Land For Peace: Fair Trade?

Camp Stone Chavrutafest Moshevet HaMedinah Second Session 2012

A ! ame for Heres" and #ffensive Po itics Shou d !e $irected To A%iva &eisin'er

(ntroductor" )ote: This cha*ura is dea in' +ith the ceasin' of territor" to Pa estinian contro in the interest of peace, A these sources are +or%in' under the assumption that such a trade +ou d indeed "ie d a astin'- true peace- an eventua it" that has to this point remained firm " in the rea m of theor", &e are not dea in' +ith the possi*i it" that terrorism +ou d continue despite territoria concession, &e are dea in' +ith the assumption that terrorism +ou d cease- and the issue at hand is +hether such a peace is more va ua* e than and in .ret/ 0israe ,

&hat1s &ron' &ith 2ivin' 3p Land?

4av Avraham Shapira- Former Ash%ena/i Chief 4a**i of (srae - Psa% Ha acha- 2005
6Accordin' to Torah a+- it is comp ete " for*idden 7issur midoraita8 to 'ive and in (srae to a non9 :e+- due to the prohi*ition of lo techannem 76$o not 'ive them a footho d in the Land-; Devarim 7:28 and due to the nu ification of the commandment to sett e the Land of (srae that is incum*ent upon ever" individua of (srae , This prohi*ition app ies to ever" :e+- so dier or civi ian a i%e, An order to ta%e part in the evacuation of :e+s from their homes in order to 'ive over the and to non9 :e+s is an order that is a'ainst the re i'ion of our ho " Torah and for*idden to fu fi , An"one +ho vio ates this prohi*ition +i not *e e<onerated 7lo yenakke8- not in this +or d and not in the +or d to come,; 1, &hat is the pro* em of 'ivin' a+a" territor"- accordin' to 4av Shapira? 2, To +hom does this app " to? Are there an" e<ceptions made?

$evarim =:192
(>[ AN @ AX GH @ RU G >T AZ ET R? GH @ RU G >N AS KB LH DU G >O AW P DN @ GW AH @ RU G >Q AY @ AH RC D >T IX DS @ A V>F AN @ R V> AU KW @ JO RT P DU GH @Q DO @ GN P AJ G HS DO @ D BF P D HQ DB @ R NO IB P E MN IB DH D JB I C D >H IJ KB L > D> GC DB E >F A> G >? A 7B @

DS @ C IS @ A V>S AU @]Z EU R V>F AN @ R V> AU KW HZ DF GO A >\ P AU @F> GH RU G >U AY @ AH RU G: 7VT ^Y @ DQ G BJ KG U Q>N AF G VH @ IJ D QN K? GQ A BJ K VQ DB K V>N AY EQ R VN @ ^Y EH R VQ D >? AH @ AU GC D >T IX DJ GC D >H IJ KB L > DG > VT DQ DT GU @ 7F: 1 &hen the L#4$ th" 2od sha *rin' thee into the and +hither thou 'oest to possess it- and sha cast out man" nations *efore thee- the Hittite- and the 2ir'ashite- and the Amorite- and the Canaanite- and the Peri//ite- and the Hivite- and the :e*usite- seven nations 'reater and mi'htier than thou_ 2 and +hen the L#4$ th" 2od sha de iver them up *efore thee- and thou sha t smite them_ then thou sha t utter " destro" them_ thou sha t ma%e no covenant +ith them- nor sho+ merc" unto them_ 1, #n the pshat eve - +hat is this referrin' to? 2, #n the pshat eve - +ho is this referrin' to?

Ta mud !av i Masechet Avoda `ara 1a*920a

ZdNdF H>>TY VHJ eQQ BJ -VTYQ BJ c[ V>NFbc :BNd NSBb BT>TY NF >\U> >FN NSB ?>J>S >THTS, From +here do +e derive these ru es? 4a**i 0ose *ar Chanina said: For the verse states: fLo

techanem" g+hich ma" *e renderedh: do not a o+ them to sett e 7chanaya8 on the soi , 1, &hat +ou d this app " to? 2, &ho +ou d this app " to?

