To Live In The Promised Land, At Peace With the Neighbors

Parshat Balak

by Rabbi Avi Billet

A larger view of the Torah provides the context through which we can see how the Biblical Israelites were meant to relate to their neighbors living in the lands within and surrounding the Promised Land. (Bereishit 15:7)

Egypt was the land in which Abraham’s descendants were to be “strangers in a strange land” (Bereishit 15:13). It was also the land to which kings were forbidden to return the nation. (Devarim 17:16) The lands east of the Jordan River (Saudi Arabia and Jordan) were occupied by Edom/Seir, Midian, Moav, Emori, and Bashan respectively. Each of them was given the opportunity to allow the Israelites to pass freely through to the Jordan River, where the intended crossing into the Land was to take place. For reference: Edom – Bamidbar 20:14-19 (refused in verse 21); Emori – Bamidbar 21:21-22, attacked in verse 23; Bashan – didn’t wait for the request, but attacked the Israelites in Bamidbar 21:33.

In the case of Moav, the Torah tells us they had already been conquered by Sichon (Bamidbar 21:26), and perhaps the defeat of Sichon freed them from his oppression. We are told in Devarim 2:8-9 that the people of Edom and Moav were untouchables, owing to Edom being descendants of Eisav and Moav being descendants of Lot. It was only the defeat of Moav at the hands of Sichon, and their land no longer belonging to Moav that allowed the Israelites to conquer that land.

Even the Gaza area, historically owned by the Phillistines since the time of Avimelech King of Gerar, was untouchable to the Israelites on account of the peace treaty that had been made in the time of Abraham (Bereshit 21:22-34). Similarly, lands further east of the areas previously mentioned were also not in the realm of Israelite conquest on account of the treaty made between Lavan and Yaakov (Bereshit 31:51-54), and the line they made that each was not to cross.

As for the seven nations living in the Land, God declared they were unworthy of maintaining their presence there on account of their idolatrous practices and immorality. (see Devarim 7:1-2, Devarim 20:16-18, Yehoshua 3:10 and other places) Despite what the biblical text says, they were given the option to leave, as the Girgashi did, or to accept Israel’s authority (see last Tosafot on Sotah 35b), and had they done so, there would have been peace in the land since time immemorial. Even cities further out of these areas were to be given the option of accepting Israel’s authority, and had they done so they would have been spared of the sword. (Devarim 20:10-11)

We can also note that had Israel been deserving of staying in the land, they never would have been exiled.

All of this points to the idea that, while ancient Israel were certainly given one-time instructions to wipe out certain nations, the peaceful offer was always to be put on the table first. In many cases, such as Emori, Bashan, Moav, Midian, Jericho, Ai, as well as all the nations of Canaan (see Yehoshua 9:1-2), they chose to attack Israel. When your nation attacks, they become subject to a counter-offensive, which in ancient times often translated to a complete annihilation. Think about the aims and goals of the nation of Amalek, and what became the mantra towards Amalek which we still recall to this day (Shmot 17:14, Devarim 25:19), and was actually acted upon by King Saul (Samuel I 15) and David (Samuel I 30).

All of mainstream Jewry today does not subscribe to ancient rules of genocide. Any Biblical mandates of such were for a specific time, a single time, and never had any bearing beyond that time period. We may all find it troubling, just as, hopefully, contemporary Christians and Muslims do not subscribe to the horrific deeds perpetrated by their co-religionists over the last 2000 years. In an age of modernity, the civilized world has embraced coexistence and rejected the “accept my way or die” offer of bygone times.

In our parsha, we see that Moav (of the Lot family) and Midian (as easily represented by Moshe’s father-in-law Yitro) chose to attack the Israelites before even hearing an offer. Their efforts to destroy Israel from within forced Israel to take revenge against Midian (see Bamidbar 31).

