#Shoftim

[girlactionfigure]

[rabbiaharon]

Shalom Aleichem!

Today I wanted to address something I have seen all too often, regarding the Torah approach to politicians - not only non-jewish politicians (particularly and especially), but even Jewish politicians. In addition, there is an issue which applies to all idolaters (I will explain the context of this term later on!), including all non-jewish politicians who fall into that category.

First of all, in Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (167:14), there is a rule stating that a Jew is forbidden to give a gift to a non-Jew that they do not know, based on the posuk “do not give them grace” (לא תחנם) which our sages explain to mean “do not give them a free gift” (לא תתן להם מתנת חינום). This being a scripturally-sourced injunction, it does not depend whatsoever on who or what kind of a person that idolater is, provided that you do not know them personally. Giving a gift to an idolater you have a working relationship with is considered under this halacha to be a purchase, as they have either already paid you or helped you in some way (and the gift is in appreciation), or there will be some personal benefit as a result of the gift.

Furthermore, the Kitzur rules (167:15) that it is also prohibited even to compliment an idolater that you do not know personally, as it also falls under the category of “do not give them grace”. This applies even complimenting their appearance, and, as the Kitzur says “How much moreso to compliment their actions”. However, it is permitted to compliment their appearance in certain situations, if you are intending not to compliment them, but to compliment Hashem for creating such a beautiful creation. The Kitzur clarifies at this point (167:16) that we are permitted to take care of the non-jewish poor (in other words, they aren’t included in the category of idolaters who you cannot give a gift to), because of darkei shalom.

The category of who is considered an “idolater” is delineated in the Rambam (Maimonides) in his magnum opus, in The Laws of Kings and Wars (Chapter 8): This includes anyone among the non-jews who does not keep the 7 Laws of Noah because they were given to Moshe at Mount Sinai to give over to the nations (A relatively high bar to reach, as someone who does not keep the Laws of Noah because they don’t know about them, someone who keeps them because they are logical, and even someone who keeps them becaues they were given to Noah, are all categorized equally as idolaters).

The ruling in 167:14-15 applies to all people classified as “idolaters”, certainly including non-Jewish politicians, who you would be hard pressed (if not frankly unable) to prove are keeping the 7 Noahide Laws because they were given to Moshe. While there may be heterim (exceptions) for individuals to donate to political campaigns (regarding the ruling of 167:14), as they don’t represent individuals but rather ostensibly collections of policy that you may want implemented in your area, it is always best to donate first to Torah Institutions rather than political campaigns. However, this idea does not extend to the question of complimenting individual idolatrous politicians, like the candidates currently running for federal office in this country. You can certainly vote according to your conscience, but know that complimenting your pick, especially regarding their actions (saying “Oh, this individual is/was so good for Israel!” Or “This person will be better to support Torah in this country”) would definitely constitute a violation of the ruling in 167:15.

In Masechta Avos in the Mishnah, there are 2 mishnayos which deal with the question of our interaction with any politician, one in the first chapter, in the name of Shamaya (“Don’t become familiar with the government”), and an additional mishnah, brought without a name in the second chapter. The conclusion of the first mishnah, written by Shamaya, is explained by the Bartenura as follows:

”’Do not become familiar with the government’ in order to receive any sort of authority from it. Another explanation is ’do not become familiar with the government so that you will not violate the expectations of your maker‘, as happend with Doeg HaEdomi. ’government’, using the term rashus (permission), indicates the government’s ability to do what it wants, regardless.” This applies even with Jewish politicians, especially those that do not keep Torah.

The second explanation of the Bartenura is especially notable in the case of idolaters in government, as following them and trying to become close to them would almost inevitably lead to the violation of the aforementioned halachos in Shulchan Aruch.

The second Mishnah is stated as a stam (a mishnah without an attached name) meaning that the compiler of the Mishnah (Rebbi Yehuda HaNasi) intended it to represent an absolute teaching, universally applicable in all relevant situations, rather than the opinion of one particular Rabbi:

”Be careful around the government, as they will not befriend a person except for their own needs; they seem like friends when it is to their own benefit, but do not stand by a man in his time of need.”

