Parashat Shof’tim

By Rabbi Pete Tobias of The Liberal Synagogue Elstree

Summary:

This Torah portion is a continuation of Moses’ lengthy discourse to the Israelites, laying out the laws that should be observed when they enter the Promised Land. The Book of Deuteronomy is an ingeniously constructed work, written by the lawmakers who were working around the time of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem. They were faced with a vexing problem: the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple suggested, in terms of Ancient Near Eastern theology, that the Israelite God had failed his people. The gods of victorious Babylon must, therefore, be superior.

In order to preserve the ‘reputation’ of their God, the writers of Deuteronomy established a covenant theology. Briefly, this meant that divine protection was conditional on the people’s behaviour. Therefore, if the people suffered – and the siege and destruction of Jerusalem was grievous indeed – then this was the consequence of their failure to uphold their side of the covenant. This historical catastrophe occurred because the people had failed God, not the other way round.

The authors of Deuteronomy constructed a series of guidelines by which the people should live (or should have lived) safely and prosperously in the land. In order to give them authority, and a divine imprimatur, the rules were declared to have emanated from God and were placed in the mouth of Moses, addressing the people in the wilderness, on the borders of the very land from which they were about to be ejected.

The regulations in this week’s portion include instructions regarding the appointment of judges, the responsibilities of the king as well as priests and prophets. The portion contains the inspired and inspiring exhortation ‘tzedek, tzedek tirdof – justice, justice shall you pursue’ (Deuteronomy 16:20) – the prophetic principle that underpins Liberal Judaism’s emphasis on righteousness and justice. The portion concludes with rules of engagement for war and treatment of Canaanites. This last section is the focus of this comment.

Commentary:

Chapter 20 of Deuteronomy offers instructions to the Israelites regarding how they should prepare themselves for battle. Although victory appears to be assured by the authors, who inform their listeners that the priest will encourage the soldiers by telling them that God will fight with them to guarantee their success. This highlights a major problem with any conflict where each side invokes divine assistance: God cannot simultaneously fight for both sides! The solution to this conundrum appears to lie with 2nd century C.E. military leader Shimon bar Kochba who, prior to his battles with the Romans, would pray that God show favour neither to him nor to his enemies.

After this assurance of victory, the priest continues with a list of reasons that would excuse an Israelite man from joining the battle. Anyone who has recently planted a vineyard, built a house or become betrothed is told to go home. Moreover, the army preparing for battle is then told that anyone who is faint of heart should also go home, lest he discourage his fellow soldiers.

In more than one instance, I have noted similarities between biblical texts or events and sketches by the Monty Python team. There is a section of the film ‘Meaning of Life’ in which a sergeant major on the parade ground is exhorting his cadets to ‘…march up and down in squares.’ One of the soldiers suggests, timidly, that he would prefer not to do this and, after a show of rage, the sergeant major grants him permission to leave. His colleagues then follow suit, saying they would prefer to read a book or go to the pictures and eventually the sergeant major is left marching up and down in squares on his own.

If only. I remember from my youth a film with a title that was something like ‘Suppose they called a war and nobody came.’ I didn’t see the film, which I guess had something to do with Vietnam, I just recall being impressed by the title. Unfortunately, there seems to be no shortage of people willing to go to war, to lay down their lives for one cause or another. Is any cause worth dying for? The authors of the Bible thought so. Plenty of other people throughout history have thought so too. And the truth is that there is so much wickedness in our world that there must inevitably be occasions when a stand must be taken to protect and defend that which we value.

This week, the ceasefire between Israel and Hizbullah in Lebanon appears to be growing increasingly fragile. It was agreed a week ago and one of the stipulations to ensure that it would hold was that the United Nations would send peacekeeping troops. When set against humankind’s brutal history, this seems quite remarkable – troops being sent to ensure that there is no fighting! That may not be what the priests and the officers of ancient Israel’s army had in mind when they were addressing their troops, but it might have struck a chord with the visions of Isaiah and other biblical prophets. Sadly, rather like the theme of Monty Python’s sketch, it would appear that the various member nations of the UN are looking for all sorts of things they would rather be doing than travelling to southern Lebanon to join this force. In a rather grotesque parody of that 1960’s film I never saw, it seems we have a situation that could be summed up as ‘Suppose they wanted to establish peace and nobody was prepared to try.’ That, more than any of our other failings, would be the worst possible outcome for humankind.