Caught up in the
passions and anxiety that is the very stuff
of war, enticed by the [enemy] maidens whose
job is to distract, the victorious Jewish
soldier falls for a woman and takes her
home. In this yefas toar
[beautiful maiden]section, the Torah
does not flinch [Devarim, 21:10-13]
If you should go to war against your
enemies, and Ad-noy, your G-d, puts them in
your hand, and you capture prisoners from
them; And you see among the prisoners a
beautifully formed woman; if you desire her,
you may take her as your wife. You will
bring her into your house and she will shave
her head and allow her nails to grow. She
must discard her prisoner's garb from upon
her, and she will remain in your home and
weep for her father and her mother a month
of days; and afterwards [if you still
desire her] you may come to her and
consummate with her, and she will become
your wife.
Step 1: On one level, the Torah
clearly designs a procedure to push off the
woman, our soldier's object of desire. And
yet, there is no escaping the shocking
consent to an apparently very unholy type of
union. Regarding this relationship, the
Talmud uses a phrase that appears but once
in its entire corpus[1]
[Kiddushin, 21b]
Lo dibrah Torah ela kineged yetzer hara -
the Torah only spoke to the evil inclination
of man
Simply put, the Torah permits the
rendezvous, because the Torah is a document
grounded in reality. Hashem only prohibits
that which is within man's control. Even as
the Torah does not approve of the behavior,
the primal yetzer hara's power can
not allow for a blanket prohibition.
It is just
too much to ask from every soldier to hold
back.
From such a low place, our famous mussar
(ethical) works turn the whole thing on its
head. The Torah's realness in our situation
allows us to deduce that barring the unique
circumstance, the very same Torah is equally
real in demanding our absolute loyalty to
the complete corpus of mitzvot. To those
that protest, but Rabbi I can't - the
Torah says: You surely can!
Which leads us to a stunningly simple
S'fas Emes [5631] question. Why create
the exception? Would it not have been better
for the Creator of the yetzer hara
to rein it in, just this one time? Why
create a scenario where man has to concede
to that yetzer hara - blotting possible
perfection?
Step 2:
Exactly what is the Torah permitting
here?
It's a long story, but the short version is
that unsurprisingly it is a matter of
dispute.
Rashi[2]
goes with the simple meaning of the text.
The soldier takes the woman home and only
after putting her though the halachic hoops
does he have license to marry and be with
her. Of course, there is no likuchin,
Jewish marriage until the women converts.
Therefore, the Torah is allowing the soldier
to marry the maiden - post conversion. After
all the smoke clears, Ramban poses a simple
question. If the lady is Jewish, then
where's the prohibition that the yetzer
hara overrides?
Here are two answers: Ramban and Tosafot's[3]
technical response: Conversion is usually a
choice; here the women is forced into the
conversion (giyur b'al korcha) , an
almost paradoxical notion for Jewish
conversion, one whose lynchpin is personal
acceptance of all the mitzvoth. A more basic
intuitive solution: The whole thing
shmecks - smells from impropriety. This
is not the stuff of kiddushin, of Jewish
holy marriage! Even if no technical
prohibition has been violated, finding a
Gentile and "kashering" her out of personal
lust is essentially despicable.
Ramban and Rabbeinu Tam go for broke. They
believe that the Torah permits the soldier
to have relations with the maiden
immediately.[4]
The procedures spelled out in the text are
for the soldier that wants to marry the
woman even after initial relations.
Post-lust and before contemplating the
marital relationship, the Torah wants to
knock some sense (or knock out some desire)
in our Jewish soldier, requiring a thirty
day procedure of stripping the maiden of her
allure. According to these commentaries
then, concession to the yetzer hara means
permitting that which is a full blown sin in
other contexts - a remarkable concept[5]
Ramban concedes that Rashi's approach is the
simple textual one for the verse only
mentions taking the woman after the
whole series of procedures. It is only based
on the Oral tradition that we understand
otherwise. We may then reasonably ask why
does the Torah reverse the order? (if the
soldier is permitted to have relations once
before the safeguards).
The Point:
A remarkable Chazal cast this whole section
in a completely different light. With their
insight, we will give a midrashic answer to
our outstanding questions.