The Bartenura explains that this Mishnah advises people who are involved with the needs of the Jewish Community and the Jewish people, who need to be acquainted with authorities in order to facilitate the community’s ability to live and thrive, that the government is not our friend. The government isn’t thinking about the Jewish people, they’re only thinking about themselves. This is a poignant lesson that has been proven all too clearly over the past 10 years, with world leaders giving platforms to antisemites to broadcast their hate… as well as local and national leadership legitimizing, emboldening, and endorsing antisemitic organizations and protests. For us, though, it’s important to remember that we don’t have to rely on them, nor have we ever. We have an advocate above who can and will judge us favorably and support us in our time of need. If we want to be redeemed, if we want to leave our exile… We just have to reach higher.

Good Shabbos.

[geostatonary]

tonight in torah study we discuss jurisprudence, the basic units of testimony, kindness in allowing people to leave your armies, and ramban's pitch for a murder mystery television series

[eretzyisrael]

Parashat Shoftim

by: Meir Anolick

Written for Shabbat Parashat Shoftim, ד באלול תשע”ד:

This week’s Parsha contains a plethora of important Mitzvot, many of which are national or communal Mitzvot. Among these are the commandments for us to follow the ruling of the courts, and that we should not deviate right or left. “According to the teaching that they will teach you and according to the judgment that they will say to you, shall you do; you shall not deviate from the word that they will tell you, right or left.” (17:11)

This verse means more than just following the courts. It seems obvious that for any social and judicial structure to work, we must obey the decisions of the courts, lest the nation fall to disarray and chaos. However, this Mitzvah is also a more general Mitzvah that constitutes the requirement to follow the teachings and ruling of Rabbanim, not just the courts1. If a Rav tells you to perform a Mitzvah in a certain way, and you don’t like that way, then you must do it anyway. There is no deciding for ourselves, and no shopping for Rabbis; if the Rabbi says it, you do it.

Over the past few years, I have heard many cases of people who disregard or mock the saying and teachings of Rabbanim, both great and small. Things like, “Oh, that’s just what the Rabbis say”, and “Those Rabbis don’t know what they’re talking about” seem to have become frighteningly commonplace. Many important facts seem to be ignored, disregarded, or forgotten by people who utter such disparaging remarks. First, some seem to feel that we don’t need to treat the Rabbanim of our generation with the same reverence and respect that we treat the Amoraim and Tannaim, since our generation and our leaders are on a much lower level than a couple thousand years ago. However, as it says in this week’s Parsha, just before the above-quoted verse, “and to the Judge who twill be in those days” (17:9), which is one of the places where we learn that the greatest of our generation needs to be treated like the greatest of the previous generation, since they are the greatest in our days.

Furthermore, many people seem to have forgotten that Rabbanim are, in fact, human, and as such have to deal with many of the same issues that the rest of us common folk do. As such, they understand our problems and difficulties, and their rulings will be taking these into account. In addition, anyone who is a Posek has achieved a very high level of learning, and for us to tell him that he’s wrong is like us trying to tell Einstein that he got his theory of relativity wrong. Without the years of knowledge and experience that they have, how can we think that we begin to understand how they came to the ruling they’ve given us?

Though there is plenty more to say on the subject, I will leave off with one last point. Judaism is built on tradition. It is through tradition that the ancient teachings of our sages from ages past and that national memory of the Exodus from Mitzrayim have been retained for over two-thousand years.

That tradition has been preserved, cultivated, and maintained carefully by the Rabbanim of each generation, and they are the ones that have helped to guide us through to get us where we are today. To start denigrating and disregarding them is to sever that tradition that links us back all the way to Har Sinai, and that would sever us from the great tradition that gives us our strength. 

We must remember that our Rabbanim are our leaders and guides in a world that is often overwhelming us with materialism and futile desires. We must learn to cling to them, and cling to their teachings, if we want to be able to develop a connection to Hashem. Shabbat Shalom.

1 From here, it would seem that violating a Rabbinic prohibition also violates a Torah prohibition, and we know that is not the case, but it is a complex matter.

[jewishandmore]

Good Faith Judaism

“Good faith partners don’t quote scripture at each other.”

Working with people from multiple faith backgrounds, I often say this and find general agreement among accomplices in justice work.

Jewish teachers regularly cite sacred sources, from the Five Books of Moses all the way through current writings. Many Jews quote texts all the time and do much more than say: “Look, I have a source to back up my argument.” We have thousands of years of established procedures for “d’rash-ing” or interpreting texts.

