And the land became defiled, and I visited its sin upon

it,

and the land vomited out its inhabitants. (Vayikra 18:25)

The nations have

defiled themselves… and the land became defiled – These words are

usually used in reference to the entire planet earth – as it relates to

humanity, since the entire earth is called land. Its name [adama

– "earth"] reflects its significance – the foundation for the

development of the human [adam]… blessings for the land depends on

man's level of ethics. Since the land is adama, it cursed because of man

– adam (see Bereishit 3:17); the

earth which took a brother's blood from the hand of his murderer will no longer

give him its product (see Bereishit 4:11-12)…

corruption of human ways brings about the similar corruption of all living things…

this is the relationship man's moral behavior and the entire earth. However,

the Holy One, blessed be He, established a much stronger tie between Israel and

its land, for these two have been chosen as His instruments for the moral

rejuvenation of the human race… the earth loses the reason for its existence

if the society living upon it corrupts it’s ways and loses the reasons for its

existence. That is why a socially and morally corrupt population has no future

in this land.

 (Rabbi S.R. Hirsch ad loc)

And the earth

stands forever – Resh Lakish said: Everything that the Holy One

blessed be He created in man he created in the land as well. Man has

a head and the land has a head, for it said: and the

beginning [literally: the head] of the dust of the earth.

Man has eyes and the land has eyes, for it is said: and it covered the eye

of the land. Man has ears and the land has ears, for it is said: and

listen O earth. Man eats and the land eats, for it is written: a land

that eats its inhabitants. Man drinks and the land drinks, for it is

written: you shall drink of the dew of heaven. Man rages and the land

rages, for it is said: the land raged and quaked. Man gets drunk and the

land gets drunk, for it is said: the earth shall surely move like a drunk.

Man vomits and the land vomits, for it is said: and the land vomited out

its inhabitants. Man has hands, and so does the land, for it is said: and

the land is broad-handed. Man has a navel and so does the land, for it is

written: Who dwells upon the land's navel. Man has hips and so does the

land, for it is written, and [I shall]

gather them from the uttermost ends [literally: the hips] of the

earth. Man has feet and so does the land, for it is written: and

the land stands forever – stands and preserves its trusts. R. Aha said: Its

food, and the land stands forever – that is Israel, for it is said: for

you shall be a desired land.

 (Yalkut Shimoni Kohelet 1, 967)

Retaliation, Revenge, and "Measure for

Measure": Aharei Mot-Kedoshim

Deborah Weissman

Dedicated to the memory of my parents

My father and teacher Dr. Nahum Weissman, z"l

Who passed away on 21 Nissan 5753

And my mother and teacher, Sylvia Weissman, z"l

Who passed away on 21 Adar 5756

In the course of my

work teaching Judaism to Christians who visit Israel from places around the

world I occasionally come across some very different interpretations of theirs of

the Scriptures we jointly consider holy. One excellent example of this is an

expression found both in Shemot 21:24 as well as Vayikra 24:20, i.e., an eye

for an eye. This law has been given the Latin name of lex talionis. Lex

means "law" and talionis is related to the English word "retaliation."

Some of the Christians view this law as "primitive," making Judaism

morally inferior to Christianity. One Christian Arab even insisted that the

verse does not appear in their Bible! Others quote the Gospel according to

Matthew (5:28-29) where Jesus says in the

Sermon on the Mount: "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for

an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But I tell you not to resist an evil

person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him

also" (NKJV translation). Both Jews

and Christians seem to have forgotten that this idea first appears in

Lamentations (3:30): Let him offer his cheek to his smiter; let him be filled

with reproach. The passage quoted from Matthew continues Jesus'

critique of the Torah, for instance: "…that you may be sons of your

Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and

sends rain on the just and on the unjust… And if you greet your brethren

only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so?"

(5:45-47).

Thus was born the

Christian anti-Jewish stereotype according to which Christianity is a religion

of love and forgiveness towards enemies while Judaism is a religion of wrath

and vengeance.

Some Christians try to

defend the Hebrew Scriptures. They usually contrast biblical law with that of

similar codes from the ancient Middle East, claiming that the former

demonstrates moral and human progress by limiting the range of retaliation. There

had been cultures in which the loss of an eye was repaid by the assailant being

killed by the victim or his family. These Christians read the verse as saying only

an eye [and not two eyes] for an eye. The law sets forth limits

upon permissible retaliation.

The Jewish Scholar

James Kugel also takes this tack. In his book, How to Read the Bible: A

Guide to Scripture, Then and Now (Free

Press, 2007, pp. 64-65, he cites Bereishit 4:3-24): Now Lemech said to his wives, "Adah and Zillah,

slain a man by wounding [him] and a child by bruising [him].

shall be seventy seven fold." Kugel claims that Lemech is

announcing all of this in order to frighten off any would-be attackers. It is significant,

he says, that Lemech views Cain and his descendants – the Cainites – as an

example of disproportionate revenge. It seems that from a very early period the

Cainites had a reputation for being people who would kill seven of the enemy

for each one of their number who was killed. God granted them this special

privilege because they were nomads who did not enjoy the protection of walled

cities.

