Parashat Ki-Tetze, Deut. 20:10-25:19

This week’s portion – Ki Tetze (literally, “Should you go,” as in “should you go to war against your enemy”) – continues Moshe’s lecture on the laws of the Torah - the very essence of the Book of D'varim. Some of these laws may seem somewhat antiquated, at least at first sight. But others surprisingly maintain their freshness and relevance to today's world, demonstrating a keen social eye and a true understanding of the human nature, despite being written (and contemplated) over 3,500 years ago.

This week's portion covers a myriad of important and substantial rules and laws; I would do justice to none should I merely attempt to enumerate them all (let alone to discuss them is some detail). Instead, I would rather focus today on just one of these law – a law near and dear to my heart -- the Law of the Rebellious Son. But before reviewing this fascinating law and its implications, allow me to say a few words on the format of some of the laws we will be reading this week.

On the Format of Biblical Laws

Anyone who studies law today – and by “study the law” I literally mean the studying of the rules and laws currently governing a modern democratic community – could not escape the notion that those rules could not be written in a more formal, dry, perhaps even dreary fashion. Take for example the manner in which the Ohio Criminal Code describes a man escaping from prison who, on his way out, purposely kills one of the guards: 

No person who is under detention as a result of having been found guilty of or having pleaded guilty to a felony or who breaks that detention shall purposely cause the death of another… Whoever violates this section is guilty of aggravated murder, and shall be punished as provided in section … 

I’m sure that there are many other ways to draft this law in a manner that is way more interesting to read. But, world-over, criminal codes today are written, to a large extent, in this exact same manner. Now, to be sure, some biblical laws are also written in the same concise, dry fashion – the second part of the Ten Commandments comes to mind as a perfect example (“Thy shall not kill”; end of story). Other laws are also concise – but far from being dry. Take for example one of my all-time favorites (a biblical law that sounds more like a life-coaching advice than a firm rule, which I have applied on a myriad of circumstances), which appears in this week’s portion; it reads:

“Do not try to block an ox while it is threshing.”

(Deut. 25:4; and compare Sun Tzu, The Art of War: “He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight… Do not stop an army on its way home.”)  But the reason I bring up this week’s portion in the context of legal format is different. This portion also presents to us a completely different way to thinking about law drafting. A way that is much more narrative-based and less formal; much more detailed and less generally-applied; much more specific and therefore, likely, less applied. Still, these laws, which are probably based on cases that Moshe heard during his days as a judge, are read like the best John Grishams of today. Take for example the law of the “Captive Beautiful Woman,” which opens this week’s portion:

Should you go to war on your enemies and God has given them to you and you have taken some prisoners; and you have seen, among the captive, a beautiful woman whom you desire and would like to become your wife; then you shall bring her into your own home, and let her shave her head and pare her nails; then she would replace her captive’s garb, and you would let her sit and your home and cry for her father and mother for an entire month; and only then shall you come to her and consummate, and then she would become your wife. But in case you shall no longer want her you shall let her go free; you shall not sell her for money – you shall not exploit her for you have already tortured her.

(Deut. 21:10-14) Other than being a somewhat just and humane law for its time (consider the fact that neither captives nor women have enjoyed any rights at the time), I think this law may serve as a great example for how to write laws; surely if all laws would have written this way many more people would have attempt to practice law…

 The Law of the Rebellious Son

A much more serious issue is presented by one of the most controversial laws presented in this week’s portion – The Law of the Rebellious son. But before even touching upon the complex relationship between parents and their undisciplined boys as they are beautifully presented in this week’s portion, we should remember that we are dealing with a book of laws. And a book of laws (a legal code), the book of D’varim does not tend to bother with the myriad instances of hardships that accompany our everyday life – the house that is never in order, the payments that are always late, the never-ending chases – these warrant no special legal attention or regulation. Rather, this law book – like many others before or since – deals mostly with life’s aberrations, those instances that warrant special attention (and, in most cases, special punishment). One of those instances is that of the rebellious son.

