Shoftim, Shof'tim, or Shofetim (שופטים — Hebrew for “judges,” the first word in the parshah) is the 48th weekly Torah portion (parshah) in the annual Jewish cycle of Torah reading and the fifth in the book of Deuteronomy. It constitutes Deuteronomy 16:18–21:9. Jews in the Diaspora generally read it in August or September.

Scale of justice

“Justice, justice shall you pursue.” (Deuteronomy 16:20.)


Rules for magistrates

Moses directed the Israelites to appoint magistrates and officials for their tribes to govern the people with justice, impartially, without bribes. (Deuteronomy 16:18–19.) “Justice, justice shall you pursue,” he said. (Deuteronomy 16:20.)

Abhorrent practices

Moses warned the Israelites against setting up a sacred post beside God’s altar or erecting a stone pillar. (Deuteronomy 16:21–22.)

Moses warned the Israelites against sacrificing an ox or sheep with any serious defect. (Deuteronomy 17:1.)

If the Israelites found a person who worshiped other gods, the sun, the moon, or any celestial body, then they were to make a thorough inquiry, and if they established the fact on the testimony of two or more witnesses, then they were to stone the person to death, with the witnesses throwing the first stones. (Deuteronomy 17:2–7.) If a case proved too baffling for them to decide, then they were promptly to go to the place that God would choose for God’s shrine, appear before the priests or the magistrate in charge and present their problem, and carry out any verdict that was announced there without deviating either to the right or to the left. (Deuteronomy 17:8–11.) They were to execute any man who presumptuously disregarded the priest or the magistrate, so that all the people would hear, be afraid, and not act presumptuously again. (Deuteronomy 17:12–13.)

King David Copenhagen

King David (statue by F.A. Jerichau)

Rules for kings

If, after the Israelites had settled the land, they decided to set a king over them, they were to be free to do so, taking an Israelite chosen by God. (Deuteronomy 17:14–15.) The king was not to keep many horses, marry many wives, or amass silver and gold to excess. (Deuteronomy 17:16–17.) The king was to have the priests write for him a copy of this Teaching to remain with him and read all his life, so that he might learn to revere God and observe these laws faithfully. (Deuteronomy 17:18–19.) He would thus not act haughtily toward his people nor deviate from the law, and as a consequence, he and his descendants would enjoy a long reign. (Deuteronomy 17:20.)

Rules for Levites

The Levites were to have no territorial portion, but were to live only off of offerings, for God was to be their portion. (Deuteronomy 18:1–2.) In exchange for their service to God, the priests were to receive the shoulder, cheeks, and stomach of sacrifices, the first fruits of the Israelites’ grain, wine, and oil, and the first shearing of sheep. (Deuteronomy 18:3–5.) Levites were to be free to come from their settlements to the place that God had chosen as a shrine to serve in the name of God with their fellow Levites, and there they were to receive equal shares of the dues. (Deuteronomy 18:6–8.)

Rules for prophets

The Israelites were not to imitate the abhorrent practices of the nations that they were displacing, consign their children to fire, or act as an augur, soothsayer, diviner, sorcerer, one who casts spells, one who consults ghosts or familiar spirits, or one who inquires of the dead, for it was because of those abhorrent acts that God was dispossessing the former residents of the land. (Deuteronomy 18:9–14.)

God would raise a prophet from among them like Moses, and the Israelites were to heed him. (Deuteronomy 18:15.) When at Horeb the Israelites asked God not to hear God’s voice directly, God created the role of the prophet to speak God’s words, promising to hold to account anybody who failed to heed the prophet’s words. (Deuteronomy 18:16–19.) But any prophet who presumed to speak an oracle in God’s name that God had not commanded the prophet to utter, or who spoke in the name of other gods, was to die. (Deuteronomy 18:20.) This was how the people were to determine whether the oracle was spoken by God: If the prophet spoke in the name of God and the oracle did not come true, then that oracle was not spoken by God, the prophet had uttered it presumptuously, and the people were not to fear him. (Deuteronomy 18:21–22.)

