Reb Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev interprets the opening of Devarim through a Chassidic lens, explaining that Moshe's rebuke was given out of pure love — the words of a tzaddik spoken from the heart enter the hearts of his listeners, making Devarim the Torah of love and return.
דבר משה אל בני ישראל ככל אשר צוה ה' אותו אליהם (דברים א, א). ויבואר על פי מה שכתב בזוהר הקדוש על המשנה כל דבר שהיה בכלל ויצא מן הכלל כו', הכלל התורה הקדושה יש בה פנימיות סודות נעלמות ומה שנאמרה התורה בסיפורי מעשיות מעשה אברהם, מעשה יצחק, מעשה יעקב עם לבן, מעשה אמהות, מעשה בלעם ואתון שלו, באמת יש בהם סודות נעלמות פנימיות, רק שמגוף התורה שמבואר במעשה גם כן ילמדו ממנה מדות טובות, דהיינו מעשה אברהם ללמוד לעשות חסד מאברהם, מעשה יעקב להראות צדקתו של יעקב, מעשה האמהות להראות וללמוד צדקת האמהות צדקת רחל אשר עדיין זה הזכות קיים לנו שהכניסה צרתה כו', כמבואר ברבותינו ז"ל שעל זה נאמר (ירמיה לא, יד) קול ברמה כו', רחל כו'. ונמצא נכתבו המעשים כדי ללמוד גם מהמעשה המדה התלויה בה. וכן כתיב מעשה בלעם ואתון שלו, כדי להראות מעשה מגונה של אותו הרשע להרחיק מן מעשיו כמאמר חכמינו ז"ל (אבות ה, כב) מה בין תלמידיו של אברהם אבינו לתלמידיו כו', דהיינו ליקרב עצמו למדת אברהם ולרחק עצמו ממדת בלעם הרשע. נמצא זה שהתורה נאמר בסיפורי מעשיות כדי שגם מן המעשה נלמד המדה אבל באמת ישנו בה סודות נעלמות עד אין סוף. וכן אפילו שאר התורה שנאמרה בה המצוה בפירוש יש בה סודות נעלמות. וזהו כל דבר שהיה בכלל, דהיינו התורה שהוא הכלל מן העולמות. ויצא מן הכלל, להכתב בסיפור מעשה. ללמד, דהיינו ללמוד גם מן המעשה עצמה המדה המבואר בה. וזה לא ללמד על עצמו יצא כו', כלומר לא בהתורה אשר נכתבה בסיפור כו' יש בה סודות כו', אלא גם בהתורה אשר מבואר המצוה בה באר היטב יש בה סודותכו', וזהו אלא ללמד על הכלל כולו יצא. וזה מבואר קצת בזוהר הקדוש. ובאמת במשנה תורה לא נכתבה בסיפור מעשה, רק מבואר בה במצות היטב מדות השם ודרכי השם ותוכחה לישראל להסיר מדרך הרע ולדבק בדרך הטוב בדרך ה' ולמה זה, כי דור שהיו במצרים והיו משוקעים בטומאת מצרים ועל ידי זה הכעיסו לפניו יתברך כנאמר ברבותינו ז"ל, ועיין ברש"י בערבה מול סוף בין פארן כו', ודי זהב כו' עיין שם. ונמצא על ידי זה הוצרך להלביש התורה בסיפורי מעשיות כנזכר לעיל. אבל במשנה תורה שהיו דור שלם דור שנכנסו לארץ הקדושה שלא היו משוקעים בטומאת מצרים לכך נאמר להם התורה בלי שום לבוש כנזכר לעיל. וזהו אלה הדברים, כל מקום שנאמר אלה פוסל את הראשונים, כלומר מה שנאמר לראשונים תורה בלבוש כנ"ל, הוא מחמת במדבר בערבה כו', כפירוש רש"י אחרי הכותו כו', הואיל משה באר את התורה כו', ככל אשר צוה ה' אותו אליהם כנ"ל: בעבר הירדן בארץ מואב הואיל משה באר את התורה (דברים א, ה). עיין ברש"י באר בשבעים לשון. ולמה ביאר כאן התורה בשבעים לשון, ובו יבואר הפסוק (תהלים פז, ו) ה' יספור בכתוב עמים זה יולד שם סלה, הכלל, כי לפעמים כתיב בתורה תיבת התרגום כגון יגר סהדותא (בראשית לא, מז) וכן הלשון של שאר אומות כגון טוטפת ט"ט בכתפי שתים פת באפריקי שתים (זבחים לז:) וכן הן בלשון יוני אחת, וכן שאר לשונות שכתוב בתורה מלשונות הגוים. וחד טעם הוא, כי הלשון של כל האומות הוא החיות מן האומה ולשון הקודש הוא של ישראל לבד. ובאמת ישראל שמעו התורה בסיני רק בלשון הקודש והקדוש ברוך הוא המביט מראשית אחרית שראה שישראל צריכין להיות בגלות לזה כתב בתורה לשון של שאר אומות שעל ידי זה יהיה להם אחיזה בחיות שלהם שהוא הלשון בהתורה הקדושה בכדי שישראל יוכל להיות להם תקומה בגלות. וזהו הרמז בפסוק ה' יספור בכתוב עמים, כלומר שהקדוש ברוך הוא כתב בתורה איזה כתב מן העמים מן שאר האומות. זה יולד שם סלה, בכדי שהצדיק יוכל לקיים שם, כי הצדיק נקרא זה כמאמר חכמינו ז"ל (ברכותו:) כל העולם לא נברא אלא לצוות לזה. וזהו הרמז זה יולד שם סלה, בכדי שהצדיק יהיה לו קיום בגלות. וזהו בארץ מואב, כי בארץ ישראל לא היה רק לשון הקודש אבל בארץ מואב שהוא ארץ הגוים חוץ לארץ ישראל צריך לבאר התורה בכל הלשונות בכדי לקיים ישראל בגלות:
Deuteronomy 1,3. “Moses spoke to the Children of Israel in accordance with all that Hashem had commanded him concerning them.” This verse will be better understood when we look at the Zohar III 149.where the Baraitha of Rabbi Yishmael at the beginning of Torat Kohanim, states כל דבר שהיה בכלל ויצא מן הכלל וגו', “anything that was included in a general statement, but was then singled out to teach something, was not singled out to teach only about itself., but to apply its teaching to the entire generality;” When applied to the Holy Torah, we have to distinguish between matters treated by the Torah as “more profound than immediately visible after a superficial reading of the text, i.e. פנימיוות וסוד, “something mystical, buried deep inside,” and between matters that every reader can understand at once, such as references to places, dates, such as when the Torah relates details of the lives of Avraham, Yitzchok and Yaakov. When the Torah reports about their respective dealings with Lavan, or stories told about the matriarchs, Bileam and his ass, these are not to be understood only at face value, but they contain deeply hidden aspects, such as that we are to