Bar-Ilan University
Haazinu 5773/September 7, 2013
Parashat Hashavua Study Center
Lectures on the weekly Torah reading by the faculty of Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan, Israel. A
project of the Faculty of Jewish Studies, Paul and Helene Shulman Basic Jewish Studies Center, and
the Office of the Campus Rabbi. Published on the Internet under the sponsorship of Bar-Ilan
University's International Center for Jewish Identity. Prepared for Internet Publication by the
Computer Center Staff at Bar-Ilan University.
986
On The Haazinu Poem
Menahem Ben-Yashar*
The Torah in general and Deuteronomy in particular contain many passages of
admonishment warning Israel not to abandon the ways of the Torah. The long passages
appear in Leviticus (28:14-46) and Deuteronomy (28:15-68), and the short ones are all in
Deuteronomy, at the beginning of the book (4:25-30; 8:19-20; 11:15-17) and towards its end
(29:16-27; 30:17:18; 31:16-18; and 31:16-29 as an introduction to the admonishments in this
week's reading). Most of the admonishments conclude with the harshest of catastrophes:
exile from the land. And rightly so; if the land of Israel was given to the people on condition
that they observe the laws of the Torah, then we would expect that when the people violate
the terms, the present is taken from them. Exile can come about at the hands of an enemy,1
*
1
Menahem Ben-Yashar is professor emeritus in the Department of Bible and the Ashkelon College.
Both in Leviticus 26 and in the two scenarios of destruction in Deuteronomy (28:6-37, 38-68),
although the people are exiled by an enemy, this is preceded by natural disasters. The two scenarios
of destruction in Deuteronomy conclude with exile, perhaps because one goes with the covenant
made on the plains of Moab and the other, the covenant on Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal.
1
by natural disaster,2 or without the means being specified. Interestingly, Haazinu primarily
describes natural disasters (22-24) that will come upon Israel if they are idolatrous, but the
poem does not threaten exile.
Nahmanides sums up the poem towards its end, saying, "It predicts all that will befall us in
clear terms," that is, explicitly and precisely, including Israel being dispersed in exile, for he
interprets the word af'eihem (Deut. 32:26; rendered as "reduced them to naught") as
meaning "I will scatter them to all corners [pe'ah]." But other commentators have noted
that the meaning of this hapax legomenon is far from clear,3 and that the threat implied by it
does not come to pass (because of verse 27: "But for fear of the taunts of the foe").
The surprising absence of the punishment of exile in Haazinu is joined by two other
surprising features: one, that the relationship between Israel and the Lord begins in the
wilderness, in contrast to Scripture's other historical overviews of Israelite history, all of
which begin with the patriarchs.4 The other, that in other passages of admonishment that
conclude with words of consolation, the conclusion of the passage includes a description of
Israel repenting and returning to the Lord,5 or at least confessing (Lev. 26:40), but the
repentance motif is altogether absent from Haazinu.
Thus the span of history covered by this week's reading is rather brief. After a general
introduction about the Lord's righteousness in contrast to Israel's corrupt ways (1-6), the
poem describes the land of Israel being chosen for the people of Israel (7-9) and recounts
the Lord's kindness to His people in the wilderness (10-12) and in the land (13-14). In
response, Israel betrays the Lord who has been beneficent to them (15-18), and as a
punishment the Lord sends calamity upon Israel (15-26). The Lord refrains from wiping them
out for fear of His name being profaned among the other nations (27-31). Next, the
2
Deuteronomy 11. Other shorter passages of admonishment do not specify exile as a punishment.
3
Elhanan Samet, Iyyunim be-Farshot ha-Shavua, Leviticus-Numbers-Deuteronomy, Jerusalem 2002,
pp. 424-426. Of late af'eihem has been interpreted according to the Arabic root p-'-y, meaning to cut
off or stab. See Menahem Haran (ed.), Olam ha-Tanakh, Deuteronomy, Ramat Gan 1994 (Avishur,
loc. cit.); HALOT Dictionary, under p-'-y. Tzvi and Rivkah Rin (Alilot ha-Elim, Jerusalem 1968, p. 243)
claim that in Ugaritic this root means to cut down, although other Ugarit scholars do not mention this
root.
