| Insight Israel from Rabbi Professor David Golinkin | |
|
Pidyon shvuyim (The Redemption
of Captives)
How Far Should Israel Go in Order to Redeem Captives from Terrorist Organizations?
I)
Introduction Indeed,
this is not the first time Israel has debated a lopsided prisoner exchange.
There follows a chart comparing similar exchanges in the past: 4500 Lebanese
+ The
first two exchanges were with Arab countries and were part of a ceasefire agreement
after war. In the last case, there was no ceasefire; 800 of the 1150 terrorists
were returned to the West Bank where many of them resumed terrorist activity.
II)
Arguments in Favor of the Current Exchange IV) The
Importance of Pidyon Shvuyim in Rabbinic Literature and in Medieval
Jewish History Indeed, the Talmud
(Bava Batra 8b) calls pidyon shvuyim a mitzvah rabbah
(= great mitzvah) and says that captivity is worse than starvation and death.
Maimonides rules that he who ignores ransoming a captive is guilty of transgressing
commandments such as you shall not hearden your heart (Deut. 15:7); you shall
not stand idly by the blood of your brother (Lev. 19:16); and you shall love
your neighbor as yourself (Lev. 19:18). (Maimonides, Laws of Gifts to the Poor
8:10 = Shulhan Arukh, Yoreh Deah 252:2). And one who delays in ransoming
a captive, is considered like a murderer (Yoreh Deah 252:3). Indeed,
Maimonides himself wrote letters exhorting his fellow Jews to redeem captives
and collected money for pidyon shvuyim. The Cairo Genizah contains receipts
to Jews who donated funds for that purpose written by Maimonides himself! (See
the Bibliography, Section I, 10.) V) The
Exception to the Rule When the Price is too High One does not
ransom captives for more than their value because of Tikkun Olam
(literally: fixing the world; for the good order of the world; as a precaution
for the general good) and one does not help captives escape because of Tikkun
Olam
This Mishnah was
codified by the standard codes of Jewish law. The Babylonian Talmud (ibid.)
gives two different explanations for this takkanah (rabbinic enactment):
A) because
of the [financial] burden on the community;
For
the past few months, Israelis and the Israeli media have been conducting a fierce
debate on the subject of pidyon shvuyim (the redemption of captives).
Should Israel exchange 400 Arab terrorists including Sheikh Obeid and Mustafa
Dirani for Elhanan Tanenbaum and the bodies of three Israeli soldiers kidnapped
and killed in Lebanon in October 2000. This has been further complicated by
the fact that this exchange will not include Lt. Col. Ron Arad, who
was captured in Lebanon seventeen years ago, nor information about his fate,
even though Obeid and Dirani were captured by Israel for the express purpose
of exchanging them for Ron Arad.
Israelis
Arabs
Six Day War
4
6000 soldiers
Yom Kippur
War
294
8400 soldiers
November 1983
6
99 Terrorists in Israel
May 1985
3
1150 terrorists
Prime Minister Sharon and others in favor of the current exchange say as follows:
III) Arguments Against
the Current Exchange
Anyone who surveys this topic historically is struck by the fact that many thousands
of Jews were captured and held for ransom throughout Jewish history and that
Jewish communities went to extraordinary lengths to redeem captives. (See the
Bibliography, Section I.)
It would seem from the above, that pidyon shvuyim is an absolute mitzvah,
which must be followed at all times. But there is one major exception, as explained
in the Mishnah (Gittin 4:6 = Bavli Gittin 45a):
The Talmud does not
decide which explanation is correct, so halakhic authorities throughout the ages
stressed one or the other, leading to different conclusions. Rashi, for example,
says that if you accept the first explanation, a relative could pay an
excessive ransom, because that does not place a financial burden on the community;
whereas according to the second explanation, a relative may not pay the
high ransom because that will still encourage the kidnappers to kidnap more Jews.
B) so that they [=the robbers] should not sieze more captives
i.e. paying a high ransom for captives will encourage kidnappers to kidnap
more Jews and demand still higher ransoms.
VI) Was
the Mishnah in Gittin Followed in Practice?
The standard explanation for more than their value is the amount that captive
would fetch if he/she were sold as a slave. Even so, despite, the clear language
of the Takkanah in the Mishnah, we know from the Talmud, the commentaries,
the Cairo Genizah, and the responsa literature that they were many exceptions
to the rule:
Thus, to summarize, the Mishnah in Gittin says one may not redeem captives for more than their value, and this law was codified by all the standard codes of Jewish Law. But in practice, many talmudic Sages and medieval rabbis found ways to circumvent that Mishnah by interpretation or by creating exceptions to the rule.