As a rabbinic colleague pointed out, we try not to do this “at” each other, so much as with one another. We aim to be guided by some agreed upon principles in the process. We don’t always get it right. We can be argumentative and hurtful and divisive as much as anyone else, but we do try to unite around some basic ideas, like these, which are only a sample:

- Respect and Dignity — as one family of humanity, hailing from the same universal source, we try to treat one another as mutual bearers of an infinite spark, a shard of divinity. When we teach, generally, and particularly when we use our sacred texts, we aim to uphold these principles, and our teachings ought not defy them.

- Compassion and Inclusion — kindness, soulfulness, a high regard for each other’s humanity and human needs. While there are many sources in our traditions that can be used to divide and exclude, we should aim higher.

- Learning and Tradition — while wisdom often starts in a source text, Jews have embraced an evolution and movement with the times that progresses our texts with us. We are people of many books, some of which have only been written yesterday.

Rabbi Amy Scheinerman teaches about these principles and and many others, calling them “meta-commandments”[1] — underlying guidelines for applying Jewish teachings in practice.

We try not to use our texts as a bludgeon against one another. Sharing wisdom from ancient sources fulfills another important Jewish principle — bringing us together in community. When we use our sacred texts to sow division and enmity, we fall into historical challenges that Jewish wisdom has cautioned us against for millennia. Jewish teachings often attribute the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem, in 70 CE, to “baseless hatred” between Jews, taking responsibility, perhaps unreasonably, for something that was clearly done to our ancestors by the Roman Empire.

Nearly seventy rabbis and rabbinical students from different affiliations recently joined together in an organization called Beit Kaplan, which is “a forum for the cultivation of a flourishing, dynamic Jewish civilization…With deep ties to Reconstructionist Judaism”[2].

Beit Kaplan rallied in support of students who left the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College last year because of the hostility directed at them as supporters of the State of Israel, self-proclaimed “liberal Zionists”. Beit Kaplan sponsored a gathering to hear the testimony of these former students on Monday, September 9, 2024.

On Friday, September 6, 2024, a rabbi and faculty member at the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College (RRC) wrote a regular email to rabbinical students and advised them to not attend the Beit Kaplan gathering “both for the sake of your own well-being, and to not give the event undue attention”. The rabbi continued to provide “Torah framing” for help in dealing with “the problems that pain us” seemingly raised by the Beit Kaplan event.

The rabbi invoked that week’s Torah reading, called Shoftim, (Deuteronomy 16:18–21:9), declared that the students who left RRC were “those who provide false testimony” who spoke “unethically” and cited the verses that call for such people to be swept from your midst (Deut. 19:19) and killed for their crimes without pity (Deut. 19:21). While tempering this harsh decree from scripture with the Talmud’s qualifications that punishments should be the monetary payment for damages, the rabbi summed up with this interpretation: “There is still a consequence, and the consequence does not need to be identical to the initial action. There is mercy mixed in with justice.” The rabbi concluded with a nod to loving-kindness as a sign of power and rigor in pursuing communal justice.

This brazen use of sacred texts to condemn former community-members, disparage them as unethical liars, and then call for their punishment in vague terms shocked me. This was the kind of scriptural argument that justified American white supremacy, imposed patriarchy and misogyny onto generations of women, and argued for the subjugation of the Jewish people for nearly 2,000 years. That a rabbi made these claims, offered no evidence nor any judicial process by which those they accused could be condemned, and then alluded to punishments from Biblical and Talmudic times without any real qualifications, horrified and saddened me.

This rabbi used our shared sacred texts as a bludgeon against former students and potential colleagues as part of a message to prevent people from engaging with one another. In contrast, I propose an embrace of shared values as a necessary precursor to an argument from sacred sources. What we are arguing for is as important as which sources we use to support that argument. Quoting from the same passages in last week’s Torah reading (Deuteronomy 16:20), “Equity, equity you are to pursue”, or “Justice, justice shall you pursue”[3], we do so understanding that equity, and justice may be repeated in this verse to remind us to take others’ perspectives into account. Justice requires community and overcoming distances between one another — it is a collaborative project. In this way, I offer a Biblical interpretation that I believe asks us to participate in a system of community values that elevate all of us to behave better with one another.

