The Laws of War : According to Torah Sources

[muman613]

Shalom,

While listening to the most recent askJTF show I was inspired to look more deeply into the Jewish view toward war. So I started to search for articles by various Rabbis on websites which I access and discovered a lot of excellent information, which I would like to share with anyone interested in the topic.

I have already posted a summary of the 23 Torah commandments which pertain to war. But that summary did not really explain that the Torah sees two kinds of wars, an obligatory war, and an optional war. We are commanded to defend our land, and the Torah clearly is against giving a single inch of the land to the enemies of the nation.

Many of the laws of war seem to attempt to humanize the entire enterprise, to make sure that those who are going to war are in the correct state of mind in order to win decisively against any enemy. Among these laws are the commandments to keep the camps clean (Making sure to carry a spade, digging latrines, etc.) the commandments to let soldiers who have new wives, new homes, vineyards, and those who are afraid to go to war be excused from going to war (though only in an optional war). There are commands to make sure that fruit-bearing trees will not be destroyed in the process of going to war and then the very difficult to understand commands concerning the captive woman.

What follows are some articles which explain some of these concepts:

[muman613]

http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5762-06.html

5762 - #06

War And The Innocent Bystander

Even as the vast majority of Americans and Canadians fully support the war on terrorism, there is a vocal minority that protests against the war. One of the concerns voiced by some of these opponents is the possibility of innocent civilian bystanders being killed as a result of the offensive. The United States government itself constantly clarifies that its enemy is not the Afghan people but terrorists and those that harbour terrorism. Indeed, it could be argued that the Afghan people are themselves victims of the Taliban conquerors of their homeland. Nonetheless, the war against terrorism has resulted and will continue to result in the deaths of civilian Afghan citizens and others. Protesters point to this reality and thereby declare the war to be unjust: They ask: even if the goal is commendable, how can one justify the spilling of innocent blood in the attempt to stop the terrorists?1 This is a question that needs to be addressed.

Rabbi J. David Bleich2 writes: "Not only does one search in vain for a ruling prohibiting military activity likely to result in the death of civilians, but, to this writer's knowledge, there exists no discussion in classical rabbinic sources that takes cognizance of the likelihood of causing civilian casualties in the course of hostilities legitimately undertaken as posing a halakhic or moral problem."3 Unfortunately, Rabbi Bleich does not give any explanation as to why the "likelihood of civilian casualties" does not pose "a halakhic or moral problem." It may be that this is an assumed cost of war and the allowance for war inherently allows the loss of civilians. Minchat Chinuch, Mitzvah 425 states that in regard to the commandments that obligate the Jewish nation to wage war, there is no argument for exemption because of pikuach nefesh, concern for life. While concern for life generally allows (even demands) one to transgress a commandment, this dispensation does not apply to war commandments. Minchat Chinuch's argument is simple: war by definition is dangerous. It may be that war has its own rules. When the Torah allows or demands the waging of war, it could be argued that the Torah is, by definition, declaring a recognition that different moral guidelines have to apply than those that exist in peace situations.4 Since as U.S. Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld stated, the loss of civilians is an inevitable consequence of war,5 the halachic permission to wage war may itself recognize and sanction this inevitable loss of civilian lives. An allowance for war by definition removes culpability for these deaths.

Essentially, the moral question changes in the context of war. There is still a moral question that needs to be addressed but, with war, it is transformed. Our question is not whether the loss of civilian life or how much loss of civilian life is acceptable in the pursuit of a terrorist. Our question is whether war is an appropriate response to this terrorist incursion. If it is, by definition, it means an acceptance of loss of civilian life. Rabbi Bleich clarifies this distinctive nature of war by comparing a moral call for arms - such as a defensive war - to the law of the rodef, the pursuer.6 According to Jewish Law, if one is threatening another's life, we are commanded to protect the one threatened even if it demands killing the pursuer. Rabbi Bleich, however, contends that under the law of rodef the possibility of harm to a bystander would limit the possible responses. A rodef may not be attacked if such action "is likely to result in casualties among noncombatants."7 The consequence of such a distinction is major. According to Rabbi Bleich, if the pursuit of a terrorist is defined as a police action - and thus carried out under the law of rodef - this action is significantly limited by the need to minimize potential harm to civilians. If this pursuit is defined as an act of justifiable war, however, this action is not thereby limited.8

Still, why is war unique? Why does war create a shift in moral axioms? Maharal, Gur Aryeh, Bereishit 34:13 sees war in the context of the nation. As an individual, one person may not be responsible for the actions of another and, therefore, ethically protected from suffering because of the other’s actions. However, Maharal contends that as part of a nation, in war this individual is subsumed under the group. He/she, thus, halachically shares the fate of the group, even if he/she is personally not responsible for the actions of the perpetrator. This is an example of the shift in moral axioms that is part of war. But this case may also serve to help elucidate the nature of this shift. In war, we see the nation, not the individual. Similarly, in war, it may be that we assert the value of the broad principle and not the specific morality of each detailed case. With a declaration of war against terrorism, a general goal to eradicate this evil becomes paramount notwithstanding the cost in lives.9


Notes

1 If the evil of terrorism is ultimately defined by the spilling of innocent blood, the question ironically is: how can one justify the spilling of innocent blood (in the military offensive) in order to prevent the spilling of innocent blood (by terrorists)?

2 See Contemporary Halakhic Problems, Volume 3, Preemptive War in Jewish Law, p. 277.

3 Rabbi Bleich, in this article, is discussing warfare within the context of Jewish Law, specifically certain issues involving the Jewish nation's right and/or obligation to wage war. Within this Insight, we are, for the purposes of moral investigation, extending aspects of this discussion to war in general as it may apply to all nations.The Noachide laws governing war as it applies to all nations, however, may be different than the laws governing a Jewish nation at war. Thus, this extension must be approached with some caution. Yet, it is my belief that this extension is generally applicable. Further on the status of warfare under the Noachide Code, see Rabbi J. David Bleich, Contemporary Halakhic Problems, Volume 2, Miscellaneous Questions: War and Non-Jews.

4 Another example of this shift in moral axioms is the case of the yefat to'ar, the beautiful woman captured in war. See Devarim 21:10-14. According to those Torah scholars that allow nations to initiate hostilities under the Noachide Code, the exclusion of war casualties from the prohibition of homicide may be another example of this shift. See, further, Ntziv, HaEmek Davar, Bereishit 9:5.

5 Even, in this case, with the U.S. intent to limit such losses.

6 See Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzvot 600 and 601.

7 Notwithstanding Rabbi Bleich's position, this issue in itself may be worthy of discussion. Yet, in that the law of rodef is different than the parameters of war, the point is still made.

8 Of course there must still be an evaluation of the projected extent of this cost in terms of the objectives of the war. This evaluation process, it should be recognized, is also an inherent part of the nature of war. For example, while danger is an acceptable consequence of war, great losses or even pyrrhic victories may not be justifiable. As such, while pikuach nefesh may not be a factor in evaluating a situation, the potential for great losses may override a command to fight if avoidance of this danger would be a normative battle decision.

