In addition, we see that a person's lifespan is not pre-determined since if the person returns home and does not fight then he has a greater chance of living. Hoffmann (1961, p. 379, on 20:7) writes that for sure the person was destined to die, but just like the law by putting up a guardrail (22:8), we do not want the person's death to be the responsibility of the officials who send the people to war. Yet, this analogy is not correct since the guardrail stops everybody from falling off the roof and dying, while here the exemptions only stop a few people from dying. The simple understanding of 20:2-8, and of the law of putting up a guardrail, is that if a person acts in a dangerous manner, then he/she has a greater chance of dying, and when possible people should take precautions to increase their chance of living.
The four draft exemptions can be divided into two groups, based on the break in 20:8, "and the shotrim continue to speak." The first group, 20:5-7, record exemptions for a person who has built a house but has not yet dedicated it, planted a vineyard but did not harvest it or was engaged but did not yet marry. The second group, 20:8, is for a person who is scared of dying and/ or of attacking the enemy (Ibn Ezra and Hizkuni on 20:8).
It is striking that these exemptions do not include the most popular draft exemption today in Israel, learning Torah. If this is a legitimate exemption, why was it not mentioned in the Torah with the other exemptions? In fact, the examples of planting a vineyard and building a house are probably completely removed from the life of the typical person today who does not serve in the Israeli army. As S. R. Hirsch writes, (1989, on 20:5-7) “Clearly here the Torah… strikingly lays value on these peace-time tasks being accomplished by every individual personally.” The list of draft exemptions is another case where the Torah indicates the importance of working.
The Torah explains that the reason for the exemption in 20:8 (the second group) is in order that these people who are exempt do not harm the morale of the people fighting, but what is the reason for the exemptions in 20:5-7 (the first group)? One curiosity within the first group of exemptions is that for each of the three cases, the Torah stresses that there is fear that somebody else may either dedicate the house, harvest the vineyard or marry the woman. Why is this possibility relevant to granting the exemption to a person from fighting? Why is it important who dedicates the house or harvests the vineyard?
The three possibilities mentioned in 20:5-7 are also referred to in the section of curses, 28:30, which is understandable since it is a misfortune if a person cannot enjoy his/ her efforts by the house and the fields and if a person who is engaged loses the prospective spouse to somebody else. However, here the fear is that a person will die in battle, why is it worse that the soldier dies without dedicating his house, eating the grapes of his vineyard or getting married?
One approach (see Rashi on 20:5 and Bekhor Shor on 20:7) is that the exemptions are because it is very sad for somebody who has worked so hard at a project to be unable to complete the project. This sadness compounds the sadness of a soldier dying in battle. Is this true even by a vineyard? Is the death of a soldier sadder if somebody else lives in the house he built? Also, if one accepts this idea, that the goal is to reduce the sadness of a death of a soldier, why are there no exemptions to soldiers who have pregnant wives or very young children?
Another approach (see Ibn Ezra on 20:5 and Ramban end of comments on 20:1) is that because a person is so pre-occupied with thinking about his house, vineyard and wife, he will flee the battle. Again, I do not understand why this concern should also not be for a soldier with a pregnant wife or young children? Also, with this idea, what difference does it make if another person is going to enjoy the vineyard or the house? Furthermore, if a person is really so worried about his house, vineyard and wife, maybe he would fight harder to get back to them. Paul Kloot (congregant of shul in Modiin) suggested to me that in battle everybody has to be together, so if a person is worried that another person will take his house, vineyard or wife, then the person will not be willing to sacrifice to help out his fellow soldiers.
My guess is that the draft exemptions are to slightly reduce the tragedy of war. In war, many people die and there is no recollection of them at all, as at times even the bodies cannot be identified. In all three cases of the draft exemption of 20:5-7, the person is on the verge of making a name for himself, either by his house, vineyard or wife, that people would say this is his house, vineyard or wife. This is the point of dedicating the house that it will be called his house, and this is the fear of another person appearing, that the house, vineyard or wife will be called after the other person. The Torah gives this person an exemption in order that he can make a name for himself in some small way, and not suffer the fate of a solider to be a nameless causality. With this logic, we understand why no exemption was granted for a soldier whose wife was pregnant or who had young children since his name and memory would be remembered by the wife, children or potential child.
Bibliography:
Hirsch, S. R. (1808-1888), 1989, The Pentateuch, translated by Isaac Levy, second edition, Gateshead: Judaica Press.
Hoffmann, David Tzvi (1843-1921), 1961, Commentary on Deuteronomy, translated by Tzvi Har-Shefer, Tel Aviv: Nezach.
No comments:
Post a Comment