The Audience is the Issue
The portion of the Torah called Ki Tavo (Deuteronomy 26:1–29:8) is dominated by Moses’s restatement of the blessings and curses found in a different form in Leviticus 26. There, God described the blessings that would accrue to those whose behavior met the required standards and the curses, or rebukes, that would result from a failure to meet those standards. The description of the calamities, known as the tokecha, or verses of rebuke, found in Ki Tavo is particularly graphic and difficult. Traditionally those passages are read in a soft undertone, little more than a whisper, when recited publicly.
In the Leviticus version of the tokecha, which was spoken by God, the language is in the second person plural. God speaks to the people as a whole. In Moses’s version in Deuteronomy 28, the language is in the second person singular. Moses speaks to each person individually.
The recitation of calamities in Deuteronomy is much longer than the one in Leviticus and the standard of behavior that merits the calamities is less severe—the threshold for behavior meriting punishment is set lower. In Leviticus, the disobedience that leads to punishment is egregious, “If you reject My laws and spurn My rules so that you do not observe all My commandments and you break My covenant….” In Deuteronomy, the condition reads, “But if you do not obey the Lord your God to observe faithfully all His commandments…” The Leviticus standards suggest much more active, willful, and blameworthy failures. But this more egregious behavior is associated with less severe punishments. Why might that be?
In fact, why does Moses need to restate the blessings and the curses? Why are his words addressed to each individual rather than to the people as a whole? Why are the calamities stated in such graphic and shocking language? Why are the punishments more harsh for behavior that seems less egregious?
In Ki Tavo we are nearing the end of the book of Deuteronomy. Moses is nearing the end of his final addresses to the people before he is to die. He will shortly be replaced by Joshua who will lead the people into the promised land. Moses would certainly want to instill in each person a clear and powerful understanding of the costs of failing to comply with God’s laws. The use of the second person singular rather than the plural personalizes the message.
Most of those Moses was addressing in Deuteronomy would not have heard the Leviticus version of the blessings and curses; at least as it was spoken by God. The action of Leviticus occupies the first month of the second year after the liberation from Egypt. It follows the erection of the tabernacle, which was dedicated on the first anniversary of the deliverance. And it precedes the opening of the book of Numbers, which occurs on the first day of the second month of the second year. The people were still near Sinai. They had not yet begun to travel. The episode of the spies had not yet occurred. So, the generation that left Egypt had not yet been condemned to die without entering the promised land.
Ki Tavo occurs in the eleventh month of the 40th year following the liberation from Egypt, nearly 39 years after the Leviticus account. Almost all of those who would have heard the words of rebuke spoken by God in Leviticus would have died before Moses delivered his version in Deuteronomy. The audience that Moses addressed was a different audience.
In the book of Numbers, we read again and again about the inappropriate behavior of those who had actually stood at Sinai and heard the words of Leviticus 26. The failure of that generation to adhere to the standards set might not have been so bad that we would say they “rejected” or “spurned” God’s laws, but they certainly did not display a trust in God’s promises.
But even the generation that would enter the land had failed to act in a way that would demonstrate faithfulness to the covenant. The behavior of the people after Miriam’s death, and with the Midianite women in the aftermath of the Bilaam episode, made that clear. So, the people Moses addressed had not acted in a way that generated confidence in their adherence to the law. Given that history, Moses might well have thought it appropriate to use more graphic and frightening language in his restatement.
For Moses to speak in the singular, addressing each person individually, makes the message more strongly personal. To expand the list of calamities, requiring greater attention to them than to the blessings, emphasizes their importance. And to frame the curses in the most terrifying language possible increases their emotional power.
The first version of the tokecha, spoken by God, did not have the effect intended. This was Moses’s opportunity to restate the conditions and consequences for the new generation in even stronger and more personal language. We find in the later accounts, of course, that as horrifying as the promised curses might have been, they did not have the power to prevent the prohibited behavior.