Cities of refuge

When the Israelites had settled in the land, they were to divide the land into three parts and set aside three cities of refuge, so that any manslayer could have a place to which to flee. (Deuteronomy 19:1–3.) And if the Israelites faithfully observed all the law and God enlarged the territory, then they were to add three more towns to those three. (Deuteronomy 19:8–9.)

Only a manslayer who had killed another unwittingly, without being the other’s enemy, might flee there and live. (Deuteronomy 19:4.) For instance, if a man went with his neighbor into a grove to cut wood, and as he swung an ax to cut down a tree, the ax-head flew off the handle and struck and killed the neighbor, then the man could flee to one of the cities of refuge and live. (Deuteronomy 19:5.) If, however, one who was the enemy of another lay in wait, struck the other a fatal blow, and then fled to a city of refuge, the elders of the slayer’s town were to have the slayer turned over to the blood-avenger to be put to death. (Deuteronomy 19:11–13.)


The Israelites were not to move their countrymen’s landmarks, set up by previous generations, in the property that they were allotted in the land. (Deuteronomy 19:14.)

Rules for witnesses

An Israelite could be found guilty of an offense only on the testimony of two or more witnesses. (Deuteronomy 19:15.) If one person gave false testimony against another, then the two parties were to appear before God and the priests or magistrates, the magistrates were to make a thorough investigation, and if the magistrates found the person to have testified falsely, then they were to do to the witness as the witness schemed to do to the other. (Deuteronomy 19:16–19.)

Rules for war

Before the Israelites joined battle, the priest was to tell the troops not to fear, for God would accompany them to do battle against their enemy. (Deuteronomy 20:2–4.) Then the officials were to ask the troop whether anyone had built a new house but not dedicated it, planted a vineyard but never harvested it, paid the bride-price for a wife but not yet married her, or become afraid and disheartened, and all these they were to send back to their homes. (Deuteronomy 20:5–8.)

When the Israelites approached a town to attack it, they were to offer it terms of peace, and if the town surrendered, then all the people of the town were to serve the Israelites as forced labor. (Deuteronomy 20:10–11.) But if the town did not surrender, then the Israelites were to lay siege to the town, and when God granted victory, kill all its men and take as booty the women, children, livestock, and everything else in the town. (Deuteronomy 20:12–14.) Those were the rules for towns that lay very far from Israel, but for the towns of the nations in the land — the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites — the Israelites were to kill everyone, lest they lead the Israelites into doing all the abhorrent things that those nations had done for their gods. (Deuteronomy 20:15–18.) When the Israelites besieged a city for a long time, they could eat the fruit of the city’s trees, but they were not to cut down any trees that could yield food. (Deuteronomy 20:19–20.)

The found corpse

If, in the land, someone slain was found lying in the open, and the slayer could not be determined, then the elders and magistrates were to measure the distances from the corpse to the nearby towns. (Deuteronomy 21:1–2.) The elders of the town nearest to the corpse were to take a heifer that had never been worked down to an ever-flowing wadi and break its neck. (Deuteronomy 21:3–4.) The priests were to come forward, all the elders were to wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken, and the elders were to declare that their hands did not shed the blood nor their eyes see it done. (Deuteronomy 21:5–7.) The elders were to ask God to absolve the Israelites, and not let guilt for the blood of the innocent remain among them, and they would be absolved of bloodguilt. (Deuteronomy 21:8.)

In classical rabbinic interpretation

Deuteronomy chapter 16

Resh Lakish deduced from the proximity of the discussions of appointment of judges in Deuteronomy 16:18 and the Canaanite idolatrous practice of the Asherah in Deuteronomy 16:21 that appointing an incompetent judge is as though planting an idolatrous tree. And Rav Ashi said that such an appointment made in a place where there were scholars is as though planting the idolatrous tree beside the Altar, for Deuteronomy 16:21 concludes “beside the altar of the Lord your God.” (Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 7b, Avodah Zarah 52a.)