We are all familiar with the notion of a son who does not listen to his dad. Most of us have been right there – when Dad wants you to do “what is right” while you, thinking you know much better, insist on doing “what is cool, fun, or just feel like doing.” What are the options that parents have in this situation?

Most of my life I tended to examine this question through a very narrow lens – that of the (ignorant) son, who naturally thinks he knows better than his parents and therefore opts to do the opposite of what he is told.  That view has evolved, however, over the years; as Mark Twain had observed: “When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But, when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much he had learned in seven years." Indeed, I, too, realized how much my dad has “learned” over the years as I grew up.

My perspective has further evolved about five years ago, when I had my first son (Gabi) and became a parent myself.  Suddenly I realized what it means to actually ask your son to do something and have him completely ignore me (or worse, do the opposite). From that vintage point, all of a sudden, the issue of “the son who knows better” received an entire different meaning. It begins with requirements that seem very small, or petty, to him – the insistence that he would hold my hand when we cross the street; the requests not to play ball near traveling cars – but may lead to a safety issue in case they are ignored. And it continues towards much larger issues – study properly, respect your parents (and other elders), etc., etc., etc.

So what is a father to do in these situations? What can we do when our children repeatedly ignore our requests, or insist on doing the opposite? The Torah, at first glance, offers very little guidance. The solution it offers – quite shockingly – is to kill that boy. Here is the language of the text:

If a man has a wayward and rebellious son, who does not obey his father or his mother, and they chasten him, and [he still] does not listen to them; his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city, and to the gate of his place. And they shall say to the elders of his city, "This son of ours is wayward and rebellious; he does not obey us; [he is] a glutton and a guzzler.” And all the men of his city shall stone him to death, and he shall die. So shall you clear out the evil from among you, and all Israel will listen and fear. (Deut. 20: 18-21)

To be sure, the Law of the Rebellious Son was never implemented as written; indeed, our sages were quick to realize that this is a paradigmatic case of “Halacha Ve’Ein Mornin Ken” – A law that should remain on the books, but never enforced.  So why is that law on the books? Why would the Torah dedicate so much time and effort to detail a story that would never come to pass? Many a sage have attempted to offer a solution to this question (mostly that there is value in studying the Torah itself, even if it does not lead to immediate applications in our own lives), but none of those seem satisfactory.  My hunch – for all its worth – is that this law was intended more as a cautionary tale than a real rule. And this cautionary tale is aimed at all of us, “sons” and “fathers” alike. On the “son” part, it intends to tell us that our parents – through the representing institutions – have the ultimate authority upon us – even the power to kill us. The parents are the ones instructed with the role of our education; but they also have the authority to constrain us should we keep disobeying their orders. So extreme is the power parents have, that they can even lead to our death as disobedient sons.

But the lesson to the parents, in my mind, is even more striking. Allegedly, this section provides the parents with the ultimate solution to a very difficult and delicate problem; “Know you, all parents out there,” the Torah instructs us, “that should your son consistently disobey you, you are hereby granted with the ultimate power; you may – through the representing institution – put your son to death.” But this solution is of very little comfort. Very few parents would like to see their son die (even a disobedient son). And even fewer parents would like to actually send their son to his death by their own hands.

Indeed, perhaps the Torah is trying to tell us something much deeper here. Perhaps the message is that death can never be a solution; that even if you have the power to inflict death, in a relation between parents and children, you should never exercise that power – you should always opt for a much more sophisticated, and lesser harsh, sanctions to  try and amend the ways of your disobedient son.

And to that extent – that in the father-son context, death is never a real option for a solution – I find the Portion very rewarding this week.

Before I part with my usual Shabbat Shalom, I wanted to mention another very interesting Shabbat Blog – one relating to the Shabbat food. If you’re planning on having  - or going to – a Shabbat dinner, please give this blog a chance; you will not regret it.  http://www.edibletorah.com/

Shabbat Shalom,

Doron