4am*am Hi chos Avoda `ara 10:i

VUdSJ VUdSS NFUZ UB >BNZ QF>O> FOU> UJ>XBU ,UT>T>F V>F?U? >bFUZ Y>THJ UTJ NU\B VH>JZ HX>dQ JBNO> b>O eS[F VBU ,HZO >XJ UJ>XB C]NBF UFO> BJ NSBTO YT >TF UUj]TO QU]S ZFO U>JZ JFd>O bZ BJB UT]NBF NUFZ> BJ HNUY\F BJB e>JFdS e>B JFU>H eS[F BJO JFB WHUT JFU>HO eS[F BJB FOUQ NW e>JFdS e>BU ,FOUQ NW H[ >NH QU]S ZFO U>JZ JFd bFJF db] NW A the a*ove matters app " on " in an era +hen (srae is in e<i e amon' the ido aters or in an era +hen the ido aters are in po+er, &hen- ho+ever- (srae is in po+er over them- it is for*idden for us to a o+ an ido ater amon' us, .ven a temporar" resident or a merchant +ho trave s from p ace to p ace shou d not *e a o+ed to pass throu'h our and unti he accepts the seven universa a+s commanded to )oah and his descendants- as g.<odus 2k:kkh states: fThe" sha not d+e in "our andf 9 i,e,- even temporari ", A person +ho accepts these seven mit/vot is a ger toshav, A ger toshav ma" *e accepted on " in the era +hen the g a+s of theh :u*i ee 0ear are o*served, (n an era +hen the g a+s of theh :u*i ee 0ear are not o*served- ho+ever- +e ma" accept on " fu converts gto :udaismh,

1, 2, k,

Accordin' to the 4am*am- +ho are +e not a o+ed to 'ive and to? Are there an" e<ceptions made? &hat passu% does the 4am*am use?

Peirush 4am*an A HaTorah $evarim 20:1l

B>HU ,OdUSJ CJ H>H> >? VH>HJB QB bUFZQ >? >J CQUB UB>jY> eX C]NBF UFO> BJ (WJ W? QUSO) HN>H[H HNUQH HTH C["Z bUFZJ CUQX> VHS V>FNU C]NBF UFO> Q>NF VH>HJBJU VHJ QUN?Q VB >? V>F?U? >bFUZF HNH[B The Torah +arns us- f$o not et them d+e in "our and- est the" turn "ou a+a" from me- *ecause "ou +i serve their 'ods- and it +i *e a stum* in' * oc% for "ouf- and this is a +arnin' from ido aters*ecause if "ou ma%e a covenant +ith them and their 'ods- the" +i d+e in "our and- and man" of them +i seduce "ou to serve ido s,,,, 1, &hat passu% does the 4am*an use? 2, &hat is the reasonin' *ehind the commandment- accordin' to 4am*an? k, &ho does it app " to- accordin' to the 4am*an?

m, $oes this a'ree or disa'ree +ith the 4am*am? 5, &hat other issues mi'ht *e impacted *" this de*ate

4av Avraham 0it/cha% Hanohen noo%- Shuft Mishpat nohen- no, ik

W>OSO ,Y"FH b"Z CUS\J O> >BbU ,JdHJ CUS\J HU]S H[? BNUTU VU]Z dYbF CUS\J >S JZ B]STO VUdS J?FO ,>QZbJ JFB ,["ZZ? VT>Bb HJUbW NQU> BNF\ >UH ZdNdF '>TY e>TZJU .Y"TQS e>TZJ ["ZZ? VT>B V>JBZSO>b NUjH eUOJS d>>bU >"FB ["ZF BUH Bb>XdH Nd>Z ?"B ,VH>HJB QB bUFZQ >? >J CQUB UB>jY> eX C]NBF UFO> BJ :BNdF ONUXSb eU>? !ut- in m" opinion- in an" p ace +here +e find someone upon +hom to re " in a e<tenuatin' circumstance of a ma'nitude such as this- it is a mit/vah to *e enient- certain " +e can re " on the +ords of the !ach - +ho ar'ues on the !eit 0osef and derives from the an'ua'e of the Tur that the 0ishmae im are not considered ido +orshippers in the matter of a free 'ift, And as for the matter of residence on and- there1s a *etter reason as to +h" the" are not ido +orshippers- since it is e<p icit in the Torah- f$o not a o+ them to d+e in "our and- est the" ma%e "ou sin to me- *ecause "ou +i serve their 'odsf- if so- the essentia +orr" is a*out ido atr", 1, 4av noo% is ta %in' here a*out se in' and to a non9:e+ durin' shemitah, $oes this app " to our discussion? &h" or +h" not? 2, &ho is 4av noo% e<p ainin' the ha acha i%e?

