELDERS OF ISRAEL COMMANDED THE PEOPLE, SAYING: KEEP ALL THE COMMANDMENT etc. The meaning thereof is that after Moses completed his words [to the people,] he ordered the elders also to join him and warn the people to keep all the commandments, for every nation follows the advice of its elders. It states which ‘I’ command you this day, not “we,” for the principal speech was that of Moses, while the elders merely proclaimed, saying to the people, “Hear, hearken, and observe.” Similarly, And Moses and the priests, the Levites spoke unto all Israel, etc.⁵⁵Further, Verse 9. means that the priests said to the people, Keep silence, and hear, O Israel,⁵⁵Further, Verse 9. and Moses said, This day thou art become a people.⁵⁵Further, Verse 9. But Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that the expression keep all the commandment⁵⁶In Verse 1 before us. refers to the commandment about the stones which he will mention further on.⁵⁷Verses 2-8. But this is not correct [since the verse states keep ‘all’ the commandment, it must refer to the commandments in general and not to one commandment in particular].

ויצא משה וזקני ישראל, G’d co-opted the elders seeing it was they who would stand at Mount Gerizim and Mount Eyval, and not Moses.

ויצו משה וזקני ישראל את העם, Moses and the elders of Israel commanded the people, etc. Why did Moses single out this paragraph to mention the elders of Israel? Moses referred to what is spelled out by our sages in Berachot 19 that when the desecration of G'd's name is at stake there is no room for worrying about the respect or honour due to one's rabbi. We base this principle on Proverbs 21,30: "there is no wisdom, insight, or counsel which prevails against G'd." Moses, the Chief Rabbi of the Israelites, decreed that the elders too issue the same command to the people. [I believe the author means that normally Moses would consult with the elders and leave it to their own wisdom to communicate the Torah insights they had learned from him to the people in their own time and in their own words. In this instance, when a renewed commitment to Torah was required by a generation most of whom had not been alive at the revelation, Moses acted in what appears like a somewhat autocratic manner for the reasons mentioned. Ed.] Moses used the word שמר, because it refers to negative commandments, and the rule that one does not bother to give honour to elders applies when we need to make sure that negative commandments are not violated in public.

ויצו משה וזקני ישראל, “Moses and the elders commanded the Israelites, etc.;” After Moses had concluded his review of the Torah he commanded the elders to also address the people and to caution them to observe all the commandments of the Torah, because he knew that such a warning would be effective as all the people willingly obeyed their respective elders.

שמור את כל המצוה, “Observe the whole command ment, etc.” The Torah refers to the impending command to erect stones on Mount Eyval (verse 4) after they have been inscribed, stones taken from the river Jordan at the time the people would cross that river. These stones are intended to commemorate the miracles which occurred enabling the Israelites to cross the river without becoming wet at a time of year when it was swollen with melting snow from Mount Hermon. There were a total of 12 such stones as we know from Joshua 4,2 that one stone per tribe was to be erected. Joshua commanded the twelve men to whom he had assigned the task of taking these stones from the river after the people had completed crossing. These stones were carried on the shoulders of the twelve men, each of whom represented his tribe (Joshua 4,1-8). These stones were deposited next to the place at Gilgal where the Israeites spent the first night in the Holy Land, close to the river. The stones which were erected on Mount Eyval had the entire text of the Torah inscribed on them. Another twelve stones (Joshua 4,9) were erected in the river bed of the Jordan at the site of the miracle where the priests with the Holy Ark had crossed and G’d had arrested the flow of the river so as not to swamp the Holy Ark (Joshua 4,7). The reason the stones are described as having to be “large,” is to enable the engravers to inscribe the whole text of the Torah on their surface. The latter stones are reported as still being in existence at the time the Book of Joshua had been written. [What is written in Joshua 4,3-4 is an elaboration of what was mentioned in summary in the preceding verse 2.] (compare Daat Mikra). There were a total of 36 stones, three groups of 12. Twelve were erected in the river bed of the Jordan, before the Jordan had resumed flowing south. 12 were erected at Gilgal. The final twelve were taken all the way to Mount Eyval. These latter stones were made into the altar on Mount Eyval as mentioned by Rashi in his commentary on verse two of our chapter. [According to a view also mentioned by Rashi in conjunction with the Baraitha in Sotah 35, the stones which were made into a (temporary) altar on Mount Eyval were brought back to Gilgal and erected there.]
Our author feels that the plain meaning of our verses allows for only a total of 24 stones, 12 of which were erected in the river bed, whereas the other 12 were taken from the river. The stones erected in the river bed remain to this day and their purpose had been to enable the feet of the priests carrying the Holy Ark not to get wet in the slime while crossing the river. [The actual flow of the water had been arrested in deference to the presence of the Holy Ark. Ed.]
We find the expression באר used in Deut. 1,5 when Moses is reported as “explaining” the Torah. We find it used again in verse 5 of our chapter here. This gives rise to the exegesis by means of a גזרה שוה that just as Moses explained the Torah in 70 languages, the inscribing of the stones with the Torah also was in 70 languages.
The words והקמות לך אבנים גדולות (verse 3) may be understood as a כלל, a general summary of the subject under discussion, whereas the words (verse 4) והיה בעברכם את הירדן תקימו את האבנים האלה may be viewed as the details elaborating on the summary mentioned before. It is as if the Torah wanted to say that the twelve stones mentioned earlier were to be treated in a certain manner. Verse four refers to the aforementioned stones and instructs for them to be erected on Mount Eival. They are to be covered with plaster and then inscribed after the altar on Mount Eival has been erected. [the building of the altar is to precede the erecting of these stones, not as the wording appears at first glance (Rabbi Chavell) Ed.] Following all this, the stones are to be inscribed with the text of the entire Torah, well clarified (verse 8). If we do not explain the verse in this fashion i.e. on the basis of A) summary (כלל) followed by B) detailed instructions (פרט), the entire passage will sound confusing. What would be the point of writing in verse 8 that the entire Torah, well clarified, is to be inscribed on these stones, seeing that G’d had already instructed the Torah to be inscribed on the stones in verse 3? Furthermore, how could the Torah first write: “you are to write upon them” (verse 3), and subsequently “you shall build an altar there?” (verse 5). The Talmud in Sotah 32 also appears to understand our paragraph as an example of the exegetical principle of כלל ופרט.

This denotes constancy, etc. Meaning, you should always keep this commandment. It is not an expression that denotes a command because if so, it would have been punctuated with a sheva underneath the שי"ן. You also cannot say that it is an infinitive because then it should have said שמור תשמור, as in פתוח תפתח (above 15:8), נתון תתן (ibid. v. 10). (Re”m)

Kap. 27. V. 1. ׳שמר .ויצו משה וגו infin.: das Hüten. Nachdem nun die Gesetzgebung ganz abgeschlossen ist, tritt jetzt nun die Aufgabe, das Gesetz zu hüten, d. h. ihm stete Kenntnis und Erfüllung zu sichern, heran, und zwar soll das die Aufgabe nicht bloß der "Führer und Ältesten" der Repräsentanten der Nation, sondern die Aufgabe des ganzen Volkes sein. Jeder im Volke und alle zusammen haben dafür einzustehen. Darum nimmt Mosche die "Ältesten Israels" sich zur Seite und verpflichtete auf die Erhaltung des Gesetzes das Volk. Er nennt aber das nun abgeschlossene Gesetz: מצוה, ein Gebot; denn alle Gesetze zusammen bilden die Aufgabe, zu deren Lösung Israel auf seinen weltgeschichtlichen "Posten" gestellt worden.

שמור את כל המצוה, “Observe the entire commandment, etc.” According to Ibn Ezra the “commandment” referred to here is the one to erect the huge stones upon which, after these stones had been properly whitewashed, a copy of the Torah would be engraved. Nachmanides writes that this is not correct, but that Moses referred to the entire Torah as a single “מצוה” at this point.

אשר אנכי מצוה אתכם, “which I am commanding you.” Moses did not say: “which we are commanding you,” seeing that basically G’d had addressed Moses, and the function of the elders was to raise their voices so that the whole people could hear what G’d had commanded Moses. Not only that, but the elders by being placed strategically among the people, could secure the people’s attention. A little while later (verse 9) the Torah writes that Moses, as well as the priests and the Levites, addressed the whole of Israel, calling upon them to pay attention, and to make a note of the fact that on that day they had truly become a nation.

והקמת לך THEN THOU SHALT RAISE THEE UP [GREAT STONES] — in the Jordan, and afterwards you shall take out from there others and build an altar of them on Mount Eval. Consequently you must say that there were three sets of stones: twelve in the Jordan, an equal number in Gilgal, and another twelve on Mount Ebal, as is stated in Treatise Sotah 35b.

ושדת אותם בשיד, “and you shall coat them with plaster.” The Torah did not use the term גיר, chalk, in this instance as the prophet Isaiah 27,9 used when describing shattered altar stones. This in spite of the fact that גיר is a far stronger material than שיד. The reason the Torah ordered the stones to be covered with שיד is that this is a material which stands up to rain better than גיר.

There were three kinds of stones, etc. Nothing can be proved from the verses here. Rather, everything is proved from the verses in Yehoshua. It is written there (4:2) that they erected twelve stones in the Jordan at the place where the kohanim's feet stood, and they erected twelve stones in Gilgal, the first place they sojourned in the Land of Israel. And on those stones [of Gilgal] Yehoshua had previously written the whole Torah at Mount Eival. Because sefer Yehoshua mentions these two types of stones, i.e. those of the Jordan and those of the Gilgal, Rashi therefore mentions them first, even though they [i.e. the ones of Gilgal] were first erected at Mount Eival. But because they removed them, and took and erected them in Gilgal, Rashi mentions them [those of the Jordan and the Gilgal] together. Regarding this Rashi writes “As stated in Tractate Sotah,” because that is where the verses of sefer Yehoshua are cited. And when Rashi writes “three kinds of stones,” he means [two kinds at] three different sites. This answers the questions raised by Re”m against Rashi from Tractate Sotah Chapter Eilu Ne'emarin.