9 In comparison, in a non-war situation, individual life would be the paramount concern.

[muman613]

From Rabbi Avraham Yitzak Kook:


Ki Teitzei: Waging War
The Necessity to Fight

"When you wage a war against your enemies and God will give you victory over them ..." (Deut. 21:10)

War is perhaps the most tragic and horrific aspect of the human condition. Our most fervent wish is for peace. This is the final blessing of the kohanim. The last statement in the Talmud also extols the unsurpassed importance of peace: "The Holy One found no vessel more capable of holding blessing for Israel than peace" (Oktzin 3:12).

So why does Jewish law include such concepts as compulsory and optional wars — milchemet mitzvah and milchemet reshut? Why do we find that the greatest spiritual leaders of the Jewish people — Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Samuel, King David, Rabbi Akiva — all led their nation into battle?

In a letter penned in 5664 (1904), Rav Kook explained:

"It would have been totally impossible, at a time when all of the surrounding nations were truly wolves of the night, that only the Jewish people would refrain from waging war. The nations would have joined together and destroyed the remnant of the people, God forbid. On the contrary, it was absolutely crucial to act without mercy in order to evoke fear in the wild savages."

We look forward to the day when the human race will develop to its proper state. The Torah, however, does not attempt to proceed too quickly, before the world is ready.

"Nothing ruins the groundwork for perfecting human society as much as the influence of elevated ideas on masses who are not ready to accept them. Those who sought to advance humanity by imposing the Torah's ethical teachings before the world was ready for them — completely misunderstood God's intention. The proof [that this approach is faulty] is aparent in the phenomenon of those who burnt their victims alive in auto-da-fe [during the Inquisition] under the banner of 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' This is because the Torah's refined ideals require preparation. As the Sages cautioned, 'It is an elixir of life for those who follow it diligently... but the derelict will stumble in it' (Shabbat 88b, based on Hosea 14:10).

The cruel conflicts that we witness are in fact a result of ethical constraints that were artificially imposed on the nations of the world. This created an unhealthy culture suffering severe distress; it produced negative traits, mental imbalance, and deep-rooted anger. A profound resentment erupted into vast displays of destruction and cruelty, with a brutal violence that revealed their as-yet unrefined character.

Even within the Jewish people, regarding matters pertaining to the public and national arena, the Torah did not attempt to coerce the spirit of the people towards unrealistic saintliness. This would have lead to an unnatural, forced piety. The Torah's objective is to establish an ethical awareness in the hearts of the people based on their own free will. That is why we find that the Torah is lenient regarding certain war-related issues, such as the law of female captives.

The Divine Purpose in War

Yet, one may still ask: what is the purpose of war in general?

In his book Orot, Rav Kook sought to uncover the Divine purpose even in war. Great wars, he wrote, have a important function in the world: they awaken the yearnings for the Messianic Era. Solomon described the hour of redemption as "the time of the songbird ('zamir')" (Song of Songs 2:12). It is a time to prune (zamir) and cut down the wicked.

But what about the many innocent lives lost in the destructive surge of violence? This phenomenon contains a measure of "mitat tzaddikim mechaperet," atonement of the world that comes from the death of the righteous. These souls elevate to the source of life, and their lives bring universal good and blessing for the overall advance of the world in all of its aspects.

With the conclusion of the war, the world is renewed with a new spirit, and the footsteps of the Messianic Era are revealed. Thus we find in the daily prayers a connection between war and the messianic light of redemption:

"Master of wars, Who sows kindness and brings forth salvations ... You will shine a new light on Zion."
(Adapted from Igrot HaRe'iyah vol. I, letter 89, p. 100; Orot pp. 13,15)

[muman613]

http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/413826/jewish/Dying-for-Life.htm
Inner Stream - Dying for Life
By Lazer Gurkow


When our ancestors would mobilize their forces for war, they were addressed by a high ranking priest. First he would offer brave words of encouragement and confident predictions of victory. “Let your heart not be faint; do not fear the enemy nor enter into panic and do not be terrified for G-d will vanquish your enemy for you.”

The military officers would then announce: “Any man who has built a home, but has yet lived in it... planted a vineyard, but has yet to render it fit for use... betrothed a woman, but has not yet married her... should return home, lest he die in war....” (Deuteronomy 20)

This is an astounding time for such announcements. The priest has just bolstered the morale of the troops and the officers; yet now, it seems, he proceeds to demoralize them by thinning their ranks!

(There are a number of explanations that are offered by the commentaries for these announcements. Ibn Ezra1 argues that this was strategically wise. Men with such concerns on their mind will worry about their affairs at home and will be unable to keep their mind on the battle. Filling their ranks with such unmotivated troops would weaken the military and undermine their prospects for victory. Abarbanel2 argues that since these men did not have opportunity to fulfill the respective mitzvot associated with their endeavor (the house builder has yet to build his parapet, the vineyard planter has yet to offer the priestly gifts and the betrothed has yet to sire children) they would not merit the miracles required for victory.)

Protecting a Way of Life

The Talmud remarks that the order of these announcement reflect the proper conduct of life: First we ought to build a home, then plant a vineyard, or establish alternative sources of income, and only then should we marry.3 This remark indicates that our sages viewed these three announcements as a reflection on the ordinary routine of life.4

Why does an army go to war? To protect its national interest. What is a nation's primary interest? It's citizens' unhindered pursuit of life's ordinary routine. When an enemy threatens the ordinary pursuit of day to day life, the nation's very fabric is undermined.

In this way, perhaps we can explain the priest's public announcement of these exemptions from battle immediately following his words of encouragement. The troops were reminded of their exalted purpose. Why are we going to war? To enable our comrades to pursue the normal routine of life. So they can build homes, plant vineyards, and establish families.

The troops that were sent home knew that they were entitled to recuse themselves from military draft, but they came anyway. How could they not come? They could not sit home while their brothers fought for their country. It was not easy for them to abandon their brothers and go home.

Yet they were told to do just that. These soldiers, with their departure, validated their comrades' efforts on the battlefields. If they went to war, their comrades would die in vain.

Modern Application

When the enemies of Israel threaten our cities with rockets, when they threaten our lives with suicide bombers, when they send our citizens to bomb shelters and destroy our way of life, the nation is justified in going to war.

No argument can justify a cease fire that does not achieve the goals for which the nation set out to war. If our soldiers are not safe, if our borders are still violated and if our cities are still under attack then our war is not over.

We mourn the loss of innocent lives on all sides, our Torah ethic demand it. We pursue the war with a vengeance, till peace can be restored, our Torah ethic demands that too. We do not seek a peace that will lead to another war. We seek a war that will lead to a lasting peace. This is the unfortunate reality fostered upon us by our enemy.

We must embrace life. But if victory is not achieved, then those who have sacrificed their life will have died in vain. We cannot allow that to happen.

Fear Nothing, but Sin

Just before the army embarked for war, one last announcement was made. “He who is fearful and fainthearted should return home, lest he melt his brothers' heart as well.” There are those who fear the consequences of war, but such fear is intolerable in war. The Torah instructs us to keep such fears silent, lest they melt the hearts of the brave.

According to one of our sages this announcement was directed to sinners. An enemy that G-d promised to vanquish need only be feared if we were made unworthy by sin.5

Israel's destiny is in G-d's hands. We have no reason to fear our enemy, but we do have reason to fear our own sins. If we fear the odds in this war it is because we are not worthy of G-d's miracle. The obvious antidote is repentance.

