I recently saw the film ‘Inland road’ where a young child asks if her father could grow again. He died in a car accident. The brother survived as well a female hitchhiker who also was in the car. Her father has just been buried, while a friend of the child explained that rain makes things in the ground grow. So the child constructs a reasonable hypothesis, if it rains it could happen to her that father grows again.[1]
All the characters in this movie seek to break free, seek deliverance from suffering, seek rescue to have the opportunity to construct their life in a more meaningful way for themselves and also for their own family, including the courage to fix problems.
The film brought several themes that are linked with Ki Tavo.
At one point two of the characters, the young lady and the brother, try to sing together, one the high tone, the other the low tone. They try several times and finally succeed, for they actually listen to themselves and as well to the other. They sing ‘Swing low, sweet chariot’, a famous African American hymn probably written in the end of the 19th century, inspired by Elijah being taken to Heaven in a chariot.[2] The song became a hymn for hope for freedom during the struggle for Civil Rights in the sixties in America. [It currently happens that the song is also performed by rugby players and fans during games, which is another story]. Nevertheless we note that the same words can express seeking freedom, deliverance and comfort for different groups at different times.
Everyone needs to be comforted, needs to see hope in any challenging, difficult or desperate situation and thus wants to find solutions to achieve a goal, to feel relieved and eventually free. The solution often involves other people, for one single person alone rarely finds a solution. As in the film when the characters try to sing in two different tones, it is a matter of reciprocity, to give of oneself and receive from the other and forge ahead.
In Ki Tavo, this notion of reciprocity is one of the points developed, which it is possible to interpret as one ingredient of being free.
If we have a look at the beginning of the parasha we read the mitzvah of bikkurim– the commandment of the first fruits and the rules about the ma’aseroth– the tithes of the products from year to year. Even if these mitzvoth are supposed to be performed in the land of Israel they can be drawn as a model of the offering if we read them and link them with other commandments in the Torah. Here in Ki Tavo, the first fruits from the harvest have to be taken to God. Concerning the annual tithes there are also a number of rules. To quote one example, every third year a part of the tithes shall be given to the Levites, the stranger, the orphan and the widow.[3] It implies that a good harvest is considered beneficial if each grower remembers to share its products and actually does it.
Thus a connection can be made with the commandments of the first fruits, of the annual tithes in Ki Tavo and parashat Kedoshim read in many synagogues during Yom Kippur, which also speaks of harvests. We read the law of the lequet-the gleaning that shall not be gathered and the law of the corner of the field that shall not be reaped in order to be left to the poor and the stranger.[4] So, where in Kedoshim the cultivators abandon a part of the harvest in the field that must remained intact for the poor and needy to harvest, in Ki Tavo, the first fruits shall be taken for God and brought to the Temple and a part of the tithes are meant to be given for the poor and the stranger.
In both parashiyyot the farmers receive from the ground they cultivate and share the products with those in need. There are some differences in the manner of giving, in Kedoshim one must leave something in order to give, whereas in Ki Tavo one must take from the harvest to give. The results can be seen as equivalent but the purpose of the action in Ki Tavo is more physical, everyone has to be more conscious of the act.
In Ki Tavo they concretely thank God with the first fruits, it is an acknowledgement that something is utterly beyond the correct way to cultivate the ground, something beyond the control of any expertise in growing. The reciprocity includes God in the relationships between the people and the earth. Food, help and solutions can be provided by people, with the extra advantage of God.
In the film the characters live off the ground and are shepherds. They take care of the land and of their animals. They know they depend on them for their livelihood; they struggle, for it is hard work but they feel thankful and carry out their task with joy. This capacity for rejoicing is indeed a mitzvah in Ki Tavo, ‘vesamachta bekhol hav tov’, ‘ and you shall rejoice in all the good’.[5] It is a slight advantage to have the capacity and the desire to rejoice even when you struggle for food and when you lose a part of your enthusiasm and confidence in life.
The characters in the film try to overcome the death of a parent who is also a travel companion. They try to overcome their grief and suffering by being with each other, helping each other. They are engaged in the process of reciprocity, without naming it, they just do it with joy. It is their way to live free again with their pains and healings.
They combine three points, commandment, freedom and joy.
When we struggle in our life, it is not good to remain alone. When we struggle to be free, whatever free means, we shall not be alone. We need the others, and in reciprocity each person is capable of helping a neighbour, a parent, a colleague, a friend to make them feel supported, loved or simply listened to. Sometimes we cry to God to be heard and be freed, the extra advantage of God to deliver us from slavery.
Freedom is so often mentioned in Torah, in the rituals and during festivals, it is also one of the purposes of the High Holidays. We are currently starting to prepare ourselves to be freer, and to help those around us and rejoice with them. As with the young woman at the end of the film, joy can again appear and move us forward into a new year.
I recently saw the film ‘Inland road’ where a young child asks if her father could grow again. He died in a car accident. The brother survived as well a female hitchhiker who also was in the car. Her father has just been buried, while a friend of the child explained that rain makes things in the ground grow. So the child constructs a reasonable hypothesis, if it rains it could happen to her that father grows again.