V. 2. והיה ביום וגו׳. Das Aufrichten der Steine, das Bekalken derselben und das Schreiben des Gesetzes darauf wird vollständig nochmals (Verse 4 — 8), nur örtlich präzisiert und mit dem Altarbauen und den Opfern erweitert, angeordnet. Verse 2 u. 3 sagen daher: nicht erst בעברכם wie Vers 4, wenn ihr hinüber seid, sondern sofort: ביום אשר תעברו, in dem Momente, in welchem ihr im Begriff sein werdet, den Jordan zu überschreiten, sollt ihr euch mit der Errichtung von mit Kalk zu überwerfenden Steinen beschäftigen, um auf sie בעברך, wenn ihr den Jordan überschritten haben werdet (vergl. בעברכם V. 12), das ganze Gesetz zu schreiben. Die Errichtung dieser Steine für das Gesetz, mit welcher ihr euch sofort, wenn ihr den Jordan überschreiten wollt, beschäftigen, die ihr schon vor vollbrachtem Überschreiten beginnen sollt, sie wird es bewirken, dass ihr überhaupt den Jordan überschreitet und in das verheißene Land kommet. Nur der תורה verdankt ihr das Land, für das Gesetz, für die Erhaltung und Erfüllung des Gesetzes erhaltet ihr das Land. Das soll sofort bei eurem Überschreiten des Grenzflusses bekundet werden. In der Tat wurden auch — wie Josua 4, 2 — 8 berichtet und Sota 32 a u. 35 a erläutert wird — die Steine aus dem Jordan, von der Stelle, wo und während die Priester mit Gesetzesbundeslade standen, vor welcher der Jordan zurückgewichen war, ausgehoben, und nachdem davon auf dem Ebal der Altar gebaut und das Gesetz darauf geschrieben worden war, zum bleibenden Gedächtnis in Gilgal, der ersten Raststätte auf heimischem Boden, aufgerichtet, damit diese Steine noch den späten Enkeln erzählen mögen, dass נכרתו מימי הירדן מפני אדון ברית ד׳, dass vor der Gesetzeslade des Gottesbundes die Fluten des Jordans zurückgewichen waren, nicht vor Israel, בעברו בירדן, weil das Gesetz seiner Bestimmung entgegenzog, נכרתו מי הירדן. Und schon vor dem Hineinschreiten in den Jordan hatte Josua (daselbst 3, 12) das Volk zwölf Männer, je einen Mann aus jedem Stamm, zum Ausheben und Mitnehmen dieser Steine bestimmen lassen. Sehen wir den Numeruswechsel vom Plural zum Singular und vom Singular zum Plural in diesen Versen 1-8, so dürfte sich ja eben darin der Gedanke aussprechen, wie die Aufgabe der שמירת חתורה, für deren Lösung das verheißene Land gewährt wird, nicht die Sache einzelner, auch nicht nur der Gesamtheit in ihrer durch die Staatsrepräsentanz verkörperten Einheit, sondern der Gesamtheit in ihrer Vielheit sei, somit dafür das ganze Volk in seinem einheitlichen Zusammenwirken einzustehen habe, ein Gedanke, der durch die vom Volke selbst aus jedem Stamme auszuwählenden Zwölfmänner für die Steine des Gesetzesdenkmals den sprechendsten Ausdruck gefunden hat.

והקמות לך אבנים, “you shall set up for yourselves stones;” according to Rashi the Torah decrees three times that such stones shall be set up; once in the river Jordan, once in Gilgal, the first stop of the Israelites after crossing that river; and the third time at the base of Mount Eyval. He bases himself on the Talmud, tractate Sotah folio 35. [Actually, according to the Talmud there, one set of stones was erected in the land of Moav, another in the Jordan river by Joshua, and the third was erected by Joshua at Gilgal. The Talmud has two versions about this subject, Rashi apparently having preferred the other version. There is much discussion about this subject; seeing that we cannot resolve what the sages did not resolve who were chronologically much closer to the event, there is no sense in our pursuing the subject further, as it is of no consequence even after Moshiach will have come. Ed.]

אבנים גדולות, “large stones;” large enough to engrave the list of the commandments in the Torah as listed in the volume halachot gedolot. (negative commandments)

These stones were to be placed on one another and separated by some kind of mortar, just as in any normal building.

AND THOU SHALT WRITE UPON THEM ALL THE WORDS OF THIS LAW. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote in the name of the Gaon⁵⁸Rav Saadia Gaon. See Vol., II p. 99, Note 230. that “they wrote upon the stones a list of the commandments like those written down in the ‘Hilchoth Gedoloth,’⁵⁹Rabbi Shimon Kairo of the Gaonic period, who flourished in the second half of the eighth century Common Era, was the first to enumerate the Taryag Mitzvoth contained in the Torah. The listing is in the preface to his work “Hilchoth Gedoloth”. His concept was utilized by the Paitanim, the writers of liturgical poetry who wrote various Azharoth (Exhortations), liturgical poems containing the Divine Commandments. — It should be noted that while the “Hilchoth Gedoloth” contains the first historical record in our possession of an attempt at enumerating the individual commandments, there is no doubt that the author drew upon older sources of such lists, and as Rabbeinu Saadia Gaon writes here, such “a list of the commandments” was written upon the stones by Moses. in the form of Azharoth (‘Exhortations’ of the liturgical poets). And the meaning of the expression ‘ba’eir heiteiv’ (very plainly)⁶⁰Verse 8. refers to the writing” [i.e., that it be in legible script, but it does not mean “well explained,” since only a brief list of the commandments rather than a detailed rendering was inscribed upon the stones].
And our Rabbis have said⁶¹Sotah 32a. [that ‘ba’eir heiteiv’⁶⁰Verse 8. means] in the seventy languages [of the peoples of the world]. Now, we find in the Book of Tagin (crownlets)⁶²See Vol. I, p. 11. that the entire Torah was written on them [i.e., the stones] — from the beginning of Bereshith to in the sight of all Israel⁶³Further, 34:12. — with its crownlets and its flourishes, and from there all the crownlets in the entire Torah were copied. It is likely that either these stones were huge, or it was a miraculous event [for, otherwise, it would have been impossible to inscribe so much on a few stone tablets].

למען אשר תבא אל הארץ "in order that you may enter the land, etc." Rabbi Avraham ibn Ezra explains this to mean that when you commence to observe His commandments, i.e. to inscribe the stones, (and this is the first commandment), you will enter the Holy Land by dint of this merit. Nachmanides understands the words: "in order that you will enter" as a commandment to inscribe the entire Torah on these stones at the time the Israelites would cross the Jordan [as opposed to Ibn Ezra who wrote that only the actual commandments had to be inscribed on these stones. Ed.] I do not believe that either one of these two explanations does justice to the plain meaning of our verse. Another thing we have to explain are the words כאשר דבר ה׳ אלוקי אבותיך לך, "as the Lord the G'd of your fathers has said to you." The Torah should have written the word לך, to you, immediately after the words כאשר דבר, and we would have entertained no doubt about who had said this to the Israelites.

וכתבת עליהן את כל דברי התורה הזאת, “you shall inscribe upon them all the words of this Torah. Ibn Ezra writes, quoting Rav Saadyah gaon, that the list of the commandments was inscribed on these stones in a manner similar to the well known work halachot g’dolot where these commandments are recorded in the form of warnings of what to do and what not to do. (Babylon, by Rabbi Yehudai ben Sh’muel gaon, 9th century) The words באר היטב, normally understood as in clearly comprehensible language, mean in “clearly legible script”, and do not refer to interpretation. Our sages claim that the entire text of the Torah was inscribed on these stones with careful attention given to the crowns on all the letters, and in addition the text was translated and inscribed in 70 languages. (Compare Rashi) Either the stones were exceedingly large, or there was a miracle that enabled the scribes to accomplish this.

למען אשר תבא אל הארץ, “so that you may enter the land, etc.” Ibn Ezra understands these words to mean that the publication of the Torah on these stones will help the Israelites to acquire the merit to enter (and take possession of) the land of Canaan, as they have already fulfilled the first commandment tied to living in that land. Nachmanides adds, that according to the opinion of Ibn Ezra there is a hint in this commandment to constantly keep in front of our mental eye all the commandments, which in turn ensures that we will keep them and be worthy to keep the land that Hashem is giving us as an inheritance. Ibn Ezra further points out that the sons of Yaakov’s major wives stood on Mount Gerizim when the blessings were proclaimed, whereas the tribes descended from the minor wives stood on Mount Eyval, but seeing that there were not enough of them, two of Leah’s sons, the eldest, Reuven, and the youngest Zevulun, joined the sons of the minor wives on Mount Eyval.

However, the Torah had to consider the fact that previously Moses had told the Israelites that the fact that they would enter the Holy Land was not due to their own merits (compare 9,5), but to the wickedness of the Canaanites residing in that land at that time. Another reason given by the Torah at that time for the Israelites entering and taking possession of the land was the promise G'd had made to their forefathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In view of all this, the Torah here had to state that fulfilment of a commandment would be a factor in the Israelites entering the Holy Land due to their own מצוה-input. The positioning of the word לך at the end of the verse is an arbitrary decision by Moses, the author of our verse. The meter of the whole verse is as follows: "in order that your entry into the land which the Lord your G'd gives to you in accordance with what He said to your forefathers will be one which you are entitled to by your own merit, so that you do not have to rely on the covenant G'd made with your ancestors."

SO THAT THOU MAYEST GO IN UNTO THE LAND. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that it means “that G-d will help you [to come into the Land] if you begin keeping His commandments, for this was the first commandment [that they were to observe] upon coming into the Land.” In my opinion the expression so that thou mayest go in unto the Land alludes to all the words of the Torah, the verse stating that you are to write upon the stones all the words of this Law when thou art passed over the Jordan immediately so that thou mayest go into the Land, for it was for the sake of the Torah that you will have come there. Similarly, so that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou. And thou shalt remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt⁶⁴Above, 5:14-15. which means: “let your manservant and your maidservant rest like you so that you shall remember that you were servants in the land of Egypt.”⁶⁵The thought conveyed is as follows: Scripture usually writes the phrase ‘l’ma’an’ (so that …) as the effect of an event although the intent thereof is really for the cause of the event. Thus in the verse before us the order of the words is: And thou shalt write upon them … ‘so that thou mayest’ go in unto the Land. From this it would appear that the cause is the writing upon the stones, and the effect is the coming into the Land. Ramban points out that the real thought of the verse is: you are coming into the Land so that you may write G-d’s Torah upon the stones. Thus the cause is the coming into the Land and the effect is the writing upon the stones. The word ‘l’ma’an’ (so that) although written with reference to the coming into the Land refers to the writing upon the stones. A similar case is the verse referring to the Sabbath where the word ‘l’ma’an’ (so that) appears with the cause [so that your servants may rest] but should be interpreted with the effect, the remembering of your being a servant. Therefore, the sense of the text is, let your servants rest so that you will remember that you too, were servants in the land of Egypt. Or it may be that the meaning of the verse is as follows: “you shall write upon the stones all the words of this Law to serve you as a remembrance so that you may come into the Land and conquer it and drive out all these peoples, [a conquest that will be yours only] when you will remember the Torah and keep all its commandments.”

למען אשר תבוא אל הארץ, “so that you may arrive in the land,” etc.; this means that on account of your keeping these commandments of the Torah you will be allowed to enter the Holy Land. The reason the stones had to be erected and inscribed was to remind the people that their conquest of the land was only designed to enable them to keep the Torah in that land. This is the way Nachmanides understands these words. (verse 6) This would then be the reason that the sages decreed that mention of the Torah must be made when reciting the benediction acknowledging our taking possession of the land of Israel (in the recital of grace, ועל תורתך שלמדתנו).
It is possible to explain the words למען אשר תבוא אל הארץ as “in order to enable you to come to the land,” seeing that the power of the Torah destroys all our enemies in the land enabling us to settle in their land as our heritage.

V. 4. בהר עיבל (siehe zu Kap. 11, 29 u. 30).

תקימו את האבנים האלה, “you shall set up these stones.” This verse refers to the stones mentioned in verse two.