Resh Lakish contrasted Leviticus 19:15, “In justice shall you judge your neighbor,” with Deuteronomy 16:20, “Justice, justice shall you pursue,” and concluded that Leviticus 19:15 referred to an apparently genuine claim, while Deuteronomy 16:20 referred to the redoubled scrutiny appropriate to a suit that one suspected to be dishonest. Rav Ashi found no contradiction, however, between the two verses, for a Baraita taught that in the two mentions of “justice” in Deuteronomy 16:20, one mention referred to a decision based on strict law, while the other referred to compromise. For example, where two boats meet on a narrow river headed in opposite directions, if both attempted to pass at the same time, both would sink, but if one made way for the other, both could pass without mishap. Similarly, if two camels met on the ascent to Beth-horon, if they both ascended at the same time, both could fall into the valley, but if they ascended one after another, both could ascend safely. These were the principles by which the travelers were to resolve their impasse: If one was loaded and the other unloaded, then the unloaded was to give way to the loaded. If one was nearer to its destination than the other, then the nearer was to give way to the farther. If they were equally near to their destinations, then they were to compromise and the one that went first was to compensate the one who gave way. (Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 32b.)

The Rabbis taught in a Baraita that the words “Justice, justice shall you pursue” meant that one should pursue the most respected jurist to the place where the jurist held court. The Rabbis also taught a Baraita that the words “Justice, justice shall you pursue” meant that one should follow sages to their academies. (Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 32b.)

The Mishnah taught that the words of Jeremiah 17:7, “Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord and whose hope is the Lord,” apply to a judge who judges truly and with integrity. The Mishnah taught that the words of Deuteronomy 16:20, “Righteousness, righteousness shall you pursue,” apply to tell that an able-bodied person who feigned to be disabled would become disabled. And similarly, the words of Exodus 23:8, “And a gift shall you not accept; for a gift blinds them that have sight,” apply to tell that a judge who accepted a bribe or who perverted justice would become poor of vision. (Mishnah Peah 8:9.)

Rabbi Samuel ben Nahmani taught in the name of Rabbi Jonathan that when a judge unjustly takes the possessions of one and gives them to another, God takes that judge’s life, as Proverbs 22:22–23 says: “Rob not the poor because he is poor; neither oppress the afflicted in the gate, for the Lord will plead their cause, and will despoil of life those that despoil them.” Rabbi Samuel ben Nahmani also taught in the name of Rabbi Jonathan that judges should always think of themselves as if they had a sword hanging over them and Gehenna gaping under them, as Song of Songs 3:7–8 says: “Behold, it is the litter of Solomon; 60 mighty men are about it, of the mighty men of Israel. They all handle the sword, and are expert in war; every man has his sword upon his thigh, because of dread in the night.” And Rabbi Josiah (or others say Rav Nahman bar Isaac) interpreted the words, “O house of David, thus says the Lord: 'Execute justice in the morning and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor,'” in Jeremiah 21:12 to mean that judges should render judgment only if the judgment that they are about to give is as clear to them as the morning light. (Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 7a–b.)

Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob deduced from the prohibition against any kind of tree beside the altar in Deuteronomy 16:21 that wooden columns were not allowed in the Temple courtyard. The Gemara explained that it was not permitted to build with wood near the altar. Rav Hisda taught that stone columns were permitted. (Babylonian Talmud Tamid 28b.)

Deuteronomy chapter 17

The Mishnah questioned why Deuteronomy 17:6 discussed three witnesses, when two witnesses were sufficient to establish guilt. The Mishnah deduced that the language of Deuteronomy 17:6 meant to analogize between a set of two witnesses and a set of three witnesses. Just as three witnesses could discredit two witnesses, two witnesses could discredit three witnesses. The Mishnah deduced from the multiple use of the word “witnesses” in Deuteronomy 17:6 that two witnesses could discredit even a hundred witnesses. Rabbi Simeon deduced from the multiple use of the word “witnesses” in Deuteronomy 17:6 that just as two witnesses were not executed as perjurers until both had been incriminated, so three were not executed until all three had been incriminated. Rabbi Akiba deduced that the addition of the third witness in Deuteronomy 17:6 was to teach that the perjury of a third, superfluous witness was just as serious as that of the others. Rabbi Akiba concluded that if Scripture so penalized an accomplice just as one who committed a wrong, how much more would God reward an accomplice to a good deed. And the Mishnah further deduced from the multiple use of the word “witnesses” in Deuteronomy 17:6 that just as the disqualification of one of two witnesses would invalidate the evidence of the set of two witnesses, so would the disqualification of one witness invalidate the evidence of even a hundred. Rabbi Jose said that these limitations applied only to witnesses in capital charges, and that in monetary suits, the balance of the witnesses could establish the evidence. Rabbi said that the same rule applied to monetary suits or capital charges where the disqualified witnesses joined to take part in the warning of the defendant, but the rule did not disqualify the remaining witnesses where the disqualified witnesses did not take part in the warning. And the Gemara further qualified the Mishnah’s ruling. (Mishnah Makkot 1:7–8; Babylonian Talmud Makkot 5b–6b.)

