וְזֹ֣את הַמִּצְוָ֗ה הַֽחֻקִּים֙ וְהַמִּשְׁפָּטִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר צִוָּ֛ה יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵיכֶ֖ם לְלַמֵּ֣ד אֶתְכֶ֑ם לַעֲשֹׂ֣ות בָּאָ֔רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֥ר אַתֶּ֛ם עֹבְרִ֥ים שָׁ֖מָּה לְרִשְׁתָּֽהּ׃
In the opening of one of the most foundational chapters in the Torah — Devarim 6:1 — we encounter a verse that seems straightforward at first glance. Moses, standing on the threshold of the Promised Land, introduces the laws that Israel must observe once they cross over. Yet beneath this simple surface lies a rich grammatical structure that reveals how deeply the Torah intertwines commandment, instruction, and covenantal identity.
The phrase וְזֹאת הַמִּצְוָה — “this is the commandment” — begins what appears to be a list of laws. But it does not function as a mere heading. It is, in fact, a grammatical pivot: the point where divine instruction becomes covenantal obligation. Through a careful analysis of this verse’s syntax and morphology, we uncover how the Torah defines law not only as legal code but as pedagogical performance — a system meant not just to be obeyed, but to be taught, internalized, and lived.
“This Is the Commandment”: The Grammar of Totality
The verse opens with:
וְזֹאת הַמִּצְוָה הַחֻקִּים וְהַמִּשְׁפָּטִים
This translates literally as: “And this is the commandment — the statutes and the ordinances…” At first glance, this might seem like a typical introductory clause. However, the use of זֹאת (“this”) before a plural noun (הַחֻקִּים וְהַמִּשְׁפָּטִים) creates a striking syntactic tension. How can “this” refer to a plural set of laws?
This construction is not unique to our verse. In Biblical Hebrew, when a singular demonstrative pronoun like זֹאת or זֶה precedes a plural noun, it often functions as a collective determiner — treating the entire set as a unified entity. This is a hallmark of covenantal language, where laws are not isolated commands but components of a single, cohesive moral and theological system.
| Word | Root | Form | Literal Translation | Grammatical Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| זֹאת | ז-ו-ת | Demonstrative pronoun, fsg | “this” | Used with plural nouns to denote collective unity. |
In effect, the grammar signals: this is not merely a list of laws, but a singular covenantal body — a unified way of life.
From Command to Teaching: The Verbal Chain of Transmission
The next key phrase is:
אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם לְלַמֵּד אֶתְכֶם
“…which the Lord your God commanded to teach you.”
Here, the verb צִוָּה (“He commanded”) sets up the action, but the infinitive לְלַמֵּד (“to teach”) carries the theological weight. Why use an infinitive instead of a finite verb? Because the act of teaching is not completed — it is ongoing, perpetual, and central to the nature of the command itself.
This infinitival construction is common in contexts where the emphasis is not just on what was commanded, but on the process of its transmission. Consider another example:
וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ וְדִבַּרְתָּ בָּם (Devarim 6:7) — “You shall teach them diligently to your children and speak of them…”
In both cases, the imperative is not simply to obey, but to instruct — making the law not static, but generational.
The Purpose Clause: Law as Identity in the Land
The final section of the verse reads:
לַעֲשֹׂות בָּאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אַתֶּם עֹבְרִים שָׁמָּה לְרִשְׁתָּהּ
“…to do them in the land which you are crossing there to inherit it.”
The purpose clause לַעֲשֹׂות (“to do them”) links observance directly to land possession. The law is not abstract — it is tied to place, history, and destiny. And the participle עֹבְרִים (“you are crossing”) emphasizes the present-tense movement toward that future. They are still in transition, yet already under obligation.
This dynamic reflects a broader theological principle in Deuteronomy: obligation precedes inheritance. The people must live by the law even before they possess the land — because the law is what makes them worthy of possessing it.
The Verb That Teaches Obedience
In closing, Devarim 6:1 is far more than a preface to law. It is a declaration of how Israelite identity is formed — not through conquest alone, but through commandment, teaching, and obedience. The grammar reinforces this: a singular demonstrative pointing to a plural set of laws, an infinitive emphasizing perpetual teaching, and a purpose clause binding law to land.
What we see here is not just law, but pedagogy — a system designed not only to regulate behavior, but to shape memory, identity, and relationship with God. And so, the verse invites us not only to read, but to teach, to learn, and to live within the rhythm of covenantal life.