The Middle East is a very large swath of land, which has room for many groups. Were each group to look at itself and say, “Let us make the best living conditions for ourselves. Let us grow our economy. Let us provide for ourselves. Let us make something of ourselves,” while at the same time realizing that war and fighting is beneficial to no one, it would be incredible to see what could come from putting down weapons.

In Solomon’s days, peace reigned in the Land. If Israel is not attacked, if Israel is simply respected and allowed to live their lives in peace, there would be no fighting, because Israel – from ancient Biblical times – has only wanted to live in the Promised Land in fulfillments of God’s vow to Abraham of “To your children I have given this land.”

Whenever they were not attacked, they had no reason to fight on the offensive or to defend themselves. (There were exceptions in ancient times, either for "Milchemet Mitzvah" or for expansion of land purposes (a common practice of many ancient nations) - but these were uncommon events)

And that is what the modern State of Israel would like to see today: neighbors who are happy to live as neighbors, who have no desire to destroy Israel’s rights to her Ancestral Land.

You Are All Alive Today

Parshat Va'Etchanan

by Rabbi Avi Billet

In times like these, one feels a sense of helplessness. A sense of unworthinesss.

                

Now that Hamas has resumed their rocket attacks, and Israel has been drawn in again to war, we shudder with the thought of every new story that comes out of Israel, of the short life of a fallen soldier, which has and will continue to make us wonder if we are doing our part for the sake of the Jewish people. How many of us, were we fit and trained properly, would be willing to go to the front lines, or send our sons to the front lines, knowing we or they might not return?

                

We are here, at Shabbos Nachamu, looking for comfort, and yet the words of Eichah 1, “There is no comfort” (repeated four times in the chapter), are what resonate. How can we be comforted when so many young men, true “giborim” fell at the hands of the enemy?

                

There is no comfort.

                

I have read of a Hamas plot for this coming High Holiday season that may have been averted on account of Operation Protective Shield. If true, it might be a slight comfort.

                

But who knows? I, for one, would rather have every one of these soldiers and teenagers back now, and deal with the next challenge when it comes.

                

Alas, this is the price of war. Fallen soldiers, lost sons, brothers, fathers, husbands, fiancés, and families bereft.

                

And yet, a united nation. From the left to the right, Israelis have supported this war and understand its validity and necessity. When a bereaved mother can say “Am Yisrael Chai” (the nation of Israel lives!) and that “Ahavah t’natzeach” (love will win the day), a world of sensible people looks on with admiration and in awe.

                

The Torah tells us, “You, who cling to Hashem your God, you are all living today.” (4:4) The translation doesn’t do justice to the Hebrew “Chayim kulkhem hayom.” You are all “Chayim.”

                

Understandably, the specific context of that statement was Moshe speaking to the generation about to enter the Land of Israel. Their parents had lost a connection with God on account of the Golden Calf and the sin of the spies, but the present generation Moshe was addressing had never sinned in such a manner.

                

Why does Moshe tell them they are living? Obviously, if he’s talking to them, they are alive!

                

Because the concept of living has different meanings. The first definition of “living” is obvious to us all – blood flowing, brain functioning, a person who contains the breath of life. Living also refers to what we are doing with our lives. We may be alive, but is the life in which we exist one in which we live it to the max? A life of meaning and of purpose? With goals?

                

And there is also the living that comes after death. Every Shabbos, we say the prayer of “Av Harachamim” which invokes some of the language King David used to eulogize King Shaul and Prince Yonatan who fell in battle. “They were lovely and pleasant in their lives, and in their death they have not departed.” (Samuel II 1:23)

                

They have not departed because they still live in us. If Rashi “says” (present tense) and Rambam “says” - they are both still living. If David’s friendship with Yonatan never ended, Yonatan was always alive to him. If we can welcome Eliyahu at every bris, it is because Eliyahu is still “living.”

                

The Or HaChaim takes this several steps further when he offers a number of interpretations on our verse. He notes that the tetragrammaton can have a prefix added to it, but the prefix does not attain the holiness of God’s name. In Ba’Hashem or La’Hashem the bet or lamed can be erased. However, when a suffix is added to the name “Elokim,” the suffix attains a level of holiness akin to God’s name, and cannot be erased.