Rav Joseph reported that a Baraita interpreted the reference to “the priests” in Deuteronomy 17:9 to teach that when the priests served in the Temple, a judge could hand down capital punishment, but when the priesthood is not functioning, the judge may not issue such judgments. (Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 52b.)

Deuteronomy 17:9 instructs, “you shall come . . . to the judge who shall be in those days,” but how could a person go to a judge who was not in that person’s days? The Rabbis taught in a Baraita that Deuteronomy 17:9 employs the words “who shall be in those days” to show that one must be content to go to the judge who is in one’s days, and accept that judge’s authority. And the Rabbis taught that Ecclesiastes 7:10 conveys a similar message when it says, “Say not, ‘How was it that the former days were better than these?’” (Babylonian Talmud Rosh Hashanah 25b.)

The Mishnah explained the process by which one was found to be a rebellious elder within the meaning of Deuteronomy 17:12. Three courts of law sat in Jerusalem: one at the entrance to the Temple Mount, a second at the door of the Temple Court, and the third, the Great Sanhedrin, in the Hall of Hewn Stones in the Temple Court. The dissenting elder and the other members of the local court with whom the elder disputed went to the court at the entrance to the Temple Mount, and the elder stated what the elder and the elder’s colleagues expounded. If the first court had heard a ruling on the matter, then the court stated it. If not, the litigants and the judges went to the second court, at the entrance of the Temple Court, and the elder once again declared what the elder and the elder’s colleagues expounded. If this second court had heard a ruling on the matter, then this court stated it. If not, then they all proceeded to the Great Sanhedrin at the Hall of Hewn Stones, which issued instruction to all Israel, for Deuteronomy 17:10 said that “they shall declare to you from that place that the Lord shall choose,” meaning the Temple. If the elder then returned to the elder’s town and issued a decision contrary to what the Great Sanhedrin had instructed, then the elder was guilty of acting “presumptuously” within the meaning of Deuteronomy 17:12. But if one of the elder’s disciples issued a decision opposed to the Great Sanhedrin, the disciple was exempt from judgment, for the very stringency that kept the disciple from having yet been ordained served as a source of leniency to prevent the disciple from being found to be a rebellious elder. (Mishnah Sanhedrin 11:2; Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 86b.)

'The Visit of the Queen of Sheba to King Solomon', oil on canvas painting by Edward Poynter, 1890, Art Gallery of New South Wales

The Visit of the Queen of Sheba to King Solomon (painting by Edward Poynter)

Mishnah Sanhedrin 2:4–5 and Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 20b–22b interpreted the laws governing the king in Deuteronomy 17:14–20.

David King Over All Israel

David, King Over All Israel (illustration from a Bible card published 1896 by the Providence Lithograph Company)

The Mishnah taught that the king could lead the army to a voluntary war on the decision of a court of 71. He could force a way through private property, and none could stop him. There was no limit to the size of the king's road. And he had first choice of the plunder taken by the people in war. (Mishnah Sanhedrin 2:4; Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 20b.)