Pi%uach )efesh
4av 0osef $ov So oveitchi%- Teshuva $rasha- 1ai=
(f pi%uach nefesh supercedes a other mit/vos- - it supercedes a prohi*itions of the Torah- especia " pi%uach nefesh of the "ishuv in .ret/ 0israe , And a the si " statements ( read in the ne+spapers- one oourna ist sa"s that +e must 'ive a he territor" *ac%- another sa"s that +e must 'ive on " some territor" *ac%- another re eases edicts- strictures and +arnin's not to 'ive an"thin' *ac%, These :e+s are p a"in' +ith 2 mi ion ives, ( +i sa" that as dear as the note Hamaarovi is- the 2 mi ion ives of :e+s is more important, 1, 3pon +hat does 4av So oveitchi% p ace more va ue- "ishuv eret/ "israe or :e+ish ives? 2, !ased upon +hat ha a%hic idea does he do this? k, &hat mi'ht *e pro* ematic a*out this idea?

4av T/vi 0ehuda noo%- 1a=m

fand "ou +i inherit the and and sett e in itf means that the and +i *e in our hands fand +e +i not eave it in the hand of the nationsf,,,, (t is a positive commandment of the Torah- c ear and a*so utethat o* i'ates a :e+s ,,, &e are o* i'ated to sacrifice ourse ves 7meserut nefesh8 for this and- for a of

its *oundaries, (f *ecause of po itica * unders *" 2enti es or 72od for*id8 *" :e+s +e +i *e compe ed 7to eave the and8- +e are a o* i'ated to *e %i ed and not to trans'ressp #n :udea and Samaria- and on the 2o an Hei'hts99it +i not happen +ithout +arf 1, &hat does 4av T/vi 0ehuda noo% va ue more hi'h "- .ret/ 0israe or :e+ish ives? 2, $oes 4av T/vi 0ehuda have ha a%hic oustification for his vie+? k, Ho+ does he concieve of the mit/vah of "ishuv ha1eret/? m, &hat mi'ht *e pro* ematic a*out this vie+?

4a**i 0osef !adad- Minchas Chinuch- m25

\TH JZ '>T>b CUS\Q BJ HNUQHb ZUb>U VHSZ VUYJJ HQU>] HNUQHb U[ HU]S S"S HT?\H >TXS V>YbT QU]SH J?b >HT Z"]U .HT?\ BUHb qB VHSZ VUYJJ HN[W HNUQHb eT>[Y ?"B HSYJS QZF V>bb]H >TOS V>WNHT VJUZH CNbFU e"FSNF NBUFS? Z"]U e?Q\>O qB UQUB WUNHJ HU]SU H[H VUdSF HT?\ '>UYb ?"B This matter reruires stud"- for a mitzvot are set aside +here there is dan'er- *ut neverthe ess the Torah commands gush to fi'ht a'ainst them 7the Seven )ations8- and +e %no+ that the Torah does not han' its a+s on a mirac e- as is e<p ained *" the 4am*an- and it is the +a" of the +or d that peop e from *oth sides die in time of +ar, Accordin' "- +e see that the Torah commands gush to fi'ht a'ainst them even +hen there is dan'er- and if so- dan'er is set aside in this situation- and there is a mitzva to %i him even if this puts him in dan'er, The matter reruires further stud", &hat important point is the Minchas Chinuch ma%in' a*out +ars that are o* i'ated *" the Torah?