                

The Or HaChaim says “You who cling to Hashem your God” is a message to those who cling to Hashem in the manner of “Your God” – who attach themselves to God in such a way that we achieve holiness and can’t be erased as being not really part of God’s name – “you are living today.”

                

When the nation of Israel, in Israel and abroad, can unite under the banner of a united People under God, when Jews the world-over can say the Shema, recite Tehillim, gather to pray, the nation and its people live. When we count every soldier who falls as a lost son, and pay no attention to whether he was from a left-wing kibbutz, a secular family, a Hesder yeshiva, or a Nahal Haredi, we are living. And the memory of the soldier, who gave his life for the highest purpose, lives on.

                

If on Tisha B’Av we still remember those martyred during the time of the Second Temple, the Ten rabbis who were murdered in the 100 years following, the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Chmielnicki massacres, the Holocaust, and all those who have fallen since the establishment of the State of Israel, then those who “were pleasant and beloved in their lives, and in their deaths have not departed” becomes true for us and future generations.

                

We mourn because we are broken and sad by the loss of these beloved soldiers. And we shout Am Yisrael Chai because we cling to God in a manner that makes us all holy as well. When one of us falls, a piece of God’s holiness is lost in this world. This is why we all feel it, and why it is so hard to find comfort.

                

May we be able to find comfort soon, when the IDF completes its mission, and the entity of Hamas is destroyed forever. When the Land of Israel is free of attacks our people will merit to fulfill all meanings of “Chayim kulkhem hayom” – that those who cling to God find the fullest meaning in life itself. 

The Victory That Comes From Doing God's Will

Parshat Devarim

by Rabbi Avi Billet               

Moshe said, “God was also angry at me… [as He] said, ‘You too shall not go there. Yehoshua bin-Nun… is the one who will apportion it to Israel. As for your children of whom you said ‘They’ll be taken captive,’ and your children who did not know good from evil this day – they will come there. To them shall I give it and they shall possess it.’” (Devarim 1:37-39)

                

Without going into too much of the background, in this passage Moshe outlines who will be inheriting the land – as the apportioner and the apportionees – and who will not be involved in the process (Moshe himself).

                

His focus on the children being the ones to inherit – along with the emphasis on good and evil – prompted the Midrash Tanaim to explain that this is a reference to war. “They have to know that it is God who wages war for you, and that you do not have to fight when you are doing God’s will.” The Baal Haturim goes along similar lines when he says exile would have never happened had the people not turned to sin.

                

Rabbi Yehuda Amital, the founding Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Har Etzion (“the Gush”), was appropriately critical of people (i.e. certain contemporary rabbis) who would look at any event and ascribe causality to it. “This tragedy happened because…” is in an ineffable statement to make. We don’t explain rockets, destruction, wars, and a Holocaust. We are not prophets. We do not know why these things happen.

                

God-fearing people say “This is God’s will. It is part of His Master Plan,” and continue to live their lives in the service of God, trying to get closer to Him despite the sadness that may pervade at any particular point in time. Rav Amital, whose fifth yarzeit was this past week, was in several labor camps during the Holocaust and lost his entire family. In response to the question of how he could have faith in God after the Holocaust, he explained that if he had lost his faith that wouldn’t bring his family back. It wouldn’t answer any of his questions about God’s hiding His face during that era of darkness.

                

But the message of the Midrash Tanaim is still worthy of consideration. We do not understand how the “doing of God’s will” plays a role in the upper spheres. But every one of us can probably pinpoint a time in our lives when we knew we were doing things right, and other things in our lives fell into place. Whether it was a job, a promotion, a family member getting better from illness, or life just being good. It happens all the time – we just don’t always notice.

