Yehoshua 16: One for All and All for One

Shoftim 11: Daughter of Mine, Tell me Where Have You Been?

Eager to gain G-d’s support against Ammon, Yiftach makes a calculated mistake. He vows that the first thing that walks into his barn will be given as a burnt offering to G-d. וַיִּדַּר יִפְתָּח נֶדֶר לַה׳ וַיֹּאמַר אִם־נָתוֹן תִּתֵּן אֶת־בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן בְּיָדִי׃ וְהָיָה הַיּוֹצֵא אֲשֶׁר יֵצֵא מִדַּלְתֵי בֵיתִי לִקְרָאתִי בְּשׁוּבִי בְשָׁלוֹם מִבְּנֵי עַמּוֹן וְהָיָה לַה׳ וְהַעֲלִיתִיהוּ עוֹלָה (Judges 11:30–31) Like Yaacov’s proclamation to Lavan cursing the individual who stole Lavan’s idols that doomed Rachel, this vow turns tragic. Yiftach’s daughter is the one who walks into Yiftach’s barn. Based on Yiftach’s promise, his daughter should have been sacrificed. What actually happened? When his daughter walks in, the Navi adds that “she was his only child, he had no other son or daughter” (verse 35). וְרַק הִיא יְחִידָה אֵין־לוֹ מִמֶּנּוּ בֵּן אוֹ־בַת (Judges 11:34) This recalls the command of G-d to Avraham to take his son, his only son, that he loves, before the Akeidat Yitzchak. קַח־נָא אֶת־בִּנְךָ אֶת־יְחִידְךָ אֲשֶׁר־אָהַבְתָּ אֶת־יִצְחָק (Genesis 22:2) On the one hand this could mean that he would have to sacrifice her, on the other hand, Avraham ultimately did not have to sacrifice Yitzchak. Perhaps the reference to Akadat Yitzchak hints that she was not actually sacrificed. Next, Yiftach tears his clothes and tells his daughter that he is upset because he made a vow and cannot retract it. Ripping clothes is connected to mourning. The implication is that he was “pre mourning” his daughter’s death. By stating that he could not go back on the vow it adds impact to the gravity of the situation. The Midrash in Bereishit Rabbah 60:3 chastises both Yiftach and Pinchas, the Kohen gadol at the time, for not getting together to have the vow annulled. Annulment is possible for most vows under halacha. Neither approached the other, accounding to the midrash, as each wanted the other to come to him. As a result, both Pinchas and Yiftach were punished. Pinchas lost his prophetic vision and Yiftach had to sacrifice his daughter. How Pinchas could still be alive at the time of Yiftach is a whole other issue. Yiftach’s daughter responds that Yiftach made a vow, so Yiftach should follow through because G-d kept His side of the bargain. She then asks for two months to go with her friends and “lament and bewail my maidenhood”. וַתֹּאמֶר אֶל־אָבִיהָ יֵעָשֶׂה לִּי הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה הַרְפֵּה מִמֶּנִּי שְׁנַיִם חֳדָשִׁים וְאֵלְכָה וְיָרַדְתִּי עַל־הֶהָרִים וְאֶבְכֶּה עַל־בְּתוּלַי אָנֹכִי וְרֵעוֹתָי (Judges 11:37) The midrash interprets this request as Yiftach’s daughter taking matters into her own hands to find a legal loophole. Some commentators latch onto “bewail my maidenhood” as a hint from the text that she was condemned to a life of solitude and not that she was killed. She should have been lamenting her life, not her maidenhood. Next, “after two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed. She had never known a man. So it became a custom in Israel / for the maidens of Israel go every year for four days and sing for the daughter of Yiftach” (verses 39–40). וַיְהִי מִקֵּץ שְׁנַיִם חֳדָשִׁים וַתָּשָׁב אֶל־אָבִיהָ וַיַּעַשׂ לָהּ אֶת־נִדְרוֹ אֲשֶׁר נָדָר וְהִיא לֹא־יָדְעָה אִישׁ וַתְּהִי־חֹק בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל׃ מִיָּמִים יָמִימָה תֵּלַכְנָה בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְתַנּוֹת לְבַת־יִפְתָּח הַגִּלְעָדִי אַרְבַּעַת יָמִים בַּשָּׁנָה It seems like Yiftach followed through with his oath, and as a result the date lived in infamy. But, the Navi never directly mentions that he killed her. Some commentators focus on the second part. They explain that she was sent to a solitary life and was only allowed visits four days a year from other maidens, which is why this ceremony was mentioned. If Yiftach indeed killed his daughter, it is yet another tragic example of the lawlessness during the time of Judges, where even those who tried to be loyal to God, still had a dark side.