This time of year is conducive to repentance. So let us repent this year not only for ourselves, but for our entire nation.


FOOTNOTES
1.   Rabbi Abraham ben Meir ibn Ezra, Spain, 1092–1167.
2.   Don Yitzchak Abarbanel, Spain, 1437-1508.
3.   Talmud, Sotah, 44a. See Maharsha, ibid., that this standard only applied to a person of means. One, who cannot afford to build his own house and business may marry on the basis that the community will support him till he finds an independent source of income.
Maimonides places house building ahead of vineyard planting. Many commentators have attempted to explain the seeming contradiction with the Talmudic statement.
4.   It is interesting to note that when G-d reprimands the Jews and warns of their impending punishment should they abandon the Torah the loss of these three freedoms are specified. “You will betroth a woman, but another man will lie with her, you will build a house, but another mail will live in it, you will plant a vineyard, but will not render it fit for use (Deuteronomy 28:30).
5.   Talmud, Sotah, 44a. See also Rashi's and Nachmanides' commentaries on Deuteronomy 20:9.

      
The content on this page is copyrighted by the author, publisher and/or Chabad.org, and is produced by Chabad.org. If you enjoyed this article, we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply with the copyright policy.
 

[muman613]

Here is a very good explanation of the 'captive woman' commandment.


http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/kahn/archives/kisetze69.htm

Torah Attitude: Parashas Ki Seitzei: Human strengths and weaknesses

Summary

"You see among the captives a beautiful woman and you desire her, and you may take her for yourself as a wife." The Jewish soldier sees the beauty of the woman's soul and desires to help bring it into the Jewish people. The laws concerning a captive woman in war are a special dispensation from the regular halacha. It is within our ability to fulfill every single Torah law. Only very righteous people who never sinned would be going into battle in this kind of warfare. The Torah here teaches us an important lesson about natural human weaknesses. "Better that you should be ashamed of Amram in this world, than be ashamed of him in the World to Come." Even the greatest and most pious have within them this evil inclination, and there are instances when it takes superhuman strength to control oneself. We are all being challenged in different ways with tests that are tailor-made to our nature and our capabilities. No one is tested beyond what he can handle. Every Torah commandment was given to us to supply us with opportunities to amass merits throughout our lives.

Captive woman in war

In the beginning of this week's Parasha, it says (Devarim 21:10-11): "When you go out to war against your enemies, and HASHEM your G'd will deliver them into your hand, and you will capture its captivity, and you see among the captives a beautiful woman and you desire her, and you may take her for yourself as a wife."

Souls come back to holiness

Under normal circumstances, it is well known that it is prohibited by Torah law for a Jewish man to marry a gentile woman. Even if the woman is ready to convert to Judaism, it is not permitted if her conversion is for the purpose of marriage. So why does the Torah allow this union? Every Torah law can be understood on different levels. On a deeper level, the Kabbalists explain that the sin of Adam caused certain souls to be pushed into the realm of impurity. In the cause of time, G'd will orchestrate situations that will allow these souls to come back to the realm of holiness and purity. This parasha deals with such a situation. According to this, the Torah is talking about a Jewish soldier who sees the beauty of this woman's soul and desires to help bring it into the Jewish people (see Or HaChaim 21:11).

Special dispensation

On a simple level, Rashi quotes the Talmud (Kiddushin 21b) that teaches that the laws concerning a captive woman in war are a special dispensation from the regular halacha. The Talmud explains that G'd knows that the temptation for the soldier at war would be too great, and if it would not be permitted, chances are that this soldier would not be able to control himself and would take this woman in any case.

Ability to fulfill every Torah law

The famous Rabbi of Slutzk, Rabbi Yechezkel Abramsky, who later headed the London Beis Din, comments that this teaches us that it is within our ability to fulfill every single Torah law. G'd, Who created us, knows our strengths and weaknesses, and gave us no commandment that is too difficult. Sometimes people would like to strengthen themselves in their observance as they recognize the truth of the Torah and its commandments. But they feel that at their age it is too difficult for them to change their lifestyle. They encourage others, as well as their children, to embrace the Torah but claim that it is too late for them, as they are too establish in their way of life. Says Rabbi Abramsky, such an excuse is nothing but the evil's inclinations way of dealing with this person. Every Jewish person has the ability to live according to the instructions of the Torah. The Torah only demands of us what is within our capabilities.

Only conscript righteous for war

Rashi further explains that this Parasha is dealing with the warfare that is described towards the end of last week's Parasha (Devarim 20:1-9) where the Torah exempts anyone who is scared to go into battle. Rashi quotes the Talmud (Sotah 44a) that explains that this includes anyone who has transgressed a Torah commandment and does not feel secure that he will survive the war due to his sins. Says Rabbi Eliahu Lopian, if so, only very righteous people, who never sinned, would be going into battle in this kind of warfare.

Natural human weaknesses

Asks Rabbi Lopian, does the Torah need to be concerned about these righteous people that they cannot control themselves because they see a beautiful woman? He answers that the Torah here teaches us an important lesson about natural human weaknesses. No one is above an urge like this that every man is created with. He quotes the Jerusalem Talmud (Shabbos 1:3) where it is related about an elderly, pious sage who suggested a slight change in the words of the Mishnah (Pirkei Avos 2:5). The Mishnah says, "Don't trust yourself till the day that you die." This great sage felt that he had reached a level a purity that he would not need to worry about any temptations, and therefore he read this passage as "Don't trust yourself till the day of your old age." This did not go unnoticed in the Heavenly Court, where the Accuser requested and got permission to dress up as a most beautiful woman and entered the study of this sage. When the sage looked up and saw this beautiful woman in front of him, he addressed her in a somewhat inappropriate way. However, he caught himself immediately and was greatly pained over this incident. The Heavenly Court took mercy on him and instructed the Accuser to reveal the truth to the sage, and to tell him that he was sent from Heaven to teach him that he should not change any word in the oral Torah for it is accurate to the minutest detail.

Rabbi Amram the Pious

The Talmud (Kiddushin 81a) relates an amazing story that happened to Rabbi Amram the Pious. A group of women had been taken into captivity and were redeemed by the Jewish community of Naharda'a. They were brought to the home of Rabbi Amram the Pious who gave them accommodation on the upper floor of his house. With the assistance of ten men he removed the staircase that led up to where they stayed so that no one should be tempted to start up with them. A little while later, one of the women passed by upstairs, and her beauty was so special that it seemed like a light lit up downstairs. This was too much even for the pious Rabbi. His adrenaline surged so much that he single-handedly moved the staircase back to go to the upstairs. As he was halfway up the staircase, he got second thoughts and with all his might stopped in his tracks and started shouting at the top of his lungs, "There is a fire burning by Amram." All the neighbours heard his call and came running to extinguish the fire. As his colleagues, the other rabbis, entered his house, they said, "You are making us ashamed." The Rabbi responded, "Better that you should be ashamed of Amram in this world, than be ashamed of him in the World to Come."