learn from the excerpts of Avraham’s life how do practice loving kindness with our fellow man. From the details revealed about Yaakov’s life, we are to learn about the righteousness of Yaakov; similarly there are many human attributes practiced by our matriarchs which we are to learn to emulate by immersing ourselves more deeply in the stories of the Torah than one does by reading a novel. Proper reading of these “stories” helps us understand that we are till this day benefiting by the merits accumulated by our forefathers, some of which, we, as their descendants, are being rewarded for. Rachel’s foregoing marriage to her betrothed, Yaakov, in order not to publicly shame her sister Leah, is one of the outstanding examples of selflessness from which we are to learn, according to our sages, when they comment on Jeremiah 31,14 קול ברמה נשמע נהי בכי תמרורים רחל מבכה על בניה מאנה להנחם על בניה כי איננו, “a voice is heard in Ramah- wailing, bitter weeping- Rachel weeping for her children she refuses to be comforted for her children who are gone.” In its introduction to megillat eychah, Lamentations, the author, quoting above verse from Jeremiah interprets it as G’d’s promise to bring redemption to Rachel’s descendants on account of her merits. If the Torah took the trouble to relate fragments from the lives of the patriarchs and matriarchs to teach us to emulate their virtues, it wrote of Bileam’s conduct in order to teach us not to emulate the abuse Bileam had made of his freedom of choice. Anyone reading of how boastful Bileam had made a fool of himself and left Balak after having become totally discredited, will surely learn a lesson from this. Avot 5,9 points to the difference between the disciples of Avraham and the disciples of Bileam. Avraham’s virtues are worth emulating, whereas Bileam’s great intellectual gifts, due to their being abused by their owner, must be shunned. In other words, although we are able to derive much value from just reading the text superficially, what is hidden behind such superficial reading of the text is even more illuminating. Similarly, with the parts of the Torah that on the surface purport to teach G’d’s commandments; although we must, of course use the text in order to know which commandments to perform and when and where, the text contains many hidden nuances that are discovered only when we apply ourselves with the intention to discover them. This is what the author of the Baraitha of Rabbi Yishmael that we quoted earlier meant when it stated that “any matter that was part of a general statement, etc,” the general statement is the Torah as a whole, whereas “the statements singled out,” are the specific details about critical moments in our patriarchs’ and matriarchs’ lives, as well as critical details in the lives of other personalities the Torah has singled out from the millions it could have chosen. The words in the Baraitha “but was then singled out from a general statement to teach something only about itself,” refer to specific attributes possessed by the persons mentioned, which are meant either to be emulated or to be shunned. The words: “was not singled out to teach only about itself,” teaches that the attribute emphasized in that example is not to be treated as an exception but is to be applied generally. That Baraitha also hints by its wording that we must not only look for something beyond the bare text in the stories the Torah tells about outstanding personalities, but search for deeper meaning in the text teaching the commandments. There is a lesson to be learned not only regarding how to perform the commandments, but also regarding moral/ethical lessons to be derived from each commandment. This latter idea is somewhat elaborated on in the Zohar. It is interesting to note that the fifth Book of the Torah is known also as משנה תורה, [loosely translated as “review of the Torah,” although it is much more than that, containing commandments that did not appear previously at all. Ed.] In this Book, the emphasis is not so much on the attributes of outstanding human beings, but on the attributes of the Creator, and His relationship to His chosen people under various circumstances. Knowing the manner in which G’d relates to His people is the key to all the warnings issued by Moses to the people concerning their deviating from the right path and the consequences which this would bring in its wake sooner or later, whenever G’d’s patience in waiting for the people to repent would come to an end. Since the Book of Deuteronomy was addressed (at the time) to the generation of Israelites who had not been adults at the time of the Exodus, or who had not even been born yet at that time, they did not