×
Friend,    With Purim right around the corner, Sefaria is busy preparing for the “Purim bump” — the increase in users who visit Sefaria to celebrate the holiday. Last year, more than 100,000 people visited the library or used the app to connect with the holiday or read along with Megillat Esther. This year we’re expecting even more.    To help with our text and tech preparations ahead of this busy time, a generous Jewish foundation is matching all gifts to the library up to $36,000.    Please give today to help us meet your learning needs!     
Save "War and Peace VI ~ Torture
"
War and Peace VI ~ Torture

Rabbi Michael Broyde, "Only the Good Die Young?":

It is logical to assume that license to kill in wartime when such is unavoidable to achieve a proper military goal also grants a license to suspend any other rabbinic (and Torah) commandments when such suspension is militarily necessary to triumph, including torture.

מתני׳ מצות הנשרפין היו משקעין אותו בזבל עד ארכובותיו ונותנין סודר קשה לתוך הרכה וכורך על צוארו זה מושך אצלו וזה מושך אצלו עד שפותח את פיו ומדליק את הפתילה וזורקה לתוך פיו ויורדת לתוך מעיו וחומרת את בני מעיו ר' יהודה אומר אף הוא אם מת בידם לא היו מקיימין בו מצות שריפה אלא פותח את פיו בצבת שלא בטובתו ומדליק את הפתילה וזורקה לתוך פיו ויורדת לתוך מעיו וחומרת את בני מעיו אמר רבי אלעזר (בן) צדוק מעשה בבת כהן אחת שזינתה והקיפוה חבילי זמורות ושרפוה אמר לו מפני שלא היה בית דין של אותה שעה בקי: גמ׳ מאי פתילה אמר רב מתנה פתילה של אבר מנא לן אתיא שריפה שריפה מעדת קרח מה להלן שריפת נשמה וגוף קיים אף כאן שריפת נשמה וגוף קיים רבי אלעזר אמר אתיא שריפה שריפה מבני אהרן מה להלן שריפת נשמה וגוף קיים אף כאן שריפת נשמה וגוף קיים מאן דיליף מעדת קרח מנא ליה דכתיב (במדבר יז, ג) ואת מחתות החטאים האלה בנפשותם שנשמתן נשרפת וגוף קיים ואידך ההיא שריפה ממש היא ומאי בנפשותם שנתחייבו שריפה על עסקי נפשותם כדריש לקיש דאמר ריש לקיש מאי דכתיב (תהלים לה, טז) בחנפי לעגי מעוג חרק עלי שנימו בשביל חנופה שהחניפו לקרח על עסקי לגימה חרק עליהן שר של גיהנם שניו ומאן דיליף מבני אהרן מנא ליה דכתי' (ויקרא י, ב) וימותו לפני ה' כעין מיתה ואידך ההוא שריפה ממש הואי ומאי דכתיב וימותו דאתחיל בהו מגואי כעין מיתה דתניא אבא יוסי בן דוסתאי אומר שני חוטין של אש יצאו מבית קודש הקדשים ונחלקו לארבע ונכנסו שנים בחוטמו של זה ושנים בחוטמו של זה ושרפום והכתיב (ויקרא י, ב) ותאכל אותם אותם ולא בגדיהם ונילף מפרים הנשרפים מה להלן שריפה ממש אף כאן שריפה ממש מסתברא מאדם הוה ליה למילף שכן אדם חוטא נשמה פיגול אדרבה מפרים הנשרפים הוה ליה למילף שכן מכשיר לדורות הנך נפישין מאן דיליף מעדת קרח מאי טעמא לא יליף מבני אהרן ההוא שריפה ממש הואי ונילף מינה אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה אמר קרא (ויקרא יט, יח) ואהבת לרעך כמוך ברור לו מיתה יפה
MISHNA: The mitzva of those who are burned, i.e., the process of execution by burning, is carried out in the following manner: The executioners submerge the condemned one in dung up to his knees so he cannot move, and they place a rough scarf within a soft one, so his throat will not be wounded, and wrap these scarves around his neck. This one, i.e., one of the witnesses, pulls the scarf toward himself, and that one, the other witness, pulls it toward himself, until the condemned one is forced to open his mouth, as he is choking. And another person then lights the wick and throws it into his mouth, and it goes down into his intestines and burns his intestines and he dies. Rabbi Yehuda says: But if this one who is condemned to death by burning accidentally died at their hands by strangulation, they have not fulfilled the mitzva of execution by burning for this person. Rather, the process is carried out in the following manner: One opens the mouth of the condemned person with prongs, against his will, and one lights the wick and throws it into his mouth, and it goes down into his intestines and burns his intestines and he dies. Rabbi Elazar ben Tzadok said: An incident occurred with regard to a certain priest’s daughter who committed adultery, and they wrapped her in bundles of branches and burned her, contrary to the process described in the mishna. The Sages said to him: That court did not act properly; they did so because the court at that time was not proficient in halakha. GEMARA: What kind of wick is the mishna referring to? Rav Mattana says: A wick of lead, i.e., a long, thin piece of lead in the shape of a wick, which is melted and poured down into the intestines. From where do we derive that burning means this kind of death? It is derived from a verbal analogy between the burning that is described in the context of capital punishment (see Leviticus 21:9) and the burning described with regard to the assembly of Korah, when they were burned by God (see Numbers 17:4). Just as there, with regard to the assembly of Korah, they were killed by the burning of the soul within the body, but the body itself remained intact, so too here, the condemned one is executed by the burning of the soul, but the body remains intact. He is not executed by means of the burning of the body with wood, as in that case the body would be consumed. Rabbi Elazar says that there is a different source for this method of burning: It is derived from a verbal analogy between the burning that is described in this context and the burning that is described with regard to the deaths of Nadav and Avihu, the sons of Aaron (see Leviticus 10:6). Just as there, Nadav and Avihu were killed by the burning of the soul, but the body remained intact, so too here, the execution is carried out by the burning of the soul, but the body remains intact. The Gemara asks: From where does the one who derives that burning means this kind of death from the assembly of Korah derive that their bodies were not burned? The Gemara answers: He derives it from that which is written: “And the firepans of these men who have sinned with their souls” (Numbers 17:3), which indicates that