Deuteronomy Ki Teitzei

Ki Teitzei
Deuteronomy 21:10 – 25:19

I. Summary

A. Ki Teitzei = “When you take the field” (against your enemies … take their women as yours). Focuses on the rights of the individual (v. last week’s parasha, Shoftim, which focuses on the nation as a whole along with checks and balances on the people who possess power).

B. Moses reviews a wide variety of laws regarding family (legal obligations towards female captive taken as wife, legal protection of less-favored wife, punishment (death!) for defiant son), animals (treatment of found animals and taking birdlings from mother) and property (plant only one type of seed, not plowing with ox and ass together, not wearing clothes made of wool and linen and making tassels for garments). (Deut 21:10–22:12)

C. Moses delineates various civil and criminal laws, including those regarding sexual relationships, interaction with non-Israelites, loans, vows, neighbors’ rights, exemption from war service, kidnapping, skin infections, personal responsibility and protection of the weak. (Deut 22:13–24:22)

D. Moses sets out “socio- legal” subjects, i.e. excessive punishment, obligation to marry widow of one’s deceased brother, unseemly fights and honest weights. (25:1–25:19)

E. Moses concludes with the commandment to remember for all time the most heinous act committed against the Israelites—Amalek’s killing of the old, the weak and the infirm after the Israelites left Egypt. (Deut 25:17–19)

II. Commentary (Plaut, various websites, Jewish Study Bible and prior Hevreh discussions)

A. Strictness of law v. ability to change - This is a portion single-mindedly dedicated to the eradication of moral and ritual depravity from the community of Israel. Five times in this parashah, the text repeats that its legislation is given to Israel in order that we may “sweep out evil from [our] midst” (see 21:21, 22:21–22, 22:24, 24:7) The moral correctness of our communities is so critical that one is obligated to hand over even one’s own child for execution if he is wayward and disobedient (21:18–21). Blended with these strict rules, however, is the new idea that some people and practices that were previously taboo can be transformed and redeemed i.e. even inherently sinful things can be transformed into something positive, e.g. when a convicted murderer is put to death, corpse must be accorded respect by being buried same day as execution (21:22–23).

B. Specificity and breadth of mitzvot - What is significance of extreme specificity and breadth of mitzvot (74 in this parasha alone… more than any other)?
1. Does specificity and breadth of mitzvot create tension with free will?
2. Does specificity and breadth reinforce or take away from the concept that the attempt to follow God’s words is more important than the end result (or perhaps even God’s words themselves)?
3. Is specificity and breadth provided simply to offer comfort and guidance to those seeking direction for their behavior?
4. Is specificity used simply for emphasis of importance/significance (similar to detail re: building tabernacle = importance of God and movable worship)?
5. Is the purpose of breadth to have a mitzvot to guide us in virtually all our activities and force awareness of God on a continuous basis?

C. Harshness and Sexism - Is there a pattern of harshness and sexism in mitzvot? Even though Rabbinic interpretation removes some of the harshness, what do the presence of these words in Torah say about God, about the Israelites and about the purpose and source of Torah?
1. Take conquered women as yours (Deut 21:10-13)
2. Stoning a defiant son (Deut 21:18-21)
3. Taking birdlings from their mother (Deut 22:6-7)
4. Stoning a non-virgin bride (Deut 22:20-21)
5. Death to adulterers (Deut 22:22) v. forced marriage and fine for rapists of virgins (Deut 22:28-29)
6. Flogging the loser of a valid dispute (Deut 25:1-3)

D. Stoning wayward son (Deut.21:18-21) – So extreme as to arguably never had occurred. Perhaps extreme conditions (parents have to announce son’s disloyalty to town, parents have to be exemplar themselves, son has to be disloyal, defiant, glutton and drunkard) intended to make extreme remedy impractical but do set standard for more moderate punishment of more moderately bad behavior of son. Impracticality in application reminiscent of preconditions to carrying out capital punishment (two testifying witnesses) making capital punishment a deterrent rather than a practice.

E. Caring for and returning lost property (Deut 22:1-4) – Obligation first mentioned in Exodus 23:4 (return your enemy’s ox or ass). Applies to emotions as well as property. Most often, what we find and hold in trust are the feelings, the shared dreams, or the confidences of friends, co-workers, and family. These, too, we must guard carefully and return with the accrued interest of our friendship, our honest praise, and our commitment always to nurture these vital human connections.)

F. Leaving the overlooked sheaf for the stranger (Deut 24:19) - Teaches importance of lack of selfishness. Further, teaches about tzedakah in its most pristine state (levels of tzedakah), whereby the donor and the recipient are unknown to each other. Also asks us to perform good deeds consciously, rather than unconsciously which suggests responsibility to be proactive in carrying out mitzvot.

G. Fear of God inhibits evil acts - The terrible evil that Amalek inflicted on Israelites (unfairly attacking the weak as they march to Promised Land … Exod 17:8-13) is possible because Amalek turned his back on God—he is arrogant and acts “undeterred by fear of God” (Deut 25:18). What we must now fear is not the external enemy but our own internal paralysis. What are our present-day Amaleks: Doubt? Fear? Confusion? Embarrassment?


(Revised 8/26/09)