need to have everything spelled out for them by means of the stories in the Torah, i.e. parables, as according to Moses’ own testimony in Deut. 29,3 they had become a generation that could use their eyes and ears (not only physically). This was a generation that was not tainted by the ritual pollution it had taken out with them from Egypt. This is how we must understand Bereshit Rabbah 12,3 that wherever the Torah commences a paragraph with the words: אלה וגו', “these,” etc., it signifies that conditions that had existed prior to this point had become completely irrelevant. In the line in Genesis 2,4 where we find the word אלה for the first time, this signals that anything that the Torah had written about the state of the universe before the creation of light, i.e. the state of תהו ובהו, utter chaos, had by now become totally irrelevant. When we apply this Midrash to the Book of Deuteronomy, it means that rules that had been relevant to the people who had left Egypt as adults no longer had any relevance. The present generation was on a spiritually so much higher level that Moses could speak to them without having to use parables. This is also what Rashi had in mind when in his commentary on the words: אחרי הכותו את סיחן וגו', “after He had smitten Sichon, etc.” (1,4) he says that Moses waited with his words of rebuke for the people until G’d had begun the fulfillment of His promise to give the land of the Canaanites to Israel by giving them vast territory on the east bank of the Jordan. That important victory had concluded the 40 years of wandering in the desert without meaningful progress. At that point Moses became able to speak to the people in the manner G’d had commanded him to do (end of verse 3). Deuteronomy 1,5. “on the far side (east bank) of the Jordan in the land of Moab, Moses undertook to explain this Torah;” A look at Rashi, based on Tanchuma, shows us that Moses translated the Torah into 70 languages. Why did Moses find it necessary to choose this time and location to translate the Torah into all the known languages at the time? If this was indeed so, this helps us explain a verse in psalms 87,6 ה' יספור בכתוב עמים זה ילד שם סלה, “The Lord will inscribe in His register of all the peoples that have been born, selah.” It is an accepted rule that on occasion the Torah writes some words in Aramaic, such as in Genesis 31,47 “יגר סהדותא,” “the stone of witness,” whereas Yaakov named the very same heap of stones גלעד in its Hebrew equivalent. Aramaic is not the only foreign (non Hebrew) language that is found in the Torah. An example that comes to mind is the word טוטפות used by the Torah to describe the area on the forehead where the phylacteries are to be placed. (Deuteronomy 6,8). The word may describe some jewelry worn on the head. There are still other occasions when the Torah uses words from the Greek or other languages. The Talmud Zevachim 37 deals with the subject. The point is that the gentiles come across words in the Torah which are familiar to them from their own language. More than that; the language of a nation is an essential part of its “life,” i.e. its culture, its reason for being a separate nation. Seeing that G’d foresaw that at some time in the future the Jewish people would spend their lives in exile amongst people speaking an “alien” tongue, the fact that the odd word of such languages were familiar to them from the Torah would serve as an encouragement to them, reminding them that they were not in a totally alien world. It is this thought that the psalmist alluded to in psalms 87,6 when he referred to the Jewish people though in exile will never be counted as an integral part of the host nation, but as “Zionists,” see reference in the verse preceding psalms 87,6. (Compare Alshich) According to our author, the smattering of foreign words in the Torah is designed to give Jews born in foreign lands due to their parents being in exile, confidence that they can live there as Jews, provided they live as a צדיקים, righteous persons, as the tzaddik is also referred to as זה, (Compare B’rachot 6) and this is what the psalmist alludes to when writing the word זה after the word עמים in the verse quoted earlier from psalms 87,6. The Talmud quotes as its example the word זה in the last verse of Kohelet, where the line כי זה כל האדם, for this is the “whole” human being, implies that only a person who is a ירא שמים, ”lives in awe of His Creator,” is truly a human being. The reason that the Torah refers to Moses explaining the Torah in the land of Moab is that only in חוץ לארץ, outside the Land of Israel proper, is there any need for Torah also to be understood by resorting to a tongue other than the holy Tongue.