Superhuman strength

This is human nature. Even the greatest and most pious have within them this evil inclination, and there are instances when it takes superhuman strength to control oneself. At the time of warfare, G'd does not expect such a self-control of every soldier, even if he is a righteous and pious person. The Talmud (Succah 52a) teaches an additional insight. The greater the person, the greater is his evil inclination. Every individual is challenged on a level suited to his personality and greatness. This is why the halacha requires segregation of men and women as far as possible and prohibits a man and a woman to be on their own in a place where the presence of other people is not anticipated. The halacha takes no chances and teaches that these laws apply even with a young girl or elderly woman (see Shulchan Aruch Even Haezer 21-22).

Tailor-made challenges

This is a classic example of the famous saying, "An ounce of prevention is greater than a pound of cure." Once the damage has been done the people involved are scarred for life and every measure must be taken to avoid such a pitfall. Our sages explain that G'd does not expect of us more than we can handle (see Talmud Avodah Zorah 3a and Midrash Rabbah Shemos 34:1). This applies both as a general rule in Torah law as well as in any situation that an individual finds himself. We are all being challenged in different ways with tests that are tailor-made to our nature and our capabilities. No one is tested beyond what he can handle.

Opportunities to amass merits

The Torah commandments were given to us to supply us with opportunities to amass merits throughout our lives. As the Mishnah (Makkos 23b) says: "The Holy One … wished to bring merit upon Israel. Therefore, He gave them Torah and commandments." In a similar way, every test and challenge we encounter throughout our life is for the purpose of elevating us to a higher level, and to help us to reach our personal purpose and goal in life. If we manage to internalize this message then nothing will be too difficult for us to handle, and rather than feel burdened and stressed we will accept whatever life brings us in appreciation to our Creator Who blessed us with these opportunities.

These words were based on a talk given by Rabbi Avraham Kahn, the Rosh Yeshiva and Founder of Yeshivas Keser Torah in Toronto.

[muman613]

Cowards of the World, Unite!
By Yossy Goldman


What makes a hero?

In this week's Parshah, the Torah discusses the laws of war and some of the moral imperatives that apply even under fire. Specifically, we read of the exemptions that entitled a soldier to leave the battlefront. One of these was "the man who is fearful and fainthearted." The Torah rules that "he should go and return to his home" and join the civil service, lest his cowardice "melt the hearts" of his comrades in arms and demoralize them (Deuteronomy 20:8).

Interestingly, Maimonides rules that this exemption only applied to wars which were optional for political or territorial reasons (milchemet ho'reshut), but not to obligatory wars where the Torah itself mandates that we go to battle (milchemet mitzvah), such as a war of self defense or the wars to conquer the Promised Land.

But what is the logic here? Why the distinction? If the problem is that the coward's fear will have a negative effect on his fellow combatants, then that is a psychological fact of life. What difference does it make if the war is mandated by G-d or by Jewish leadership of the day? Surely a coward is a coward whatever the war!

But Maimonides is sharing with us a striking analysis of human nature. Fear and anxiety are magnified when there is more than one option open to us. When we have the choice of fighting or not, when war is not strictly commanded by G-d and it's a government decision, then I may very well choose to retreat. But when there is no choice, when it is a non-negotiable mitzvah from G-d that this war be fought, then even cowards become heroes.

I am fond of quoting that famous American philosopher, John Wayne, who once said, "True courage is not the absence of fear. True courage is being scared like hell and saddling up anyway." Now that's a wise cowboy. The fearless few who heedlessly plunge into every offered challenge are indeed strange exceptions to our race. Most normal people experience fear in scary situations. Those of good courage face up to the fear and confront it.

I can tell you many stories of ordinary people who became heroes. How? By overcoming their fears and doing whatever deed had to be done. My friends' father, Pinne Merkel, once ran into a synagogue in the old neighborhood of Doornfontein, Johannesburg to rescue the Torahs from the Holy Ark. The firemen warned him not to, but he ran in anyway. Pinne was not a religious man. But for him, saving the Torah scrolls was something that just had to be done, so an ordinary Jew became a holy hero.

My congregant's son, Hugh Raichlin, is not a doctor. He's a lawyer. But when his wife was in labor and suddenly things started happening much too quickly, he delivered his own child inside the car in the parking lot of the maternity hospital. He wasn't looking for heroism. He had no option and heroism found him.

When something just has to happen, we find a way to make it happen. We pluck up the courage and act valiantly.

My own father, may he be well, used to be a chain smoker (thank G-d, he gave up the habit long ago). It often amazed me that the same person who would never be without a cigarette between his fingers six days a week was able to go cold turkey every Shabbat. For six days he couldn't wait two minutes, but once a week he waited for 25 hours! How? The answer is that keeping Shabbat for him was simply a non-negotiable commitment, so he had no option and persevered. As soon as Shabbat was over, though, he and his fellow Shabbat-observant smokers would make a mad dash for the nearest pack.

It applies to life, to marriage, to business, to everything. If something is so important to us that to lose it would be unthinkable, we discover that we really can find a way, after all. In our Jewish lives, too, when we accept that a particular mitzvah is a sacred principle and inviolate, we will observe it no matter what the challenge.

So, cowards of the world, unite! Let us do what we know must be done. That's how ordinary people become heroes.

[muman613]

http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2007/parsha/rros_kiteitsei.html

Confronting and Overcoming Human Weakness

Parshat Ki Teizei begins with the laws of yefat toar. In the context of war which may stir intense human emotions and passions, the Torah reluctantly and conditionally sanctions relationships that would otherwise be illicit. Rashi, citing the gemara (Kidushin 21b), explains this unusual allowance as a concession to human weakness ("dibrah Torah keneged yetzer ha-ra").

The Torah's perspective about the religious challenges of warfare is particularly significant when one considers that the ideal soldier according to Jewish law is one who is steeped in righteousness and Divine faith. According to R. Yose ha-Glili (Sotah 44a) one who is concerned about his religious stature is exempt from war ("yarei ve-rach leiv"). R. Akiva has a more inclusive stand regarding the piety of those who are qualified to fight, but also requires an advanced level of spirituality (at least according to Rambam's interpretation- Hilchot Melachim 7:15). The Baal ha-Turim links the last words of the previous parshah ("ki taaseh ha-yashar be-einei Hashem"), referring to the admirable implementation of Hashem's will, with the first words of Parshas Ki Tisah that discuss waging war because righteousness is a prerequisite for military conscription. And yet, despite the admirable character of the Jewish soldier, the Torah addresses and makes allowances for human frailty in the context of war. Apparently, the difficulty of maintaining spiritual equilibrium in the heat of battle, a time of intense passion and emotional stress, is a formidable one that tests even the most committed. Undoubtedly, the spiritual vulnerability of the pious soldier also reinforces the view expressed in Chazal (Sukah 52a) that great men are particularly challenged to maintain their high standards ("kol ha-gadol me-chaveiro yizro gadol heimenu").

While the laws of yefat toar demonstrate the Torah's realism in acknowledging and occasionally even providing outlets for human frailty, close scrutiny of the process that precedes the allowance of yefat toar (removing her from her indigenous environment, growing of her nails, shaving of her head…) unequivocally establishes that one is obligated to rigorously pursue any reasonable course to refashion one's emotional response to avoid even sanctioned halachic compromise.  By detailing this process, the Torah conveys that this rare and unusual concession should not be abused or misconstrued. The steps outlined for yefat toar also provide a model through which one can respond to human temptation and strive for ideal halachic observance. Neutralizing the initial superficial stimuli and utilizing the perspective of time and distance constitute instructive guidelines in the struggle to confront and overcome human appetites and temptations.