only their souls were burned, but their bodies were intact. The Gemara asks: And how does the other Sage, who does not derive that burning means this kind of death from here, interpret the deaths of the assembly of Korah? The Gemara answers: That burning was actual burning of their bodies. And what is the meaning of the term: “With their souls”? It means that they were deemed liable to be killed by burning due to matters of sustaining their souls, i.e., they sinned because Korah helped them fulfill their bodily desires, and consequently they followed him. This latter explanation is in accordance with the statement of Reish Lakish. As Reish Lakish says: What is the meaning of that which is written: “With the flattering mockeries of spitefulness [maog] they gnash at me with their teeth” (Psalms 35:16)? It means that because of the flattery of those people who flattered Korah over matters of eating, i.e., because of the food and drink that he would give them, the minister of Gehenna gnashed his teeth over them, as they eventually sinned and fell into his hands. The word maog is interpreted homiletically here as alluding to uga, cake. The Gemara asks: And from where does the one who derives that burning means this kind of death from the sons of Aaron derive that their bodies were not burned? The Gemara answers: He derives it from that which is written: “And fire came out from before the Lord, and devoured them, and they died before the Lord” (Leviticus 10:2). The term “and they died” indicates that it was similar to a natural death, in which the body remains intact. The Gemara asks: And how does the other Sage, who does not derive that burning means this kind of death from here, interpret the death of the sons of Aaron? The Gemara answers: That burning was actual burning. And in that case, what is the meaning of that which is written: “And they died”? It means that the fire started from within them, and therefore it was similar to a natural death, which occurs within the person. As it is taught in a baraita: Abba Yosei ben Dostai says: Two threads of fire came out of the Holy of Holies and split into four, and two entered the nostrils of this one, and the other two entered the nostrils of that one, and the threads of fire burned them. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it written: “And devoured them [vatokhal otam]”? The usage of the expanded term “vatokhal otam,” instead of the terser vatokhlem, indicates a limitation, i.e., only they were consumed, to the exclusion of their bodies. The Gemara answers: The verse means that the fire devoured “them,” but not their clothes. The Gemara asks: And let us derive the correct method of execution by burning from the halakha of the bull offerings that are burned. Just as there, the reference is to actual burning, so too here, perhaps there should be actual burning. The Gemara answers: It stands to reason that one should derive the halakha with regard to capital punishment from the death of a person, i.e., either from the assembly of Korah or the sons of Aaron, as they share common elements: They deal with a person, a sinner, and a soul that is taken through burning, i.e., the person dies as a result of the burning. Furthermore, the halakha of an offering that was sacrificed with the intent to consume it after its designated time [piggul], is not relevant in either case, whereas it is relevant to bull offerings that are burned. The Gemara asks: On the contrary, one should derive the halakha with regard to capital punishment from the bull offerings that are burned, as both enable the fulfillment of a mitzva, whereas the deaths of the assembly of Korah and the sons of Aaron were not mitzvot. Furthermore, both of these are fixed halakhot for all future generations, whereas the deaths of the assembly of Korah and the sons of Aaron were onetime incidents. The Gemara answers: Those elements that are shared by capital punishment and the deaths of the assembly of Korah and the sons of Aaron are more numerous than the elements that are shared by capital punishment and the bulls that are burned. Therefore, the halakha is derived from the assembly of Korah and the sons of Aaron. The Gemara asks: With regard to the one who derives this halakha from the assembly of Korah, what is the reason he does not derive it from the sons of Aaron? Because in his opinion that was actual burning. But if this is the case, let us derive from the death of the sons of Aaron that execution by burning should be performed with actual burning; why does he derive from the assembly of Korah that hot lead should be used? Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says: The verse states: “And you shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18), which teaches that even with regard to a condemned prisoner one should select a good, i.e., a compassionate, death for him. The method of burning described in the mishna is certainly faster and less painful than the burning of the entire body.
כל חייבי מיתות שנתערבו זה בזה נידונין בקלה הנסקלין בנשרפין ר' שמעון אומר נידונין בסקילה שהשריפה חמורה וחכמים אומרים נידונין בשריפה שהסקילה חמורה
With regard to all those liable to be executed with different court-imposed death penalties who became intermingled with each other and it cannot be determined which individual was sentenced to which death, they are all sentenced to the most lenient form of execution to which any of them was sentenced. In a case where those who are liable to be stoned were intermingled with those who are liable to be burned, Rabbi Shimon says: They are all sentenced to be executed by stoning, as burning is a more severe form of execution than stoning. And the Rabbis say: They are all sentenced to be executed by burning, as stoning is a more severe form of execution than burning.