My Christian students

are usually surprised to discover that the Oral Law reads the phrase an eye

for an eye as plainly referring to a monetary penalty. Neither are they

acquainted with the halakhah's sophisticated definition of compensation based

on the categories of damage, suffering, medical expenses, lost working time,

and humiliation (Mishnah Bava Kama 8:1). This

compensation may also be intended to keep the victim's family from retaliating.

Halakhah does not recognize retaliation or revenge against the attacker as

something the victim "deserves." Our parasha warns us, Do not hate

your brother in your heart… (Vayikra

19:17). That is to say – not to hold a grudge even against those who

have genuinely hurt us.

Critics of retaliation

claim that it is not enough to limit revenge, since even attenuated revenge

encourages a continued cycle of violence. It was in that spirit that the Indian

leader Mahatma Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye will blind the whole world."

Is the correct response to forgive and forget? Certainly not, if the attacker

continues his aggression and constitutes an existential threat. In such a case

retaliation is not a matter of revenge but rather a method for ending violence.

As members of a society that possesses institutions for the promotion of law

and order – the police and judicial systems – we expect them to deal with

criminals so that blood feuds do not develop between families, a phenomenon

found in various cultures. The purpose of imprisonment in contemporary society

is not so much to punish as to rehabilitate. The criminal is supposed to

undergo an "educational" process that will facilitate his remorse and

inner change. If this process does take place, he can leave prison to live life

as an ordinary citizen.

All of the above is

fine until we get to the question of revenge at the national level. Our parasha

tells us, You shall neither take revenge from nor bear a grudge against the

members of your people (verse 18),

but what happens when members of other peoples are involved? Don't our

classical sources and liturgy contain many references to revenge against the

nations?

At this juncture I

would like to mention the work of Prof. Ruth Langer of Boston College. In a

drasha she gave in Newton's Shaarei Tefillah synagogue on Purim of 2008, Prof.

Langer had the following to say about vengeance:

On the one hand, we

need communal responses to our situations of persecution and oppression, to

validate our anger and our pain, and to allow us to deal with them; but on the

other hand, what our liturgy traditionally does is to divert us from active

personal responses by placing the onus for actually solving the situation in

God’s hands. In general, this is not the way that Judaism works; in most

situations, we are expected to do our human best to solve the situation. That

is what makes this liturgical response so powerful and deserving of attention.

Here are some examples:

The Passover Haggadah says

"Pour out Your wrath" – and not "our wrath."

Psalm 94 says: God of vengeance – appear!

The name of a slain victim is

followed by the phrase "May the Lord avenge his blood", and not "We shall avenge

his blood."

The benediction following the

Megillah reading speaks of God as "Our avenger."

As for the first example, I

must mention that while many of my friends are completely opposed to that

passage, I have no problem including it in the Seder. I think the reason for

this is that in my parents’ home – they were non-religious Socialist Zionists –

that moment in the Seder was used to commemorate the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising

which began on the first day of Passover 5703. We read a special prayer in

memory of the Shoah and sang Ani Ma'amin – "I believe with a

perfect faith in the coming of the Messiah." After growing up I came to

understand that we were not asking God to pour out His wrath on all the nations – God forbid – but

rather only upon those who "did not know You," such as the Nazis, may

their name and memory be erased. Those who know the Lord can be our friends and

allies. I have personally invited Christian guests to the Seder and felt no

embarrassment when we said "Pour out Your wrath."

Beyond this, I would ask

whether Langer's suggestion can really solve the problem for the Jewish People

– a people which is commanded to walk in God's ways. If God is a "God of

vengeance," where does that leave us? An internal debate was sparked in my

synagogue – Kehillat Yedidya – concerning the recitation of the Av HaRahamim

prayer on Shabbat. That prayer opens with noble words:

May the merciful Father who

dwells on high, in his infinite mercy, remember those saintly, upright, and

blameless souls, the holy communities who offered their lives for the sanctification

of the divine name. They were lovely and amiable in their life, and were not

parted in their death. They were swifter than eagles and stronger than lions to

do the will of their Master and the desire of their Stronghold. May our God

remember them favorably among the other righteous of the world. (Birnbaum

translation)

If the prayer were to end with

those words, no problems or reservations would have arisen concerning its

recitation. On the contrary – up to this point the prayer may even invite a

universalistic interpretation, connecting members of our people who died for

the sanctification of the divine name with the "righteous of the

world." However, those lines are followed by others taking a rather

different tone: "May He avenge the blood of His servants which has been

shed… the Avenger of bloodshed remembers them… " And also the

especially problematic line: "He will execute judgment upon the nations

and fill [the battle-field] with corpses; He will shatter [the enemy's] head

over all the wide earth.." It is hard for us to stand in prayer with these

words in our mouths. How does this prayer affect those who hear it – such as

our children? The congregation has not yet made a decision in the matter.