בהר עיבל, “at Mount Eyval.” In order to pacify the tribes that had been ordered to stand on Mount Eyval while listening to the curses, Moses ordered the building of an altar of stones to be built there on which burnt offerings were to be offered [This is the only time we hear about burnt offerings being offered other than on the altar at the entrance to the Tabernacle, inside its compound for the last 39 years. Ed.] Also peace offerings were to be offered there, i.e. offerings that in the main were eaten by the people at large, not the priests and their households. This would convince the tribes lined up there that the presence of the Lord was as much in evidence there as above the Tabernacle itself.

VV. 5-7. ובנית שם וגו׳: auf dem kahlen Gipfel des Ebalberges, nicht auf dem blühenden des Gerisim, sollen die Gesetzessteine zu einem Altar zusammengebaut werden. Die Erfüllung des göttlichen Gesetzes und die dadurch anzustrebende Erhebung alles Irdischen zu Gott ist an keine irdische Voraussetzung gebunden. Der ärmste irdische Boden genügt, um dort dem göttlichen Gesetze und deinem Emporstreben zu dessen idealer Höhe eine Stätte zu gründen, genügt, um mit diesem deinem Emporstreben zu Gott deinen Frieden und deine Freude vor deines Gottes Angesicht zu finden. —

. לא תניף עליהם ברזל, “you shall not lift up any iron tool over these stones in connection with building this altar. אבנים שלמות תבנה, “you are to use whole stones for building it.” (unhewn) Our sages in the Talmud tractate Middot, folio 3, derive from this verse that if any of these stones had been touched by iron the altar is disqualified from being used. Moreover any blemish on any of the stones used in building it, similarly disqualifies an altar from being used. Having heard the commandment not to use iron, where did we learn about the penalty if these instructions would be disregarded? It is found in Exodus 20,22: כי חרבך הנפת עליה ותחללה, “for if you have lifted an iron tool over it you have desecrated it.”

מזבח אבנים וגו׳ (siehe Schmot 20, 21 u. 22).

ושמחת לפני ד׳ א׳ (vergl. Wajikra 23, 40).

ושמחת לפני ה' אלוקיך, over the privilege of entering a covenant with G’d at Mount Gerizim and Mount Eyval.

באר היטב EXPLAINING THEM WELL — i.e. in seventy languages (Sotah 32a; cf. Rashi on Deuteronomy 1:5).

'וכתבת על האבנים את כל דברי וגו, for when they were now sworn at Mount Gerizim and Mount Eyval the Torah was present before them in written format, and they were sworn to keep its commandments.

According to Ramban these stones were enormous in size, perhaps miraculously formed, to write from Bereishit through “before the eyes of all Israel” [at the end of the Torah] on them. According to Ibn Ezra in the name of Rav Saadia Gaon, they wrote on the stones the overall count of mitzvot and prohibitions, like those recorded in Halachot Gedolot. Others explain that only the previous paragraph (Devarim 26:16-19) was written on them. My son, the insightful Rabbi Shmuel, explained that here the word “kol [all]” is best understood as “klal [general principle]”, which incorporates many specific details. This is akin to “And you shall remember all the mitzvot of G-d,” which the Sages teach refers to the paragraph of Shema, which contains within it an acceptance of all rule of Heaven and a distancing from idol worship. So, too, the first two of the Ten Commandments, “I am” and “You shall not” are referred to as “All of these words” (in Exodus 15:22). And we have already been taught from the words of Rabbi David Kimchi that “kol” is not just a word; rather, it is a term that refers to “the entire general principle.” ... So too here, “all the words of this Torah” means “the general principle of the Torah’s words”... This explains the statement of the Sages (in Tractate Sotah) that the Torah was written on the stones in seventy languages in order to benefit the nations of the world, to learn it-but the nations of the world aren’t commanded to observe the entire Torah ... Rather it refers to the general Torah, meaning the unity of the Creator, as we have said. More literally, we could explain, as do other commentators, that “all the words of the Torah” means from Bereishit through “before the eyes of all Israel” [at the end of the Torah]. When the Torah states, “And you shall write them on the stones,” it is analogous to the statement, “And you shall write them on the doorposts.” That “writing” doesn’t mean to write the words on the doorpost itself, but rather on a parchment which is then mounted on the doorpost. So too here it means to write the entire Torah, from Bereishit through “before the eyes of all Israel”, on parchment in the form of a Torah scroll, and then mount it upon the stones. However, the tradition of our Sages [that these words were written on the stones themselves] should be the deciding factor.

In seventy languages. See above in parshas Devarim (1:5) where I explained this (Minchas Yehuda). The reason it was written in seventy languages is explained in Tractate Sotah (35) that it is to enable the nations to copy it (Nachalas Yaakov).

V. 8. וכתבת וגו׳. In dem Hochgefühle dessen, was Israel die Zukunft bringen werde, wenn das Gesetz selbst in seiner Verwirklichung ein zu Gott emporstrebender Altarbau wird, in dem Hochgefühle, wie dann mit diesem Gesetze an die Stelle der Gewalt (ברזל) das Recht und die ungezwungene und unverkümmerte Vollendung des dem Menschen eingeborenen geistigen und sittlichen Adels (אבנים שלמות), und damit das geistig sittliche Emporstreben zu Gott (עולות), und der heilesfrohe irdische Genuss (שלמים), und die nie zu trübende Freude vor Gottes Angesicht (ושמחת) in Israels Kreis einziehen werde, — in diesem Hochgefühle schreibt Israel auf die von seinen Stämmen zum ersten Gesetzesaltarbau im Lande aus dem Jordansbette herbeigetragenen Steine "alle Worte dieses Gesetzes", und sagt sich zugleich mit diesen Steinen und deren Ursprung, dass — wie sein Nationalgesang (Ps114, 7; vergl. Josua 3, 11 u. 13) den Moment noch in der Erinnerung feiert — ׳מלפני אדון חולי ארץ וגו, dass vor dem Herrn, dessen Gesetz voranschreitend dem Volke den Weg durch die Jordansfluten gebahnt, alle irdische Gewalt und Hoheit zurücktreten werde, und Israel, bei seiner Jakobsschwäche, so lange es der Bundeslade dieses Gesetzes folgt, alle irdischen Hindernisse überwindet. —

באר היטב verglichen mit Habakuk 2, 2 כתוב חזון ובאר על הלחות למען ירוץ קורא בו könnte באר היטב auch hier die hinlängliche Deutlichkeit der Schrift bezeichnen. Sota 32 a wird jedoch hier באר in dem Sinne wie הואיל משה באר את התורה הזאת (Kap. 1, 5) als Erläutern, zum Verständnis Bringen gefasst, und gelehrt, dass dieser Abschrift des Gesetzes zugleich eine Übersetzung für das Verständnis der anderen Völker beigegeben war, somit Israel, fern von dem uns angedichteten Partikularismus, seine Mission zur geistigen und sittlichen Erlösung der Gesamtmenschheit von vornherein zu begreifen hatte, deren Zukunftsheil ebenfalls mit diesem Einzuge des göttlichen Gesetzes in ihre Mitte gegeben sein sollte. Ja, daselbst (35 a) wird gelehrt, dass selbst für das Verständnis der kanaanitischen Völker die Kap. 20, 18 gegebene Klausel für deren Vertreibung: למען אשר לא ילמדו אתכם לעשות בכל וגו׳ unter die Gesetzesabschrift wiederholt und erläutert war, damit sie es wissen sollten, dass nur, wenn sie ihren polytheistischen Anschauungen und Lebensweisen getreu bleiben wollten, ihre Vertreibung bevorstehe, mit ihrer Rückkehr zur allgemein menschlichen Gesetzlichkeit aber ihrem Verbleiben im Lande nichts im Wege steht (siehe zu Kapitel 20, 10 f. u. 20, 18).

הסכת — Understand this as the Targum does: אצית listen!

וידבר משה והכהנים הלוים, Moses co-opted the priests to caution them on the importance of studying the Torah in depth. This was because it was their primary duty to teach the Torah to the people. [service in the Temple occupied only a few days’ a year of each priest’s time. Ed.] (compare Deut. 33,10 יורו משפטיך ליעקב, “they shall teach Your laws to Yaakov.”)

Each day let it appear to you, etc. Rashi explains that because it is written “you have become a people to Adonoy, your God,” instead of writing “you will become,” it indicates that it is referring to a previous covenant. And by writing “this day,” it hints that “Each day let it appear to you as if, on that very day, etc.” (Re”m). It seems to me that this is deduced from “this day,” as in the verse “This very day, Adonoy, your God, commands you (26:16).” You cannot understand it according to its straightforward meaning, because on that day they accepted upon themselves the blessings and curses that would be said at Mount Gerizim and Mount Eival. And if that is the reason it says “this day” here, it should have first said, “Moshe commanded the people, etc.,” which is the parsha of curses, and afterwards it should say the parsha of “This very day.” It is not relevant to apply here [the rule], “There is no earlier or later in the Torah,” [i.e., the Torah was not written in chronological order] because this is the main reason that “This very day” is said.

V. 9. וידבר וגו׳. Nachdem im Vorhergehenden das Volk selbst — nicht bloß seine Vorgesetzten (siehe V. 1) zu Vertretern und Erhaltern des Gesetzes bestellt und verpflichtet worden waren und ihnen der Auftrag geworden war, an dem ersten Tage ihres gemeinschaftlichen Betretens des Landes, vor ihrem Auseinandergehen in die mit der Besitznahme beginnende Vereinzelung, durch die Errichtung der Gesetzessteine dieser Gesamtverpflichtung für das Gesetz bleibenden Ausdruck zu geben, sprach nun Mosche mit Zuziehung der die Gesetzeskenntnis vermittelnden Priester zu ganz Israel, zu Volk und Vorgesetzten:

היום הזה נהיית לעם, “on this day you have become a nation;” this is the result of having accepted the laws of the Torah with a solemn oath.

היום הזה נהיית לעם THIS DAY YOU HAVE BECOME THE PEOPLE [OF THE LORD YOUR GOD] — On each day it should appear to you as though it were “today” that you have entered the covenant with him (Berachot 63b).

הסכת, illustrate the concepts for you in your mind, as in Amos 5,26 את סכות מלככם, “they even named the idol ‘image’.”