                

And so it is up to us, particularly at this time of year with Tisha B’Av approaching, to ask ourselves if we are properly doing God’s will. The great prophets and Sages were granted the insight to say the first Temple was destroyed because of murder, idolatry, immorality, and the Second Temple was destroyed on account of baseless hatred. And while we don’t dare make similar pronouncements in our times (and shame on those who do!), we can certainly improve in those areas! Idolatry and murder are, thank God, not big challenges for our people. But immorality is. And baseless hatred certainly is.

                

There’s a reason many of the “al chet”s we include in our Viduy confession are for sins of the eyes and the mouth, because it is through these channels that most of our sins are committed – whether we ourselves look at things we should not be looking at and say things we should not, or whether we cause others to look at things they should not see or have them hear things they should not be hearing.

                

The good and evil that the Midrash Tanaim says refers to war could have two meanings. The esoteric meaning is for the internal battle that a person fights between the yetzer hara (the evil inclination) and the yetzer hatov (the good inclination).

                

But in a practical sense, it refers to the battles which were to soon be waged by the Israelite armies entering the land. And Moshe is recalling how 39 years earlier he told the generation that was not going to be entering the land that it would be up to their innocent children, who had not yet tasted good and evil, to lead the charge in inheriting the land.

                

The verses which follow show the response of the people when they heard this pronouncement:  “We have sinned to God! We will go up and do battle according to everything that our God has commanded us!” (1:41)

                

And the Exodus generation was told not to, because God was no longer with them and would not fight their battles any more.

                

Are we reliving this history? Every generation in Israel has borne the responsibility of fighting the battle that the previous generation did not finish. It is the “children” (18-22 year olds are young men, but they are all sons of the nation of Israel) who are fighting, the children who learn quickly about the difference between good and evil. Many of these “children” are older reservists, and they too are battling in the trenches.

                

Our job is to love them, to care for them, and to do our part through doing God’s will. Unlike the generation who left Egypt, who were told (when they messed up with the spies) that God is no longer with them, we must assure, for the safety of our soldiers and our People in Israel and around the world, that we are doing God’s will, so God will in-turn be with us.

                

When the enemy is so evil and only cares to rack up deaths on both sides, we must know where we stand. War is sadly a necessary evil. And it brings great sacrifice in pursuit of a hopefully attainable and sustainable peace. The attitude of Tzahal (IDF) through all of this has been inspiring.

                

May our efforts, not just during the Nine Days, but throughout the year as well, sway God to continue to guide the soldiers of Israel in their important work, and may all of Israel merit to live peacefully under the banner of the promise that “your children who did not know good from evil this day – they will come there. To them shall I give it and they shall possess it.” In safety, in peace, and – much like has been demonstrated in Israel in support of the soldiers – with a complete sense of Ahavat Chinam, loving our fellow Jew.

To Defeat An Enemy

Parshat Masei

by Rabbi Avi Billet

When the war with Midian did not originally go as planned, the Torah told us (31:14) that Moshe became angry at the appointed officers. The “Ish Yehudi” explained Moshe’s anger, in light of Moshe being a humble person with a checked demeanor, suggesting that the Torah is showing that when the going was tough, Moshe was powerful, resolute and strong. During war, the Ish Yehudi said, there is no place for softness and emotions, and not for giving in and for forgiving.

           

Really, war is meant to destroy enemy infrastructure (31:10), so they can give up any desire to fight and focus only on rebuilding and bettering their lives, rather than thinking only of killing the enemy.

            

As General Patton said in his famous speech to the Third Army during World War II, prior to the Normandy invasion, “I don't want [to hear] any messages saying 'I'm holding my position.' …We're advancing constantly and we're not interested in holding anything…Our plan of operation is to advance and keep on advancing. We're going to go through the enemy…to absolute victory.”

            

The beginning of Masei reminds us of another epic battle waged against an Israelite enemy. As it recounts the journeys, the Torah says “And Egypt was burying those who had died when God struck the firstborns and destroyed their gods.” (33:4) The only “proportional response” to Egyptian treachery was to hit them where they’d lose the will to keep the slaves any longer.