As a graduate of the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College and a proud student of the teachings of Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan that inspired the founding of RRC, I implore the faculty and leadership of RRC to reconsider the words of one of your own. Please join us in this season of return and reconciliation in shared work of repair. Please engage with us and those who have shared their difficulties with RRC in good faith.

Let us teach and learn our texts with one another, and not use them as weapons against each other.

 [1] I have heard Rabbi Scheinerman teach this under the phrase “meta-mitzvah”, here is one place in print:  Scheinerman, A. (2018, October). Hospice, Interfaith, and Halakha. https://collegecommons.huc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/BullyPulpit_Rabbi_Amy_Scheinerman_Transcript_FINAL.pdf, Pages 4–5

[2] Beit Kaplan. (n.d.). The Rabbinic Partnership for Jewish Peoplehood. Retrieved September 10, 2024, from https://www.beitkaplan.org/

[3] The first translation is from: Fox, E. (1997). The Five Books of Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. Schocken.

And the second is from: Jewish Publication Society Inc. (2009). JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh. Jewish Publication Society of America.

[barszcz-czerwony-i-biali]

I'd like to blame someone (idk who) for me not realizing that Bethlehem בית לחם literally translates to bread house until two minutes ago while reading shoftim 19

Now I want to go up to christians and tell them their guy Josh was born in Bread House

[anonymousdandelion]

צדק צדק תרדף

justice, justice

it is somewhere ahead

just out of sight

around the bend in the arc of the universe

close enough to dream of

but too far to see

let alone to touch

or to hold

we have been chasing this

(this dream;

this hope;

this future)

for lifetimes

yet still

it escapes us

~

I am not, by nature, a hunter

my vision is poor

my heart is weak

and my legs tire easily

yet the quarry is out there

somewhere just ahead

I shall not give up

the pursuit

[hyperpotamianarch]

Tanach ask: who's your favourite Judge and why?

My first major problem with this question is that I pick favourites between books in the Tanach. And the book of Judges is low on the list. Due to mostly that, I don't necessarily have a favourite judge, but I can probably pick one with some thought.

My first thought would be Gid‘on. I'm not going to compare him to all other judges, because I don't necessarily remember them all too well, but Gid‘on has, in my opinion, been one of the most level-headed of them - he comes out especially as a good one when compared to his fellow tribesman, Yiphtaḥ. You see, both of them face the same conundrum: their sibling tribe, Ephraim, complain not getting a part in the glory of the fight.

One thing that is easy to overlook in the time of the judges, and I promise this is relevant, is how divided it is. When you actually look at the stories, most of them are isolated to very specific tribes. When the Moabites subjugate Israel, it's a Binyaminite rising against them. The Pelishtim are fased by a Danite who stays around Yehudah. The king of Ḥatzor is faced by a small coalition of Naftalites abd Zevulunites mostly. Yiphtaḥ fights the Ammonites, which is framed as a more general undertaking? But I'm pretty sure that the first time most of the tribes come together is, ironically, against Binyamin, in the Levite's Concubine story. Fun stuff. Point being, the nation is divided, and if Menashe want to rise up against the midianites... Well, Ephraim might not see a reason to join... Until victory is assured, that is. At which point they'll complain not being called.

In all honesty, in both the situations with Gid‘on and Yiphtaḥ, I feel like the Ephrites are whining for nothing. It's not really totally clear, but Yiphtaḥ just blows on them, claiming that he did call them... But let's wheel back a minute and describe the situation.

Both Gid‘on and Yiphtaḥ win their fights against their respective enemies, though Gid‘on keeps going after the incident described. Anyway, right after said victory, the Ephrites come to complain over not being called to partake in the battle. They even threaten violence over that. And here comes the difference between the judges: while Yiphtaḥ escalated, claiming that he did call them and they didn't came, Gid‘on de-escalated, telling them that they captured the leaders, completing the most important part.

And it's not like Gid‘on never takes harsh actions to people refusing to cooperate with him. Look at the people of Sukkot. That might not be a positive trait of his, but his policy is certainly better than Yiphtaḥ. He avoids war over hurt egos, instead only punishing people who refused to lend him aid when he could use it, because they weren't assured he'll win.

Gid‘on also gets a great introduction - literally asking an angel he meets where are all the miracles of the olden days. After destroying a local idol, his father defends him by claiming the god he ruined the altar of can avenge him for it, giving Gid‘on the nickname Yeruba‘al. Meaning "the Ba‘al will fight him", basically.

There are a couple more things that can be said on why Gid‘on is a good judge, and he might be a vanilla pick (inasmuch as many people have a favourite judge). He's still a nice one. And I favour him despite the fact Bahad 1 has a quote from his story by the front gate (Israelis might get the reference).

[torais-life]

¿Qué hacer cuando no sabemos cómo arreglarnos?: Parashat Shoftim Rab. Kalmus & Rab. Kornblit

[slyandthefamilybook]

I went to an Orthodox school and it was a thing to memorize every single parasha. It's one of those things that never leaves you

Question to English-speaking diaspora Jews: How do you typically refer to books of the Tanach? Is it by their Hebrew name (e.g. Bereshit) or by their English-given name (e.g. Genesis)?

[eesirachs]

what would have happened to mary magdalene at antioch?

the same thing that happened to sarai at moriah, to hagar at šava, in the negev, to jezebel at yizreel, to the nonnamed shoftim girls at ephraim, mizpah, and etam

[girlactionfigure]

In many areas of life, from sports through to professional productivity, attack can often be the best form of defense, as we see in this week’s #PieceofParasha on Shoftim.

More: here

Rabbi Benji

[finelythreadedsky]

Hey! I just saw one of your qrts of a poem on censorship and I’m really curious about one of the tags you added that said there is a connection between the Jewish sense of identity and the ancient Carthaginians/Phoenicians and I’m super interested, could you please elaborate?

um so the genesis of those tags is actually in two conference talks i heard in december that discussed dido in the civilization video games, which i have never played and know nothing about, but i found it really interesting that the creators of that game give dido an in-game affinity with judaism (that's the religion she's inclined to 'found' if you play as her? or something) and reconstructed the phoenician dialogue her voice actor delivers based on modern hebrew pronunciation. i think it was maureen attali who went into more detail about various jewish approaches to/reception of dido, but i don't remember specifics. i believe the conference proceedings will eventually be published as a book about the reception of the women of the aeneid-- edith hall and magdalena zira are the people behind that.

in an even broader context, i just think it's fascinating that a sense of affinity with the ancient phoenicians and carthaginians seems to develop so easily among modern jews. like the way sonya taaffe's poetry frames both carthage and judea as victims of roman imperialism. and it's sort of baked in on a linguistic level too: it's really easy to learn phoenician/punic if you already know hebrew, and the older convention was even to print phoenician and punic with hebrew letters. if you're familiar with hebrew or even just anything jewish, there are a lot of moments of recognition when you start to look at phoenician and punic history and material culture! like oh wait the suffete? same word as the hebrew name for the book of judges, shoftim. and that's the baal that the bible is always going off about.

like a friend of mine recently joked that the movie frozen is an aeneid 4 retelling bc the sisters elsa and anna map onto elissa (dido) and anna, but the names aren't a coincidence! elsa derives ultimately from the hebrew elisheva, which uses the same root el- as the phoenician name elishat which became elissa in greek/latin! and the name anna became common in europe because hannah (anna in greek) was a common jewish name around the turn of the millennium, cognate with the phoenician name based on the same root that was also latinized as anna!

and also the phoenicians were characterized (both in texts and in reality) by their involvement with trade, which rings with more modern characterizations of jews, and there's also often a degree of untrustworthiness attributed to them because of that association with trading that feels weirdly akin to the last millennium of antisemitism. like i'm thinking of dougherty 2001, the raft of odysseus ch 5-- the picture of the phoenicians suggested in the odyssey looks very much like portrayals of jews, with varying degrees of antisemitism. so i do think there's a sense of (sometimes defensive) identification that easily arises there.

and all that is particularly interesting bc within the bible the phoenicians/canaanites are presented as the enemies of the israelites against whom they're trying to define themselves! and that israelite hostility toward the canaanites is perhaps precisely because they are so similar and so closely related.

anyway reception of the phoenicians is so cool

[catulhu333]

How powerful Lilith really is...

...in the Zohar?

Kinda connected to my previous article (of which Lilith's depiction in the Zohar was a major part of), I would also want to shed some light on this rather obscure information.