Suggested Discussion Questions:

1. What does this text add to the larger debate of ethical war?

2. How do you respond to the notion of "suspension of halakhic moral safeguards" during times of war?

3. How does one reconcile "tzelem elohim" (the notion that all people are created in the image of God) and just treatment of enemies during war?

The following passages state that even though "war is hell," soldiers are still responsible for a certain degree of ethical conduct:

כָּל הַיָּכוֹל לְהַצִּיל בְּאֵיבָר מֵאֵיבָרָיו וְלֹא טָרַח בְּכָךְ אֶלָּא הִצִּיל בְּנַפְשׁוֹ שֶׁל רוֹדֵף וַהֲרָגוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה שׁוֹפֵךְ דָּמִים וְחַיָּב מִיתָה אֲבָל אֵין בֵּית דִּין מְמִיתִין אוֹתוֹ:

(13) Whosoever can save [a pursued victim] by [injuring one] of the limbs [of the pursuer] and he did not bother with [limiting himself to only doing] that [measure], rather he saved [the victim] with the life of the pursuer [i.e.] he killed [the pursuer], this [vigilante] is a spiller of blood [i.e. a murderer] and is liable to death, though a [human] court does not execute him [for this crime].

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible on our site. Click OK to continue using Sefaria. Learn More.OKאנחנו משתמשים ב"עוגיות" כדי לתת למשתמשים את חוויית השימוש הטובה ביותר.קראו עוד בנושאלחצו כאן לאישור