            

And even when they chose to chase after the Children of Israel, Egypt’s aims seemed to be to attack civilians. Was it a traditional battlefield? Hardly. Did all of Israel have their backs to the sea? Yes. And thank God, He carried the day and wiped out the Egyptian army so they would have no desire to fight the Israelites anymore – we don’t hear from them for over 500 years! There is even an alliance between Egypt and Israel during the time of King Solomon! The first attack of Egypt against Israel takes place in the fifth year of Solomon’s son, Rahavam’s, reign. (Kings I 14:25) A very different time, and a very different set of circumstances. It would be similar to Britain attacking the United states in the year 2276.

            

In anarticle written in March 2012, during a different Gaza operation, Rabbi PhilipLefkowitz (Agudas Achim in Chicago) quoted a WWII veteran who explained how wars are won. Using Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki as examples, the veteran said wars are won when the leadership no longer has the support of the devastated population.

            

Or, as we saw in ancient Egypt, when the enemy army is annihilated.

            

Of course, assuming the election in 2006 was legitimate, and that, as I’ve read, Hamas gained power most likely on account of PA corruption, one wonders how things would go were there to be another election in Gaza.

            

Silly me, thinking Hamas would ever allow an election.

            

There was another article in the Blaze about how there are over 1000 millionaires amongst Hamas leadership. You know, the same leaders who send others out as suicide bombers but personally and cowardly hide in bunkers. So much for ridding Gaza of corrupt “politicians.”

            

Gazans don’t have their backs to the sea. Israel has no interest in pushing them there. It just wants a peaceful, demilitarized neighbor.

            

Israel does its best to avoid civilian casualties – no army in the world does it better. And, I suppose, since Israel would prefer to live in peace with its Gaza neighbors (who have every opportunity, with proper anti-fighting leadership, to create a Singapore or Miami Beach!), it is not interested in pulling a Dresden, Hiroshima, or Warsaw to force the enemy to capitulate – even though militarily it seems like the most definite way to end Gazan fighting and infiltration once and for all. Israel will continue its pinpoint strikes and put its own soldiers in harm’s way to protect the civilian population of Gaza.

            

I wish for the civilians in Gaza, who truly want peace, to live out productive lives with leadership who accepts Israel’s presence as a reality and acknowledges Israel’s right to exist. A leadership who is concerned more for their own civilians’ wellbeing than in any military actions against peace-wanting-and-loving Israel. And civilians who accept similar notions. Absent such an approach, there will never be peace in Gaza.

            

And of course, we pray for Israel’s safety, for the safety of Israel’s precious soldiers who are sons, brothers, fathers – too many of whom have been lost this week – and for peace to reign in the region. May the IDF and the Israeli government be granted insight from Heaven, and may they be guided through the darkness of war to achieve their goals and more, to bring about a resolution that can last at least 500 years.

When Enemies Make Real Peace

Update 2018: After writing my DT for 2018, I was "shocked" to discover I had the same solution for peace 6 years earlier! Of course while the conclusion is the same, the angle in the parsha is completely different. I guess Hamas leaders don't read my blog. 🙍

Parshat Vayetze

by Rabbi Avi Billet           

There was no love lost between Yaakov and his father-in-law Lavan. Lavan criticizes Yaakov for having "stolen" his family, and Yaakov responds saying he had been cheated numerous times over a period of 20 years working for Lavan.

            

The most telling comment comes from Lavan who says, "I have it in my power to do you great harm. But your father's God spoke to me last night and said, 'Be very careful not to say anything, good or bad, to Jacob.'" Had God not appeared to him, who knows what he would have done? This is surely one of the proof-texts for the Haggadah's notion that "Lavan bikesh laakor et hakol," Lavan wanted to uproot everything.