With Lilith's power in the Zohar, she is actually described as actually stronger than her husband, Samael/Satan (Pinchas, verse 362): ""The appendix of the liver" MEANS a woman of harlotry, THAT IS LILIT, who comes out and emerges from the liver, THAT IS SAMAEL, to mislead people and denounce them, and she leaves the male to practice prostitution. And that is why IT IS WRITTEN: "the appendix of the liver;" "the appendix above the liver" MEANS THAT, after her fornications, she rises above him. She has "a harlot's forehead" (Yirmeyah 3:3) and subdues her husband, who is SAMAEL, WHO IS CALLED 'liver,' with the anger of the gall, being a quarrelsome and anger-prone wife who rules over her male. THUS "The harlot's forehead" has control over the liver, WHICH IS SAMAEL, BECAUSE SHE IS a quarrelsome, angry woman AND IS THEREFORE CALLED "THE APPENDIX ABOVE THE LIVER."

While this fragment could be seen as just describing Lilith "wearing the pants" in the relationship, there are further statements that confirm Lilith's power (and by proxy being stronger than Samael). In another verse, Lilith is called the most powerful sprit (Vayikra, verse 316): "Come and see: In a hole by the great, supernal abyss, there is a certain female, a spirit above all spirits. We have explained that its name is Lilit."

And the most interesting, and controversial part - Lilith (also called the "evil maid" or "evil maidservant") manged to defeat an aspect of God, the Shekhinah (also called the Matron or Matronit) (Mishpatim, verses 450-452): "So many blessings did the evil maidservant steal from the Shechinah through heavy tax burdens, different kinds of harsh judgments against the SHECHINAH'S children, numerous Temple sacrifices deprived from the Matron, the shaming of the Matron," ... "The pit represents the evil wife, Lilit, in her house, namely the prison. The evil maid seized the Matron and her children, NAMELY THE CHILDREN OF YISRAEL, put them in her exile, placed them in twisted chains, and tied their hands to the back; "she dwells among the nations, she finds no rest" (Eichah 1:3)."

As well taking the Shekhinah's power and position (Bereshit A, verse 268): "BECAUSE WHEN THE SHECHINAH IS IN EXILE, LILIT AND THE MIXED MULTITUDE RECEIVE HIS ABUNDANCE, WHICH WAS SUPPOSED TO BE GIVEN TO THE SHECHINAH. FOR THIS REASON, THE EXILE IS CONSIDERED THE NAKEDNESS OF SUPERNAL YISRAEL."

While this is meant to be a metaphor for the exile of the Jews/Israelites, it also is meant to be direct real event, as the Bible states places and events on Earth, have (greater) counterparts in Heaven.

It's also notable the Shekinah is mentioned defeating and even destroying Samael in the future (Shoftim, verse 8): "Its members are pieces of wood in which a fire will burn, which is the fire of the commandment, in each member, to burn Samael BY the supernal Shechinah, THAT IS BINAH, with a tree that is Tiferet, and with all the trees, MEANING SFIROT, that are attached TO TIFERET. When the fire of the higher descends over the wood of the sacrifice, "the stranger that comes near shall be put to death" (Bemidbar 1:51), because he will be burned IN THE FIRE."

Defeating even an aspect of God, arguably makes Lilith the most powerful demon in (actual religious) Abrahamic scripture and literature.

Then why Lilith is often depicted as inferior, even visibly to Samael/Satan/Lucifer etc., and rarely equal in power at best? Well, as I mentioned in Demon WLW in Kabbalah, translated works of Kabbalah were in past harder to acquire, people often reading works that quoted or summarized them, that omitted this information. Later Kabbalistic writings also didn't depict Lilith as this powerful.

In general, aside from also sexism (not always and more in the past), Satan also is seen as the ultimate force of evil, with it being weird for many that another being like Lilith could equal or even exceed him in power. The verse with Lilith taking Shekhinah's power and position were also interpreted (I personally think misinterpreted) as God taking Lilith as a wife/consort/lover in the place of the Shekhinah.

[eretzyisrael]

Parashat Shoftim

(Judges)

In this Torah portion, Moses reviews the justice system for the Israelites. Moses talks about the limits future kings should have on their possessions. Moses explains that the priests and Levites should not be paid and should survive on donations from the people. Finally, Moses explains the laws of warfare.

FULL SUMMARY

HAFTARAH SUMMARY

TORAH READING

Deuteronomy 16:18-21:9

[torahtot]

parshat shoftim miracle please