Five totafoswithin the tefilin, etc. See my explanation above in Parshas Va’eschanan (4:2). Rashi’s statement, “five species with the lulav,” refers to where he binds them so that the five species are all bound together — For [only] then does he transgress. But if he did not bind them together, he does not transgress. Even according to the viewpoint that a lulav does not need binding, it is nevertheless understood that if he binds them together he transgresses the prohibition of, “Do not add.”

And should you ask, why the Holy One, may He be blessed, etc. Rashi is answering the question: The word כי (for) is always a reason being given for what was written above. Yet here, how is it giving a reason? Therefore Rashi explains: “And if you should ask, etc.” And now the word, “for,” fits well as giving a reason.

The voice of the prophets. I.e., “Keep His commandments,” already implies the entire Torah given through Moshe, which includes all His commandments. If so, what is the meaning of, “Heed His voice”? Rather, it includes the voice of the prophets.

In His Sanctuary. The word “serve” refers to sacrifices, which is in the Sanctuary. For if it refers to the service of fulfilling His commandments, this has already been mentioned.

Embrace His ways; engage in kindness, etc. Why does Rashi not explain similarly above in Parshas Eikev (10:20) where it also written, “Cleave to Him”? The answer is: The simple meaning of the verse in Eikev [actually] is: “Embrace His ways; engage in kindness, etc.” But here in order that we do not make a mistake to explain [in a similar fashion] the verse “After Adonoy, your God, are you to go...” that it means “after having acquired all of these attributes, then “Cleave to Him” — in order that you shall have His Divine Providence. Therefore, Rashi needed to explain: “Embrace His ways, etc.”

Even if He had done nothing for you but redeemed you, etc. Otherwise why is the phrase, “Who redeemed you from the house of bondage,” necessary? For Scripture had already written, “Who took you out of the land of Egypt.” And when He took them out, they had already been set free [i.e., redeemed].

The word הסתהalways denotes inciting ... He seduces him, etc. You might ask: At first Rashi explains, “The expression הסתה always denotes inciting,” but afterwards he writes, “He seduceshim, etc.,” which denotes to mislead. This question has already been answered by Re”m in Parshas Bereishis regarding the verse (3:13), “The serpent seduced me.” He writes: Although the term הסתה usually means, “to mislead,” nevertheless Rashi explains here [in Re’ey], “The word הסתה always denotes inciting ... he seduces him, etc.” This is because inciting is only accomplished through words that are misleading. And the meaning of [Rashi’s words], “He seduces him into performing the act,” is, “he misleads him into performing the act.”

Maternally. A vav is lacking, [and it means as if it said] ובן אמך (or your mother’s son). It is not correct to say that only a brother from the same father and mother is intended. For we find the term “brother,” indicates even a paternal brother, as in (Bereishis 42:13), “Your servants are twelve brothers,” and (below 25:5), “If brothers reside together.” Rather, the verse must be understood as if it said, “or.” [“Your mother’s son,” is written] because one’s paternal brother is more beloved to him than his maternal brother.

This refers to your father, etc. [Rashi is referring to the term, “soul mate,” and] the verse is lacking the word “or.” For a father is never referred to as ריע (neighbor).

This refers to the sun, the moon, and the heavenly hosts, etc. Otherwise Scripture should have written only, “At a distance from you to the ends of the earth.”

Do not be inclined towards him, etc. For this verse cannot be understood according to its simple meaning — “Do not agree with his words, and do not accept them.” For if so, what is the meaning of, “Do not view him compassionately ... for you must certainly execute him, etc.” He is about to be executed! Does the verse need to warn, “Do not agree with his words, and do not accept his words to serve other gods”?

Because it states, “Lay aside [your hatred of him] and assist him,”, etc. Onkelos explains עזוב תעזוב as, “Lay aside whatever is in your heart against him,” which means to [put aside] the hatred in your heart and be forgiving to him. Although Rashi explains above (Shmos 23:5) that the term עזוב תעזוב denotes assistance, here he says that it denotes forgiveness, because Rashi above is explaining the simple meaning of the verse. (Maharai explains likewise).

Do not retry him to exonerate him. Otherwise why does it need to say הרג תהרגנו (lit., you shall execute, execute him), which is apparently repetitive? Even though the Torah uses common speech, Re”m says: “We only say this if there is nothing to expound [from the apparent redundancy]. But if there is something to be expounded, then we do so.” But it seems to me that Rashi is answering the question: The entire phrase הרוג תהרגנו is seemingly superfluous! For it is written afterwards, “Let your hand strike him first to execute him.” Therefore, “surely execute him,” is to be expounded.

Which was not given as a dwelling place, etc. I.e., to any individual, but rather any Israelite has the right to dwell there, because Jerusalem was not apportioned to the tribes.

Saying the following: Men have gone out, etc. I.e., the word לאמר (saying) here does not follow its usual meaning — “say again,” or, “say to them words of rebuke.” Rather, it is connected to the verse following [“Men have gone out.”]

But not women. Otherwise why is the word אנשים (men) needed? For Scripture already writes בני בליעל (unscrupulous people). And this is why Rashi explains בליעל before he explains אנשים [even though it appears in the verse later].

“Thoroughly” and “Thoroughly” are extrapolated by the principle of textual comparison etc. It is as if they are all written together, “You must (1)investigate, and (2)inquire (3)thoroughly, and the magistrates must (4)investigate (5)thoroughly, and you must (6)investigate (7)thoroughly,” — these are the seven [inquiries].