All the characters in this movie seek to break free, seek deliverance from suffering, seek rescue to have the opportunity to construct their life in a more meaningful way for themselves and also for their own family, including the courage to fix problems.
The film brought several themes that are linked with Ki Tavo.
At one point two of the characters, the young lady and the brother, try to sing together, one the high tone, the other the low tone. They try several times and finally succeed, for they actually listen to themselves and as well to the other. They sing ‘Swing low, sweet chariot’, a famous African American hymn probably written in the end of the 19th century, inspired by Elijah being taken to Heaven in a chariot. The song became a hymn for hope for freedom during the struggle for Civil Rights in the sixties in America. [It currently happens that the song is also performed by rugby players and fans during games, which is another story]. Nevertheless we note that the same words can express seeking freedom, deliverance and comfort for different groups at different times.
Everyone needs to be comforted, needs to see hope in any challenging, difficult or desperate situation and thus wants to find solutions to achieve a goal, to feel relieved and eventually free. The solution often involves other people, for one single person alone rarely finds a solution. As in the film when the characters try to sing in two different tones, it is a matter of reciprocity, to give of oneself and receive from the other and forge ahead.
In Ki Tavo, this notion of reciprocity is one of the points developed, which it is possible to interpret as one ingredient of being free.
If we have a look at the beginning of the parasha we read the mitzvah of bikkurim- the commandment of the first fruits and the rules about the ma’aseroth- the tithes of the products from year to year. Even if these mitzvoth are supposed to be performed in the land of Israel they can be drawn as a model of the offering if we read them and link them with other commandments in the Torah. Here in Ki Tavo, the first fruits from the harvest have to be taken to God. Concerning the annual tithes there are also a number of rules. To quote one example, every third year a part of the tithes shall be given to the Levites, the stranger, the orphan and the widow. It implies that a good harvest is considered beneficial if each grower remembers to share its products and actually does it.
Thus a connection can be made with the commandments of the first fruits, of the annual tithes in Ki Tavo and parashat Kedoshim read in many synagogues during Yom Kippur, which also speaks of harvests. We read the law of the lequet-the gleaning that shall not be gathered and the law of the corner of the field that shall not be reaped in order to be left to the poor and the stranger. So, where in Kedoshim the cultivators abandon a part of the harvest in the field that must remained intact for the poor and needy to harvest, in Ki Tavo, the first fruits shall be taken for God and brought to the Temple and a part of the tithes are meant to be given for the poor and the stranger.
In both parashiyyot the farmers receive from the ground they cultivate and share the products with those in need. There are some differences in the manner of giving, in Kedoshim one must leave something in order to give, whereas in Ki Tavo one must take from the harvest to give. The results can be seen as equivalent but the purpose of the action in Ki Tavo is more physical, everyone has to be more conscious of the act.
In Ki Tavo they concretely thank God with the first fruits, it is an acknowledgement that something is utterly beyond the correct way to cultivate the ground, something beyond the control of any expertise in growing. The reciprocity includes God in the relationships between the people and the earth. Food, help and solutions can be provided by people, with the extra advantage of God.
In the film the characters live off the ground and are shepherds. They take care of the land and of their animals. They know they depend on them for their livelihood; they struggle, for it is hard work but they feel thankful and carry out their task with joy. This capacity for rejoicing is indeed a mitzvah in Ki Tavo, ‘vesamachta bekhol hav tov’, ‘ and you shall rejoice in all the good’. It is a slight advantage to have the capacity and the desire to rejoice even when you struggle for food and when you lose a part of your enthusiasm and confidence in life.
The characters in the film try to overcome the death of a parent who is also a travel companion. They try to overcome their grief and suffering by being with each other, helping each other. They are engaged in the process of reciprocity, without naming it, they just do it with joy. It is their way to live free again with their pains and healings.
They combine three points, commandment, freedom and joy.
When we struggle in our life, it is not good to remain alone. When we struggle to be free, whatever free means, we shall not be alone. We need the others, and in reciprocity each person is capable of helping a neighbour, a parent, a colleague, a friend to make them feel supported, loved or simply listened to. Sometimes we cry to God to be heard and be freed, the extra advantage of God to deliver us from slavery.
Freedom is so often mentioned in Torah, in the rituals and during festivals, it is also one of the purposes of the High Holidays. We are currently starting to prepare ourselves to be freer, and to help those around us and rejoice with them. As with the young woman at the end of the film, joy can again appear and move us forward into a new year.
Yaera Ratel, LBC student Rabbi
[1] Inland Road, by Jackie van Beek, New Zealand, 2017.
[2] 2 Kings 2: 11.
[3] Deuteronomy 26: 2; 26: 12.
[4] Leviticus 19: 9-10.
[5] Deuteronomy 26: 11.
The views expressed in this D’var Torah do not necessarily reflect the position of Leo Baeck College.