|
MOSHE’S ANGER
Moshe
Rabbeinu’s anger against the officers in the war against Midian, conveyed
in Bamidbar 31:14-16, would seem to be quite understandable. God’s
command to Moshe was for the nation to take vengeance against Midian for
causing the Jewish People to rebel against God, with the subsequent consequence
of a plague engulfing Israel, as presented in Bamidbar 25:1-9. As Rashi,
Bamidbar 31:16 explains, this rebellion was expressed through promiscuity
as the Midianite and Moabite1 women seduced the men of Israel. Thus,
letting the women, those who specifically caused the harm, live would seem to
be contradictory to the very purpose of the war. The war’s purpose was to
punish those who led Israel to sin. The women were the ones who specifically
did this and, yet, the soldiers allowed them to live.2
No wonder Moshe was angry.
There,
however, is a slight problem with this understanding. This approach would
actually make total sense pursuant to the straightforward reading of Bamidbar
31:17 which seems to imply that only the women who actually had had
relations with men were to be killed.3 T.B.
Yevamot 60b, however, maintains, building on the language of Bamidbar
31:18, that the directive was not just to kill any woman who had relations
but, rather, to kill any woman who was capable of having relations whether she
had done so or not. Given the argument we presented above as to why it was
specifically wrong to exempt the women from punishment, why would the directive
include killing the adult women who did not have relations? Furthermore, why would
Moshe have been angry that the soldiers allowed the adult virgins to live?
These women obviously were not a factor in the Jewish men sinning through
promiscuity. Rabbi
Yaakov Kamenetsky, Emet L’Yaakov, Bamidbar 31:15 explains that indeed Moshe
was only angry in regard to the fact that the soldiers kept alive the women who
had had relations with men. This, the soldiers should have figured out on their
own – that these women were, within this context, deserving of death. Moshe
then added a new law, that all the women capable of having relations, although
they had not done so, should also be killed. This, the soldiers would not have
known and thus Moshe was not angry with them for having kept these women alive.
The new directive, however, was also to kill them. The obvious question is why.
Rav
Yaakov maintains that there are actually two separate issues here, touching
upon two distinct understandings of the purpose of war (although clearly not
the only reasons for war). One is to punish. The second is as a reaction to
heresy in that such death in war is a consequence to actions that were
undertaken in rebellion against God. To clarify this latter case, Rav Yaakov
uses the case of the ir hanidachat [the city of idolaters].4 In
the case of the ir hanidachat we also find a directive to kill all
within the city – men, women and children.5 In
this case, the war’s purpose is not specifically punishment but, rather, to
avenge God’s honour in that there was a (Jewish) city on this Earth devoted
idolatry. Such a city must be obliterated from this world and so the
destruction may include those who may not technically be deserving of
punishment. So it was with this war against Midian. It was a war to avenge
God’s honour, not just to punish, and so its call was also to kill the adult
virgins and the male children.6 Paradoxically,
it would seem, Rav Yaakov then also applies this thought to further explain Moshe’s
anger. By leaving the women alive, the soldiers thought that this was like any regular
war in which women (non-combatants) should not be targeted. The people were already
told, though, that this was a war of nekama [vengeance] which demands
full destruction and so Moshe was angry that the soldiers did not act
appropriately. The problem is, however, that Rav Yaakov already stated that
Moshe was only angry that the soldiers kept the women who had relations alive.
If the issue was not correctly applying the principles of a war to avenge God’s
honour, should he not have been angry with keeping any of the women alive? Why
was Moshe specifically angry that the soldiers kept the women deserving
punishment alive? Our assumption would seem to be that the soldiers should have
known better from their own reasoning. Moshe’s anger emerged because the
soldiers simply, should have known better. By extension, it would also seem, a
determination that a war should be one of punishment could be one reached by
human beings through reason. The soldiers should have thus understood the
purpose of this war and acted appropriately. Their failure in doing so is what
angered Moshe. Moshe’s statement that this was a war of nekama would
seem not to have been a factor in this. The
challenge is that Rav Yaakov then writes that Moshe was specifically angered because
the soldiers were told that this was a war of vengeance. Such a recognition,
though, would seem to demand the execution of all the adult women so why would
Moshe be angry only in that they did not kill the women deserving of
punishment? It may be, though, that even the categorization of a war as one of
punishment can only be made with an explicit Divine declaration of such. If so,
without any declaration that this was a war of nekama, there never would
have been an assumption in any way that non-combatants, including the
non-virgin women, should be targeted. It was only the Divine statement that
this was a war of vengeance that could have initiated an understanding that the
punishment of those who wronged Israel was also to be a consideration in this
war. Moshe
could understand that the soldiers did not recognize that this declaration that
this was a war of nekama would include the execution of the adult
virgins. The fact that it was, at least, a call for punishment, though, could
not be ignored. This is what angered Moshe; the soldiers then not, as God
demanded, executing the non-virgins who were deserving of this punishment. Rabbi
Benjamin Hecht Footnotes 1 As to why God did not also demand vengeance against the
Moabites, see Rashi, Bamidbar 31:2. 2 For an
interesting reason as to why the soldiers may have done so, see Meshech
Chochmah, Bamidbar 31:14. 3 See Ntziv,
HaEmek Davar, Bamidbar 31:17,18 who applies this simple approach to the
verses (although still noting the gemara). 4 See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Avodat Kochavim,
chapter 5 specifically 5:6. 5 A presentation of the actual rules regarding an ir
hanidachat is clearly beyond the parameters of this Insight however it
should be noted that, as is often found with Torah law, there is, in this
matter, a distinction between the general statement of law and its application
in detail. For our purposes, the idea is that in such a case there is a
theoretical call to kill all within the city – including children – even though
they, by definition, did not sin. 6 As to why the female children were exempt from death, see Rabbi
Shimshon Raphael Hirsch, Bamidbar 31:17,18. This would be a distinction
between the call of revenge in this war and this call in the case of ir
hanidachat which Rabbi Hirsch’s theory could somewhat explain. Applying it
to Rav Yaakov’s theory, though, is slightly difficult leaving us somewhat with
the question of the female children in regard to Rav Yaakov. . © Nishma 2014
Return to top |
© 2010 NISHMA