Nitzavim: Of Rabbit Holes & Rashi: A Ten Commandments’ Moment

The Torah Portion Nitzavim starts with a beautiful passage advancing the Ten Commandments’ collective nature. This post explores whether the collective theme’s passage contains a hidden message.

The Nitzavim passage is as follows:

“You’re standing today, all of you, in front of the Lord, your God- your heads, your tribes, your elders, and your officers, every man of Israel, your infants, your women, and your alien who is in your camps, from one who cuts your wood to one who draws your water- for you to enter into the covenant of the Lord, your God…” Deut 29:9-11.

This act and expression captures the Torah’s vision of citizenry and community. The inclusion level is reminiscent of the Decalogue’s Sabbath Commandment.

The Decalogue, when speaking of the Sabbath’s labor cessation, in advancing collectivism, also expressly enumerated individuals subject to the commandment. It states that “neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. ” Exodus 20:9-10.

This notion was further expressed within Deuteronomy’s reiteration of the Ten Commandments.

It states: “You shall not do any work: you and your son and your daughter and your servant and your maid and your ox and your ass or any animal and your alien who is in your gates- in order that your servant and your maid will rest like you.”‘ Deuteronomy 5:14. [This recanting of the Decalogue was done at the end of the wilderness wandering.]

The Mt. Sinai covenant’s message that the Deity-People relationship was not class exclusive. Rather, rights and responsibilities extended throughout the community at large, including to both servants and aliens.

The Decalogue’s Sabbath Commandment, unlike the Nitzavim passage, was not concerned with any particular occupation.

A Problem?

While Nitzavim’s passage captures the Mt. Sinai’s collective theme, it also raises eyebrows. For those familiar with the Book of Joshua, Nitzavim’s occupational reference is quite troubling.

Thus, it is no surprise that Rashi- the renown Rabbinic Commentator from the Middle Ages- attempted to resolve the conflict. For those unfamiliar, Rashi, who was from France, was the leading biblical exegete of his time. While producing authoritative commentaries, his Torah commentary is most well-known. It is so popular that many Torah publications reflexively include it with the Pentateuch.

Before addressing his comment, it is necessary to understand the problem. The specific occupations of wood cutters and water bearers distinctly relate to a post-Pentateuch story in the Book of Joshua.

The Tale

In Joshua’s encounter with the Gibeonites, those occupations- wood cutter and water bearer- played a significant role in the story. The Book of Joshua tells of a community crisis with respect to an engagement with the Gibeonites. They employed deception to secure a treaty with the Israelites. Joshua 9.

After the deception was uncovered, the Israelite assembly was upset that their leadership had made the treaty. The sticking point involved was that an oath was given. To violate it, arguably, would have been a Ten Commandments’ violation. Joshua 9. [Using the Lord’s name in vain.]

To resolve the matter, and still honor their word, the Israelites accepted the Gibeonites. The compromise was that they were delegated to being wood cutters and water carriers in service to the entire community. Joshua 9:21.

Back to Rashi

Rashi, fully aware of this story, offers the explanation. “This teaches us that Canaanites came to convert during Moses’ lifetime, just as we find that Gibeonites came in the time of Joshua, and this is alluded to by the statement regarding the Gibeonites: ‘they also did so cunningly.’ Moses accepted them, but appointed them as woodcutters and water-drawers.“

Rashi’s explanation is not satisfying. The Gibeonites’ occupational assignment was punitive. If Moses’ dealings with aliens joining the collective were that troubling, the encounter would have been recorded in the Torah. Thus, if Moses accepted converts, it is unlikely that a hard labor assignment would have been made.

Further, if those two occupations were so important, why weren’t they delineated in either of the Decalogues’ Sabbath passages? This especially is the case in that the last Decalogue pronouncement occurred close in time to this Nitzamin passage’s iteration.

Thus, one could argue that the Nitzavim passage is anachronistic. Arguably, it attributes something to a time period in which it does not belong.

The Answers?

If the Gibeonites are the rabbit hole to venture down, there is certainly some reward.

Why would a positive mention for the Gibeonites be placed into an earlier text? Was it to send a positive message concerning them?

Beyond Joshua’s treaty with the Gibeonites, the Hebrew Bible references them in conflict with the newly minted Kingdom of Israel. According to the Book of Samuel, King Saul had a murderous conflict with the Gibeonites. This was revealed to David when he sought counsel with the Lord concerning three years of famine. He was told that the famine was”…on account of Saul and his blood-stained house; it is because he put the Gibeonites to death.” 2 Samuel 21.

The reader is told that David sought to reconcile this matter with the Gibeonites and took measures to do so. 2 Samuel 21. [Note: It should be acknowledged that how David resolved this dispute creates another rabbit hole that will not be addressed.]

Given the severely wounded Israelite-Gibeonite relationship, is it possible that the text was generated to address this issue? Could this have been done by the scribes of the House of David? [Note: by House of David, this reference extends to King Josiah.]

In essence, were the Gibeonites’ designated occupations inserted within Deuteronomy for that purpose? Was the addition’s intent to bring attention to the fact that Gibeonites were community members in good standing?

Conclusion

The Torah Portion Nitzavim arguably has an anachronism within it. The occupational reference may have been intended to plant some recognition to the Gibeonites. From the scripture, after the first monarchy, there was a period of oppression. With David installed as King, however, efforts were made to repair the relationship.

Given this background, the theory offered as to what may have occurred smacks with irony. Nitzavim’s unity of the community passage was transformed to project an additional message of community. In doing so, the text intended to both repair a damaged relationship and strengthen the community.

Be well!!

Please like, share, comment