In addition to these steps to combat obstacles and difficulties once encountered, it is vital to anticipate personal vulnerability and spiritually fortify oneself in advance of halachically challenging events or environments. The Kli Yakar notes that the Torah refers to multiple opponents ("oyevecha") even though it speaks only of a single defeated enemy ("unetano Hashem …"). He explains that in order to succeed against the concrete enemy on the battlefield, one must first struggle internally to refine one's halachic values and vanquish the yetzer ha-ra that is accentuated by the passions of battle. This is accomplished by identifying and fortifying against one's spiritual deficiencies. Awareness that one confronts a second, highly personal front in all epic battles enables appropriate preparation for the dual struggle that may preclude the very problem of yefat toar! The role of intense Torah study is particularly crucial in confronting spiritual dangers, as Chazal (Kidushin 30a; Berachot 5a) viewed the internalization of Torah values and reinforcement of halachic perspective by means of study as an especially effective antidote to the yetzer ha-ra.

Chazal warn that marrying a yefat toar risks serious detrimental repercussions. Midrash Tanhuma (cited in Rashi) perceives the "hated wife - ha-senuah" and even the incorrigible or rebellious son ("ben sorer u-moreh") in the next sections of the parshah as products of this halakhically flawed, albeit legal union. Chatam Sofer (Torat Moshe, Ki Teizei) sharply rejects the implication that any halakhically sanctioned marriage could produce such suffering. He concludes that the full halachic allowance is extremely limited, as it is contingent upon maximal effort to neutralize one's improper obsession and skewed emotional state. In his view, the "hated wife" and rebellious son reflect the abuse rather than the proper implementation of yefat toar, although the marriage still stands. [Compare with Rambam (Melachim 8:2) and Ramban's (s.v. ve-chashaktah bah)] Chatam Sofer's perspective accentuates the obligation to strive for ideal halachic standards to avoid compromise.

It is conceivable, however, that the projected damage resulting from the yefat toar union depicted by Chazal does not constitute punishment but reflects the natural consequences of diluted and compromised standards of discipline, restraint, and mutual respect, cornerstones of the halachic vision of sanctity in family life. The origins and foundation of misplaced passion and obsession may easily produce a poisoned marriage (ishah senuah). The legality of the yefat toar marriage may be insufficient to foster an emotional and halachic environment that effectively inculcates the values of authority, restraint, and kedushah that safeguard against the development of a ben sorer u-moreh.

Directly and by hint, the Torah communicates through the halachot of yefat toar that one must strive mightily to maintain halachic standards and perspective even in the most challenging environments and circumstances. While conceding man's spiritual frailty, Chazal emphasize that one bears the potentially dire consequences that result from acquiescing to spiritual mediocrity. Our ultimate goal is to attain authentic kedushah which demands not only that we eschew halachic compromise, but that we conduct ourselves in accordance with Torah values that transcend strict obligation. Kadesh azmechah be-mutar lach.

[muman613]

http://www.kby.org/hebrew/torat-yavneh/view.asp?id=4005


The Mishna in Sotah 44b mentions groups of people who are told to return home from the battlefield. It concludes, "This is only for a war of 'reshut,' but for a war of 'mitzvah' everyone goes out, even a bridegroom from his chamber and a bride from her chupah." R. Yehuda similarly distinguishes between a war of "mitzvah" and "chova." What is the difference between Tana Kamma and R. Yehuda?

R. Yochanan equates the "reshut" of Rabanan with the "mitzvah" of R. Yehuda, and the "mitzvah" of Rabanan with the "chova" of R. Yehuda. In other words, they both draw a similar distinction and there is only minimal difference between them. Both agree that the wars of Yehoshua to conquer Eretz Yisrael were certainly "chova," whereas the wars of David for expansion (such as Syria) were certainly "reshut." They argue about defensive wars, to weaken the enemy so that Jews should not be attacked. According to Rabanan this is also only "reshut," whereas according to R. Yehuda this is also a war of "mitzvah." The Gemara concludes that the practical ramification of this categorization is for the issue of "osek bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah," whether the soldier in such a war is exempt from other mitzvot at that time. Thus, according to Rabanan, there are only two levels -- "chova/mitzvah" (where everyone goes out) and "reshut" (where there is not even the principle of osek bemitzvah.), whereas according to R. Yehuda there is a third -- "mitzvah" (where not everyone goes out, but has rule of osek bemitzvah).

The Rambam writes (Melachim 5:1) that a king must first fight wars of mitzvah, such as to capture Eretz Yisrael, eradicate Amalek, and defend Israel from their enemies who attack them, and only later can he embark on wars of expansion and glory. This Rambam poses a problem; whom does he rule like? On the one hand, he includes the defense of Israel from their enemies as "mitzvah," which seems to follow R. Yehuda. The Knesset Hagedolah understands this same way. [Based on this, he questions the Lechem Mishneh, who asked why the Rambam omitted the case of defensive wars to weaken the enemy, which is not a mitzvah according to Rabanan? The Knesset Hagedolah understands that the Rambam did quote wars to defend Israel!] On the other hand, the implication of the Gemara is that even R. Yehuda only considered it a mitzvah as far as the issue of "osek bemitzvah," but not as far as not returning from the battlefield. So how could the Rambam include defensive wars together with those to capture Eretz Yisrael?

The Chazon Ish answers that there are two kinds of defensive wars. One is when Israel is already attacked. This the Rambam defines as "help of Israel from the enemy who attacks them," and is certainly a war of "chova" in which everyone must participate. The Gemara, however, is talking about a preemptive war to prevent the enemy from launching an attack. This understanding of the Rambam is not like the Knesset Hagedolah. Rather, the Rambam rules like Rabanan, and the Lechem Mishneh's question is in place, why did the Rambam not explicitly mention a preemptive war?

The Meiri writes that the distinction between Rabanan and R. Yehuda is when we hear that the non-Jews are preparing to attack. This is the same as the Rambam. The Rambam in his Peirush Hamishnayot includes in chova only wars against the seven nations of Canaan and against Amalek. He explains there that the dispute between R. Yehuda and Rabanan is about wars to, "Kill those who are fighting them and to weaken them [based on Rav Kapach translation] so that they will not kill Jews and will not fight in their land."

Where is the source of the Rambam? Why do Rabanan consider preventative wars as only reshut? After all, there is an obligation to save Jews from danger, as the Rambam writes, "Anyone who can save [a fellow Jew] and does not save [him], violates 'You shall not stand aside while your fellow's blood is shed.'" (Hil. Rotzeach 1:14) There is a positive mitzvah to save a fellow Jew (derived from hashavat aveidah), and one who does not do so also violates a lav!

We have to ask, how is one allowed to endanger himself in battle? The Kessef Mishneh writes (based on the Talmud Yerushalmi) that to save a friend from death one is even required to endanger himself somewhat. However, the Rambam and Rif do not quote this Yerushalmi, and even if there is only risk of loss of limb one does not have to endanger himself to save another, like any other mitzvah that one is not obligated in a situation of pikuach nefesh. The Meshech Chochma comments on G-d's statement to Moshe, "Go, return to Egypt, for all the people who seek your life have died" (Shemot 4:19) -- that otherwise Moshe would not have had to endanger himself.