Shoftim 10: Dodo Bird

Judges is a unique book. Each chapter or few chapters takes place in a different era with different leaders. Some of the Judges have long backstories, but some have no stories at all. Chapter 10 falls into the latter category. Tola the son of Puah the son of Dodo comes after Abimelech with only his location listed. וַיָּקָם אַחֲרֵי אֲבִימֶלֶךְ לְהוֹשִׁיעַ אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵל תּוֹלָע בֶּן־פּוּאָה בֶּן־דּוֹדוֹ אִישׁ יִשָּׂשכָר וְהוּא יֹשֵׁב בְּשָׁמִיר בְּהַר אֶפְרָיִם (Judges 10:1) The only interesting thing about Tola is that his lineage seems to span two generations with the addition of “ben Dodo” in his name. This is unique for Judges, which leads some commentators to explain that dodo here means “his uncle,” meaning that Tola was a relative of Abimelech’s uncle. Others disagree pointing to the fact that Abimelech’s mother was not an Israelite. These commentators believe that Dodo was just the name of his grandfather. The name Dodo appears later on in the lineage of some of David’s warriors. After him is Yair the Giladite. Yair has a little more color with thirty sons riding thirty donkeys controlling thirty cities. וְאַחֲרָיו הָיָה יָאִיר הַגִּלְעָדִי וַיִּשְׁפֹּט אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם שָׁנָה׃ וַיְהִי־לוֹ שְׁלֹשִׁים בָּנִים רֹכְבִים עַל־שְׁלֹשִׁים עֲיָרִים וּשְׁלֹשִׁים עֲיָרִים לָהֶם לָהֶם יִקְרְאוּ חַוֹּת יָאִיר עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר בְּאֶרֶץ הַגִּלְעָד (Judges 10:3–4) This description will come up again with other limited‑detail judges in chapter 12. The number 30 is most likely a way to show that Yair’s party was powerful. Why do some Judges not have back stories? The straightforward answer is that nothing important happened during this time period. Things may have stayed the status quo, and so there was nothing for the book to record—both good or bad. On a deeper level, though, the lack of any story about certain Judges is another way the text comunicates the haphazard nature of the time period. Judges is not a hereditary book. Judges come from different tribes and families. Sometimes God will “introduce” the judge, but sometimes the judges just appear. It is also unclear of the judges overlapped or were truly sequential. Each one comes from a different tribe or family without any continuity. The people are not invested in maintaining the stories of each of their leaders because they soon fall back into a malaise and then move on to someone else.

Shoftim 9: Was Avimelech a Judge?

One of seventy sons, Abimelech kills his brothers and then is appointed leader of the people of Schchem and a band of hooligans. But is Abimelech a Judge? He does not conquer an enemy of the Israelites. Although the people of Shchem appoint him as a ruler over them, it does not seem like he even ruled over the city. The word used to describe his “reign” is “Vayasar” (verse 22). Rashi interprets this as “he ruled as a prince.” But Ralbag is not as convinced. He says the Navi does use the word “Judge” for a reason. Vayasar implies that Abimelech held sway on his own accord and definitely did not rule over all of Israel. The word does appear anywhere else in the book of Judges. The text is also ambiguous as to whether it was the Israelite inhabitants fo Schchem that appointed him as their leader or if it was the Canaanite inhabitants. The people are referred to as “baalai Shchem.” This may have a double meaning. They were both the inhabitants of Shchem, but also the Baal worshipers of Shchem. Beside verse 22, the word Israel appears only at the very end, after Abimelech is crushed by the millstone. “When the men of Israel saw that Abimelech was dead, everyone went home” (verse 55). This cryptic verse could mean that the people discussed in the chapter were Israelites, or it could mean that the people of Israel were finally rid of this mafia boss and could return to their homes safely. If Abimelech was not a true judge, then why include his story? 1) to shows the lawlessness of the time. Focusing on Abimelech and his band of outlaws gives some nice flavor to what it was like to live in Israel at the time of the Judges. Roving gangs could hold sway over groups of cities without any recourse. 2) to show again that Yerubaal was correct that kings are bad news because the children of a ruler can be bad. Yerubaal was a courageous ruler who helped lead the Israelites out from under Midyanite control. He pursuaded the people to leave Baal and destroyed houses of worship. His son did the opposite. He led a gang of thugs to terrorize the countryside. He partnered with the local inhabitants of Shchem and profited from the idol centers. He killed Yerubaal’s entire family.