הסכת .הסכת ושמע וגו׳ kommt nur hier vor. Dass auch vielleicht אבן משכית (Wajikra 26, 1) von שכת ,סכת, komme, haben wir dort vermutet (siehe jedoch zu Bamidbar 33, 52). Die Lautverwandtschaft mit שקט: die vollendete Ruhe, Stille, und שקד: die intensive Geistesrichtung auf ein Vorhaben, spricht dafür, auch in הסכת eine gespannte, durch nichts abgezogene Aufmerksamkeit zu erkennen. Mosche fordert somit für das, was er Israel zu sagen im Begriffe war, und zu dessen allgemeinem Verständnis die Priester ihm zur Seite stehen sollten, die gespannteste Aufmerksamkeit. Und dieser Ausspruch, dessen Verständnis und Beherzigung Mosche so sehr angelegen sein musste, war der kurze Satz:

היום הזה נהיית לעם, heute bist du zu einem Volk geworden! Die gemeinsame Verpflichtung zum Gesetze und für das Gesetz, die so eben für alle deine Angehörigen ausnahmlos ausgesprochen worden, die gemeinsame Gesetzeshut, auf deren Wacht ihr alle bestellt seid, die macht dich zu einem Volke. Heute, nicht erst der nun bevorstehende. Besitz des Landes, der gemeinsame Besitz des Gesetzes macht dich zum Volk. Das Land kann dir verloren gehen, wie es dir werden wird, aber das Gesetz und deine ewige Verpflichtung zu ihm bleibt dein ewiges unverlierbares Band der Volkeseinigung. Diese Israel tief von allen anderen Völkergestaltungen scheidende, das Geheimnis der jüdischen Volkesunsterblichkeit in sich bergende Grundtatsache mit allen Konsequenzen, die daran sich für Israels Zukunft knüpfen, sie ist es — wenn wir ihn recht verstehen — welche den bedeutungsschweren Inhalt des Satzes היום הזה נהיית לעם bildet. Die allererste Konsequenz daraus ist freilich:

ושמעת בקול ה' אלוקיך, you will hearken to the Lord your G’d as a result of carrying such a vivid image of your duties in your mind.

V. 10. ושמעת וגו׳ die noch gesteigerte Treue und Gewissenhaftigkeit in Erfüllung dieses Gesetzes. Was anderen Völkern Landesverrat ist, das ist fortan für Israel Verrat an dem Gesetze, und bezeichnend sind hier nur מצות und חקים genannt, Gesetze, die nach gewöhnlicher Anschauung nicht also wie משפטים den staatlichen Bestand und die Nationalwohlfahrt berühren, und zwar ist מצותיו mit verkürztem Pluralzeichen geschrieben, die Einheit und die völlig gleiche Wichtigkeit aller Gebote bezeichnend (vergl. Schmot 33, 13).

V. 11. ויצו משה וגו׳. Nachdem Mosche zuerst mit Hinzuziehung der Ältesten das Volk zu Wächtern des Gesetzes bestellt, sodann mit Hinzuziehung der Priester ganz Israel aufgefordert, diese gemeinsame Verpflichtung für das Gesetz als ihr einziges volksbildendes Element zu begreifen und zu beherzigen, gebietet er nun dem Volke von diesem Standpunkte aus die Ausführung der Segen- und Flucherteilung auf Gerisim und Ebal, die bereits oben Kap. 11, 29 u. 30 angeordnet war. ונתתה, hieß es oben, das Volk selbst soll die Segen- und Fluchalternative, die Gott ihm für die Erfüllung oder Nichterfüllung seines Gesetzes vorgelegt hatte, über sich und alle seine gegenwärtigen und zukünftigen Angehörigen aussprechen und damit das Gesetz als die Grundbedingung der eigenen Nationalwohlfahrt proklamieren. Diese Tendenz der Proklamation ist hier nun noch erhöht, nachdem soeben das Volk selbst zu Wächtern des Gesetzes bestellt und diese Gesetzeswacht als die einzige Seele seines Volksdaseins zu beherzigen gegeben war. Die Fassung der hier folgenden Aussprüche zeigt nun noch insbesondere, wie die zum Gesetzeswächter bestellte Volksgesamtheit vor ihrem Auseinandergehen in die Vereinzelung jedem ihrer Angehörigen den Hinweis auf die allgegenwärtige, Segen und Fluch verhängende Gotteswaltung mit in die Einzelheimat für alle die Fälle hinausgeben sollte, die sich der menschlichen Erkenntnis entziehen, für die daher die Gesamtheit ihre Gesetzeswächterpflicht zu üben nicht vermag.

לברך את העם [THESE SHALL STAND UP …] TO BLESS THE PEOPLE — The procedure was as is found in Treatise Sotah 32a: Six tribes ascended the top of Mount Gerizim and the other six the top of Mount Ebal, the priests, the Levites and the Ark remaining below in the midst (i.e. in the valley between). The Levites turned their faces towards Mount Gerizim and began to recite the blessing: “Blessed be the man that does not make any graven or molten image etc.”, and both these and those (the tribes on Mount Gerizim and those on Mount Ebal) answered “Amen”! Then they turned their faces towards Mount Ebal and began to recite the curse, saying: “Cursed be the man who maketh any graven [or molten image]” — and so in the case of all of them (the curses set forth here) till the last: “Cursed be he that does not uphold [all the words of this law to do them]” (cf. Rashi on Deuteronomy 11:29).

'אלה יעמדו לברך וגו, according to the plain meaning the tribes mentioned forthwith were to confirm what the Levites said by answering Amen. The Levites, when pronouncing the respective blessings or curses, would face Mount Gerizim when intoning the blessings, and Mount Eyval when intoning the curses. (Sotah 32)

אלה יעמדו לברך. “These are to stand (on Mount Gerizim) to bless the people.” Our sages (in Sotah 32) state that the blessing consisted of: “Blessed be the man who has not made a hewn image, etc.,” whereas the curse consisted of the words spelled out in verses 15-26. Six tribes whose ancestors were sons of either Leah or Rachel stood on the mountain facing which the blessing was pronounced, whereas the sons of Zilpah and Bilhah as well as Reuven and Zevulun stood on Mount Eyval, in whose direction the curses were pronounced in order to complete the number of six tribes required to stand there. The reason the tribe of Shimon was also associated with the tribes in whose direction the blessings were pronounced was that the Torah lists here eleven different curses and the Torah wanted to avoid pronouncing a curse in his direction. Moses decreed that all the tribes receive a blessing, seeing, however, that the tribe of Shimon was not deserving of a blessing on account of Zimri its leader who had caused so much death amongst his own people, he wanted to at least not make it appear as if he were being cursed, i.e. of associating the word ארור with something pronounced in his direction. Had he allowed this to occur Shimon would have been beyond redemption (Rashi in the name of Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan).
Our sages in Sifri Vezot Habrachah item 348, claim that the blessing of the tribe of Yehudah contained within it an allusion to a blessing for the tribe of Shimon, seeing that Shimon’s tribal territory was described as an enclave within that of the tribe of Yehudah. The fact that the tribe of Reuven was placed on the mountain in whose direction the curses were pronounced does not constitute something negative against this tribe. I believe that this was the final part of the apology for the episode described in the Torah involving Reuven and Bilhah. Cursing someone who sleeps with the wife of his father (verse 20) was meant to draw our attention to the fact that actually Reuven had never been guilty of that sin. This is why the sages of the Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni Vayechi 157) claim that Yaakov, his father, had already told him that the stigma which had attached itself to him on account of what is described as יצועי עלה in Genesis 49,4 would not be totally removed from him until the one (leader Moses) of whom the Torah had written עלה, “arise!” would come. As soon as Moses arranged for the tribe of Reuven to take his place among the tribes facing the pronouncement of the curses, Reuven’s stigma had been completely wiped out. What occurred at Mount Eival enabled our sages to say (Shabbat 58) that anyone accusing Reuven of having committed the sin of sleeping with his father’s wife is in error.
What precisely was the arraignment of the respective tribes like on these two mountains? Our sages in Sotah 32 have described it in these words: “6 tribes ascended the top of Mount Gerizim whereas 6 other tribes ascended the top of Mount Eyval. The priests and Levites took up their position in the valley separating these two mountains. The priests would surround the Holy Ark. The Levites would surround the priests. The Israelites would be on either side of them (on the mountain). This is the meaning of ‘and all of Israel its elders and law-enforcers and judges would stand on either side of the Holy Ark facing the Priests who carried the Ark of the Covenant’ (Joshua 8,33). The Priests and Levites turned their faces in the direction of Mount Gerizim, beginning to recite the blessing, commencing with the words: ‘blessed be the man who has not constructed a hewn image, etc.’ The tribes standing on both mountains would respond by chanting “Amen.” The blessings were followed by the curses, a similar procedure being followed.” After completion of this ceremony they brought the stones and built an altar of them, covering the altar with plaster and inscribing on it the entire Torah in seventy languages. This is proven by verse 8, i.e. באר היטב. After this they took the stones with them returning to their assigned place for the night (Gilgal). Thus far the wording of the Mishnah. [The difficulty in all this is the distance from Gilgal to Mount Eival and the impossibility to accomplish all this within a day without miracle. (Compare the various commentators of the Mishnah), Ed.]

The Levi’im directed their faces toward Mount Gerizim, and began the blessing, etc. You might ask: It is written “(The following will stand to bless the people, etc.) Shimon and Levi and Yehudah, [and Yisachar and Yoseif and Binyomin,]” and this implies that these six tribes said the blessing, not only the tribe of Levi! The answer is that that it is written, “And the following will stand on (על) the curse at Mount Eival.” “On the curse” must mean “next to the curse,” that is, that the Levi'im turned their faces to them and therefore they are called “next to” [the Levi'im] more than those standing on Mount Gerizim, even though the Levi'im were equidistant from both. You cannot explain the verse according to its straightforward meaning, because you cannot say “the following will stand on the curse,” as a curse is not something tangible that can be stood upon. Therefore, (על) must mean “next to the curse,” i.e. next to those who say the curse. All this indicates that they themselves did not say the curses. Consequently, when it says [earlier], “These will stand to bless, etc.,” here too the tribes are not the ones who are actually saying the blessings. And now it is logical to say that they [the ones who said the blessing] were the tribe of Levi because it is written, “The Levi’im are to respond, etc.,” and it is written afterwards [i.e. it says regarding those who stand by the curse who are mentioned after those who stand by the blessing] that they themselves did not say the blessing. You might ask: [If so], what is the meaning of what is written, “The following will stand to bless the people, etc.,” which implies that they themselves said the blessings”? The answer is that it means that the following should stand next to the Levi'im on Mount Gerizim when the Levi'im stand to bless the people, Shimon, etc. (This I found in the name of one of the gedolim). It seems to me that his proof [that the Levites said the blessing] is because it is written, “The Levi’im are to respond and say to every man of Yisroel, etc.” This indicates that the Levi'im said the curses, and similarly they are the ones who said the blessings, because before saying “cursed is the man” they would say “blessed is the man.” You cannot say that when it is written, “The Levi'im are to respond” it means that the Levi'im proclaim [the blessing] first, and the people [respond] after them, because if so it should have said, “The Levi'im and every man of Yisroel are to proclaim and say, etc.” And also, what is the meaning of the verse “say to every man of Yisroel” if they [Yisroel] themselves were among those saying the curse? Perforce the Levi'im were the ones who said the blessings and curses, and they directed their faces as Rashi explains. And when it says, “The following will stand to bless the people, etc.,” it is as if it said, “These will stand on Mount Gerizim when the Levi'im come to bless the people.” And who are the ones to stand on Mount Gerizim? “Shimon and Levi, etc.” You might ask that it is written, “The following will stand to bless the people, etc. Levi and Yehudah, etc.,” which indicates that Levi too stood on Mount Gerizim just like the other tribes, so how could Rashi explain that “the kohanim and Levi’im and the ark [were] below, at the center”? The answer is that there are two kinds of Levi'im, those who are fit to serve, which is until they reach fifty years, and those who are not fit to serve, which is from fifty upwards. Those who were fit to serve stood below, while those who were not fit to serve stood on the mountain (Beraisa in Chapter Eilu Ne'emarin, Sotah 37a).