4
Deut. 26:5-9; Josh. 24:2-13; Ps. 78:9-12 (beginning with the exodus); Ps. 78:105-106; Neh. 9:7-32.
Also cf. Ben Sira 44-50:21.
5
4:29-30; 30:1-10, which concludes the admonishment in chapter 28.
2
wickedness of these nations (32-33) is described, and then the Lord's revenge against them
(34-36) and scorn for the inconsequence of their deities in comparison with the greatness of
the Lord (37-39). The enemies' blood that is shed in the act of revenge (42) atones for the
land of Israel that was sullied by the sins of Israel,6 and thus makes it possible to renew the
covenant with G-d. Several conclusions can be drawn from this:
1. The poem is based on the covenantal pact between the Lord and His people. Covenantal
promises were given both to the patriarchs and to the Israelites at the time of the exodus
from Egypt, but these were not contingent on Israel's behavior, for there was not yet a code
of laws binding on the people. Such conditions7 were first stipulated at the onset of the trek
through the wilderness, immediately after the exodus: "If you will heed the Lord your G-d
diligently" (Ex. 15:26), and later at Mount Sinai: "Now then if you will obey Me faithfully and
keep My covenant" (Ex. 19:5). Therefore the poem says, "He found him in a desert region"
(Deut. 32:10), referring to the establishment of the mutual covenant that determines the
progression of history in the poem.
The main component of the covenant from the Lord's side is that He will give the land of
Canaan to Israel and will protect and sustain them on that land. Hence the themes of the
poem include choosing the land of Canaan for the people of Israel, guiding the Israelites to
their land, and recounting what will befall them in their land.
The desolate wilderness (10) is contrasted with the land—fertile and providing sustenance
(13-14)—which the Lord burns up, along with its produce, in His wrath at His people's
unfaithfulness (22). All this is contrasted with the vineyards and fields of the enemy which
from the outset produce nothing but poison fruits (32-33). Other agricultural motifs include
the sacrifices and libations that the pagans offer to their gods to no avail (38), and the Lord's
sword that eats the flesh of the foe and His arrows that are drunk with their blood (42).
2. This brings us to the second point: in the passages of admonishment that predict Israel
repenting, by virtue of which they will be redeemed and return to their land, this repentance
takes place in exile. In Haazinu, where there is no warning of exile, naturally Israel repenting
is not mentioned as a factor in Redemption. Redemption occurs only in order to prevent
6
Reading admato `amo (the land of His people) as an archaic poetic construct form, similar to hayato
eretz (=beasts of the land; Gen. 1:24; Ps. 79:2), and the like. In Numbers 25:8-13, shedding the blood
of the evil makes expiation.
Also in Num. 35:33, and likewise in Deut. 21:1-9, blood is seen as
expiation for the earth.
7
A conditional promise was hinted at to Abraham in Gen. 18:19.
3
desecration of the Lord's name amidst the nations that defeated Israel in its own land (26),
and in order to prove the superiority of the monotheistic G-d over the pagan deities (36-39).
Preventing desecration of the Lord's name is a frequent motif in Moses' petitions for the
Lord's forgiveness after Israel's sins, appearing alongside the motif of keeping His covenant
with the patriarchs,8 but in this week's reading, as we mentioned, the motif of the patriarchs
is omitted.
3) The admonishments primarily threaten agricultural disaster and appear in the first part of
the poem (until verse 24), but from here on the dominant motif is military: an unnamed
nation will suppress the Israelites in their own land, until the Lord comes to His people's
rescue and also takes vengeance against His foes. This depiction serves the third principle:
stressing the contrast between the omnipotent Lord who ultimately remains true to His
people notwithstanding their unfaithfulness, and the gods of other nations, who are of no
consequence (37-39). All this, lest the enemies think that the strength of their gods enabled
them to overcome Israel; they should know that their victory is due solely to the Lord's
punishing His people; and the Lord is a G-d of justice (29-31). This indicates that the poem
was for an era when Israel was subject to the influence of its pagan surroundings.