            

After their argument at Galed, they reached a resolution. They drew a line exactly where they were, they built a pile of a stones and a monument and then Lavan said, "This mound shall be a witness, and the monument shall be a witness. I am not to go beyond the mound and you are not to go beyond the mound and pillar, with bad intentions." (31:52)

            

After forging the agreement, they sat down and ate together as a declaration of peace – as long as the lines will not be crossed.

            

Many commentaries note that the agreement is for no one to cross the line intending to do harm (Rashi, etc). However, crossing the line to engage in business and commerce or for other good reasons that forge camaraderie of differing peoples is acceptable ("l'tovah u'l'pragmatia" - Pesikta).

            

Ibn Ezra points to their each swearing in the name of the God each worships. A real peace treaty contains divergent opinions about "Who" is backing the peace and "Whom" we are serving through coming to peace terms. But the end result is peace – with each committing to it in the name of their respective objects of worship. Which, in essence, ideally makes the treaty inviolable.

            

Radak points to Lavan's having heard from Yaakov's God directly, which helped him arrive at the conclusion that peace was really the best option.

            

Riva raises a minority view that the agreement was a pact that each would cross the border to help the other in the event that the other is facing "raah" – a bad situation brought on by a different enemy (see Chizkuni). But the more common view maintains that they agree to leave one another alone.

            

Some of the commentaries point out that this treaty (as described by the majority position) was violated by Bilaam. The Zohar (166b) identifies Lavan as the father of Beor (father of Bilaam), the Gemara (Sanhedrin 105a) identifies Bilaam's father as Lavan (Beor having several identities), and the Yalkut Shimoni (Shmot 168) identifies Bilaam as Lavan the Aramean from Pethor. While it is not likely that these texts are meant to be taken literally, it is more than likely that some of the texts describing Lavan and Bilaam are similar (such as receiving prophesy from God in the nighttime, and both being from Aram Naharayim – see Devarim 23:5) to indicate either that Bilaam was the spiritual heir of Lavan, or perhaps even a direct descendant.

            

Daat Zekenim boldly claims that "it is the way of the charlatans and liars to be struck down by the witnesses to their offense." Bilaam's leg was struck by the wall which is identified as the pile of rocks created here. And Bilaam met his demise at the sword (Bamidbar 31:8). The anthology Hadar Zekenim explains (quoting a midrash) that the monument had a sword implanted in it, as a symbol of the 'laying down of the sword' between Lavan and Yaakov. Bilaam was somehow impaled on that sword, as his death is described as having taken place on "the sword" – as in, the one everyone knew about.

            

The message is crystal clear.

            

When Israel vacated Gaza in 2005, a line was drawn in the sand. This is your territory, this is our territory. We are happy to have the border crossed "l'tovah ul'pragmatia" – for good things and for business, but not for "ra'ah" – under the intention to do harm. Israel provides humanitarian aid to Gaza – food, supplies, medicines, and graciously treats Gazans in Israeli hospitals.

            

But when rockets fly, there is no "good": the intention is only to harm. The inviolable treaty supposedly brought on by a land swap has been violated over and over again. Those who foment the hatred are not likely to receive revelations from Yaakov's God not to harm Yaakov. This is why they don't know when to stop, or when to count losses (as Lavan did), and go home to live your own life concerned about how to make your own life better, without trying to make the other person's life miserable.

            

Lavan "bikesh" – he "wanted" to uproot all. But when he couldn't, he let go and lived out his life. Bilaam, on the other hand, couldn't let go of his hatred. And he met his end on the sword that was supposed to symbolize a truce between peoples, exactly on the border his ancestor had vowed never to cross for bad.

            

May God bless the soldiers and people of the Land of Israel. May He watch over them through the tests that lie ahead of them. And may all the spiritual heirs of Bilaam meet the same end he did so the rest of those who recognize and value what a peaceful coexistence can look like are given the opportunity to share a border l'tovah – for the sharing of goodness and peace.

Revenge... Anything But Sweet

Parshat Matot

by Rabbi Avi Billet

There are no words to explain the horrific tragedy that unfolded in Brooklyn last week, only questions.

