22,414,930 members doing good!
about our ads
share your passions, stories, inspirations, and more
Torah and Self Defense
Sep 9, 2007
Torah and Self-Defense

For some reason the Positive commandment/mitzvah "To save the pursued even at the cost of the life of the pursuer" is based in Deu 25:11-12 - an rather obscure text referring to the act of a woman grabbing the genitals of a man endangering her husband. The Negative commandment/mitzvah "Not to spare a pursuer, but he is to be slain before he reaches the pursued and slays the latter, or uncovers his nakedness " is derived from the same passage - why, I did not at first understand, because there are other far better passages that more accurately render both commandments/mitzvot. It might be argued that had she not grabbed the genitals of his husbands assailant, it would have been a clear case of "not standing by idly" - but the Negative Mitzvah "not to spare the pursuer" is clearly derived from Deu_25:12 - "then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall have no pity" implying that SHE has suddenly become the pursuer. I later found, when examining the Hebrew text that one of the words rendered in English "another" actually means BROTHER, or KINSMAN - àç 'âch
BDB Definition:
1) brother
1a) brother of same parents
1b) half-brother (same father)
1c) relative, kinship, same tribe
1d) each to the other (reciprocal relationship)
1e) (figuratively) of resemblance

Now, in order to arrive at the same conclusions the Sages did, we have to read this in context - Deu_25:11 starts "If a man is fighting with his brother..." which would imply that there is no direct leathal threat to the any of the men - they are brothers and they are arguing - that is why the wife interfering, and grabbing the other man's by the genitals is seen as the pursuer in this text. It can also be argued that it is NOT a case of one man attacking the other, but a mutual attacking, in which neither would be seen as the assailant, and therefore there is no need for the wife to step in on her husband's side, on the contrary it would in fact tip the scales in her husband's favor, so that he in fact become part of an assailing team, that would explain how the wife becomes the culprit in this text.

Now, that doesn't change the fact that there are other texts more clearly spelling out both mitzvot.

Lev 19:16 states: "neither shalt thou stand idly by the blood of thy neighbour: I am the LORD."
Exo 22:2 says: " If a thief be found breaking in, and be smitten so that he dieth, there shall be no bloodguiltiness for him."

Lev 19:16 says that one is forbidden to refrain from stepping in and defend someone who is attacked, Shemot/Exo 22:2 says that if a thief is caught while breaking in (i.e when his intent is not known - meaning that he could as well be assumed to be intent on killing the home-owner, if one then kills him when defending, one is not guilty of any crime.

The following verse in Shemot says "If the sun be risen upon him" - this the Sages understood to mean that the intent of mere thievery was known to the home-owner, i.e there was no danger to his life, and he knew that then he may not kill him - one could also read it to mean that if someone is found burglaring during the night and one kills him, the one who slay him is not guilty of any crime, but if it happens during day -time, then, like with the woman that is raped in-side the city, (Deu 22:23-24) there is a possibility for getting help -  because of the law in Vayikra 19:16 - there's an obligation on all to come to the defense of someone in need - thus implying that if no-one came to her aid, she wasn't raped (in this day and age it might be argued that she didn't have any possibility to cry for help, but Torah counts on that possibility . Likewise it is argued by Torah that in both the "night-time" burglary and the "in the fields" rape that there wouldn't be anyone around to hear any cries for help, in which case killing the assailant is not only permitted, but required, whether by the damsel herself or later by court decision (Deu 22:25-26). After all, having a murderous burglar or rapist roaming free would be quite dangerous to the society.

For more on Torah's view on Self-Defense, please read this VERY informational Web Page by Dave Kopel.

Dov
(2) | () | | send green star | flag as inappropriate
Visibility: Everyone
Tags: ,
Posted: Sep 9, 2007 2:59am

 
 
 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.

Author

,

Shares by Type:
All (468) | Blog (447) | Alert (1) | Poll (1) | Recipe (1) | Message (18)

Showing shares tagged with: self-defense [show all]
ads keep care2 free
SHARES FROM 'S NETWORK
No shares

Copyright © 2013 Care2.com, inc. and its licensors. All rights reserved