The Minchat Chinuch similarly challenges the Chinuch, who writes that there is no obligation to kill an Amalekite if it is dangerous. Since, by definition, the Torah required war, we cannot apply this logic of potential danger! The answer to this is based on the Brisker Rav's comment on the Haftorah of Devorah, who praises Zevulun and Naftali for having endangered themselves. Why only they? The Brisker Rav explains that the Torah defined annihilation of Amalek as war, and therefore there is no idea of Pikuach Nefesh (even for a war of reshut one is obligated to endanger himself), whereas the Chinuch was talking about an individual Amalekite. Although there is mitzvah to kill him, it is not considered war, so there is no need to endanger oneself to perform this mitzvah. Along the same lines, Devorah only commanded Barak to take men from Zevulun and Naftali, and therefore they were obligated in battle, despite the danger, whereas the other tribes were not obligated other than to help save their fellow Jews.

We can now understand why Rabanan defined going out to a preemptive war to save Jews as a war of reshut, since currently it is not defined as a state of war. It is only an obligation based on the mitzvah of saving Jews, and one is not obligated to endanger himself for this, nor do a chatan and kallah go out to battle. R. Yehuda, however, holds that since saving Jews is mitzvah, and one way of saving them is by going to war -- this war is also considered a war of mitzvah.

Thus, according to Rabanan, if there is a state of war we must go out and even endanger ourselves, but if there is no war and we initiate one -- there is no obligation to endanger ourselves, just an obligation to help other Jews. Thus, it is clear that if goyim attack and there is a state of war, everyone must go out. So why does the Gemara never mention this case? Because this is obviously war, and the Mishna only needs to teach about wars that we initiate, which ones are defined as war because Torah commanded so.

With this can answer question of the Lechem Mishneh. The Chazon Ish, in fact, finds the Rambam contradictory. He first talks about wars to help Israel from their enemy -- where they are already attacked, and contrasts this with wars for expansion, leaving out the middle case of a preemptive war. The Be'er Miryam explains that this is, indeed, a middle case, since the king has an obligation to go out to this kind of war also. The Rambam writes in Hil. Melachim that the king must go out to war for the benefit of Israel and must look after their welfare. Thus, in Hil. Melachim, the Rambam discusses two practical ramifications of being a war of mitzvah: 1) The king must first go out to fight a war of mitzvah (not like David with Syria). 2) The king does not need the approval of Sanhedrin (as mentioned in first Mishna in Sanhedrin) for a war of mitzvah. Thus, if the king sees a potentially dangerous situation he can go out to it first, and does not need Sanhedrin's approval. However, for the people such a war is not a mitzvah (other than from the perspective of a mitzvah to help a fellow Jew) unless they are already attacked, but not if initiated by the king. Therefore, the Rambam omitted it, and alluded to it by writing helping Israel from enemies, implying that lesser case is in-between.

With this we can understand why the Gemara only mentioned "nafka mina" of osek bemitzvah and not whether the king needs authorization, since even according to Rabanan he does not need permission.

Rav Kook writes that every government of Israel has the status of king, and has an obligation to ensure the safety of the people.

 

[muman613]

One thing that any Jew who davens from the Siddur (Prayerbook) knows is that in the Song at the Sea (Oz YaShir) Hashem is referred to by the appellation "Master of War". What is incredible is that the name used (of the two most popular names in the Torah) is the name "Yud Kay Vav Kay" which most agree is the name which we associate with Hashems trait of Mercy (The other being Elokim which denotes Hashems judgement and his aspect of nature).... Many commentators point this out such as the following article:


http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/bonchek/archives/beshalach64.htm

Parashas B'shalach (64)

This week's sedra recounts the final hours of the historic Exodus from Egypt. The Israelites left Egypt in a cloud of glory, literally. The splitting of the Reed Sea was the climactic event culminating in a miracle-packed year when Pharaoh and his culture of magic were soundly defeated by the G-d of the Hebrews. At the crossing of the Sea when Pharaoh and his choice army were drowned, Moses, and the People sang a praise to Hashem. The Song of the Sea. In it we read the following verse:
Exodus 15:3

Hashem is a man of war, Hashem is His name.

RASHI

Hashem is a man of war: RASHI: [The Hebrew 'Ish Milchamos'] means the Master of Wars. As in (Ruth 1:3) 'Ish Naomi' The husband (or master) of Naomi. Similarly, in (Kings 2:2 when David speaks to his son Shlomo) "Be strengthened and be a man" meaning "and be a strong person."

WHAT IS RASHI SAYING?

Rashi is translating the word "Ish" which literally means 'man.' He gives it the meaning of 'master.'

QUESTIONING RASHI

A Question: Why is Rashi's translation - master - better than the simple meaning of "man." ?

What was bothering him about the translation "man"?

Your Answer:

WHAT IS BOTHERING RASHI?

An Answer: Describing G-d as "man" is problematic. G-d is not a man. As the verse says "G-d is not man " (Numbers 23:19). If He is not a "man" why then does the verse refer to him as "Ish milchama"? How does Rashi's brief interpretation help us? Your Answer: UNDERSTANDING RASHI An Answer: G-d is described here neither as a "man" in the sense of "man and not woman" nor in the sense of "man and not animal." The word is now translated as "master" one who is in charge of, in control of, wars. In this way we have avoided any possible anthropomorphism, that is describing G-d in human terms.

Can you see any other significance to Rashi's new translation?

Your Answer:

A DEEPER SIGNIFICANCE

An Answer: The words " A Man of War" convey the idea of an aggressive G-d, one who's chief characteristic and who's main pastime, is making wars. This is not the Jewish view of G-d. But, in fact, it is the Christian view of the G-d of the Tanach (i.e. as they see the Jewish view of G-d). It has often been said by gentiles that the Tanach (the Tanach) conveys G-d as a cruel, unforgiving deity. A harsh disciplinarian. Many verses throughout Tanach can be cited that refute this claim. But this is the place to go into that. It is enough to see how Rashi's sensitivity to this point may have prompted him to make this comment. G-d is not a "man of war" in the sense that He is occupied and preoccupied with making war. He is rather the Master of wars, in the sense that if wars must be fought, then His battles, which are on the side of justice and righteousness, are in His control. He is the Master of these wars and after the dust of battle settles, then His values will prevail.

Let us be blessed to live to see such Divine victories.

Shabbat Shalom,

Avigdor Bonchek

[muman613]

The Jewish peoples strength comes not only from his/her physical might or the military equipment of our armies. Our strength, as the Torah tells, comes from our ability to pray to the Almighty G-d. Hashem promises us that if we open up to him and ask him for mercy, to strengthen us in our desire to keep his commandments, that he will be with us. We all need to make small steps towards the kind of observance which our earlier generations had {Shabbat and Yom Tov observance (which I myself can improve in)} and by doing so we strengthen the entire Jewish nation.

This article goes into depth on this concept:


http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/kahn/archives/vayikra64.htm

Torah Attitude: Parashas Vayikra: The Power of Prayer

Summary

How can we stop the suicide bombers? Instead of serving G'd with offerings, we now serve Him through prayer. The real organ used for prayer is the heart. Concentration is necessary when we approach the King of the Universe with our prayers. The Jewish people have inherited a special power: the voice of Jacob. Prayer should never be a burden or an obligation. We have to realize that everyone needs the mercy of G'd. The soul needs three daily prayers to sustain it. The Jews at the Red Sea raised their eyes and cried out to G'd. The Midrash tells the parable of the king who hired some robbers to get the princess to cry out once more. Prayer creates a special closeness between G'd and the Jewish nation as described in the Song of Songs. No peace can be achieved without the Master of Peace.

How can we stop the killing?

We live in a world of falseness and double standards. On the one hand, we see continued acts of terrorism in Israel. Our enemies are merciless. The relatives of suicide bombers celebrate the destruction of Jewish life when they blow themselves up along with totally innocent victims whose only crime is being born Jewish. On the other hand, when the Jews of Israel try to take protective measures and rid themselves of the constant threat, the world condemns them. The same nations that go to war against Al-Keida and fight in Iraq blame Israel for protecting their innocent inhabitants against murderers. There does not appear to be any end to this insanity in sight. What can we do to stop this injustice and the killing of our people?

Serving G'd

In this week's Torah portion, we read about serving G'd by bringing offerings. While the meaning of the offerings may be studied on many different levels of understanding, the purpose of the offerings is to bring us closer to G'd. However, since the destruction of the Temples, we can no longer serve G'd by bringing offerings. Instead, we now serve G'd through prayer.

"With all your heart"

In the second paragraph of the Shema we are commanded to serve HASHEM, our G'd, with all our heart and with all our soul (Devarim 11:13). The Talmud (Taanis 2a) asks what type of service is possible with the heart? The Talmud answers, this is through prayer. Although prayer is expressed and verbalized through the mouth, the real organ used for prayer is the heart. Albeit by saying the words of prayer even without understanding the meaning of the words one fulfills one's obligation to pray; nevertheless, we must admit that this kind of prayer is "lip service". The proper way to pray to G'd is with intense feeling and concentration. This comes from the heart.

Concentration

There is a famous saying: "Prayer without concentration (kavanah) is like a body without a soul." This does not mean to say that if we do not understand every word of our prayer we should not pray. Rather, this means that we should make efforts to understand our prayers. As Rabbi Chaim Valozhin explains, the prayers, compiled by the Men of the Great Assembly, have an effect even if said by someone who does not understand what they are saying. On the other hand, the Rosh in Orchas Chaim (paragraph 36) admonishes us to concentrate when we pray. As he says, "imagine if your son would speak to you without thinking what he is saying. Would it not make you angry? How dare we approach the King of the Universe without thinking what we are saying? Lest we be like a servant who has been honoured with a special job for his benefit but messes up the whole job. Would he dare to approach the king? We ought to ask forgiveness for the part of the prayer when we ask for forgiveness without thinking. At the very least, if we cannot concentrate throughout the whole prayer, we should concentrate in the first blessing of the Amidah and the first verse of the Shema."

Events in Israel

We are all concerned and nervous about the world situation and shaken by the events in Israel. The Jewish people have always known instinctively to turn towards our Father in heaven to pray and cry out in despair. From our Patriarchs we have inherited a special power: the voice of Jacob. As King David says (Psalm 20), "Some come with chariots, some come with horses, but we in the name of G'd call out."

Beg for compassion

We know that when calamity strikes it is a time to cry out and pray to G'd. However, do we realize that whether it is a time of war or peace, of illness or health, of poverty or wealth, intensive prayer has to be part of our daily routine? As it says in Pirkei Avos (2:18) "Rabbi Shimon says: (a) Be meticulous in reading the Shema and in prayer; (b) when you pray, do not make your prayer a set routine, but rather [beg for] compassion and supplication before G'd …" Says Rabbeinu Yona, in his commentary on this Mishna, "When you pray, you should pray like a poor person who prays for what he needs, not like one who does not put his heart into what he is saying. Prayer should never be a burden or an obligation. We have to realize that everyone needs the mercy of G'd. Even when things go well, we cannot know whether this is due to G'd's being slow to anger. There's no one who is so totally righteous on earth that he only does good and never sins (Koheles 7:20)". The absence of calamities may result from the slowness of G'd's anger. Sometimes G'd delays the harsh consequences arising from our conduct.

Pour out our hearts in prayer

G'd is merciful and everyone needs G'd's mercy. Our prayers may tip the scale as to when G'd acts with mercy or with justice. Therefore, it behooves us to constantly pray that nothing bad should happen to us or to others. However, there is more to prayer than that. We must realize that G'd does not need our prayers. Rather, for our sake G'd wants us to pray. The Kuzari explains, just like the body needs three meals a day to sustain it, so does the soul need three daily prayers to sustain it. We find that G'd brings difficult situations on individuals and communities in order to bring the Jewish people to pray. As the Midrash explains, our Matriarchs had no children until late in life. Part of the Divine plan for this was to encourage them to pour out their hearts in prayer. The Jews in Egypt were brought to pray through the hardship of their labour. As it says (Shemos 2:23), "And the children of Israel groaned because of their work, and they cried out. G'd heard their moaning, and G'd remembered His covenant with Abraham, with Isaac and with Jacob."

Perilous situation

Even more so, after the exodus from Egypt, when the Jews arrived at the Red Sea and the Egyptians pursued them, again it says (Shemos 14:10), "Pharaoh approached and the Children of Israel bait their eyes and saw how the Egyptians were chasing after them and they were frightened. The Children of Israel cried out to G'd." The Jews at that point were in a very perilous situation, pursued by their enemies, bounded by the sea and surrounded by wild animals. It was a hopeless situation. They raised their eyes and cried out to G'd.

The king saves the princess

The Midrash asks why did G'd do this? Why did He put them in that situation? The Midrash answers that G'd wanted them to pray. The Midrash compares it to a king that during his travels was approached by a princess who cried out, please save me from the robbers. The king promptly saved her. Later, the king wanted to marry this princess, but she did not even want to talk to him. The king hired some robbers to get her to cry out once more. As the robbers pursued her she started crying out to the king. Said the king, "This is what I was waiting for." So says the Midrash, the Jews in Egypt cried out to G'd from their hardship. G'd came and saved them. After the exodus the Jews stopped praying, so G'd sent the Egyptians after them. Once again the Jews prayed.

Let me hear your voice

This is what King Solomon says in the Song of Songs when he describes the events at the Sea (2:14) "Oh my dove, trapped at the sea as if in the clefts of the rock, the concealment of the terrace. Show Me your prayerful gaze; let Me hear your supplicating voice, for your voice is sweet and your countenance comely." From this we learn that prayer is not just a way to get out of peril. Prayer has a purpose of its own. It creates a special closeness and bond between G'd and the Jewish nation as described in the Song of Songs. When the Jewish people are slack in our prayer, G'd will bring a peril as a way to bring forth prayer. If we strengthen our prayer, pray more and better, who knows how many calamities may be avoided for the whole Jewish people? The Jews in Egypt were saved when they prayed to get out of Egypt. They were saved again when they were trapped by the sea. And so throughout our history, the Jewish people again and again have been in so many difficult situations. And always we have rebounded and turned to G'd who answered our prayers.

Master of War and of Peace

In the present situation, we have to learn from the past and understand what G'd expects of us. He does not want any sacrifices of human life but He wants to hear our voice and for us to re-establish the close relationship between G'd and the Jewish people. At the Song by the Sea, the Jews refer to G'd as the "Master of War". We also refer to Him in our prayers as the "Master of Peace". We all know the famous prayer "oseh shalom bimromav" that we say at the end of the Amidah Prayer: "He who makes peace in the heights, He will make peace for all of us and all Israel." No war can be won without the Master of War. No peace can be achieved without the Master of Peace. The Jewish people have to realize that only through re-establishing a strong bond between G'd and the Jewish nation through prayer and adhering to His commandments can we succeed. The real danger is when we move away from G'd and forget about his commandments. Just as at the time of Purim the Jewish people were only saved from their enemies when they listened to the Torah sage of the Time, the righteous Mordechai, and turned to G'd in earnest prayer. So must we follow the instructions of our Torah sages and pour out heart to our merciful Father in Heaven. And then, no doubt, He will hear our voices crying out and in His great mercy He will save and redeem us and put a stop to all suffering and bring peace to us and the whole world. Amen.

These words were based on a talk given by Rabbi Avraham Kahn, the Rosh Yeshiva and Founder of Yeshivas Keser Torah in Toronto.

[muman613]

More on the idea of Hashem being 'Master of War' as expressed in the Oz Yashir (Song at the Sea)...

http://www.rabbisedley.com/sed/beshalach

After the Israelites have passed safely through the Sea of Reeds, and seen the Egyptians drowned, they sang a song of praise to G-d. The majority of that Song relates the downfall and death of the Egyptians. “I shall sing to G-d, for He is exalted above the arrogant, having hurled horse and rider into the sea… G-d is master of war… Pharaoh’s chariots and army He threw in the sea… In Your abundant grandeur you shatter Your opponents...” (Shemos 15; 1 ff.). Here it seems that G-d is praised through wreaking vengeance on His enemies.

This is in contrast to the specific prohibition against seeking revenge, “You shall not take revenge and you shall not bear a grudge...” (Vayikra 19; 18). The Talmud highly praises someone who does not seek revenge, “Those who are insulted, and don’t respond, that hear themselves being denigrated and don’t respond, who act from love, and rejoice in their suffering about them the verse states, ‘Those who love G-d are like the rising sun in its might’ (Shoftim 5; 31)” (Yoma 23a).

Furthermore, the song that the Israelites sang was forbidden to the angels to sing: After the Israelites had crossed through the Reed Sea the angels wanted to sing a song of praise of G-d. He said to them, ‘Should you sing a song while My handiwork [the Egyptians] are drowning in the sea? (Megillah 10b). It seems that the angels were expected to show compassion at the deaths of the Egyptians, despite the suffering that they caused to the Israelites. How were the Israelites themselves permitted to sing praises of G-d?

The Talmud also implies that revenge is not always a bad thing, “Rabbi Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak, any Torah scholar who does not seek revenge and bear a grudge like a snake is not a true scholar” (Yoma 22b). Elsewhere it states, “How great is revenge, for it was written between two names of G-d, as the verse states, ‘G-d, Who seeks revenge is G-d’ (Tehillim 114; 1)” (Brachot 33a). Furthermore, the Midrash states that the revelation of G-d’s revenge that the nations witnessed at the Reed Sea brought great glory to G-d:

“Then Moshe sang...” (Shemos 15; 1). This is the meaning of the verse “Your [G-d’s] throne was established from then” (Tehillim 93; 2). Rav Berachiah stated in the name of Rabbi Abahu that even though You are eternal, but You were not seated on Your throne, and not known in Your world until Your children recited the Song of the Sea. (Shemos Rabba 23; 1).

The resolution of this apparent contradiction is that there are two kinds of revenge. The common usage of the word revenge implies something which is motivated by pride and a base desire for punishment for one’s enemies. The Talmud explains:

“What is revenge and what is bearing a grudge? A person asked to borrow their neighbour’s sickle, and was refused, then the following the day the same neighbour asks to borrow his axe. If he refuses saying, ‘Just as you wouldn’t lend to me’, this is revenge. What is bearing a grudge? A person asked to borrow their neighbour’s axe, and was refused, then the following the day the same neighbour asks to borrow an item of clothing. If he responds, ‘You may borrow it, because unlike you I do lend out my possessions’ this is bearing a grudge. (Yoma 23a).

There is also vengeance which is solely a quest for justice. Though in English the word ‘vengeance’ has a pejorative meaning, in Hebrew does not necessarily have connotations of vindictiveness. It is this type of vengeance which a Torah scholar must possess, and which was written in the Torah between two of G-d’s names.

The world was set up in a constant balance between G-d’s mercy and His strict justice. Without mercy the world would not have been able to exist for a moment, at the first sin everything would have been returned to emptiness and void. However, without justice G-d is not a G-d of truth. Therefore He must meet out justice, and reward and punishment so that fairness is preserved.

It is through G-d’s carrying out of justice that He is clearly perceived in the world. Every time that a sin goes unpunished, because of G-d’s mercy, there is an opportunity to think that there is no Judge and no justice. When the wicked are punished we see the Heavenly Judge in action.

However, only the injured party can seek this revenge. If someone else seeks revenge on their behalf it cannot be solely a quest for justice. This is why the Israelites were permitted to sing G-d’s praises, because they had suffered under the Egyptians. But the angels who had only observed their suffering were not permitted to rejoice at the downfall of the Egyptians.

We can now understand why G-d was not ‘seated on His throne’ until after the splitting of the sea. For 210 years the Egyptians had persecuted the Israelites with apparent impunity. They forgot that there was a G-d who ran the world. At the time of their punishment all the nations witnessed the fact that everyone ultimately receives their just desserts.

[muman613]

http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/peninim/archives/kisisa71.htm
Va'ani Tefillah

Hashem Ish milchamah, Hashem Shemo
Hashem is Master of war; His Name is Hashem.

The Shem Hashem of Yud Kay Vov Kay is the Shem of rachamim, Attribute of Mercy. Horav Shimon Schwab, zl, says that this Name is used in this pasuk to convey the message that, despite the fact that the Almighty appears now as a G-d of war, a destroyer - this is all appearance. In reality, His Name continues to remain Yud Kay Vov Kay, symbolizing rachamanus, compassion. Hashem is waging war with his Attribute of Mercy. He quotes Chazal who relate that the malachim, angels, requested to sing Shirah, songs of praise, to Hashem. The Almighty did not allow it. He asked, "My creations are drowning, and you wish to sing praises?" This is a manifestation of rachamim. The concept that Hashem employs His middas haRachamim to destroy the wicked is a difficult concept to comprehend. It is clearly rachamim to save the oppressed, but how is it rachamim to destroy the wicked? Perhaps, by destroying the wicked, they are prevented from carrying out more evil, thereby having to receive more punishment. Punishment is merciful if it comes at a time that spares one from receiving additional punishment.