4am*an- Hasa'os A Sefer HaMit/vot- Positive Commandments- no, m

UT>QJU[ b>F HF[ZT BJU FdZ>JU dY]>J VHNFBJ UT>QUFBJ HJZQ>U CNFQ> JBH eQT NOB MNBH QONJ UT>Uj]TO Q>Z>FN HU]S MNBH QB >QQT V?J >? HF VQFO>U MNBH QB VQONUHU (VO e"FSNU WJ >Z\S) VHJ UNSB BUHU .HSSOJ UB QUSUBH eS MNBH QB UONU UBF (B '>NFb) 'FQ> UNSB? V>NYB QUSUdSF U[ HU]SF e>>TZH H[? JX?TU .MNBH QB VQJYTQHU HQUB QONJ U>T?O J? JBU >NUSBH NH UBUFU NSBO US? H>N]SU H>JUFWF HJU? U[ HU]SF VHJ HQUB jNXU V?>QUFBJ >QZFOT NOB HJZ (VO) V>JWNSH e>TZF 'Q> UNSB HU]S U[O H>BNHU .VUdS HTSS UY>T> BJO .'UWU V>H qUYFU FWTFU HJXOFU NHF HFNZF QB UONU UJZ NSBJ ZTNF ObdS V?QB >"> YUJOFU (j FdZ) bUZ NSBU .QYQ JBU BN>Q JB CJ C>HJB >"> NFb NOB? ON VQZSO BJU UJ VQTSBH BJU V?>HJB >"> >X QB UNSQU FUQ? H[H NSBSF QUJZJ UFB BJ NOB?U V?J >QQT NOB MNBH NSWF UNSB C?U .HU]S QSYJS (U"S Y"X HjU\) HQUB e>NUd V>S?YHO B>H U[U .HYjFHU bUZ> BJ HU]S HQ>HO HBNUH ,UJUdF >NX\ eUOJU .QUON J?H >NFb HYUUNHJ bUb QSYJS HFUY J?H >NFb OF?J ZOUH> QSYJS HbUH> FN NSB (F bS) HjU\ 'ZFO QSYJSF HU]SH B>H QB[H HU]SH >? NSBQU OFQOQ JBU .FOQ ON>QO QU?[F HF QFO>U HQON>U (b> [> '>jXUO) UTSZ VSYJHF VHH QUSUBH WUNHJ UT>Uj]T UTBO .e? NFbH e>B .VS>NYQ VNYH ('>jXUO X"\) 'TO VbFBJ UUj]TO V>SSZ eS NUbF QUSUBH eS VQJU[ b>F BJU Vb>F HQUB Y>TT BJ MNBH JFB V>ZUb> V>BTQF VF[ZTU VHSZ V>JOT V>JOHJ U]N VBU MNB H"FdH VHJ eQTU ,UJ CJHU HTX >OWNWH ('>jXUO N"Fb) VNSBS? ,VHJ U?JHU UT>TXS VHH QUSUBH UYNF VB e?U .QUNUbH V>SSZH QB UTQ>N?H >NYB e?U .UT>jFO HF F>OUHJU QUT>bSH OUF?JU MNBF BUFJ UTYTB UT>Uj]T ,>d>NXB U[ V]NB? HFUj VT>B QUSUdSH eS VQJU[U NUOB MNB QB UB NZTO MNB QB VHJ OUF?JU MNBH QB FU[ZJ UT>jFO e? NYB U]N VB V>N?[TH OUF?F B>H U[H HU]SH >? e>FQ OF?J ZOUH> QSYJS VNSBSSU .HQF>O>FU HOUF>?F UT>Uj]TO .e>BON