The Rabbis disagreed about the powers of the king. The Gemara reported that Rab Judah said in Samuel’s name that a king was permitted to take all the actions that 1 Samuel 8:4–18 enumerated, but Rab said that 1 Samuel 8 was intended only to frighten the people, citing the emphatic double verb in the words “You shall surely set a king over you” in Deuteronomy 17:15 to indicate that the people would fear the king. And the Gemara also reported the same dispute among other Tannaim; in this account, Rabbi Jose said that a king was permitted to take all the actions that 1 Samuel 8:4–18 enumerated, but Rabbi Judah said that 1 Samuel 8 was intended only to frighten the people, citing the emphatic double verb in the words “You shall surely set a king over you” in Deuteronomy 17:15 to indicate that the people would fear the king. Rabbi Judah (or others say Rabbi Jose) said that three commandments were given to the Israelites when they entered the land: (1) the commandment of Deuteronomy 17:14–15 to appoint a king, (2) the commandment of Deuteronomy 25:19 to blot out Amalek, and (3) the commandment of Deuteronomy 12:10–11 to build the Temple in Jerusalem. Rabbi Nehorai, on the other hand, said that Deuteronomy 17:14–15 did not command the Israelites to choose a king, but was spoken only in anticipation of the Israelites’ future complaints, as Deuteronomy 17:14 says, “And (you) shall say, ‘I will set a king over me.’” (Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 20b.)

Solomon's Wealth and Wisdom

Solomon's Wealth and Wisdom (illustration from a Bible card published 1896 by the Providence Lithograph Company)

The Mishnah interpreted the words “He shall not multiply horses to himself” in Deuteronomy 17:16 to limit the king to only as many horses as his chariots required. (Mishnah Sanhedrin 2:4; Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 21b.)

Sheba tint-2

The Queen of Sheba and Solomon (painting by Tintoretto)

The Mishnah interpreted the words “Neither shall he multiply wives to himself” in Deuteronomy 17:17 to limit him to no more than 18 wives. Rabbi Judah said that he could have more wives, provided that they did not turn away his heart. But Rabbi Simeon said that he must not marry even one wife who would turn away his heart. The Mishnah concluded that Deuteronomy 17:17 prohibited the king from marrying more than 18 wives, even if they were all as righteous as Abigail the wife of David. (Mishnah Sanhedrin 2:4; Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 21a.) The Gemara noted that Rabbi Judah did not always employ the rationale behind a Biblical passage as a basis for limiting its legal effect, as he did here in Mishnah Sanhedrin 2:4. The Gemara explained that Rabbi Judah employed the rationale behind the law here because Deuteronomy 17:17 itself expounds the rationale behind its legal constraint: The reason behind the command, “he shall not multiply wives to himself,” is so “that his heart be not turned aside.” Thus Rabbi Judah reasoned that Deuteronomy 17:17 itself restricts the law to these conditions, and a king could have more wives if “his heart be not turned aside.” And the Gemara noted that Rabbi Simeon did not always interpret a Biblical passage strictly by its plain meaning, as he appeared to do here in Mishnah Sanhedrin 2:4. The Gemara explained that Rabbi Simeon could have reasoned that Deuteronomy 17:17 adds the words, “that his heart turn not away,” to imply that the king must not marry even a single wife who might turn away his heart. And one could interpret the words “he shall not multiply” to mean that the king must not marry many wives even if they, like Abigail, would never turn away his heart. The Gemara then analyzed how the anonymous first view in Mishnah Sanhedrin 2:4 came to its conclusion that the king could have no more than 18 wives. The Gemara noted that 2 Samuel 3:2–5 refers to the children of six of David’s wives born to David in Hebron. And the Gemara reasoned that Nathan the Prophet referred to these six wives in 2 Samuel 12:8 when he said, “And if that were too little, then would I add to you the like of these, and the like of these,” each “these” implying six more wives. Thus with the original six, these two additions of six would make 18 in all. (Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 21a.)


King Solomon (18th Century Russian icon)

David's Love for God's House

King David (illustration from a Bible card published 1896 by the Providence Lithograph Company)

The Mishnah interpreted the words “and silver and gold he shall not greatly multiply to himself” in Deuteronomy 17:17 to limit the king to only as much silver and gold as he needed to pay his soldiers. (Mishnah Sanhedrin 2:4; Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 21b.)

The Mishnah interpreted the words “he shall write a copy of this law in a book” in Deuteronomy 17:18 to teach that when he went to war, he was to take it with him; on returning, he was to bring it back; when he sat in judgment, it was to be with him; and when he sat down to eat, it was to be before him, to fulfill the words of Deuteronomy 17:19, “and it shall be with him and he shall read in it all the days of his life.” (Mishnah Sanhedrin 2:4; Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 21b.)