VII) Recent
Responsa about Exchanging Terrorists for Israeli Soldiers
Since 1971, many rabbis have written responsa or halakhic articles about our
current dilemma. Most have ruled that Israel may not exchange hundreds
or thousands of terrorists for a few Israeli soldiers. We shall summarize the
opinions of Rabbi Shlomo Goren who was against such exchanges, and of Rabbi
Hayyim David Halevi, who justified Israels actions in 1985 after the fact.
Rabbi Goren says that we must learn the law from the Mishnah in Gittin that we do not pay more than their value. It is true that Tosafot in Gittin 58a said that when there is danger to the captive we may indeed pay more than the captive is worth. But Ramban (Spain, 1195-1270) and Rashba (Spain, 1235-1310) disagree. Furthermore, all captivity in ancient times was dangerous (see Bava Batra 8b quoted above) and the Mishnah nonetheless ruled that one does not pay more than the captives value because this will encourage the kidnappers to kidnap more Jews and endanger the public. He adds that the safety of one or a few Jews in captivity does not take precedence over the safety of the entire public. In addition, he agrees with the Radbaz, and not R. Yosef Karo, that a person does not have to put himself in possible danger in order to save his fellow Jew from definite danger. Finally, in our case, freeing hundreds or thousands of terrorists definitely endangers the public because they will all be free to attack Israel and to take more hostages. Therefore, everything Israel did is against the halakhah of the Mishnah and the legal authorities and against the security of the Jewish people in Israel and the Diaspora.(2)
Rabbi Hayyim David Halevi, who was Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv, admits that Rabbi Gorens ruling, based on Gittin and on the rulings of leading authorities, is clear and correct. Nonetheless, he disagrees with Rabbi Goren. All of the sources quoted deal with robbers who kidnap people for money, but we are dealing with a war based on Palestinian nationalism. They will continue to kidnap Jews regardless of what we do, so the price we pay for captives is not a factor and does not increase terror. In our case, we need halakhic innovation just as R. Yehoshua innovated that one may pay excessive ransom for a Sage and just as Tosafot innovated that the Mishnah doesnt apply after the Destruction. The Radbaz too innovated a lenient approach as we saw above. The Government of Israel decided that if an Israeli soldier sees that the State will not redeem Israeli soldiers for a high price, they will prefer retreat to capture. This too can be considered a halakhic innovation. Therefore, he does not think that the State of Israel acted against Jewish law in exchanging 1150 terrorists for 3 Israeli soldiers.
VIII Summary
and Conclusions
We have seen that pidyon shvuyim is a major value in our tradition
and that Jews have exerted great efforts to redeem captives. The Mishnah in
Gittin ruled that one does not redeem captives for more than their
value and this was codified by all major codes of Jewish law. However, the Talmud
itself and later authorities found ways to circumvent this Mishnah, and captives
were frequently redeemed at excessive prices. Rabbi Goren and many rabbis compare
our dilemma to the Mishnah and say that hundreds or thousands of terrorists
is an excessive price to pay for a few Israeli soldiers. This type of exchange
will endanger the public by increasing kidnapping and setting loose thousands
of terrorists. Rabbi Hayyim David Halevi says that the Mishnah in Gittin
is not really relevant to our dilemma because at that time robbers kidnapped
for money, while Palestinian terrorists kidnap for nationalistic reasons
and the price we pay will not alter their attempts to kidnap.
I was not asked by the Israeli government for my opinion, but if I were asked, I would have to reluctantly agree with the majority of Israeli rabbis who have written on this subject. I am certainly in favor of halakhic innovation as advocated by R. H. D. Halevi, but I think he is missing the plain meaning of the Mishnah. We do not pay excessive ransom mipney tikkun olam, for the public good. In other words, the public takes precedence over the individual, even if this endangers the individual. Exchanging hundreds or thousands of terrorists for one Israeli encourages kidnapping of Israelis, and frees hundreds or thousands of terrorists who will pick up their weapons and attack Israel. In other words, it endangers the public and should not be done.
Notes
- See Rashi to Shabbat 119a, catchword treisar; Rashi to Hullin 95b, catchword treisar; and Rabbi Shlomo Yosef Zevin, Sinai 49 (5761), pp. 151-161.
- At the very end of his article, Rabbi Goren changes his mind and justifies the prisoner exchange without citing one source! In any case, his arguments against such an exchange stand on their own merits.
Bibliography
I) Historical
Studies and Sources
II)
Halakhic Studies
|
|