&e +ere commanded to ta%e possession of the and that 2od- * essed and e<a ted *e He- 'ave our forefathers- Avraham- 0it/cha%- and 0aa%ov- and not to eave it in the hands of other nations or in deso ation, This is +hat He said to them: fAnd "ou sha dispossess the inha*itants of the and and d+e in it_ for ( have 'iven "ou the and to possess it, And "ou sha divide the and for an inheritancef 7Bamidbarkk:5k95m8, And this mitzva +as repeated in other p aces- as He- * essed *e He- said: f2o in and possess the and +hich the Lord s+ore to "our fathersf 7Devarim 1:l8, And He spe ed out the detai s of this mitzva to them re'ardin' the *orders and *oundaries- as He said: fAnd 'o to the mountain of the .mori- and to a the p aces near it- in the p ain- in the hi s- and in the o+ and- and in the )e'ev- and *" the sea side- etc,f 7Devarim 1:=8- so that the" not eave out an" of it, And the proof that this is a mitzva is from +hat the * essed #ne said re'ardin' the spies: f2o up and possess it- as the Lord 2od of "our fathers has said to "ou- Fear not- nor *e discoura'edf 7Devarim 1:218, And He a so said: fLi%e+ise +hen the Lord sent "ou from nadesh9!arne1a- sa"in'- 2o up and possess the and +hich ( have 'iven "ouf 7Devarim a:2k8, And +hen the" did not +ant to 'o up after this statement- it is +ritten: fThen "ou re*e ed a'ainst the commandment of the Lord "our 2od- and "ou *e ieved Him not- nor hear%ened to His voicef 7i*id,8, This sho+s that it +as a mitzva- and not a mission or a promise, This is +hat the Sa'es ca ed o* i'ator" +ar, And thus the" said in the 2emara in Sota 7mm*8: f4av 0ehuda said: 0ehoshua1s +ar of conruest s a a'ree is o* i'ator"_ $avid1s +ar for g'reaterh comfort 9 a a'ree is optiona ,f And the formu ation of the Sifrei is: f1And "ou sha possess it and d+e therein1 7Devarim 2i:18 s *" virtue of "our possessin' it- "ou sha d+e therein,f And do not 'o +ron' and sa" that this mitzva re ates to the +ar a'ainst the seven nations that +e are commanded to destro"- as it sa"s: fAnd "ou sha utter " destro" themf 7Devarim =:28 s this is not so, For +e are commanded to %i those nations +hen the" fi'ht a'ainst us- *ut if the" +ish to ma%e peace- +e ma%e peace +ith them and eave them under certain conditions, !ut +e are not to eave the and in their hands or in the hands of an" of the nations in an" 'enerationt, And from +hat the" said f0ehoshua1s +ar of conruest-f "ou understand that this mitzva is fu fi ed throu'h conruestt 1, Ho+ does the 4am*am understand the mit/vah of "ishuv eret/ "israe ? 2, Ho+ +ou d he vie+ +ars to capture or retain territor" of .ret/ 0israe ? k, Ho+ +ou d the Minchat Chinuch app " to the 4am*an1s conception of the mit/vah? m, 3nder that understandin'- +ou d there *e room to 'ive up and for peace *ecause of pi%uach nefesh? 5, &ho is this comin' to support?

4av Aharon Lichtenstein- fCompromise and Concessionf- 1aam

This raises another ruestion: After a - it is sometimes a mizvah to 'o to +ar- +hich c ear " invo ves the sacrifice of human ives, A thou'h the Sefer Hahinnukh does sa" that the mizvah of 'oin' to +ar app ies on " +hen there is no dan'er to ife- the inhat Hinnukh immediate " raises the o*vious o*oection that such a +ar is pure fantas", The assumption is that the area invo ved is one +here it is %no+n in advance that there +i *e some sacrifice of human ives, C ear "- +ith respect to milhemet mizvah! it is difficu t to app " the cate'ories of "ikuah nefesh in their fu ran'e and intensit"- as +e

+ou d do in the case of vio atin' Shabbat or eatin' non%osher food, #n the other hand- it is unreasona* e to assume that in the case of fu fi in' a mizvah that is e<pected to demand some sacrifice of human ives- there shou d *e no imit to the num*er of ives +e are permitted or o* i'ated to sacrifice in order to achieve this no* e purpose,