Deuteronomy chapter 18

The interpreters of Scripture by symbol taught that the deeds of Phinehas explained why Deuteronomy 18:3 directed that the priests were to receive the foreleg, cheeks, and stomach of sacrifices. The foreleg represented the hand of Phinehas, as Numbers 25:7 reports that Phinehas “took a spear in his hand.” The cheeks’ represent the prayer of Phinehas, as Psalm 106:30 reports, “Then Phinehas stood up and prayed, and so the plague was stayed.” The stomach was to be taken in its literal sense, for Numbers 25:8 reports that Phinehas “thrust . . . the woman through her belly.” (Babylonian Talmud Chullin 134b.)

Moses dore

Moses Smashing the Tables of the Law (illustration by Gustave Doré)

In Deuteronomy 18:15, Moses foretold that “A prophet will the Lord your God raise up for you . . . like me,” and Rabbi Johanan thus taught that prophets would have to be, like Moses, strong, wealthy, wise, and meek. Strong, for Exodus 40:19 says of Moses, “he spread the tent over the tabernacle,” and a Master taught that Moses himself spread it, and Exodus 26:16 reports, “Ten cubits shall be the length of a board.” Similarly, the strength of Moses can be derived from Deuteronomy 9:17, in which Moses reports, “And I took the two tablets, and cast them out of my two hands, and broke them,” and it was taught that the tablets were six handbreadths in length, six in breadth, and three in thickness. Wealthy, as Exodus 34:1 reports God’s instruction to Moses, “Carve yourself two tablets of stone,” and the Rabbis interpreted the verse to teach that the chips would belong to Moses. Wise, for Rav and Samuel both said that 50 gates of understanding were created in the world, and all but one were given to Moses, for Psalm 8:6 said of Moses, “You have made him a little lower than God.” Meek, for Numbers 12:3 reports, “Now the man Moses was very meek.” (Babylonian Talmud Nedarim 38a.)

Mishnah Sanhedrin 7:7 and Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 64a–b interpreted the laws prohibiting passing one’s child through the fire to Molech in Leviticus 18:21 and 20:1–5, and Deuteronomy 18:10.

Rabbi Assi taught that the children of Noah were also prohibited to do anything stated in Deuteronomy 18:10–11: “There shall not be found among you any one that makes his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, one that uses divination, a soothsayer, or an enchanter, or a sorcerer, or a charmer, or one that consults a ghost or a familiar spirit, or a necromancer.” (Genesis Rabbah 34:8.)

Deuteronomy chapter 19

Chapter 2 of tractate Makkot in the Mishnah, Tosefta, Jerusalem Talmud, and Babylonian Talmud interpreted the laws of the cities of refuge in Exodus 21:12–14, Numbers 35:1–34, Deuteronomy 4:41–43, and 19:1–13. (Mishnah Makkot 2:1–8; Tosefta Makkot 2:1–3:10; Jerusalem Talmud Makkot; Babylonian Talmud Makkot 7a–13a.)

Cities of refuge

Cities of Refuge (illustration from a Bible card published 1901 by the Providence Lithograph Company)

The Mishnah taught that those who killed in error went into banishment. One would go into banishment if, for example, while one was pushing a roller on a roof, the roller slipped over, fell, and killed someone. One would go into banishment if while one was lowering a cask, it fell down and killed someone. One would go into banishment if while coming down a ladder, one fell and killed someone. But one would not go into banishment if while pulling up the roller it fell back and killed someone, or while raising a bucket the rope snapped and the falling bucket killed someone, or while going up a ladder one fell down and killed someone. The Mishnah’s general principle was that whenever the death occurred in the course of a downward movement, the culpable person went into banishment, but if the death did not occur in the course of a downward movement, the person did not go into banishment. If while chopping wood, the iron slipped from the ax handle and killed someone, Rabbi taught that the person did not go into banishment, but the sages said that the person did go into banishment. If from the split log rebounding killed someone, Rabbi said that the person went into banishment, but the sages said that the person did not go into banishment. (Mishnah Makkot 2:1; Babylonian Talmud Makkot 7a–b.)

