“AND SHOW COMPASSION TO YOU”
Pinhas Leiser
The context is which these
words appear (Devarim 13:18) is –
at first blush – odd and unanticipated.
Only a few passages earlier, the Torah charges us to treat the
inhabitants of the ir hanidachat (a condemned city) with the full
severity of the law: “Strike down, strike down the settlers of that town
with the edge of the sword, consign it to destruction, it and all that is in
it, and its animals, with the edge of the word..” Regarding this, the poet
would question “They say there is mercy in the world – where is mercy here?”
Many commentators, beginning with Chazal, dealt with this
difficult issue of collective punishment. In the mishna we find a marked tendency to limit possibilities of
practical application of the law of ir nidachat -- “A Condemned City”.
{A similar inclination may be found
regarding a ben sorer u’more -- “A Rebellious Son”). The Mishna in Sanhedrin (10:4) states: “The inhabitants of a condemned
city have no portion in the World to Come, as is written, ‘Men, base men, have
gone out from among you and have subverted
the settlers of their town . . .” They are not to be killed until they have been
subverted from that city and from that tribe, and until the majority have been
subverted and until they have been subverted by males. If women and/or minors were subverted, or
if only a minority was subverted, or they subverted settlers from outside the
town – all these are considered individuals [who have sinned]. And there must
have been two witnesses who forewarned
each of the sinners. In this respect, individual are punished more severely
than communities, for individual sinners
are executed by stoning [the harshest form of court-imposed execution] – and
therefore their property is spared. Communities are punished by the sword, and
therefore their property is destroyed.”
An
additional tendency towards limitation
of possibilities of application is to be found in the Tosefta (Sanhedrin 14:1)
“Minors of a condemned town who were subverted with the rest
are not to be executed”; Rabbi Eliezer
says, “They are to be executed.” Rabbi Akiva said, “What is the practical
application of the text ‘And show compassion to you, having compassion on
you and making you many’ ? If to have mercy for the adults, it is already
stated ‘Strike down, strike down’; if to have pity upon their livestock,
it is already stated ‘and its animals with the edge of the sword”. What
then, is the application of ‘and show compassion to you”? It refers to the minors in it.
Rabbi Eliezer says: “Even adults are not executed, unless
there are witnesses and forewarning. What is the practical application of ‘And show compassion to you etc.’?
Lest the Bet Din say, ‘If we make this an ir
nidachat, a condemned city, tomorrow their brothers and relatives will
conspire in hatred against us,’ says the
Omnipresent: ‘I will show compassion to you, and I will fill their hearts with
love, that they say ‘We harbor no ill feelings against you, your verdict was
just.”
Rabbi Akiva, peerless interpreter,
discerned in “And show compassion to you” a practical Halakhic order not
to punish minors. But Rabbi Eliezer does not recognize any possibility of
punishment unless it has been preceded by a valid judicial process (witnesses
and forewarning). At the same time, he
read the phrase “And show compassion to you” as a promise that the
execution of true justice will not result in social enmity, for all will
understand that that what was done was necessary. Perhaps Rabbi Eliezer’s words
can be read as condition and criterion, and not just as promise; only post
facto can one be certain whether the punishment, brutal in itself, was
justified; if the brothers and relatives of those executed in the ir
hanidachat are able to say “‘We
harbor no ill feelings against you, your verdict was just” – we will know that there has been an act
justice accompanied by compassion. If
there is hatred in their hearts, then there was neither justice nor compassion;
there is the danger that the hatred will develop and lead to vengeance, to a cycle
of violence which may be difficult to break.
Sapient Chazal, in line with the hallowed traditions of the
Oral Law, knew how to discern between principle and practical application. They
well understood that “Inhabitants of an ir hanidachat have no share in
the world to come”, that they have no right to exist in the world –they knew
that everything said regarding them in the Written Torah is declarative truth,
similar to “eye for an eye”, which comes to point out the severity of
the act; but in practical application extreme caution must be exercised, taking
into consideration a totality of complex
factors.