VV. 12 u. 13. אלה יעמדו וגו׳ על הר גריזים וגו׳ ואלה וגו׳ (siehe zu Kap. 11, 29 u. 30).

אלה יעמדו, “the following are to stand, etc.;” all the tribes that stood on the mountain listening to the blessings were descended from Yaakov’s principal wives Leah and Rachel. Seeing that Leah had so many sons, they took the oldest and the youngest of these and placed them with the four tribes that were descended from the auxiliary wives. Leah’s oldest son who had been under suspicion of having committed an inappropriate act with one of Yaakov’s auxiliary wives was placed there so that the curse on people sleeping with their neighbour’s, or their father’s wives would be impressed on the descendants of his who heard it.

לברך את העם, nicht die ברכה zu empfangen, sondern sie über die Volksgesamtheit auszusprechen. Ebenso יעמדו על הקללה ist nicht ein passives Stehen, um über sich den קללה-Ausspruch ergehen zu lassen, sondern bezeichnet ein mitwirkendes Beistandleisten bei der Ausführung einer Aufgabe. So העומדים על הפקודים (Bamidbar. 6, 2) von den Fürsten, die Mosche und Aharon bei der Volkszählung Beistand zu leisten hatten (daselbst Kap. 1, 5). Wie zu V. 11 bemerkt, sollte ja das Volk selbst ברכה וקללה aussprechen. Es sollte daher auch äußerlich durch Aufstellung sichtbar gemacht sein, dass die Leviten (V. 14) Segen und Fluch nicht eben in selbständiger Vertretung des Gesetzes über das Volk, sondern als Vertreter des Volkes und Namens desselben, somit das Volk über sich selber, aussprachen. Daher sprachen sie die Aussprüche nicht etwa von einer Höhe herab über das Volk, sondern das Volk hatte in zwei Hälften auseinander zu treten und in deren Mitte standen die Leviten. Was von diesen gesprochen wurde, war daher aus der Mitte des Volkes selbst herausgesprochen, und durch allseitiges "Amen" wurde der Ausspruch der Leviten zum Ausspruch der ganzen Nation (siehe Bereschit 15, 6 und Bamidbar 5, 22).

לברך את העם, “to bless the people;” the following tribes are to stand on Mount Gerizim, etc.” Rashi following the Mishnah tractate Sotah, folio 32, comments that six tribes ascended Mount Gerizim, and 6 tribes ascended Mount Eyval, the priests and that the Levites were standing at the respective bases of these two mountains. On the other hand, the opinion of Rabbi there, is that both the twelve tribes and the Levites stood at the base of the mountains as described in the Book of Joshua, the latter standing next to the Holy Ark. (Joshua 8,33) According to Rabbi, what has been described in Deuteronomy 11,29 means that the other tribes stood near each of those two mountains. The word על mentioned there, means the same as in Exodus 40, 3: וסכות על הארון, “you will screen the Ark with it.”Rabbi Eliezer, son of Yaakov, in tractate Sotah 37, claims that it is impossible that the members of the tribe stood at the base of these mountains as they had already been included as one of the tribes that stood on the mountain in our verse here, [which was written long before the one in Joshua 8,33. Ed.] At the same time, the verse in Joshua 8,33 clearly appears to contradict this. How are we to resolve this apparent contradiction? According to Rabbi Yoshiah, the Levites who were potentially fit to carry the Holy Ark, i.e. the ones 30 years and older but below the age of 50, stood at the base of the mountain, next to the Holy Ark, whereas the other Levites stood on Mount Gerizim. Rashi further comments on our verse here, that the Levites standing at the base faced the six tribes standing on top of Mount Gerizim commenced blessing the six tribes, using the text written for the curses but inverting it by saying that all the people not guilty of the sins described in our chapter are blessed.

In der gewöhnlichen Aufzählung der Stämme, wie Schmot 1, 2 — 4, stehen die acht Söhne Leas und Rahels zusammen — (Josef fehlt dort, da er bereits in Ägypten war) — und dann die vier Söhne Bilhas und Silpas. Sollte hier das Volk in zwei Hälften auseinandertreten, um die Leviten in ihre Mitte aufzunehmen, so mussten zwei von jenen acht Stämmen zu diesen vier hinübertreten. Um nun den Schein einer jeden Rangverschiedenheit dieser beiden Hälften zu meiden, sollten die Stämme des ältesten und jüngsten Sohnes Leas, Reuben und Sebulun, zu den von Bilha und Silpa stammenden treten. Daher die Gruppierung: Simon, Levi, Jehuda, Jißachar, Josef und Binjamin einerseits, und andererseits: Reuben, Gad, Ascher, Sebulun, Dan, Naftali. Um aber auch dem leisesten Schein zu begegnen, als werde die קללה über die בני השפחות-Gruppe ausgesprochen, hatten diese gerade ihre Stellung am Ebal zu nehmen, so dass die קללה-Aussprüche nicht an sie, sondern von ihnen ausgesprochen erschienen. Sie waren die עומדים על הקללה, und von בני אמהות-Seite wurden die ברכות ihnen zugesprochen.

וענו הלוים, and the Levites will "answer," etc. Actually, the meaning is that the Levites will commence speaking whereas the people will respond by saying "Amen." Onkelos translates the word וענו by writing ויתיבון, "the Levites will sit down." According to Onkelos these words would be in response to the Torah mentioning in verses 12 and 13 that these tribes would "stand" on the mountains to listen to the curses and blessings respectively. Targum Yonathan ben Uzziel translates the word וענו as ויכרזון, "the Levites will proclaim." I find this difficult, seeing the Torah added that they would speak קול רם, "in a loud voice." Why would the word וענו merely duplicate the meaning of קול רם? Perhaps what Yonathan ben Uzziel meant was that not only the recital but also the proclamation should be in a loud voice.

V. 14. וענו הלויים. Das Gros des Levitenstammes stand mit den übrigen Stämmen am Gerisim (V. 12). In der Mitte zwischen beiden Bergen standen nur die וקני כהונה ולויה die Ältesten der Priester- und Levitenschaft mit der Bundeslade, oder nur כל הראוי לשרת die zum Dienst am Heiligtum Berufenen, im Alter zwischen 30 und 50 Jahren (Sota 37 a und Bamidbar Kap. 4; — siehe Josua 8, 33). Nach einer Auffassung (daselbst) standen sowohl die Volksstämme als die Leviten zwischen den Bergen und das על הר גריזים (V. 12) hieße nur: bei, בסמוך, wie ונתת על המערכת לבונה זכה (Wajikra 24, 7).

הפכו פניהם כלפי הר גריזים ופתחו בכרכה כלפי הר עיבל ופתחו sie wandten sich dem Gerisim zu und begannen den Segen, dem Ebal zu und ,בקללה begannen den Fluch (daselbst). Es lehrt nämlich die Halacha, dass jeder der folgenden ארור-Sprüche zuerst im verneinenden Gegensatz als ברוך ausgesprochen wurde. Also: ברוך האיש אשר לא יעשה וגו׳ und dann: ארור האיש אשר יעשה וגו׳ usw. (daselbst 32 a u. 37 b). Damit stimmt ja auch der Wortlaut des V. 12 u. 13 und Kap. 11, 29 überein und so lautet auch der Bericht in Josua (daselbst) כאשר צוה משה עבד ד׳ לברך את העם ישראל בראשנה.

ארור האיש, all of the “cursed be” mentioned here had first been intoned as a blessing for all the people refraining from becoming guilty of the sins that are mentioned here. (compare Sotah 32) This is also the reason why the Torah commences the paragraph with the words אלה יעמדו לברך את העם, “these are the people who take up position to bless the people.” The principal reason for these lines is to curse the sinners who violate these commandments, so that they alone will bear the burden of their guilt, the people at large not sharing in that responsibility. The reason is that the sinners referred to were in the main the leaders of the people, so that the ordinary Israelite did not have the power to protest the carrying’s on of their leaders. This thought has been stated clearly by Ezekiel 22,6-7 “every one of the princes of Israel in their midst used his strength for the shedding of blood, etc. etc.” In that same chapter the prophet specifically singled out most of the (12) sins listed in our paragraph here. These obscenities were all carried out in Jerusalem; however, this does not mean that all the inhabitants of the city were guilty of these iniquities, mostly it was the highly placed members of society who were guilty of them. When the sins of the population at large are mentioned, these sins are generally attributed to the city in which these sins have been carried out. Compare verse 8 in that chapter of Ezekiel. [the reference to the “city “ as the place where all this had taken place is found in verse 3 of that chapter. Ed.]

וענו כל העם ואמרו אמן, and the entire people are to respond by saying "Amen." In this instance the Torah was not satisfied to write ואמר כל העם as it did with respect to all the other ten curses listed here. The Torah wanted to make certain that the Israelites were required to respond (not merely say). Had the Torah not written the word וענו at this point we might have thought that it was the Levites who had to say the words ואמר כל העם, "and the entire people are to say."

ושם בסתר, there are a total of 12 “curses” corresponding to the 12 tribes, all of the sins mentioned in them being of the type that one commits in private, when one is unobserved and no witnesses are present. I will explain all of them. There are only two of these which are sometimes committed in private and sometimes in public. These are idolatry and striking one’s fellow Jew. This is the reason that the Torah mentions the word בסתר specifically in connection with thee two sins that are listed here. The reason is that for sins committed in public there is no need to utter a curse as people sinning in public are not frightened of the curses either. Not only that, the court has a chance to deal with crimes/sins committed in public. This is the message in 29,28 הנגלות לנו ולבנינו עד עולם, we are forever obligated to deal with publicly committed offenses. Only when crimes are committed in secret do we leave punishment of the sinners to G’d, i.e. הנסתרות לה' אלוקינו, “secretly committed sins are left to G’d to avenge.” (same verse) This includes the whole range of punishments to which the sinner had made himself liable, not only for sins carrying the death penalty.
You will note that the Torah does not write ארור שוכב עם אשת רעהו, as normally when one enters another’s house this does not go unobserved. Sleeping with one’s mother-in-law, however, is different, as both parties usually dwell in the same house. (verse 23). Insulting father or mother (verse 16) is something normally done in one’s parents’ home, where strangers are not present. The same is true of someone moving boundaries in the field; (verse 17) it is done at night away from prying eyes. If the one doing it were to do it in full view of his neighbour, surely he would be challenged. The same applies to misdirecting the blind, (verse 18) or someone sleeping with a beast (verse 21). Naturally, all forbidden sexual unions are naturally performed by consenting adults, each one making sure he or she is unobserved.
Verse 20 speaking of someone sleeping with his father’s wife (former, not his mother) is also something which normally occurs in the male’s home, the place he grew up in, where he is not an intruder. Intercourse with animals clearly occurs in the privacy of the home or the animal’s pen, no one wanting to take a chance at being found out in such depraved behaviour. All other incestuous couplings are presumed to take place at home and with consent of the second party.