Rabbi Jose bar Judah taught that to begin with, they sent a slayer to a city of refuge, whether the slayer killed intentionally or not. Then the court sent and brought the slayer back from the city of refuge. The Court executed whomever the court found guilty of a capital crime, and the court acquitted whomever the court found not guilty of a capital crime. The court restored to the city of refuge whomever the court found liable to banishment, as Numbers 35:25 ordained, “And the congregation shall restore him to the city of refuge from where he had fled.” (Mishnah Makkot 2:6; Babylonian Talmud Makkot 9b.) Numbers 35:25 also says, “The manslayer . . . shall dwell therein until the death of the high priest, who was anointed with the holy oil,” but the Mishnah taught that the death of a high priest who had been anointed with the holy anointing oil, the death of a high priest who had been consecrated by the many vestments, or the death of a high priest who had retired from his office each equally made possible the return of the slayer. Rabbi Judah said that the death of a priest who had been anointed for war also permitted the return of the slayer. Because of these laws, mothers of high priests would provide food and clothing for the slayers in cities of refuge so that the slayers might not pray for the high priest’s death. (Mishnah Makkot 2:6; Babylonian Talmud Makkot 11a.) If the high priest died at the conclusion of the slayer’s trial, the slayer did not go into banishment. If, however, the high priests died before the trial was concluded and another high priest was appointed in his stead and then the trial concluded, the slayer returned home after the new high priest’s death. (Mishnah Makkot 2:6; Babylonian Talmud Makkot 11b.)

Chapter 1 of tractate Makkot in the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Babylonian Talmud interpreted the laws of perjury in Deuteronomy 19:15–21. (Mishnah Makkot 1:1–9; Tosefta Makkot 1:1–11; Babylonian Talmud Makkot 2a–7a.) According to the Mishnah, if witnesses testified that a person was liable to receive 40 lashes, and the witnesses turned out to have perjured themselves, then Rabbi Meir taught that the perjurers received 80 lashes — 40 on account of the commandment of Exodus 20:12 (20:13 in the NJPS) not to bear false witness and 40 on account of the instruction of Deuteronomy 19:19 to do to perjurers as they intended to do to their victims — but the Sages said that they received only 40 lashes. (Mishnah Makkot 1:3; Babylonian Talmud Makkot 4a.)

The Gemara taught that the words “eye for eye” in Deuteronomy 19:21 meant pecuniary compensation. Rabbi Simon ben Yohai asked those who would take the words literally how they would enforce equal justice where a blind man put out the eye of another man, or an amputee cut off the hand of another, or where a lame person broke the leg of another. The school of Rabbi Ishmael cited the words “so shall it be given to him” in Leviticus 24:20, and deduced that the word “give” could apply only to pecuniary compensation. The school of Rabbi Hiyya cited the words “hand for hand” in Deuteronomy 19:21 to mean that an article was given from hand to hand, namely money. Abaye reported that a sage of the school of Hezekiah taught that Exodus 21:23–24 said “eye for eye” and “life for life,” but not “life and eye for eye,” and it could sometimes happen that eye and life would be taken for an eye, as when the offender died while being blinded. Rav Papa said in the name of Raba that Exodus 21:19 referred explicitly to healing, and the verse would not make sense if one assumed that retaliation was meant. And Rav Ashi taught that the principle of pecuniary compensation could be derived from the analogous use of the term “for” in Exodus 21:24 in the expression “eye for eye” and in Exodus 21:36 in the expression “he shall surely pay ox for ox.” As the latter case plainly indicated pecuniary compensation, so must the former. (Babylonian Talmud Bava Kamma 84a.)

Deuteronomy chapter 20

Chapter 8 of tractate Sotah in the Mishnah and Babylonian Talmud and part of chapter 7 of tractate Sotah in the Tosefta interpreted the laws of those excused from war in Deuteronomy 20:1–9. (Mishnah Sotah 8:1–7; Tosefta Sotah 7:18–24; Babylonian Talmud Sotah 42a–44b.)

