Biblical Parallels Index – Devarim 4/0

Biblical Parallels Index – Devarim 4

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Overview

This index is meant to help the reader explore Biblical parallels, be they two accounts of the same event, stories with similar motifs and themes, or units of text which are linguistically similar and perhaps alluding one to the other. The page includes links to tools that aid in comparison, primary sources that touch upon the parallels, and summaries of and links to articles which analyze them in depth

“You Shall Not Add”

The prohibition of adding to the commandments of the Torah is stated in Devarim 4:2 and Devarim 13:1, with slight variations in wording and in different halakhic contexts (in Devarim 4, the prohibition appears in the context of the sin of idolatry, and in Devarim 13 it follows laws regarding prohibited sacrifices). This parallel leads one to ask why the commandment is stated twice and whether there is significance to the differences in wording and in halakhic context of the two sections.

Tools

• Use the Tanakh Lab to compare the wording of the prohibition in the two chapters.

Articles

• See Adding and Subtracting from Torah which questions the scope of the prohibition against adding or subtracting from Torah. It looks at a variety of approaches brought by commentators. Some limit the law to the realm of religious worship, others suggest that it is aimed at the masses but not learned, spiritual leaders, and others maintain that it includes both adding to existing laws and creating new ones.Several of the commentators support their position by comparing the wording and context of the prohibition in both this chapter and chapter 13.Revelation at Sinai: 

Revelation

Hashem's revelation at Sinai is described at length in Shemot 19-20 and then recounted by Moshe to the nation in Devarim 4-5.

Tools

• Use the Tanakh Lab to compare the two sets of chapters from a linguistic perspective. Some of the differences between the accounts relate to the stated goal of the experience, the role of Moshe as intermediary and as lawgiver, and the emphasis (or lack thereof) on hearing but not seeing God.

Articles

• See Ma'amad Har Sinai in Shemot and Devarim for a table comparing the two accounts and analysis of the differences.  The articles suggests that on the eve of the people's entry into the land, Moshe had two fundamental concerns regarding the nation. He feared that with foreign influences, they would stop believing in Hashem and turn to other gods, and additionally, that even if they retained belief, they would question the authority of the laws transmitted via Moshe and be lax in their observance.  This agenda might account for the unique features of Moshe's retelling of the episode in Devarim 4-5
• See זכרון מעמד הר סיני בנאותו של משה רבנו, by R. Tamir Granot, which compares and contrasts the ways that the Torah describes the experience of Matan Torah in Shemot and Devarim, demonstrating that differences between the two relate to the two distinct stages in the nation’s religious journey and, more broadly, reflect two paths toward the development of faith

A Face to Face Encounter?

Several verses in this chapter indicate that Hashem spoke directly to the nation at Matan Torah  (for example, Devarim 4:12, 15, 33, and 36).  However, other verses in the Torah imply that Hashem spoke through Moshe as an intermediary (Devarim 5:5), to Moshe with the nation listening (Shemot 19:9), or that the nation heard the commandments from both Hashem and Moshe (Shemot 19:19).  

Articles

• See The Decalogue: Direct From Hashem or Via Moshe? for an overview of commentators’ approaches to this issue, ranging from those who believe that all of the Aseret Hadibrot were given through Moshe as an intermediary to those who believe that all of them were revealed directly to the nation.
• See The Four Stages of Ma’amad Har Sinai, by R. Menachem Leibtag, for analysis of the approaches of Rashi, Ramban, and Ibn Ezra to reconciling the various verses and a theory about how the ambiguity of this narrative reflects the fundamental tension within man’s encounter with Hashem. On one hand, mand strives for a  dirct "face to face encounter", yet reality