New on the site: Michi-bot. An intelligent assistant based on the writings of Rabbi Michael Avraham.

War of Midian

שו”תCategory: generalWar of Midian
asked 8 years ago

Good evening! I have been preoccupied with the story of revenge in Midian for several days now, and I would be happy to hear the Rabbi’s response to the story. A. Why is there no explicit command from God to Moses or from Moses to the 12,000 men who went out to take revenge, what exactly should be done with the Midianites? B. What is the reason for the gap between Moses’ perception (“Did you save alive every female?”) and the rest of the warriors who killed only the male (Moses’s thought is asked, “Here they are..”)? C. Why does Moses divide between the male child and the female child? And in general, what are the children guilty of?! D. The Torah does not state that the warriors did as Moses said or accepted his words, it simply continues on to another topic, why?


Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply

0 Answers
מיכי Staff answered 8 years ago
I don’t usually engage in biblical interpretation, but I’ll try to offer something. A. Who said there is no commandment? Maybe it’s just not spelled out in the Torah. Or the assumption was that it was understandable to them from the explanation. on. Beyond that, I don’t see a big problem. They thought they could defeat Midian militarily, so they left the women. Alternatively, perhaps they wanted to make use of them for their own benefit (like the client later in the story). Moshe told them that it was about personal revenge on those who sinned and erred. third. The male offspring is part of the military victory (potential soldiers), and this proves that there is truth in the Avengers’ perception that they were needed for a military victory. But in addition, there was also personal revenge here. And the NPF is a saying in women that they should not be killed. D. Why does she have to mention anything?

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

M replied 8 years ago

See my understanding of these issues here:

https://mikyab.net/forums/topic/Between-the-moral-and-the-war-of-Medieval/

אורלי replied 6 years ago

I'm interjecting with the question: "Doesn't it bother you that the people of Israel were simply commanded to kill all the children (boys) of Midian? And this is not a civilian population killed in the heat of war, and perhaps it is impossible to avoid this, but rather a cold-blooded killing of children.. And this is not a "parable" like a rebellious son and a teacher or a remote city, but completely real. Shouldn't it bother us that the Torah supposedly takes an immoral position? Does it seem moral to you? Would you calmly accept such a ruling today?"

אורלי replied 6 years ago

And I couldn't access M's link, it's probably too old. If M is reading this and there's a chance, I'd love to get a new link.

מיכי Staff replied 6 years ago

Orly Shalom.
Good question, and rightly so. It bothers you. But the tone of grievance I sense in your words suggests a hidden defiance, as if anyone who deals with any aspect of this issue must also touch on the moral question. I will say in advance that I disagree with that. It is possible to touch on an issue that has a significant moral component and focus on another aspect without touching on it. Like dealing with various aspects of the Holocaust. For example, Yaffa Rai in column 89 (on the “urban legend” from the Technion).

[By the way, from my very clear experience it appears that for some reason such claims are much more common among women, who are often unwilling to move past a moral component or a strong human aspect of the issue under discussion, and discuss another aspect of it in a cold way. This is very noticeable in the study of Gemara, which sometimes seems too cold and detached to them. In my opinion, this does not necessarily stem from moral hypersensitivity, but from an inability/willingness to disconnect between levels of discussion. But this is of course just a hypothesis based on my personal experience]

As for your question, it depends on the context. See a similar question here regarding the Amalekite exodus: https://mikyab.net/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%AA/%D7%A2%D7%9C-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%91%D7%A6%D7%99%D7%95%D7%95%D7%99-%D7%9E%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%99%D7%AA-%D7%9E%D7%93%D7%99%D7%9F-%D7%95%D7%A2%D7%9E%D7%9C%D7%A7/

אורלי replied 6 years ago

You are right about the tone of complaint, this stems from the fact that the question has bothered me for a long time and in many searches in commentators I have not found any reference to it, so it is not just a lack of ability or willingness to separate between levels of the issue, but from frustration that there seems to be a widespread tendency not to give any reference to it at all. Moreover, in section 3, the question was asked: What are the children guilty of? And for me at least, this was not a sufficient answer, to say only that they are potential soldiers. The hypothesis that this stems from a lack of readiness or ability to separate between levels of discussion and no moral sensitivity is also, in my opinion and for me, arrogant. Forgive me.

אורלי replied 6 years ago

In any case, thank you very much for your consideration, I will look into the matter further.

מיכי Staff replied 6 years ago

I brought up the example of Nazis raising children for their murderous culture. Wouldn't you accept a policy there that kills children too? I would.
Regarding the arrogance, I reject defensive arguments of this kind. I'm telling you something that I've clearly noticed from years of accumulated experience (I've been teaching women for quite a few years), and there is definitely such a difference in approach. What's arrogant about that? These are facts. It can be argued that they're wrong, but the claim that it's arrogant is irrelevant.

אורלי replied 6 years ago

What is arrogant is to present it in such a way that if it is difficult for someone with a moral problem to the point where it is jarring for them to address another aspect of the discussion without addressing the moral problem, this stems from some inability to separate things and not from moral sensitivity itself, which may be causing this. Second, even if this is true for many women, it does not seem appropriate to me to say this to a specific woman who asked a particular question, and to attribute her question to some general characteristic of gender, rather than to the problem itself that bothered her.

אורלי replied 6 years ago

And you may have brought up the context of the Nazis in your response to me, but not in the first answer to the first questioner, and that's what I was referring to.

מיכי replied 6 years ago

And to claim that men have no moral sensitivity, isn't that arrogant? (Or are women allowed to be arrogant?)
The reason I attributed this to an inability/willingness to separate between levels rather than sensitivity is for two reasons: 1. I've also seen it in contexts unrelated to morality (for example, in discussions that deal with a hypothetical situation, women insist on commenting that such a situation is impossible). 2. Even if there is wonderful moral sensitivity, those who understand that they are now dealing with a different aspect do not find themselves obliged to mix morality into the discussion.

מיכי replied 6 years ago

I don't see what's inappropriate about that. This is a matter-of-fact comment intended to draw your attention to a common and typical fallacy. If it's not true, then of course it can be ignored, but if it's true, then I think it's appropriate and nice.

Leave a Reply

Back to top button