#n the eve of the individua - our ra**is set a fi<ed financia imit 9 and a fair " o+ one- up to a fifth of one1s assets 9 *e"ond +hich one is re ieved of the o* i'ation of fu fi in' a particu ar mizvah# Presuma* "- as the aharik posited- c ear " if there is a monetar" imit there shou d a so *e an e<istentia imit- a sort of ph"sica painf imit that is *e"ond t+ent" percent of one1s monetar" assets- ou'ht this not *e re evant to the present case as +e ? (s it p ausi* e that in the case of a mizvah that is a pu* ic o* i'ation- a nationa mizvah $ no matter ho+ important it is and ho+ carefu +e are not to *e itt e it even for a moment 9 the price in human ives shou d not have an" si'nificance? #f course- no one can determine +hat +ou d *e the eruiva ent of a fifth here- for can an"one ruantif" the va ue of a human ife? Sti - it seems to me that a of us reco'ni/e that *e"ond a certain imit +e cannot possi* " i'nore the price, And if this is the case +hen the ver" e<istence of our home is invo ved- ho+ much more so must +e ta%e this price into consideration +hen the issue is on a different eve entire ", For it is not the e<istence of our home that is at issue here- *ut rather the num*er of rooms it has, 1, &hat points does 4av Lichtenstein *rin' up a'ainst the Minchat Chinuch? $oes he inva idate the Minchat Chinuch entire "? Are his points va id? 2, &hat is 4av Lichtenstein proposin' here? Ho+ does it re ate to the ha a%hic ar'ument?

4av Sh omo 2oren- Techumim 15- i

f(f- 2od for*id- it +ou d *ecome c ear that +e ac% the stren'th and mi'ht to defeat our enemiesaccordin' to a rea istic assessment of the *a ance of po+er- in such a case an" peace arran'ement- even an unsta* e one- +ou d c ear " *e prefera* e to a rout- 2od for*id- in the fie d of *att ef 1, Ho+ does 4av 2oren modif" the Minchat Chinuch1s position? 2, (n +hat situation +ou d 4av 2oren see a peace arran'ement as ha a%hica " a o+ed? k, &ho shou d *e ma%in' such decisions?

4av #vadia 0osef- fCedin' Territor" of the Land of (srae in #rder to Save Livesf- %ehumim uo , 10- 1ala
f(f the heads of the arm" +ith the mem*ers of the 'overnment dec are that ives +i *e endan'ered un ess territories in the Land of (srae are re inruished- and there is the dan'er of an immediate

dec aration of +ar *" the nei'h*orin' Ara* gstatesh-,,,and if territories are re inruished the dan'er of +ar +i *e removed- and that there are rea istic chances of astin' peace- then it appears- accordin' to a the opinions- that it is permissi* e to re inruish territories of the Land of (srae ,,,gaccordin' to the princip e ofh "ikuach nefesh;

4av Chaim $avid Ha evi- Torah She1!aa Peh- 21 fThis is +hat +e said a*ove s this is the po+er of Ha a%ha- that it did not intervene in the detai s of the
a+s 'overnin' the state- and a it teaches are fundamenta princip es, (n m" hum* e opinion- it seems as e<ceedin' " o*vious that the 'uidin' princip e in a this is 'uaranteein' the securit" of the nation in ever" conte<t of ne'otiations on the *asis of a ver" *road understandin' of the Torah1s mitzva- fthat "ou sha ive +ith them,f Therefore- the discussion re'ardin' the return or retention of the territories must *e *ased on a c ear and simp e princip e s +hat is the *est +a" to 'uarantee the securit" of the state+hich is the preservation of the nation, This is a ha a%ha that is not +ritten- and it certain " does not stem from the a+ of "iku&ach nefesh- *ut rather from simp e o'ict &e are eft then +ith one c ear and simp e assumption: The decisive factor in this case is the preservation and securit" of the nation, And therefore an" 'overnment of (srae that +i come to the conc usion that the surrender of territories +i prevent +ars and * oodshed- and in its +a%e it +i *rin' true peace 9 is permitted- and even o* i'ated to do so, And in contrast- a +ithdra+a that is ia* e to cause an" %ind of securit" ris% is a*so ute " for*idden,