ארור האיש אשר יעשה פסל ומסכה, “cursed be the man who will construct a hewn image, etc.” Our sages in Avodah Zarah 52 understand the wording to mean that the curse becomes effective from the time construction of that image commences. We find proof of this in Deut. 9,21: “and the sin which you had constructed, the golden calf, etc.” Clearly, Moses considered the golden calf as a sin before it had even emerged from the crucible.

VV. 15 — 25. ארור .ארור וגו׳ (siehe Bereschit 3, 14). Wir haben schon zu V. 11 bemerkt, wie hier der göttlichen Segen und Unsegen verteilenden Waltung Vergehen unterstellt werden, die sich in der Regel der Erkenntnis menschlicher Gesetzesüberwachung entziehen. Verse 15 u. 24 ist dies ausdrücklich durch: בסתר bezeichnet, und wenn die anderen mit ארור betroffenen Versündigungen schon ihrer Natur nach in der Regel geheime Sünden bleiben, so ist durch diese ausdrückliche Bemerkung des: בסתר zu Anfang und Ende dieser Sündenreihe der Charakter der Heimlichkeit noch umsomehr als das diese ארור-Aussprüche Motivierende hervorgehoben, und sind damit vor allem die getroffen, die unter dem Scheine äußerer Legalität innere sittliche und soziale Verworfenheit pflegen.

'ארור האיש אשר יעשה פסל וגו, “cursed be the man who will construct a cast image, etc.” In the Talmud in tractate Sotah folio 37 the question is raised since when does making an idol only carry a curse as a penalty, and nothing harsher? The answer given here that the “man” mentioned here is a man who had incestuous relations which resulted in a son being born for him, who then left the fold and served the idols of whichever religion he adopted. The Torah curses the father and mother of such a son who are directly responsible for their son having left the fold as a result of their committing incest. Rashi explains that we face a list of eleven sins the punishment for which is introduced with the word: “cursed be;” they correspond to the eleven sons of Yaakov who had received his blessing. Shimon had not received such a blessing, and it was not Moses’ intention to bless that tribe in the manner in which he blessed all the other tribes. [Our editions of Rashi do not have this commentary on this verse, so I will not dwell on it further. Ed.] If you were to ask what makes the eleven sins subject to a curse for the sinner different from violating any of the other of G–d’s commandments, one answer may be that all these commandments when violated are known only to the sinner and the Creator. No human being can take the sinner to court for something he had not witnessed and warned the offender not to commit. [some of the eleven, of course, were committed by consent with one’s partner in sin, so that they too could not be brought to court. Ed.] According to a statement in the midrash שוחר טוב, the person subject to these curses is the one who had studied the laws in question, had taught them observed them personally, and had been in a position to protest these sins from being committed, but had failed to make use of his ability to prevent these sins from being committed. This is why at the end of the paragraph, the Torah concludes with cursing people who had been in a position to see to it that others keep the ordinances of the Torah, and had failed to make his weight felt. On the other hand, if someone had not learned the laws, had not taught them, had not observed them, say because he had sat in jail and could not do this, but had seized an opportunity to protest other people violating Torah laws, and had done so, he is included in all the people that Moses describes as being blessed for “keeping the Torah laws,” as he had demonstrated that only his physical inability to perform many of them had stopped him from doing so.

ושם בסתר. “and he set it up in secret;” all the transgressions mentioned in this chapter deal with sins usually committed in the privacy of one’s house, and therefore it is impossible to find witnesses who had warned the perpetrator in a legally acceptable manner. To quote just one example: “who would know if someone had cursed his father or mother?”

Im Zusammenhange spräche sich daher der Gedanke dieser ארורים also aus:

ארור, dem ist alles Gedeihen versagt, der äußerlich den Gottinnigen spielt, aber im Geheimen Gottes ausschließendes Sein und Walten verleugnet; der äußerlich gegen Vater und Mutter ehrerbietig ist, in seinem Innern aber sich über Vater und Mutter geringschätzig erhebt; der vor Menschen den Ruf der Rechtschaffenheit wahrt, aber ungesehen das Rechtsgebiet des Nächsten zu seinem Vorteil schmälert; der vor Klugen und Einsichtigen für Nächstenwohlfahrt schwärmt, Kurzsichtige und Blinde aber ins Unglück stürzt; vor Mächtigen und Großen kriecht, Schwachen und Hilflosen aber die Menschenpflicht versagt; sittlichen Gesellschaftsanstand heuchelt, um in vertrauter Heimlichkeit (Verse 20 — 24) geschlechtlicher Ausschweifung zu fröhnen; der den Dolch nicht gegen den Nächsten zückt, aber unter der Decke der Unterhaltung sein Glück, seinen Frieden und seine Ehre mordet; der in seiner Gemeinde das höchste Vertrauen genießt, es aber in heimlicher Korruption verbrecherisch missbraucht; endlich auch dem schon, der, wenn er auch für sich pflichtgetreu lebt, doch dem Darniederliegen der Gesetzestreue in seinen engeren und weiteren Kreisen mit Gleichgültigkeit zusieht. —

פסל ומסכה, wenn nach einer von uns zu Wajikra 19, 4 geäußerten Vermutung מסכה die Darstellung eines Schutzgottes, oder vielmehr eines Götterbildes zum Schutze sein könnte (siehe daselbst), so wäre פסל die Darstellung eines Gottes in der Idee seines Wesens an sich, und mit פסל würde die ausschließliche Einheit des Einzigeinen geleugnet und mit מסכה das allein Ausreichende Seiner Macht.

וענו כל העם, “and all the people are to respond, etc.” This expression is reserved for the response in respect of committing idolatry. In connection with all the other ten sins listed, the Torah merely describes the people’s response as ואמר כל העם. The reason for this distinction is that the people had heard the prohibition of idolatry (the first two of the Ten Commandments) with their own ears directly from G’d. Their response therefore would be “a response in the true meaning of the word.”

קלה ,מקלה verwandt mit גלה: seines äußeren Halts, seines heimatlichen Bodens und Schutzes beraubt werden; mit כלה aufhören zu sein, aus dem Kreise der Existenzen schwinden; heißt קלה: etwas seiner Kräfte und Säfte berauben, rösten, dörren; auf geistige und sittliche Verhältnisse übertragen: jemanden seines sittlichen Wertes verlustig achten, ihm die Anerkennung eines sittlichen Wertes versagen, daher קלון: Schmach (vergl. כבד und קלל).

מסיג גבול רעהו: ihm unvermerkt die Grenze seines Gebietes zurückrücken, das Gebiet seines Eigentums oder seiner Berechtigung kürzen.

מטה משפט וגו׳ (siehe zu Kap. 24, 17).

מכה רעהו בסתר: er schlägt den Nächsten, ohne dass dieser selbst es weiß und ohne dass er erfährt, von wem der Schlag herrührt. Es ist der Schlag mit der Böszunge, לשון הרע, die, vom menschlichen Gericht unerreichbar, des Nächsten Glück und Frieden und Ehre untergräbt. Eine Versündigung, die, wie keine andere sonst, eine Gewohnheitssünde wird und mehr als jede andere zur täglichen und stündlichen Übung kommt. Es heißt darum nicht מַכֶּה, welches als Verbalform auch die einmalige Übung bezeichnen würde, sondern im st. constr. מַכֵּה, das als Substantiv denjenigen bezeichnet, dem das Bösreden Gewohnheit und zur Charaktereigenschaft geworden ist. Es bezeichnet nicht das Vergehen, sondern das Laster der Bösrede.

אשר לא יקים וגו׳. Es heißt nicht אשר לא יעשה, womit auch schon die Nichterfüllung eines Gebotes mit ארור betroffen wäre. Sondern: אשר לא יקים את דברי התורה הזאת לעשות אותם, wer die Worte der תורה nicht zur Erfüllung aufrecht hält, d.h. wer einem Worte des göttlichen Gesetzes die Geltung und verpflichtende Kraft abspricht, sich beredet oder bereden lässt, es stände nicht mehr aufrecht zur Erfüllung, habe seine Bedeutung und Geltung verloren (רמב׳׳ן z. St.); und ebenso: wer nicht das Seinige tut, das Gesetz zur Erfüllung aufrecht zu halten, d. h. wer nicht, wo immer er kann, mit seiner vollen Kraft für die Erfüllung des Gesetzes einsteht und tätig ist. למד ולימד שמר ועשה והיתה ספוקו בידו להחזיק ולא החזיק הרי זה בכלל ארור und hätte einer gelernt und gelehrt, hätte Verbote gehütet und Gebote erfüllt, hätte aber auch andere zur Erfüllung des Gesetzes festigen und anhalten können und hätte es nicht getan, auch der unterläge dem תוספו׳) .ארור Sota 37 b nach dem Jeruschalmi.)

Auffallend dürfte es erscheinen, warum in der Reihenfolge dieser Aussprüche die Sätze über soziale Vergehen (Verse 17 — 19), durch die geschlechtlichen Versündigungen (Verse 20 — 23) unterbrochen sind und erst Vers 24 wieder fortgesetzt werden. Man hätte מכה רעהו und לוקח שוחד unmittelbar nach מטה משפט erwarten sollen. Es dürfte aber eben diese Einreihung geheimer geschlechtlicher Verirrungen in die Mitte der sozialen Vergehen die völlige Gleichheit dieser Versündigungen vergegenwärtigen und nach beiden Seiten hin der Wahnvorstellung begegnen sollen, als ob wohl משגה ,מסיג גבול מטה משפט ,עור usw. als gemeinschädlich zu brandmarken wären, geschlechtliche Versündigungen aber nur höchstens das Einzelwohl untergraben, die gesellschaftliche Wohlfahrt aber unberührt ließen, oder גלוי עריות wohl das jüdische Gewissen zu belasten hätten, הסגת גבול aber und לשון הרע etc. etc. weniger in die Waagschale fielen. Nach beiden Seiten tritt diese, beide Kategorien mischende Ordnung solchen unwahren Vorstellungen entschieden entgegen, und dürfte aus gleichem Grunde und um diese Unterschiedlosigkeit noch mehr hervorzuheben, gerade zwischen Verse 19 und 20, wo die soziale Reihe abbricht und zu der geschlechtlichen übergeht, der alle übrigen Sätze scheidende פרשה סתומה-Absatz fehlen (siehe כסף משנה zu רמב׳׳ם הל׳ ספר תורה Kap. 8, 4).

