Parsha Devarim: It's Not a Matter of Whether to Rebuke, but How

Moses did much for the Jewish people. Not only did he help free the Israelites from slavery, but he led them through the desert for forty years. By the beginning of Deuteronomy (in this week's Torah portion, Devarim), we have reached the point in the text where Moses is not long for this world. How does Moses decide to spend the end of his life? Dispensing some not-so-old-fashioned Jewish guilt:

דבר משה אל בני ישראל ככל אשר צוה הי אתו אלהם.

-Moses spoke to the children of Israel, according to all that G-d commanded to them. -Deuteronomy 1:3

According to Rashi, Moses' words at the beginning of Deuteronomy are words of rebuke. Moses starts his long speech after having defeated Sichon and Og in battle (Deuteronomy 1:4). Why after this battle? Because had it been before, he would have been accused of ulterior motives. Since it was done after, his rebuke is a sign of rededication (Sifrei, cited by Rashi). The first important lesson is that timing is everything. Had Moses rebuked before defeating Sichon and Og, his words would have not been taken seriously. Rashi's commentary implies that finding the opportune moment has the potential to affect the outcome of whether the rebuke is heeded (ibid.). 

Going back to Deuteronomy 1:1, we see a list of places. According to the Sifre, the landmarks listed are not places where Moses spoke his final words of rebuke. Rather, they are a list of sins in the form of allusion. "In the desert" refers to when the Israelites complained in Exodus 17:3. "In the Aravah (Plain)" refers to worshipping Ba'al (Numbers 25). "Opposite Suf" is in reference to when the Israelites made trouble by the Sea of Reeds (Exodus 14:11), and "Paran" is regarding the sin of the spies (Numbers 13). There are others, but you get the idea: Moses did not call out the sins by name. He used euphemisms to soften the blow. Why? Because Moses knew his audience, and the content of the rebuke mattered. If he would have said, "What's wrong with you people for committing all these sins? G-d is going to punish you for your stupidity and insolence," odds are that the Israelites would have ignored Moses. If this were Moses' approach, it would have been better to have not said anything because as the Talmud states (Yevamot 65b), "it is a mitzvah to refrain from saying something which will not be listened." Just as important, the content matters because it is important to preserve the honor of those being rebuked (R. Chaim Shmuelevitz).

In Deuteronomy 1:5, Moses began his words of rebuke in the land of Moab. According to Rashi's commentary (1:5), this is when Moses translated his words of rebuke in 70 languages. This is based on the assumption from the Haggadah that the world is made of 70 languages. What this implies is that Moses translated the Torah so everyone had linguistic access. Rashi's commentary teaches us that Moses went through this translation work to make sure that the rebuke is unambiguously understandable. 

Finally, if you are going to rebuke, do it out of love. It is no accident that the command to rebuke (Leviticus 19:17) is juxtaposed with the commandment to love one's neighbor as oneself in lieu of taking vengeance or holding a grudge (Leviticus 19:18). Since juxtaposition is a standard hermeneutical tool in Judaism, one could infer that either rebuke leads to love and/or that rebuke should be done with love. As the Midrash (Genesis Rabbah 54:3) states, "love unaccompanied by criticism is not love." 

This message about "criticism without love" is very important during the Nine Days. It is commonly taught that the Second Temple fell because of baseless hatred. R. Jonatan Eibeschitz expounded upon the Talmud by saying that the baseless hatred was manifested by a lack of people rebuking. For Eibeschitz, it was not an active hatred that caused the destruction of the Second Temple, but rather the apathy. 

We learn a few things here. Rebuke is not meant to be a sign of hate or disgust, but one of love. The second is that when we rebuke, what we say, how we say it, when and where we say it are all important. If Moses had not been more careful, it could have meant destabilizing the Jewish people to the point of non-existence, which could have had major ramifications for the development of humankind. Fortunately, he was aware of how to rebuke, which also explains why the end of Moses' speech a few Torah portions later ends on a high note, further illustrating the importance of content. Jewish tradition does not teach us to unconditionally accept people for who they are. To err is the human condition, and there are times where we need redirection. What's the moral of the story? When we do point out others' flaws, we do so lovingly and with considerable sensitivity. We might not have the political standing that Moses had, but our words nevertheless have power. By using our words to build up rather than tear down, we can reverse the damage caused centuries ago and bring about an era of peace in our times.