You should safeguard the observance of all the commandment(s) that I am commanding you today, so that you will live, multiply, and come to possess the Land that G‑d swore to your forefathers.

-- Devarim 8:1

Classic Questions

What is meant by "all the commandment(s)" ? (v. 1)

Rashi: The term "all the commandment(s)" is to be taken literally.

[Another interpretation:] According to the Midrash Agadah [the verse is saying]: If you have started a mitzvah, finish it, because only the one who completes it is credited with [the mitzvah]. As the verse states, "And they buried the bones of Yosef, which the Jewish people had brought up from Egypt, in Shechem" (Joshua 24:32). Was it not the case that Moshe alone took care of this [mitzvah of taking the bones, and not the Jewish people]?

However, since he did not complete it, it is credited to the Jewish people, who did complete it.

Bartenura: Rashi was troubled as to why the Torah states "all the commandment" (kol hamitzvah) in the singular, rather than "all the commandments" (kol hamitzvos) in the plural.

Rashi answers that the verse can be interpreted literally—that the Torah uses the singular when it really means the plural—but since this is somewhat difficult to accept, Rashi adds an explanation from the Midrash Agadah. This explains how the term "all the commandment" can be taken literally [i.e., one must fulfill a mitzvah in its entirety to receive credit for it].

Chizkuni: The term "all the commandment" (kol hamitzvah) is written in the singular because it refers to the previously mentioned command (Rashi on 7:25) not to covet idols.

The Rebbe's Teachings

"All The Commandment(s)" (v. 1)

Rashi's comments on verse 1 prompt the following questions:

  1. What was troubling Rashi? Bartenura writes that Rashi was troubled as to why the Torah uses the expression "all the commandment" (kol hamitzvah) in the singular, rather than the more appropriate "all the commandments" (kol hamitzvos) in the plural.

    However, it is difficult to accept that this is what prompted Rashi's comment here, for in previous cases where the Torah uses the expression "all the commandment" (in the singular), such as 5:28 and 6:25, Rashi does not comment on the fact. So apparently, the use of the singular in such instances did not trouble Rashi.

  2. Why did Rashi bring two interpretations?

  3. Why did Rashi reject the interpretation of Chizkuni, that our verse refers specifically to the preceding command, not to covet the gold and silver of idols? This would properly explain why the Torah uses the singular ("all the commandment"), for we would in fact be speaking of one single precept.

The Explanation

At the time when Moshe said this parshah to the Jewish people, as they were about to enter the Land of Israel, the prohibition against coveting idols was not yet practically relevant. For it is only after "He will deliver their kings into your hand" (7:24) that it will become possible to "covet the silver or gold that is on them and take it for yourself" (7:25).

On the other hand, our verse clearly refers to mitzvos that could be performed before the entry into the Land of Israel: "You should safeguard the observance of all the commandment(s) that I am commanding you today, so that you will live, multiply, and come to possess the Land that G‑d swore to your forefathers."

Therefore, Rashi rejected the interpretation of Chizkuni that our verse refers to not coveting the idols of the non-Jewish nations (7:25), since, at the literal level, our verse must be speaking of a mitzvah (or mitzvos) that was (or were) possible for the Jewish people to observe while they were still in the desert, before entering the Land.

Thus, Rashi was faced with a problem: It was only possible for the Jewish people to observe all the 613 mitzvos of the Torah after the Jewish people had entered the Land, since many of the commandments depend on being in the Holy Land. So why does the Torah stress here, "You should safeguard the observance of all the commandment(s) that I am commanding you today, so that you will live, multiply, and come to possess the Land"? How could the Jewish people be told to keep all the mitzvos in order to enter the Land, when they could not possibly keep all the mitzvos until after they had already conquered it?

In answer to this question, Rashi brings two solutions:

"The term 'all the commandment(s)' is to be taken literally"; i.e., notwith­standing the above problem, the verse could still be under­stood literally. Moshe was telling the people that they should safeguard "all the commandments" that they were in a position to observe at that time, and this would guarantee them a successful conquest of the Land.

However, since this interpretation is clearly not ideal (as the verse seems to suggest that they should observe all the commandments, literally), Rashi cites a second interpretation:

"If you have started a mitzvah, finish it, because only the one who completes it is credited with [the mitzvah]."

In other words, the Torah's use of the somewhat unusual term here, "all the commandments," is suggestive of the Midrashic teaching that the one who completes a mitzvah is credited with having performed the whole mitzvah (for kol hamitzvah could be translated "the whole mitzvah").

Thus, Moshe was telling the Jewish people that even though mitzvos had been performed over the last forty years, there was a special significance to the mitzvos that the Jewish people would be performing at that precise point. For these last few deeds would complete the entire body of commandments which the Jewish people had been performing in the desert, and in the merit of this "completion," they would "live, multiply, and come to possess the Land that G‑d swore to your forefathers."

(Based on Likutei Sichos vol. 19, p. 94ff.)