Much has been spoken lately

about the concept of "proportionality." The notions of retaliation

and vengeance assume a foundation of "measure for measure." However,

it is not always clear to us what scale should be used to check this and when

the use of force becomes "disproportionate." The philosopher Michael

Walzer¹ claims that rules of proportionality are different in war. War

has a future-oriented goal – it is not concerned with the payment of past

debts. In wartime, proportionality must not be judged by the provocation that

preceded it but rather by the achievement of the war's aims in the future.

A friend once told me,

"Zionism means that Jews must get their hands dirty. We must exercise

police and military force." However, he added, "There is a difference

between getting your hands dirty and wallowing in the mud."

May we know how to distinguish

between the two!

[1] "On

Proportionality: How much is too much in war?" The New Republic,

Jan. 8, 2009.

Dr. Deborah

Weissman, a founder of Kehillat Yedidya in Jerusalem, is an educator.

You shall not oppress

your fellow. You shall not rob. The wages of a laborer shall not remain with you overnight until morning.

 (Vayikra 19:13)

The wages of a laborer shall not remain with you – Then and Today

Withholding the payment of wages demoralizes employer as well as

employee. The employer loses sensitivity to the sin he is committing, so much

so that one may hear justifications for such behavior, as if the employer has a

right to "borrow credit" in this way in order to maintain his

business. When an employee waits a long time to receive his wage, he feels as

if his work goes unrewarded, and he will reach the conclusion that his efforts

to support himself through his own labor are pointless. The original Jewish

conception views the withholding of wages as being prohibited by the Torah. The

Sages, who understood the matter deeply, compared it to a capital crime. The Gemara says: "You shall pay his wage on that very

day… for he is poor and sets his soul upon it (Devarim24:15) – Why did he climb up the stool, hang on to the tree

and risk death, if not to obtain his wage?…When anyone withholds a hired

laborer's wage, it is as if he had taken his soul [i.e., life] from him" (Bava Metziya 112a).

(Moshe Unna

z'l, a member of Kevutzat Sdeh Eliyahu, formerly the Chairman of the Law and Justice Committee

of the Knesset, as quoted by

Prof. Nehama Leibowitz in

her Iyyunim Hadashim

BeSfer Vayikra, pg.

244)

Just scales

It forbids us even to have an imperfect weight or measure in our

possession, it forbids us to be careless in measuring or weighing our material

even if there is no immediate idea of trading with it, if there is the

slightest possibility of its being bought or sold, it commands us not only to

exercise the utmost care in the manufacture of weights and measures, but to be

most conscientious in keeping them in good condition and repair, to take

meticulous precautionary measures against any change in weights, scales, and

measures due to wear… The reference to the Exodus from Egypt, with which this

command of honesty in measures concludes, shows what an important position in

the sphere of the Lawgiving it occupies. It is on the basis of the redemption

from Egypt and all that which it made known to us of God's management amidst

the earth, in the midst of the life of nations on earth, as well as all

that which thereby established for all time our special relationship to God,

and our duty towards Him, that God makes the demand: You shall not commit a

perversion of justice, etc. true scales, true weights, etc. Hence,

we find in the Torat Kohanim on our verse: "I am the Lord, your

God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt upon this condition: I

brought you out of the land of Egypt on the condition that you accept upon

yourselves the commandment regarding [fair] measures, for everyone who accepts

the commandment regarding measures accepts [the veracity of] the Exodus from

Egypt, and anyone who rejects the commandment regarding measures rejects the

Exodus from Egypt." The "Law of Measures" is considered as being

on a level with the laws of arayot [prohibited sexual relations]… Just

as in arayot we see the foundation of personal morality and family life,

so in the laws of measures is the foundation of social life… It wants to make

the feeling for right and the respect and consideration for right and honesty

to be a fundamental trait of the Jewish national character.

 (Rabbi S.R. Hirsch on Vayikra

19:35-36, following the Levy translation)

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards

its publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition

  distributed in Israel $700

• English edition

  distributed via email $ 100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc.

Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in

advance to appear in the English email.

In Israel, checks payable to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B.

4433, Jerusalem 91043.

US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made

through:

New Israel Fund, POB 91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588, USA

New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD,

Great Britain

Please note that the NIF is no longer accepting donations under $100

PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations

should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite

607, New York, New York 10017 USA

All contributions to either the NIF or PEF should be marked as

donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project. For Donations

to NIF, please mention that Oz veShalom is registered as no. 5708.

About us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of

a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of

tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts that have always been central to

Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of

Israel and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes

that Jews have both the religious and the national obligation to support the

pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a

fair and just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an

option but an imperative.

5,000

copies of a 4-page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are

written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to

over 350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is

www.netivot-shalom.org.il.