Even though one might conclude from Deuteronomy 20:10 and 15–18 that the Israelites were not to offer peace to the Canaanites, Rabbi Samuel bar Nachman taught that Joshua sent three edicts to the inhabitants of the Land of Israel before the Israelites entered the land: first, that whoever wanted to leave the land should leave; second, that whoever wished to make peace and agree to pay taxes should do so; and third, that whoever wished to make war should do so. The Girgashites vacated their land and thus merited receiving land in Africa. And the Gibeonites made peace with the Israelites, as reported in Joshua 10:1. (Jerusalem Talmud Sheviit 45b.)

Deuteronomy chapter 21

Chapter 9 of tractate Sotah in the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Babylonian Talmud interpreted the laws of the found corpse and the calf whose neck was to be broken (eglah arufah) in Deuteronomy 21:1–9. (Mishnah Sotah 9:1–9; Tosefta Sotah 9:1–2; Babylonian Talmud Sotah 44b–47b.)


According to Sefer ha-Chinuch, there are 14 positive and 27 negative commandments in the parshah.

(Sefer HaHinnuch: The Book of [Mitzvah] Education. Translated by Charles Wengrov, 5:2–155. Jerusalem: Feldheim Pub., 1988. ISBN 0-87306-497-6.)


Isaiah (painting by Michelangelo)


The haftarah for the parshah is Isaiah 51:12–52:12. The haftarah is the fourth in the cycle of seven haftarot of consolation after Tisha B'Av, leading up to Rosh Hashanah.

Further reading

The parshah has parallels or is discussed in these sources:


Milkau Oberer Teil der Stele mit dem Text von Hammurapis Gesetzescode 369-2





Early nonrabbinic

Classical rabbinic

First page of the first tractate of the Talmud (Daf Beis of Maseches Brachos)


Rashi woodcut



  • Deuteronomy Rabbah 5:1–15. Land of Israel, 9th Century. Reprinted in, e.g., Midrash Rabbah: Leviticus. Translated by H. Freedman and Maurice Simon. London: Soncino Press, 1939. ISBN 0-900689-38-2.
  • Rashi. Commentary. Deuteronomy 16–21. Troyes, France, late 11th Century. Reprinted in, e.g., Rashi. The Torah: With Rashi’s Commentary Translated, Annotated, and Elucidated. Translated and annotated by Yisrael Isser Zvi Herczeg, 5:181–220. Brooklyn: Mesorah Publications, 1997. ISBN 0-89906-030-7.
  • Judah Halevi. Kuzari. 3:31, 39, 41. Toledo, Spain, 1130–1140. Reprinted in, e.g., Jehuda Halevi. Kuzari: An Argument for the Faith of Israel. Intro. by Henry Slonimsky, 165, 170–71, 173. New York: Schocken, 1964. ISBN 0-8052-0075-4.
Thomas Hobbes (portrait)



Constitution of the United States, page 1


  • United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5. Philadelphia, 1787. (prohibition on foreign rulers).
  • Thomas Mann. Joseph and His Brothers. Translated by John E. Woods, 336–38, 447, 736. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2005. ISBN 1-4000-4001-9. Originally published as Joseph und seine Brüder. Stockholm: Bermann-Fischer Verlag, 1943.
  • Morris Adler. The World of the Talmud, 30–31. B’nai B’rith Hillel Foundations, 1958. Reprinted Kessinger Publishing, 2007. ISBN 0548080003.
  • Martin Buber. On the Bible: Eighteen studies, 80–92. New York: Schocken Books, 1968.
  • Jacob Milgrom. “Lex Talionis and the Rabbis: The Talmud reflects an uneasy rabbinic conscience toward the ancient law of talion, ‘eye for eye, tooth for tooth.’” Bible Review. 12 (2) (Apr. 1996).
  • Jeffrey H. Tigay. The JPS Torah Commentary: Deuteronomy: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation, 160–93, 470–76. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1996. ISBN 0-8276-0330-4.
  • Joseph Telushkin. The Ten Commandments of Character: Essential Advice for Living an Honorable, Ethical, Honest Life, 275–78. New York: Bell Tower, 2003. ISBN 1-4000-4509-6.

External links

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.