The positive side of the story is the outpouring of love, concern, and support that a community could exhibit for a child and for his family, in the aftermath of a conclusion noone could anticipate, expect, or face as being the reality.

In light of the story and how it has affected all of is, we can ask a particularly poignant question on a verse in the Torah that seems to go against everything we hold dear.

The war against Midian was a one-time event, pursuant to a very specific nation of moral depravity who had waged a full scale war against the Jewish people, sacrificing their daughters' innocence, along with any moral fabric they may have possessed, to destroy the Israelites from within. Their actions led directly to a plague in which 24,000 Israelites died.

God's instruction was, "Enact revenge against Midian." After killing all the adult males on the battlefield, the soldiers report they've left the women alone, causing Moshe to instruct them thus: "And now, kill every [Midianite] male child and every woman who has lain with a man kill [as well]. The females who have never been with a man can be spared." (Bamidbar 31:17-18)

Could God have truly dictated such a command? Was the Midianite crime so terrible that an all out war to kill even all the male children was necessary?

This is neither the first or last time an entire nation was to be wiped out in the Torah. Amalek is the poster-nation for this concept in the Torah, and wars were waged or declared against them in Shmot 17 and Devarim 25:19, as well as in Shmuel I chapters 15 and 30. Similar rules were enforced in wars waged against the seven nations of the land (Devarim 20:16).

Certainly, God did not spare the children in His destruction of Sodom and in the Flood.

Questioning God's decisions as to how He runs His world is a silly exercise. A God-fearing person recognizes that God may choose who will live and who will die. These are judgment calls He makes on a regular basis. We may not always like it, but that is the way of the world.

But why does He have to put such a possibility into the hands of man? Why did the Israelites need to be the power behind the revenge? Why did God prefer to issue forth this command, rather than enact a plague against Midian to take care of the dirty work, as He did to Egypt? Why did the Israelites need to have the blood on their hands?

Rabbi Moshe Shternbuch argued that the classic rules of engagement did not apply to this irregular war of revenge, a war governed by definition by different rules.

This answer is helpful in a general sense, but it does not answer our question. The halakhic argument of "When one comes to kill you, kill him first" (Brachot 58a), or revenge itself can be justified against the seductive women who brought about the plague. This does not include little boys!

In raising a logical argument Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch also does not answer our question: "We must assume that the national degeneration was rooted primarily in the males, whereas the females – if removed at an early age from impure influences and impressions – were able to attain morality…"

Rabbi Ben Zion Feerer points out the incongruity. If it's all out war, then none of the children should be spared. Why is there a difference between the boys and the girls?

Rabbi Feerer suggests that the fate of the boys is inexorably linked to that of the adult women. Generally speaking, the toll of war is on the men who fight, who, in a sense, are expected not to return. Children grow up, rebuild a nation, and live out the dream their fathers died for.

The Talmud says (Kiddushin 2) that women do not normally go out to war. As their death in battle is not a normal result of war, it is much longer remermbered and carried as a "battle scar" for the rest of a child's days.

In this case, however, since the women's actions instigated the revenge, there was no getting around that they would die in battle. There was therefore a need to rid the nation of the young males, so they would not grow up harboring the hate that would come from having lost their mothers and women in battle. They would have gotten over the deaths of their fathers alone – that is the natural order of warfare. But losing their women would pit them against Israel in a future Hatfield/Mccoy war that serves no purpose to the next generation.

The innocent girls could be spared, on the other hand, because they would not take revenge one day in battle.

It's a sad state of affairs when the actions of the guilty must bring about a punishment to the innocent. But it is reflective of a society that cares more about trying to destroy their enemy than about taking care of their children.

The Israelites needed to carry out the deed so they could afterwards demonstrate and teach that the act of revenge is anything but sweet. This is not something they enjoy doing or want to do (remember, they originally returned from battle having spared all the women!)

With the moral lesson "out there" they could hopefully teach their neighbors to live and let live so that a revenge of this nature might never be necessary again.