Comentário sobre Deuteronômio 1:18

את כל הדברים אשר תעשון [AND I COMMANDED YOU …] ALL THE THINGS THAT YE SHOULD DO — These are the ten things that constitute the difference between civil cases and capital cases (Sifrei Devarim 18:1; cf. Sanhedrin 32a).

AND I COMMANDED YOU AT THAT TIME ALL THE THINGS WHICH YE SHOULD DO. “These are the ten differences between monetary and capital cases.” This is Rashi’s language quoting the Sifre.⁹²Sifre, Devarim 18. See Sanhedrin 32a for these ten distinctions between monetary and capital cases. And if so, Moses is speaking here to the judges [previously] mentioned, and he abridged on the ten differences [by not enumerating them], for they are all deduced from verses.
And in line with the plain meaning of Scripture, the reference here is to the statutes and laws, the way wherein they must walk, and the deeds they must perform,⁹³Exodus 18:20. for he [Moses] personally commanded, warned, and taught Israel all these matters. And the reason for mentioning this [subject] here is because it is known that this was the substance of Jethro’s counsel when he told Moses, Be thou for the people before G-d,⁹⁴Ibid., Verse 19. meaning that he was to pray in their behalf in the time of their affliction, and he further told him, And thou shalt teach them the statutes and the laws etc.,⁹³Exodus 18:20. meaning that he, himself, was to teach them the Torah. But regarding the execution of the law, Jethro advised him to appoint judges to assist him, and I have already explained it there.⁹³Exodus 18:20. Therefore, Moses related here that when he designated the officers over thousands and hundreds he delegated them only over the execution of justice. He, however, would personally teach them [the people] everything they were to do in accordance with the Torah, because he hearkened to his father-in-law’s counsel and did all that he had said.⁹⁵Ibid., Verse 24. Now Moses did not mention Jethro’s advice here, nor did he attribute to him anything that Jethro proposed. It appears to me that Moses did not want to mention it [the fact that he was following his father-in-law’s advice] in the presence of all Israel because of his humility,⁹⁶For people would think that, were it not for Jethro’s counsel, Moses would not have needed any assistance from the other judges. But would he have brought in Jethro’s name into this affair it might have appeared that Moses himself never thought that he would need assistance of other people. Moses humility is thus made apparent when he states his own inability to cope with all the problems of the people (Keseph Mezukak). See further in my Hebrew commentary p. 349. or it may be that it would not be to his honor to mention to that generation that he had married a Cushite woman.⁹⁷Numbers 12:1. — Since in the case of Zimri the son of Salu they chided Moses about the Cushite woman [that he had married before the Torah was given — see Rashi, Numbers 25:6], he therefore avoided referring to it in order to prevent them from stumbling into evil speech (see my Hebrew commentary, p. 533). It is also possible that the reason [for not mentioning Jethro’s name] was because he had consulted the Divine Glory and this matter was done at the command of the Almighty.⁹⁸Mechilta, Yithro 2: “And Moses hearkened to the voice of his father-in-law and did all that ‘amar’ (he, [i.e. G-d] had said” Exodus 18:24). The Mechilta thus explains the word amar as referring to G-d, and not to Jethro.

ואצוה אתכם בעת ההיא את כל הדברים אשר תעשון, “I had commanded you at that time all the things that you have to do.” Rashi, quoting Sifri, explains that the “things” referred to by the word הדברים are the ten judicial difference between adjudging disputes involving only money or its equivalent, and judging matters involving life and death. (compare Sanhedrin 32). Nachmanides writes that if that were the meaning, Moses would be addressing the judges. [Nachmanides’ problem may be that if Rashi were right, why would Moses suddenly add the words “I commanded you at that time,” when this is what he had been doing all the time? Ed.] He considers that the plain meaning is that Moses here refers to what he had taught the people in Exodus 18,20 i.e. החוקים והתורות, הדרך אשר ילכו בה, “the decrees and teachings and the path they should pursue,” the ones Yitro had told him to make his primary concern. The reason that Moses reiterates what had occurred at that time was that the people knew that the plan to appoint all the judges had originated with Yitro, and that he had told Moses that if he were to adopt it G’d would be with him and he would be able to cope with the tremendous burden imposed upon him. Moses was at pains to explain, especially to the new generation, that none of these judges had the authority to formulate new laws. They had been instructed by Moses, who had received al the laws from G’d directly. Yitro’s function had been to help Moses how to successfully disseminate G’d’s laws and teachings, and how to ensure that it could be applied with a minimum of inconvenience to the people. His suggestions had been purely administrative, not legislative. Moses had not mentioned the author of these suggestions at this time, not giving Yitro credit for his suggestions, either because he did not want to embarrass the whole people assembled before him by reminding them that what had prompted Yitro to make these suggestions was that he had observed what a difficult people the Israelites were and what a hard time they had been giving their saviour. Perhaps Moses did not want to remind the people at that time that he had married a daughter of Yitro instead of a girl who had been Jewish by birth. It is also possible that the simple reason is that Moses had not adopted any of Yitro’s suggestions until he had consulted with G’d and obtained His consent, thus making the entire appointment of the judges part of G’d’s legislation.

Between monetary litigations, etc. The fourth chapter of Sanhedrin (32a) explains regarding monetary litigation: 1. Three judges are required. 2. The judges may begin even with a guilty charge. 3. A guilty decision may be reached by a majority of only one. 4. A judge may change his verdict and render even a guilty decision. 5. Anyone may partake to acquit or to find guilty, whether a judge or a disciple. 6. A judge who was going to acquit can retract and decide guilty, and vice-verse. 7. Proceedings begin during the day and may be completed at night. 8. A decision to acquit or to find guilty may be reached on the same day. 9. The proceedings are begun by the senior judge. 10. [Ibid. 36a] A father and his son, or a rabbi and his disciple, may be considered as two judges. Capital litigation, however, requires twenty-three judges. Furthermore, everything else written above does not apply to capital litigation. To the contrary, whatever is allowed in monetary litigation is disqualified in capital litigation.

V. 18. ואצוה אתכם וגו׳ bezieht sich, dem Zusammenhange nach, auf die Nation, welcher בעת ההיא, während ihres Aufenthaltes am Horeb durch Mosche das ganze Gesetz für alle ihre Lebenstätigkeiten gelehrt worden war. Im ספרי wird es noch besonders auf die Sanhedrin 32 a gegebenen zehn Modalitäten bezogen, durch welche sich der Zivilprozess von dem Kriminalprozess unterscheidet.

ואצוה אתכם בעת ההיא, I commanded you at that time;” you have not been held up in the desert for 40 years in order to study the Torah, because I could have taught you the Torah in a few hours, but you were held up on account of your sins.