First note that the Torah speaks in 2nd
person. It is talking to you (and
me!). When you go out to battle. We
Jews have not been in the war business for a
while, and yet the Torah speaks with
certitude?! Because, according to the Sifri,
the war is within and the temptress is the
yetzer hara, the one that always
looks so fair. The battle of course is that
of a lifetime and the Torah warns us how to
deal with the ultimate battle[6]
- giving us a four pronged strategic
approach to ward off spiritual [based on
Rabbeinu Bechayei]
-
gilchah
es rosha
- cut off the hair,
-
figure
out away to weaken its primal
strength (cf. the Shimshon story)
-
asetah
et tziparna
- let the fingernails grow
-
beckon
the image of Adam before the sin
[when he was completely protected by
the nail coverings]. Before sinning,
consider the greatness that human
beings in the Divine image can
attain.
-
V'heisirah et simlas shivyah
- take off its fancy clothing
-
Sin
always looks so tempting. Remove the
facade and think long term
implications of conceding to one's
immediate gratifications
-
V'yashva b'beisecha, uvachsa es aviha
.. bring it into the home and let it cry
for 30 days
-
Acknowledge the struggle and be real
with immenseness of the task
And then
-
V'lakachta lecha l'isha
- marry her
Marry her? Say what.
Yes - after you have weakened the yetzer
hara, reflected and struggled - bring it
back home. Because the goal as we say in
the Shema. [twice a day everyday] is
to serve and love God with bechol
levavcha, with "all our hearts"
- with our good (yetzer tov) and evil
(yetzer hara) inclinations[7].
Our yetzer hara, the center of passion and
creativity is not inherently evil. Judaism
does not preach: Serve G-d with your
spiritual nature and squelch the physical;
nor do we acknowledge an autonomous Satan
who runs amok of G-d[8].
As we get ready for the Yom Kippur litany
of Al
cheit's, one that stands apart is the
confession of sinning with the yetzer hara.
Aren't all sins from the yetzer hara. Many
have suggested that the deper meaning here
is that all sin stems from the misuse of our
God given gifts.
As we ratchet up and ready for the battle,
let us channel - not choke all of our gifts,
in holistic harmony and service to Hashem.
Good
Shabbos
Asher Brander
[1]
A few other applications are found
in midrashim, e.g. in the context of
eating the produce of the 4th
and 5th year and
returning the lost animal of an
enemy. The same Talmudic piece talks
about eating the slaughtered meat of
animals that are on the verge of
dying.
[2] [Devarim, 21:11,
Kiddushin 21b yefat toar]
[3] Tosafot Kiddushin 22a
[4] Their major proof
stems from a piece of Talmud [Kiddushin
21b] that distinguishes between the
first and second act of relations (biah
rishona and shnia) . The gemara
contemplates whether the Kohein is
permitted to the yefat toar as he is
not permitted to marry a convert -
so perhaps the whole permission is
only for someone who can ultimately
marry the woman. according to Rashi,
what significant difference is there
between first and second act of
relations
[5] This is working with
the assumption that relations with a
gentile is prohibited from the
Torah. Surely, this is true in a
public context. The entire scope of
the prohibition is well beyond our
discussion
[6] Now of course the
words of Chazal ring so much more
precise. Lo Dibrah Torah Ela kineged
yetzer Harah. The Torah is speaking
about the battle against the yetzer
hara.
[7]
A famous talmudic story in Yoma
relates that post destruction of the
Temple, the Sages prayed to God for
the capture of the Yetzer Hara.
They prayed for mercy, and he was
handed over to them. God said to
them: "Realize that if you kill him,
the world goes down". They
imprisoned him for three days, then
looked in the whole land of Israel
for a fresh egg and could not find
it. (for all of procreation had
ceased even amongst the animals).
Thereupon, the Rabbis said: "What
shall we do now? Shall we kill him?
The world would then go down."
[8]
Thus the Torah alludes to the notion
of "conceding" to the yetzer hara in
the positive sense. Indeed, even Sin
and Sanctity are not the creation of
divided realms of existence - they
emerge from the very same source. Is
it not remarkable that the Hebrew
word for sin, cheit, can
also refer to spiritual immersion?
Is it happenstance that verb form of
cheit often refers to an arrow that
has missed its mark? Hardly, for
sin is the misuse of one's innate G-dly
passion, a spiritual arrow that has
missed its mark!