Die Schrift enthält nur die ארור-Sätze, denen, wie bemerkt, immer der ברוךAusspruch in einfacher Verneinung des Subjektsatzes des ארור voranging. כרוך האיש ׳אשר לא יעשה וגו usw. Die von ארור betroffenen Versündigungen sind, bis auf die letzte, positive Übertretungen von Verboten, so dass sich die Segen verheißenden ברוךSätze zu bloßen Unterlassungen von Verbotübertretungen gestalten: Segen und Gedeihen dem, der auch im Geheimen keinem abgöttischen Wahn sich hingibt, auch im geheimen Innern keinen unehrbietigen Gedanken gegen Vater und Mutter hegt, auch ungesehen nichts Ungerechtes und nichts Pflichtwidriges gegen seinen Nebenmenschen übt, auch im Geheimen sich keine geschlechtliche Ausschweifung erlaubt etc. Darin liegt ein unendlicher Trost. Wir sind dem Segen viel näher als ח׳׳ו dem Fluche. Fluch kehrt nur ein, wo das Schlechte positiv geübt wird. Allein es bedarf nur der Fernhaltung von allem Fluchwürdigen, um schon dem Segen Eingang bei uns zu bereiten. Nur der letzte Satz ארור אשר לא יקים spricht ארור über eine Unterlassung aus und verheißt somit den Segen nur für eine Erfüllung: — ברוך אשר יקים את דברי התורה הזאת לעשות אותם. Denn es gilt der Anerkennung oder Nichtanerkennung, der Aufrechthaltung oder Nichtaufrechthaltung des Gesetzes. Da ist die Gleichgültigkeit schon das fluchwürdige Verbrechen, und Segen kehrt erst ein, wenn jeder das Seine tut, dem ewigen Gesetze auch ewige Geltung und Erfüllung zu schaffen.

מקלה means, “making light of”, it has the same meaning as (Deuteronomy 25:3) “Lest … thy brother become despicable (נקלה).

ארור מקלה אביו ואמו, "Accursed is anyone who degrades his father or his mother." It is important to examine why Moses selected that only people guilty of non-observance of these eleven out of a total of 613 commandments were deserving to be publicly declared as being accursed? Are there not some more severe violations, such as the violation of commandments dealing with incest which would qualify no less for the treatment we see here accorded to the violators of these eleven commandments? Is it not difficult to consider adultery as less serious than moving a boundary stone, for instance?

Perhaps the Torah here enumerates only sins which are normally committed in secret, or which will not be revealed by their victims. This may be the reason why the Torah speaks of ושם בסתר, "and emplace it in secret" (verse 15 where the sin is idolatry). If that sin would be committed in public the sinner would not merely be accursed but he would be executed and the Israelites themselves would be charged with seeing to it that he does not get away with his sin. The same consideration may apply to someone who degrades his father or mother. The Torah speaks of people who do this in private where the hand of the law cannot reach them. This is why Moses wants to make it plain that they will be accursed by the heavenly tribunal. The same consideration applies to someone who moves boundary stones or fences in a manner which is hard to detect. Not only that, who can prove who has moved the boundary? How are we going to convict the culprit? Similarly, the son-in-law who sleeps with his (consenting) mother-in-law is untouchable by the terrestrial courts so that the Torah has to demonstrate by this means that such people are not immune to the consequences of their actions. The reference to someone who strikes his fellow in secret, i.e. where there are no witnesses, is another such example of offences which cannot be adjudged by a terrestrial court seeing that the evildoer will deny having hit the other fellow, or he may not even be accused of doing so if he acted under cover of darkness or wore a mask, for instance.

The reason the Torah inserted the offence of sleeping with a beast between the sin of sleeping with the wife of his father or the sin of sleeping with his sister, is to suggest that commission of either sin is as unlikely as having sexual intercourse with an animal. All three sins represent the most abominable aberration of which one can become guilty.

מסיג גבול [CURSED BE] HE THAT REMOVES [HIS NEIGHBOUR’S] LAND-MARK — i.e. puts it further back in his neighbor’s field and thereby steals ground from him. The word מסיג has the same meaning as the verb in (Isaiah 59:14) “and he is turned backwards (הֻסַּג )".

מסיג גבול, “who removes his neighbour’s landmark.” The perpetrator certainly would not do such a thing in broad daylight. Similarly, he would not deliberately make a blind person go astray where there were witnesses observing this. He knows that the blind person himself cannot identify him.

משגה עור [CURSED BE] HE THAT CAUSES THE BLIND TO GO ASTRAY — This means: one who is blind (inexperienced) in a matter and one gives him bad advice (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 19:14).

Blind concerning a particular matter, and he offers ill advice. We derive [our case of one who] misleads from misleads [i.e., the case of not putting a stumbling block before the blind] in parshas Kedoshim. And from where we derive that case itself? See parshas Kedoshim (Vayikra 19:14).

גר, יתום, ואלמנה, “a stranger, orphan, or widow;” all these categories of people lack influential friends or protectors who will protest their having been maltreated to the authorities. People who have carnal relations with their closest relatives who live in the same house with them are not suspected of having been guilty of such behaviour, neither are people normally suspected of having sexual relations with their domestic animals. The only two sins listed here which are committed openly are idolatry and violent behaviour against one’s neighbour committed usually while angry and out of control. This is why the Torah adds the word “committed secretly,” when speaking of these two sins. When these two sins are committed openly there is a court which can take action against the perpetrator.

BECAUSE HE HATH UNCOVERED HIS FATHER’S SKIRT. This is a respectful euphemism for the father, for in the Torah He mentioned, he hath uncovered his father’s nakedness.⁶⁶Leviticus 20:11. So also He mentioned the term “their nakedness” in the cases of his brother’s wife⁶⁷Ibid., Verse 21. and his uncle’s wife⁶⁸Ibid., Verse 20. for there the transgressors are liable to severe punishment, death [by the court, if there were witnesses] or extinction [if there were no witnesses] and Scripture thus needed to condemn the evil they had done; therefore it mentioned “nakedness” concerning them. But here the transgressor being “cursed,” it was sufficient to mention because he hath uncovered his father’s skirt, for he is deserving of an imprecation merely for uncovering his father’s skirt, for it disgraces his honor, and anyone who dishonors his father, is cursed.⁶⁹Verse 16. Similarly, A man shall not take his father’s wife, and shall not uncover his father’s skirt⁷⁰Above, 23:1. is a respectful euphemism meaning that he should not approach her, for it is not proper to uncover the skirt which he spread over a wife by means of a canopy, similar to what is stated, spread therefore thy skirt over thy handmaid.⁷¹Ruth 3:9. This excludes the interpretation of him who says⁷²The reference is to Ibn Ezra who interpreted the verse [A man shall not take his father’s wife — above 23:1] as referring to a woman violated by his father. To this Ramban objects, for this opinion coincides with that of Rabbi Akiba, while the majority of the Sages hold that a man may marry such a woman (Yebamoth 49a). that this verse [A man shall not take his father’s wife] includes a woman that was violated by him.

כי גלה כנף אביו, “for he has uncovered the robe of his father.” Nachmanides writes that the reason the Torah did not write ערות אביו (as it usually does) in such verses is out of respect for the father’s dignity. Earlier (Leviticus 20,12) when the Torah wrote ערות אביו the sin committed carried a heavy penalty, administered in many instances by a human court of law. The wording therefore had to reflect the severity of the sin in order to serve as a deterrent. The offending party in our verse is guilty of a lesser sin. Similar considerations prompted the Torah to use the term גלה כנף in 23,1 where the prohibition to marry a woman who had been raped by one’s father, or is one’s stepmother is revealed, the sin is of a lower order than sleeping with one’s mother, who is also the wife of one’s father. Nachmanides writes that the reason why Moses selected the people guilty of the above mentioned eleven sins as deserving public censure, i.e. the people mouthing a curse on anyone guilty of them, is that it is the norm for those sins to be committed in the privacy of one’s home, when there are no witnesses to the deed. The guilty party therefore cannot be convicted of his sin, as there had not been any witnesses. The curse pronounced here is to act as a deterrent not commit crimes when only G’d is the witness. The Torah begins the list with a sin committed vis a vis the Creator, i.e. idolatry, and switches to a sin committed vis a vis one’s parents, i.e. degrading them. Parents represent G’d the Creator, as He had a share in the child’s coming into this world. Bestiality is mentioned in the list, as opposed to rape performed on humans, the animals cannot protest what is being done to them, giving the sinner a distinct advantage. Similar considerations apply to proselytes, orphans, and widows, none of whom have easy access to someone who would defend them if they have been wronged.

מכה רעהו בסתר [CURSED BE] HE THAT SMITETH HIS FELLOW SECRETLY — It is of slander that it here speaks (slander may be termed “smiting in secret”) (Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 53). — I have seen in the Work of R. Moses the Preacher; There are here eleven verses beginning with the words “cursed be” corresponding to eleven tribes. In allusion to Simeon, however, he (Moses) did not write down a formula beginning with “cursed be”, because he had no intention to bless him before his death when he blessed the other tribes (the tribe of Simeon is the only one not mentioned in chapter XXXIII. which contains the blessings that Moses bestowed on the tribes), therefore he did not want to curse him either.

This refers to slander, etc. Otherwise, why is it written “in secret”? If one would hit someone in public would it be permitted?! Is it not written, “He may not add; lest he additionally [flog him over these],” in parshas Ki Seitzei (above 25:3)?

On this verse Rashi comments that there are eleven sins which have been introduced here with the word: “cursed be.” They correspond to eleven tribes. No such “curse” is written concerning the tribe of Shimon, as Moses did not have in mind to give this tribe a blessing, Zimri, its leader, having announced publicly that Moses had violated this law by marrying a Midianite woman, thus making him and the whole tribe guilty of “badmouthing” Moses. Thecourt had ample evidence of convicting him of that sin. According to Rashi’s commentary, the last of the list, referring to people who do not uphold Torah law, would refer to people guilty of lashon hara, i.e. badmouthing others. There is no one who is not guilty of this at one time or another. There are scholars who claim that there are twelve sins to which the introductory word: “cursed be” applies, so that Moses did not make an exception concerning the tribe of Shimon. The word: “cursed be,” therefore had to be used only eleven times.

I have seen [this] in R’ Moshe Hadarshan’s commentary, etc. You might ask: Why does Rashi mention [the comment of] R. Moshe Hadarshan for [the verse] “whoever strikes his fellow in secret”? The answer is that without this comment [i.e., saying that this verse is in regard to slander] the fact that the Torah writes eleven curses is no difficulty, as one could suggest it was done in order to remove Reuvein from [being represented among] the cursed because it is written, “Cursed is whoever has relations with his father’s-in-law wife,” and he disturbed his father's sleeping arrangement (Bereishis 35:22). Therefore there are only eleven curses in order to exclude Reuvein [who in any case is hinted at in this curse]. But now that we explain that striking one's fellow in secret refers to slander, if so, the Torah should have only said ten curses and [also] exclude Yoseif who slandered his brothers and spoke slander against them. Rashi answers, “I have seen, etc.” This is easy to understand. I have seen texts where Rashi writes “I have seen, etc.” on (v. 26), “Cursed is whoever does not uphold, etc.” The explanation of this [why he cites R' Moshe Hadarshan there] is as follows: “I have seen [this] in R’ Moshe Hadarshan’s commentary: There are eleven curses, etc. he, therefore, did not want to curse him.” [Rashi is answering that] you might ask: There are twelve curses, etc. if you include “Cursed is whoever does not uphold, etc.” Rashi explains that the verse here, “Cursed is whoever does not uphold etc,” encompasses the entire Torah and all the above curses are included in “Cursed is whoever does not uphold, etc.” But if so, you might ask that the above curses are superfluous and why were they written? But certainly [the answer is] as “I have seen in R’ Moshe Hadarshan’s commentary,” [that the eleven curses correspond to the tribes].

לוקח שוחד להכות, as in the case of Doeg the Edomite (Samuel I, chapter 22), whose accusation was intended to win him favours from the king. Compare also chapter 23 about the Ziphites. Tale-bearing is such a type of interest mentioned in our verse.

לוקח שוחד, “killing for pay.” Most people understand the verse metaphorically, i.e. a judge accepting a bribe to render a guilty verdict where it results in judicial murder. Our author understands it as addressed to the witnesses who perjure themselves for payment, causing the innocent party to be condemned to death by their testimony.

אשר לא יקים [CURSED BE] HE THAT DOES NOT UPHOLD [ALL THE WORDS OF THIS LAW TO DO] — Here (in these words) he included the entire Torah under a curse and they took it upon them pledging themselves by an execration and an oath.

CURSED BE HE THAT CONFIRMETH NOT THE WORDS OF THIS LAW. “Here [in these words] he included the entire Torah and they took it upon themselves with an imprecation and an oath [to observe all the commandments thereof].” This is Rashi’s language. In my opinion this “acceptance” requires that one avow the commandments in his heart and consider them as the truth, believe that he who observes them will be requited with the best of rewards and he who transgresses them will be punished, and if someone denies any of them, or considers it annulled forever he will be cursed. However, if one transgressed any commandment, such as eating swine or some abominable thing because of his desire, or he did not make a Booth or take the palm-branch [on the Festival of Tabernacles] because of laziness, he is not included within this ban, for Scripture did not say “who does not perform the words of this Law” but it states that ‘confirmeth’ not the words of this Law to do them, similar to the expression the Jews ordained, and took upon them [and upon their seed … so as it should not fail, that they would keep these two days — of Purim — according to the writing thereof].⁷³Esther 9:27. Thus the verse [before us] is the ban on those who rebel [against the authority of the Torah] and who deny [its validity].
Now, I have seen the following text in Yerushalmi Sotah:⁷⁴Yerushalmi Sotah VII, 4. “Asher lo yakim [literally: ‘that does not stand up’ — the words of this Law]. But is there ‘a falling Law?’ Rabbi Shimon ben Yakim says, This refers to the officer [of the Synagogue, as explained further on]. Rabbi Shimon ben Chalafta says, This is the court on earth, because Rav⁷⁵The title “Rav” (Rabbi) indicates that that particular Sage lived in Babylon, where there was no ordination of the traditional nature. “Rabbi” indicates that the Sage lived in the Land of Israel where such ordination was conferred. On “ordination” see Vol. II, p. 339, Note 20. Yehudah and Rav Hunah in the name of Shmuel said: Due to this verse [asher lo yakim (that confirmeth not)] King Josiah rent his clothes,⁷⁶II Kings 22:11. The event is narrated that Josiah was brought back to the true faith by the discovery of a copy of the Torah found in the Sanctuary, which escaped the attempts of his predecessors to eradicate the true faith from their kingdom. And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the Book of the Law, that he rent his clothes (ibid). The question now arises as to which particular verse affected the king to rend his clothes? Rav Hunah in the name of Shmuel said that it was the verse before us, asher lo yakim — ‘that confirmeth not’ the words of this Law, and since he was king, he felt it his responsibility to re-institute the authority of the Law. saying, ‘The duty is upon me to stand up [the Law].’ Rabbi Asi in the name of Rabbi Tanchum the son of Chiya said, [Even if a person] learned and taught [Torah], observed and fulfilled [its commandments], but had the means to enable [others to study the Torah] and did not do so — he is included within the curse” [mentioned in the verse before us]. Thus the Rabbis [in the above Yerushalmi] interpretated this “standing up” [of the Torah] as referring to the royal house and that of the Nasi [the Prince of the Sanhedrin] who have the power to uphold [the authority of] the Torah over those who annul it. And even if he was a perfectly righteous man in his own deeds, but he could have strengthened the Torah against the power of the wicked ones who annul it [but failed to do so], he is accursed. This is close to the subject that we have explained.
And by way of a homily the Rabbis [in the above Yerushalmi] said: “This refers to the sexton of the Synagogue who does not stand up the Scroll of the Law to set it up properly so that it should not fall.”⁷⁷This obviously refers to the custom of reading from the Torah with the Scroll of the Law in an erect position. This is the custom still followed in Sephardic Synagogues. In Ashkenazic Synagogues the reading from the Torah is done while the sacred Scroll of the Law lies flat on the Reading table. It appears to me that it [the Yerushalmi] refers to the sexton who does not stand up the Scroll of the Law before the public to show the face of its writing to all people as it is explained in Tractate Sofrim⁷⁸“Scribes.” Laws of writing and reading the Torah are found in this tractate. The text referred to is found in 14:14. that “they lift the Torah high and show the face of its writing to the people who stand there to the right and left thereof and turns it frontwise and backwards, for it is incumbent upon all men and women to see the written words and bend the knee and say And this is the Law which Moses set before the children of Israel,”⁷⁹Above, 4:44. and such is the custom.

אשר לא יקים את דברי התורה הזאת לעשות אותם, who neither observes nor admits that they are all worth observing. but, who in his arrogance, considers some commandment or commandment of the Torah not worth his while observing. In the Talmud such a person is considered a “heretic because he rejects a single one of G’d’s commandments.”

ארור אשר לא יקים את דברי התורה הזאת, "Accursed is one who does not uphold the words of this Torah, etc." This verse includes both what is spelled out, i.e. the person who fails to observe the commandments mentioned in this paragraph and to thereby undermine the character-building effects of Torah observance, as well as all the other commandments not listed in this paragraph. Our sages in Sotah 37 concentrate on the wording here, i.e. אשר לא יקים…לעשות. Why was it not sufficient for the Torah merely to write לעשות, "to do?" They say that if the Torah had only written the words לא יקים or לעשות, no Israelite would have been able to face G'd. After all, if one does not own a field, for instance, how can one fulfil all the commandments that a farmer has to fulfil? Or, if a person did not own a slave, how could he be expected to treat the slave in accordance with the duties that the Torah imposes on the owner of such a slave? This is why the Torah adds the words לעשות in addition to writing the word להקים, "to uphold," to tell us that unless one has the opportunity to uphold, i.e. to fulfil the commandments of the Torah, one is not subject to the curse pronounced by the Torah through the Levites in this paragraph. It is our duty to make up our minds that we will carry out the commandments when the opportunity arises to do so.

ארור אשר לא יקים, this is a blanket curse applying to all sins committed in private, the sinner making sure he is not observed.

אשר לא יקים את דברי התורה הזאת, “who will not uphold the words of this Torah;” Rashi understands the verse as Moses demanding from the people that they accept the entire Torah by calling down a curse upon themselves if they were to deliberately commit violations of it. Nachmanides writes that in his view the word קבלו “they accepted”, in Rashi, means that they mentally accepted, i.e. believed in the authenticity of all the Torah’s commandments as relayed to them by Moses. This includes the belief that people observing the laws of the Torah would, in due course, receive a reward from the Lawgiver, whereas those flouting the commandments deliberately, would receive their punishment from G’d. If a Jew disbelieved even a single one of these commandments, -even the ones one does not have a single opportunity in one’s life to be called upon to perform, such as the levirate marriage if one did not have a brother- he is still subject to the curse called down upon the sinners in this verse. However, if one transgressed one of the commandments, even knowingly, but because one’s evil urge was too strong, not because of a matter of principle, one is not subject to the curse pronounced here. In the Jerusalem Talmud Sotah 7,4 the verse is understood as being addressed primarily to the kings and the authorities within whose power it is to see to it that the common people, at least in public, live according to the laws of the Torah. This is derived from the word יקים in the causative mode, hiphil, as opposed to the active mode kal that would have been יקום, and would refer to oneself, intransitively. Anyone who is capable of promoting Torah observance by others and fails to use his talents in this direction is included in the curse pronounced in our verse. The Jerusalem Talmud also understands the verse as addressed to the reader of the Torah in public, who is called upon to show the scroll he has read from to the public at the end of the reading, and to invite the congregation to rise and give honour to the Torah. (Sofrim 14,14) The congregation is to respond with the line (Deut. 4,44) וזאת התורה אשר שם משה לפני בני ישראל (על פי ה' ביד משה).

ארור אשר לא יקים את דברי התורה הזאת, “cursed he who will not uphold the words of this Torah.” This includes all the commandments in the Torah. The meaning of the verse is: “a person must acknowledge all the commandments of the Torah as true and emanating from G’d; he may not exclude a single one of them from his acceptance as such by denying that it is of value to body and soul. He must not view a single commandment as superfluous and meaningless.” This is the meaning of אשר לא יקים לעשות אותם. He must be convinced in his heart that all the commandments are worthwhile observing seeing they are all full of meaning to people engaged in studying them.
A more literal meaning of the words לא יקים is cited by the Jerusalem Talmud Sotah 7, which claims it refers to a reader of the Torah who fails to raise the Torah scroll with the text visible to the entire congregation.

אשר לא יקים, “who does not accept;” this expression is used in the same sense in Deut. 29,12: למען הקים אותך היום לעם, “in order to accept you this day as a nation.”

That is that He commanded us to rejoice in the the festivals. And that is His, may He be exalted, saying, "You shall rejoice in your festival" (Deuteronomy 16:14). And this is the third of the three commandments that are practiced on the festival. And the first matter that is hinted to us with this command is that we offer a peace-offering no matter what. And these peace-offerings, that are in addition to the holiday peace-offerings. are called peace-offerings of joy. And they said (Chagigah 6b) that women are obligated in these. And Scripture has already appeared [about it], "And you shall sacrifice peace-offerings, etc." (Deuteronomy 27:7). And the regulations of this commandment have already been explained in Chagigah. And included in, "You shall rejoice in your festival," is what they said to also rejoice on them with various types of joy. And among them are to eat meat, to drink wine, to wear new clothes, to distribute types of fruits and sweets to children and women, to play with musical instruments and to dance specifically in the Temple - and that is the joy of the house of water drawing (simchat beit hashoevah). All of this fits into His saying, "You shall rejoice in your festival." And that one is specifically obligated in the drinking of wine is because it is uniquely associated with joy. And the language of the Gemara (Pesachim 109a) is that one is obligated to rejoice his sons and daughters on the festival with wine. And there, they said, "It is taught in a bereita: Rabbi Yehuda says, 'When the Temple is standing, rejoicing is only through meat, as it is stated, "And you shall sacrifice peace-offerings [and you shall eat there and you shall rejoice]." But now, rejoicing is only with wine, as it is stated (Psalms 104:15), "And wine that gladdens the heart of man."'" And they also already said (Pesachim 109a), "Men, with what is fit for them; and women, with what is fit for them." And the language of the Torah is that we include the weak, the poor and converts in this joy - when He, may He be blessed, says, "the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow" (Deuteronomy 16:14). (See Parashat Re'eh; Mishneh Torah, Festival Offering.)