Commentators of later times relate
to the psychological damage which may be experienced by one who executes cruel
punishment. Rabbi Hayyim ibn Attar, 18th
century author of “Ohr HaHayim,”
writes:
“And show compassion to you” – The meaning of
this passage is as follows: Inasmuch as He commanded that, in the ir
hanidachat,’ they put the entire city to death, including the livestock, such
action can produce a cruel nature in man’s heart, as the Ishmaelites tell
us of a band of murderers subservient to the king, who murder with great
passion; compassion has been uprooted from them, and they have become cruel.
This characteristic can be rooted in those who annihilate the ir hanidachat.
Therefore, they are promised that God will give them “rachamim” – compassion;
even though they will have developed a cruel nature, their fountain of mercy
will shower them anew with the “power of
compassion” to nullify the force of cruelty engendered by their actions. “And show compassion for you” –
Whenever man Possesses a cruel nature, so will God relate to him, for God has
compassion only for the compassionate. (Shabbat, 151b)
Rav Chayim ben Attar explains that cruel behavior can
transform any person into a brutal person; only the ‘source of compassion’ can
immunize one against cruelty. The author of the Ohr HaHayyim interprets
“and show compassion to you” as a qualification of the promise; the
promise is given only to the compassionate and not to the cruel. The gift of
compassion is dependent upon the ‘source of compassion’ and upon the person
himself.
The Netziv of Volozhin, one of the Torah giants of an
earlier generation, elaborates upon the damage (‘evils’ in his terminology)
which may affect the individual and society as a result of imposing the
prescribed sentence upon the inhabitants of the ir hanidachat:
1st. One who kills
develops a cruel personality. When an
individual is executed by a proper court, the punishment is administered by a
chosen appointee of the court; when an entire city is to be wiped out, of
necessity we must train many people to kill and become cruel.
2nd.
Every inhabitant of the ir
nidachat must have relatives elsewhere; hatred will increase in Israel.
3rd.
Israel’s population will
decrease, creating “bald spots” on the population map. Scripture promised that
if we execute the commandment without any personal benefit from spoils, God’s
wrath will subside.
The Netziv, then, strictly adhering to the plain reading of
the text, discerns a connection between the beginning of the passage “No
part of the banned property may adhere to your hand” - and its continuation
“so that God will turn back from his burning wrath, and He will show you
compassion.”
The ethical message emerging from a careful reading of
Chazal and later commentators is unambiguous.
On occasion, one is called upon to perform acts which are
necessary, which serve noble causes. Cruel acts, involving bloodshed, are never
noble; in any case, even when done for a noble and necessary cause, they have a
deleterious effect upon the soul. The
only possibility for minimizing the damage is dependent upon God’s grace.
Decreasing such damage depends upon the purity of intent and upon absence of
any personal involvement and pleasure in performing the cruel acts. This, too, is dependent upon God’s grace. The
justice of a cruel, but necessary, act must be observed and measured by the
result -- acceptance of the sentence by the relatives of the punished.
Ben Gurion labeled the cannon that he ordered to fire upon
the Altelena “the holy cannon”. He was
wrong. There are no ‘holy cannons.’
King David, sweet singer of Israel, servant of God, was not
allowed to erect the temple:
“But the word of the Lord came to me, saying: You have shed
blood abundantly, and have made great wars; you shall not build a house unto My
name, because you have shed much blood upon the earth in My name.” (Chronicles I, 22:8)
War and bloodshed are often unnecessary and must be
prevented. Occasionally there are situations of ‘ayn berayra’ – ‘no
alternative’ – and we must fight, kill, and be killed. It is essential to
differentiate between the two situations. In any case, bloodshed and the
building of the temple are not compatible; bloodshed makes the Land tamei (impure),
drives away the Shekhina, and causes spiritual and psychological damage.
Today, there seems to be a dangerous tendency to forget
this simple moral truth. Therefore, we must remember, remind, and repeat –
there are unnecessary wars, and there are wars which are ‘necessary evils’ - - there are no holy wars.
Pinchas Leiser is a psychologist
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה