Showing posts with label death penalty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label death penalty. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Tzaraat or Death? Disastrous Results of Haughtiness and Denying God

Parshat Korach

by Rabbi Avi Billet

 After the Korach episode, Moshe is told by God to tell his nephew Elazar to take the fire pans of those who perished bringing the k’toret, and hammer them out in order for them to become covers for the miz’be’ach.
 “And Elazar the Kohen took the copper pans that were offered by those who were burned, and he hammered them into covers for the miz’be’ach. [It was to serve as] a reminder to the Children of Israel, in order that no stranger – who is not of the seed of Aharon – will come close to burn the k’toret before God. And he will not be like Korach and like his cohorts, as God spoke, in the hand of Moshe, to him.” (17:4-5) 
Many commentaries note that the last phrase, “as God spoke, in the hand of Moshe, to him,” seems out of place. Some, such as the Da’at Zekenim, suggest that though these words appear at the end of 17:5, they refer directly to Elazar’s actions of 17:4.

 The phrase “And he will not be like Korach and like his cohorts” is also enigmatic. It could refer to Elazar who, unlike Korach, will be doing exactly what God instructed; it could refer to the non-Kohen who, unlike Korach, avoids bringing k’toret; it could refer to the punishment itself (as opposed to the behavior), that no perpetrator will be swallowed by the ground!

 Rashi (and many others) focuses on the strange phrase “B’yad Moshe” (in the hand of Moshe), suggesting that the verse is teaching us that those who argue over Kohanic rights will be punished with Tzara’at, just as Moshe was punished “in his hand” with tzara’at in Shmot 4:6. This suggests that being swallowed by the ground or consumed by a fire is not a punishment which will be assigned to any future k'toret burners.

 Rashi supports this teaching using the example of King Uzziah (Divrei Hayamim II:26:19) who was afflicted with tzara’at for the rest of his life after he approached the Temple to burn k’toret, despite not being a Kohen.

 But there are problems with Rashi’s teaching. The phrase “B’yad Moshe” appears over 15 times in the Torah. It usually refers to how Moshe presented the law, which descended from the mountain “in Moshe’s hand,” and it doesn’t seem to ever refer to the “punishment” Moshe received at the burning bush. One could even argue that the tzara’at that Moshe received at the burning bush wasn’t even a punishment, as it only lasted for 5 seconds, and was meant to be a sign that God had sent him! Furthermore, where at the burning bush does Moshe burn k’toret or covet the Priesthood?

 Rashi is likely referring to the passage in the Talmud Sanhedrin 110a that says
“someone who hangs on to ‘machloket’ (the need to maintain a fight) violates the rule to not be like Korach and his cohorts. Rav Ashi says, he deserves to get tzara’at – because in this case it refers to [a punishment literally] in the hand of Moshe, and in Shmot Moshe was told to bring his hand into his shirt [in order to receive the tzara’at].”
 How is one parallel to the other? Even if Moshe was punished, how is his circumstance similar to Korach’s?

The Kli Yakar advances this question further, suggesting that if we’re going to try to learn a punishment of tzara’at for challenging authority, we’d be better off learning it from Miriam’s story, when she spoke about her brother’s leadership, claiming similar strengths as a prophetess, and got tzara’at as a result!

 We know that tzara’at was a punishment for seven sins: lashon hora, murder, swearing in vain, immorality, haughtiness, theft and stinginess. (Arakhin 16a) Note that wanting the Priesthood is not on the list.

 Kli Yakar notes that God’s worldview of punishment is “measure for measure.” The Talmud (Shabbat 97a) says, we learn from Moshe that one who suspects others unjustly is punished on his body. Moshe suspected that the Israelites would not believe he was sent by God (Shmot 4:1), assuming he had made everything up. This is exactly what Korach accused Moshe of – fabricating a law that serves his own purposes and makes him (and Aharon) important, without any real Divine instruction.

 Were Moshe’s accusation at the burning bush true, the people would have been subject to tzara’at. Since it was not true, that punishment was put on Moshe, measure for measure. The Kli Yakar explains that this sort of pronouncement fits in with the sins of lashon hora and haughtiness, which the Israelites would have been displaying had they indeed not believed that Moshe was sent by God.

 The reason why Korach and his cohorts met the end that they met was because in addition to bringing k’toret, they denied God completely. They were culpable for two punishments, (tzaraa'at and death) and they received the greater one (death) following the principle of “Kim leh b’d’raba mineh.”

 The strange conclusion of our verse, therefore is teaching the following: the flattened out pans are meant to serve as a reminder for all non-Kohanim not to bring k’toret, because while we are confident they will not be like Korach and his cohorts who denied God’s law and were guilty of all kinds of sins, they are still challenging Moshe’s prophesy that the Priesthood belongs to the family of Aharon alone, as they are thinking their worthiness trumps the priestly bloodline. This is a sin of haughtiness which is punishable with tzara’at. 

Elazar’s role, therefore, is significant only in that he is a Kohen who is representing that Moshe’s prophesy of the Divine assignment of the priesthood is true.

 For everyone else, the lesson is clear. There are different ways of challenging authority. Asking legitimate questions in the pursuit of knowledge and understanding is not only valid. It is significantly important. And if there is something wrong with the authority, it is imperative to find the truth and to bring it out.

 On the other hand, saying Moshe or Aharon are unworthy because “I am more worthy” or because “I deny God’s role in appointing you,” is an offense that is beyond the pale. It is not only arrogance which drives such an approach, but it comes from a place that is far deeper and darker than a respectable desire to understand.

 There are no Moshes and Aharons today. No one is given Divine Authority for any position. When we need to challenge leadership, we must always come from the first approach – a genuine pursuit of truth aimed towards understanding, in order to know how to proceed.

 Korach and his cohorts wanted to bring Moshe and Aharon down simply because they didn’t like them. We dare not look to destroy anyone’s life on account of any hateful vendetta.

Friday, September 5, 2014

Getting Rid of the Evil Among Us

Parshat Ki Tetze 

by Rabbi Avi Billet 

 From the one time in Re’eh to the three times in Shoftim to the five times in Ki Tetze, the Torah tells us nine times to eradicate evil – “Uvi’arta hara” – from either amongst you, or amongst all of Israel.

 It would seem that in most of these cases, as well as others in our parsha, the Torah is advocating for a death penalty kind of punishment for those who are either guilty of a crime, or are in violation of a mitzvah.

 Most people I know would have much less of a problem with capital punishment for truly evil people, such as murderers and terrorists. This is likely true in times of peace, but is even more true during times of war when the swift justice of war eradicates evil people.

 But for sinners?

 We are all sinners! Why would we advocate for these death penalty punishments, or any kind of corporal punishment, when the laws which trigger these punishments are so easily violated? I have seen Sharia law advocates explain that the law is meant to be a deterrent, and that the message of “they will hear and they will fear” will serve as the inspiration to create a moral society as we weed out the bad apples among us. Even if this works in theory, the lack of compassion, and the lack of a soul in the hands of the executor of "justice" is so anti the civil society we have accepted as tolerant and (acceptably) liberal.

 The problem with applying the literal presentation of the Torah's laws in our parsha as "the way the Jewish society was" is that the court system always required witnesses and warnings. And if the warning was not issued in the proper fashion (let alone if it was not issued at all), or if there were no witnesses, or if the witnesses did not fit the necessary criteria or were somehow disqualified (such as if they were related to one another or to one of the claimants), the court case is more of a spectacle than an effective system of punishment. The corporal punishments the Torah describes are immediately thrown off the table.

 Understanding to which crimes and sins specific punishments were appended requires a careful reading of Devarim chapters 17-24. But all of the cases in question come with Talmudic caveats. The rebellious son never existed. The betrothed daughter at that specific age was never unfaithful. Warnings. Witnesses. Etc.

 How then is a just society created if the court system has its hands bound and can’t carry out the law?

Two elements come into play in a society living under God. Firstly, monetary cases are decided by the courts. Documents always had to have witnesses. Legal jargon may not have been what it is today, but the paperwork was there. And courts could decide between he said-he said cases, even in the absence of witnesses.

 The other element is God’s role. The God fearing individual reads the Torah, understands the gravity of the worst sins described in the Torah, and makes a conscious choice not to violate, and to otherwise live a holy existence, to the best of one’s ability.

 Otherwise, between the punishment known as “kares” (which has many possible manifestations) and “misah bidei shamayim” (death at the hands of heaven), the courts would put certain punishments in the hands of Heaven. Imagine the otherwise guilty party (minus the necessary proof to actually convict) walking out of court with the judges saying, “Good luck because you’re going to need it. God is going to get you.”

 What will it take? A car accident? A slip and fall? A heart attack? Or, in those days, perhaps getting gored by an animal running amok? Precisely.

 I am not suggesting that the victims of tragedies like these in our day are being punished for indiscretions. Even if they were guilty of certain sins (after all, aren’t we all?), in most cases it was private, and it was certainly never adjudicated in court. More likely they were not even remotely guilty of the sins of the magnitude described in our parsha. How then do we explain why tragedy struck?

 We can’t. And those who think they know the answers are fools and should be shunned. Sometimes we don’t know and can’t understand the ways of God. Saying things like “it was his time” and “God wanted it this way” are the wrong things to say to people who are filled with questions.

Two final points. I read an opinion piece in Haaretz this week that suggested that as we have evolved from the punishments described in the Torah and no longer practice “an eye for an eye” and capital punishment, we should also consider getting rid of Bris Milah, as the author suggested, “Ritual circumcision is the only act of physical harm that remains.”

 The author’s misunderstanding of the corporal and capital punishments aside (most of which were either monetary compensation to victims or impossible-to-enforce capital punishment), he completely misunderstands what Bris Milah is all about. The Covenant is not viewed as a punishment. It is a gift from God. The act of circumcision is an act of faith that has been adequately addressed by Rabbi Akiva almost two thousand years ago. (Midrash Tanchuma Tazria 7) 

 Finally, we are to understand that as much as society “evolves” the Torah’s truths remain. The punishments described for the heinous crimes and sins are meant to illustrate just how badly these specific violations tear apart the fabric of our Torah-guided society.

 Our goal is to weed out sinners. And we do that through educating sinners not to sin. May we all become experts in Torah knowledge so we can not only continue to enhance our wonderful society, but be a light to the world for how to treat our fellow man.

Thursday, May 30, 2013

Gather Wood and Die?

Regarding the Identity of Tzlafchad see here (or listen here!). And regarding the Death Penalty For Shabbos Violations see here

Parshat Shlach

by Rabbi Avi Billet

 To the best of my counting (and happy to hear a correction!), the Torah mentions the concept of Shabbos once in Bereishis, six times in Shmos, four times in Vayikra, twice in Bamidbar (including our parsha) and only once in Devarim.

 Add to this at least 16 times it is referenced in the remaining 19 books of the Bible, and we have a significant day in the Jewish calendar.

 The story of the woodgatherer (m'koshesh eitzim) in 15:32-36, however, is one of the more disturbing references to the holy day in the Torah. And while it is Shmot 31:14 that is the pretext for the result meted out to the woodgatherer, it is nonetheless troubling to see someone put to death for "violating the Sabbath."

 The Talmud (Bava Batra 119a-b) suggests - somewhat approvingly - the violator did so on purpose to teach a lesson to the people.

 I have always found this Talmudic passage to be troubling. Since when is a person given approval for violating a capital offense in order to teach a lesson? The active principle in the Torah is that when a person is guilty of violating a capital crime, the punishment will be so public that "All of Israel will hear and fear [the punishment] and they will not continue to do such a heinous crime." (see Devarim 13:12, 21:21) There is no justification granted to those who purposely sin for the benefit of the masses! Their sins are not whitewashed in the Torah, and yet the Talmud does give the woodgathering sinner an air of justification.

 It happens that even this principle (capital punishment as a deterrent) is hard to fathom in the two cases in Devarim – the former being an individual who tries to get others to leave the fold and worship idolatry, while the latter is the case of the wayward son who has become a glutton and violates the fifth of the Aseres Hadibros (Ten Statements) through disrespecting his parents. For a different discussion. 

How do we reconcile a person doing a simple act of carrying wood on Shabbos and receiving the death penalty as a result?

 We can't. And this is why the Meshekh Chokhmah notes that "from the time the woodgatherer was stoned – though he had intended his act for the sake of heaven, to publicize the punishment so people would not take the prohibitions of Shabbos lightly – it had such an emotional impact on the people (note he uses the word הרגש - which can either mean as I've translated it, or that they were terrified about violating the shabbos.) that while they were in the mountains of Moav and going through the motions of the book of Devarim (and the review of many laws that it includes), Shabbos is not mentioned. The manna's regular cycle (double portion on Friday) was the eternal reminder of the existence of Shabbos. This is why it is otherwise only mentioned in the retelling of the Ten Statements, which is a reminder to people to keep the Shabbos [but says nothing about those who violate it]."

There is no other evidence (that I'm aware of) that the death penalty was invoked for a violation of Shabbos. [Note from January 2014: See the Midrash in the comments that suggests one of the reasons Achan was killed (in Yehoshua 6-7) was because of Chillul Shabbat]

According to the reading of the Meshekh Chokhmah that the people were emotionally impacted, one might be able to argue that the people were not interested in hearing about the death penalty for Shabbos violations. According to the other way of reading it, it was unnecessary to raise the discussion because the matter was closed. Everyone got the point and the message about not violating the Shabbos.

Maybe the book of Devarim avoids the topic because the repercussions for its violation are so emotionally wrenching.

 But what is the crime?

 The mitzvah to keep Shabbos is so essential to who we are as a people on account of its prominence in testifying to God's creating the world.*

 It is also how we attest to God's role in taking us out of Egypt, and creating the nation of Israel that was finalized with the giving of the Torah - which includes the mitzvah of Shabbos so prominently displayed on the first of the Two Tablets.

 The wood gatherer displayed his utter disregard for all of this. Perhaps in the aftermath of the spies incident he felt that God had forsaken the Jewish people. Maybe he felt that there was no hope for the future - he, along with his generation were fated to die in the desert. Maybe he lost heart. Maybe he gave up. Maybe he felt there was nothing to live for anyway.

 that is a fatalist attitude. We have been waiting for the Messiah to come for a long time. We wait for peace in Israel, even though despite the good intentions of politicians, it will continue to elude the region with the "peace partners" that are anything but sincere.

 Do we give up? No. We forge on. With our faith intact. We do not abandon God and suggest He no longer exists because we are angry with Him. We maintain an ever present hope for the future. 

Abandoning God and the Torah is for people who, like the wood gatherer, don't see the point in it all. A person can believe in God and not observe the Sabbath. But ignoring the rules of resting on the Sabbath is an indicator that God's role in creating the world and resting on the seventh day is irrelevant to the Holy Day.

 While there is thankfully no death penalty for those who violate Shabbos, we pray that Jews across the world will revisit Shabbos, tap into its beauty, and help bring the day the Messiah can come. (Talmud Shabbos 118b)

*
מדרש אגדה (בובר) במדבר פרשת שלח פרק טו סימן לד 

ולמה נסמכה פרשת חילול שבת אצל ע"ז, ללמדך כשם שהמודה בע"ז ככופר בכל התורה, כך כל המחלל שבת ככופר בכל התורה כולה וכן שקולה שבת ככל המצות, שנאמר ועל הר סיני ירדת (ודברת) [ודבר] עמהם [משמים וגו' ואת שבת קדשך הודעת להם] (נחמיה ט' י"ד) 
******************
ps. Check out Rabbi Shimon's response to Rabbi Eliezer!!

ספרי זוטא פרק טו פסוק לב
(לב). ויהיו בני ישראל במדבר, אמר ר' אליעזר בן יעקב נאמר כאן ויהיו בני ישראל במדבר ונאמר להלן אבינו מת במדבר (שם /במדבר/ כז ג) מה מדבר שנא' להלן צלפחד אף מדבר האמור כאן צלפחד. - אמר לו ר' שמעון אי אפשר לומר מקושש היה צלפחד מפני שהיה מקושש בשנה ראשונה בעשרים ואחד לחדש השני וכי אפשר שיהיו בנות צלפחד בנות מלכים נאות וכשרות הקטנה שבהן היתה יושבת ארבעים שנה עד שלא נשאת וכי באיזו שעה מת צלפחד בשעה שנ' וישמע הכנעני מלך ערד (שם /במדבר/ לג מ) באותה שעה מת צלפחד: וימצאו איש, איש אחד היה: 


מדרש אגדה (בובר) במדבר פרשת שלח פרק טו סימן לד

ולמה נסמכה פרשת חילול שבת אצל ע"ז, ללמדך כשם שהמודה בע"ז ככופר בכל התורה, כך כל המחלל שבת ככופר בכל התורה כולה וכן שקולה שבת ככל המצות, שנאמר ועל הר סיני ירדת (ודברת) [ודבר] עמהם [משמים וגו' ואת שבת קדשך הודעת להם] (נחמיה ט' י"ד).