When was this? At the end of the introduction to the poem it says: "In time to come [aharit
ha-yamim] misfortune will befall you" (Deut. 31:29). In our parlance, as well as in the
Hebrew of the Sages,9 this Hebrew phrase refers to the end of time, the end of history. But
in Biblical Hebrew "aharit ha-yamim" is relative:10 after the time at hand, after the present
historical period. When Jacob foretells to his sons/the tribes "what is to befall you in days to
come [aharit ha-yamim]" (Gen. 49:1), he means to the period after the bondage in Egypt,
i.e., the period of settling the land of Israel. The same applies, in the view of several
8
Ex. 32:11-13; Deut. 9:26-29.
9
As in be-aharit ha-yamim in Gen. 49:1. Genesis Rabbah, 98.2 says: "This indicates that Jacob was
about to reveal the end to them [his sons] when it was hidden from him." Another homily says, "The
Holy One, blessed be He, would have like to make Hezekiah the Messiah," but he was not given the
privilege, for he had not sung the Lord's praises when Sennacherib was toppled (Sanhedrin 94a).
10
Just as aharon (=last or latter) in Biblical Hebrew can also be relative. See Haggai 2:8, Gen. 33:2,
and regarding the latter source, also Genesis Rabbah 78.8: "Last but not least."
4
commentators,11 to aharit ha-yamim in this poem: after the death of Moses and the
conquest of the land, i.e., in the time of the judges, when the Israelites would be settling the
land. Moshe David Cassuto12 shows how the depiction in this week's reading matches the
description at the end of Judges:
enemies from within the country and from the
surroundings attacked the Israelite tribes and ground them to dust, until Israel called out to
the Lord, and He sent them deliverance over their enemies. Perhaps calling out to the Lord
could be considered a form of repenting, although this is not mentioned at all in Haazinu;
nevertheless, this seeming repentance was of little substance, for when the danger passed
the Israelites went back to their practice of idolatry.
After the warnings and admonishments in the Torah, presented in prose, and after the
introduction to Haazinu (Deut. 31:14-29), briefly summarizing the content of the poem,
comes this admonishment in verse. Why? The Torah itself explains the reason: "Therefore,
write down this poem and teach it to the people of Israel; put it in their mouths, in order
that this poem may be My witness against the people of Israel" (Deut. 31:19). The other
admonishments were written in the Torah scrolls that were kept by the priests in their
centers or in the Temple, and neither the people nor the king had access to them (Deut.
31:25-26). Therefore, the discovery of a Torah scroll in the Temple storeroom in the time of
Josiah was astonishing and sensational (II Kings 22:9-23:3).
For the warnings of the
admonishment to reach the ears of the entire people it had to be given in the form of a
poem. Thus it would be easy to remember and transmit from generation to generation.
Moreover, since "punishment is not administered without due warning," witnesses and
advance warning were necessary; the poem could serve as both, for the Lord cautioned
them beforehand, saying it would be "witness against the people of Israel."
We live many generations past the time of the original settlement of the land and the era of
the judges, nevertheless, as Rabbi Samet has remarked, the prophecies and warnings in this
poem are still relevant today, to us, who live in the land of Israel in a generation seeking to
establish a society in the reborn state we are privileged to have. May it be the Lord's will
that after the terrible desecration of the Name that occurred in the Holocaust we witness
11
Elhanan Samet (note 3), pp. 430-432, who sees the poem as directed at the time of the Judges and
of the battles of the Arameans against Israel, as described in I Kings, chapter 20, and II Kings, chapters
6-13, respectively.
12
Moshe David Cassuto, Sifrut Mikra'it ve-Sifrut Canaanit, Vol. 2, Jerusalem 1979, pp. 3-7.
5
sanctification of the Name in the material and spiritual growth of the Jewish people, as the
Lord once more remembers His people and establishes them again on their land.
Translated by Rachel Rowen
6