Parashat Eikev

As Moshe Rabbeinu nears his end, he repeatedly urges the nation to keep the Torah and Mitzvos on a holistic level. The narrative of Sefer Devarim – especially in the early parashiot – shifts from the compartmentalized approach to Mitzvos and focuses instead on the Bris, the general relationship we maintain with HaKadosh Baruch Hu through these Mitzvos. It would seem out of place to compartmentalize or categorize any Mitzvos within this context, and yet that is exactly what Rashi does to the opening words of our parasha.

ViHaya Eikev Tishmi’un – “And it will be” if the small Mitzvos that one generally tramples with his heel “you listen to…”

Rashi, Devarim 7:12

Clearly bothered by the pasuk’s diction, Rashi – quoting the Medrash Tanchuma – offers a rather unexpected definition for the word Eikev. Instead of it meaning “as a result of,” as it does in many other appearances in the Torah (like “Eikev Asher Shama Avraham BiKoli,” Beraishis 26:5), Rashi treats it as a literal reference to one’s heel, the Akeiv. The Ramban, bewildered by Rashi’s literal interpretation of the Medrash’s message, points to the conditional nature of the pasuk and questions how Rashi could understand the pasuk as a Tannai without translating the word “Eikev” as “Im,” if.

Rashi’s defense of the Ramban’s challenge is quite obvious, for within his Peirush, the word “Im” is explicitly included. It appears Rashi felt the “if” clause of the pasuk was implicit, whereas the term Eikev served as an object, and not a preposition. But why? Where does the need for such a convoluted read of the pasuk derive? Wouldn’t the simple understanding still fall as the Ramban sees it?

The Levush HaOrah deftly defends Rashi’s position, for this alternative translation of Eikev not only serves as a viable interpretation, but also resolves a seeming contradiction. Last week’s parasha ended with the command to keep the Mitzvos HaYom, today. The gemara in Eiruvin and Avoda Zara both teach that the seemingly superfluous HaYom La’Asosam comes to teach us when we earn our Schar, as opposed to the time we receive that Schar, namely Olam Haba. This pasuk therefore implies that we don’t receive Schar for Shmiras Mitzvos until we reach Olam Haba, yet the rewards described at the outset of our parasha are clearly of a worldly nature. We are guaranteed fertility, healthy flocks, and robust fields!

To resolve this contradiction, Rashi isolates certain Mitzvos for which the Schar is awarded in this world. Because these smaller Mitzvos – the ones commonly trampled by our heels – have less Schar attached to them, we wouldn’t mind “wasting” their returns on worldly pleasures, but the pricier rewards of the more involved Mitzvos are stored away for the World to Come. Therefore, Eikev Tishmi’un Es HaMishpatim HaEileh must refer to a specific category of Mitzvah – not all the Mitzvos – and the term Eikev must be used in order to define this category.

The Levush HaOrah’s answer is a start, but it doesn’t fully justify the term Eikev. Eikev does not connote smallness, but rather insignificance; it paints a very clear image of neglect. However, we do not know the Schar of each and every Mitzvah, nor are we capable of projecting their respective values. There is no Mitzvah more costly, more difficult to perform, than Kibud Av, and no Mitzvah easier than Shilu’ach HaKan, and yet both offer long life as their reward. The Torah thus teaches us that we can never measure a Mitzvah’s Schar by how significant that Mitzvah appears in our eyes. How then can we project the significance of a Mitzvah?

Granted, the term Eikev can refer to the Mitzvah’s significance in Hashem’s eyes, but then the term Eikev would have to refer directly to the category of Mitzvah – not to the human heel – and the pasuk wouldn’t read smoothly. The pasuk explicitly states the words “Es HaMishpatim HaEileh;” to avoid a superfluity, the pasuk can only be understood as “if your heel will watch over these Mitzvos,” and not “if you watch over these heel-type Mitzvos.”

I believe that Rashi’s comments are motivated by an alternative difficulty in our parasha, a problem that emerges a few pasukim later. The pasuk, detailing our worldly rewards for keeping those “heel-type Mitzvos,” states, “…and you will devour the neighboring nations. Do not have pity on them and do not worship idols, for this will be a trap for you.” To say that idol worship serves as a “trap” implies that things are going well and later about-face on us because of our improper actions. But if we are Oveid Avodah Zara, then we are already not fulfilling Hashem’s requirements. That’s not called a trap, that’s simply a transgression!

It seems that the simple reading of this pasuk must instead be “You shall devour all neighboring nations. Do not have pity on them, lest you worship their idols, and the pity you have taken on them will prove to have been a trap for you.” This makes plenty more sense, since having pity on the Goyim does not yet violate the Mitzvos, but will soon lead to a violation, namely Avoda Zara; that indeed is a Mokeish.

Notably, the pasuk deviates from the normal language of chasing away. The pasuk says to devour the nations. “Devouring a nation” implies that they still live amongst us, as opposed to chasing them out. The obvious question is that we are not supposed to share the land with nations when we are perfect, so why doesn’t the pasuk tell us to chase them out?

The first Rashi on the parasha may in fact be coming to answer this very question. A quick glance at our pasukim would suggest that Hashem asks us to keep all the mitzvos, but Rashi notes that these are instead the rewards are for keeping only some of the Mitzvos, the Mitzvos Kalos. The idea behind the Mitzvos Kalos is to recognize how serious every commandment Hashem gave us is; even if we can’t bring ourselves to fulfill that which is difficult (i.e. those requiring lots of money), as long as we maintain the proper serious perspective on our relationship with Hashem, we will be treated well.

But the Goyim will, in such times, live in our land and we won’t chase them out. In the time of the Shofetim, the people were alternately good and bad, but even in the good times when the Jews prospered, the Goyim lived in the land. The only thing that changed between good and bad times was balance of power, who the ruler was and who collected the taxes. The pasuk here tells us in said “good times,” ViAchalta es Kol Ha’Amaim, we will rule and collect from them, and the biggest mistake we can make in such a time is to take the danger of their presence lightly, because the moment we begin to act casually, we stop performing every Mitzvah Kala with the proper fervor and passion. Then the problems start. Next thing we know, we’ll be worshiping idols.

ViHaya Eikev Tishmi’um Es HaMishpatim HaEileh, and if your heel will watch over these Mitzvos [Kalos], then we shall rule the Goyim. When times are only “good” and not perfect, we must remain wary of even our slightest steps. Such care will warrant our mandate over the Goyim, and such control will enable us to further our fulfillment of Hashem’s Mitzvos, eventually earning us the spiritual rewards alluded to in the earlier parasha, the rewards stored away in the World to Come.