Shoftim 8: Wishful Thinking for a King

At the end of the chapter, there are two strange things that Gideon does. The first is after Gideon finally captures the two kings. Instead of killing them himself, he asks his son to kill them. His son wavers, and instead the kings taunt Gideon into killing them. At the end of the chapter, Gideon collects rings from the people to create a fancy robe. Why are these two points included in the story? The answer may have to do with what happens in between. Gideon is the conquering hero who defeated the Midyanim. The people have already gone through a few other judges, and decide they want to appoint Gideon as their king. Gideon refuses and says that God should be the one who rules over the people. Perhaps the Navi was also trying to send a message with his son and the robe. The people approach Gideon because he was a great warrior, and on that alone his children should rule after him. But Gideon showed that just because he was a great warrior, it did not mean his son was. Killing the two captured kings should have been an easy ask. Instead, Gideon’s son was not up for the task. Later in the book of Kings, Israel will learn this lesson the hard way with children of kings not necessarily following in the path of their parents. The Navi is sending the message that patrilineal leadership is no guarantee of success or safety. After the people ask him to be king, Gideon collects nose rings from everyone. The last time Israel w as asked for nose rings to make something was back in Exodus at the sin of the Golden Calf. And, just like at the sin of the Golden Calf, the people begin to worship the clock that Gideon makes. The message here is two-fold, the first is that even the most noble rulers can fail. In Exodus, Aaron tried to assuage the people’s fears about Moshe by creating a symbol in the Golden Calf. That did not go well. Here as well, Gideon creates this clock as a message, but it ends up being a snare for the people and for him.

Shoftim 7: Lapdogs

In chapter 6, Gideon tested God through special signs, in chapter 7, God uses His own test. Back in Joshua, after the defeat of Yericho, the people prepare to attack Ai. Secure in their victory over the walled city, the people choose to send a smaller force to attack the city of Ai. The tactic fails, and the force is routed. The motivation there may have been hubris that led to the Israelite defeat. Here, Hashem wants to send a message to the Israelites, and the Midyanim. He tells Gideon that his large fighting force is too big to send the right message: “The LORD said to Gideon: ‘The people with you are too many for Me to deliver Midian into their hands, lest Israel vaunt themselves against Me, saying, “My own hand has saved me.”’” וַיֹּאמֶר ה׳ אֶל־גִּדְעוֹן רַב־הָעָם אֲשֶׁר אִתָּךְ מִתִּתִּי אֶת־מִדְיָן בְּיָדָם פֶּן־יִתְפָּאַר עָלַי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר יָדִי הוֹשִׁיעָה לִּי (Judges 7:2) At first, Hashem has Gideon send away the people that are afraid: “Now therefore proclaim in the hearing of the people: ‘Whoever is fearful and trembling, let him turn back…’ And twenty two thousand of the people turned back, and ten thousand remained.” וְעַתָּה קְרָא־נָא בְּאָזְנֵי הָעָם לֵאמֹר מִי־יָרֵא וְחָרֵד יָשֹׁב וְיִצְפֹּר מֵהַר הַגִּלְעָד וַיָּשָׁב מִן־הָעָם עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁנַיִם אֶלֶף וַעֲשֶׂרֶת אֲלָפִים נִשְׁאָרוּ (Judges 7:3) The number remaining is still too large. God then has Gideon perform a test. He asks the remaining army to go to the river and drink. Those who lap at the water with their tongues like dogs should be separated from those who bend down on their knees. “Everyone who laps the water with his tongue as a dog laps, you shall set apart… And the number of those who lapped, putting their hand to their mouth, was three hundred men… And the LORD said, ‘By the three hundred men that lapped will I deliver you…’” כֹּל אֲשֶׁר־יָלֹק בִּלְשׁוֹנוֹ מִן־הַמַּיִם כַּאֲשֶׁר יִלֹּק הַכֶּלֶב תַּצִּיג אֹתוֹ לְבָד… וַיְהִי מִסְפַּר הַמְלַקִּים בְּיָדָם אֶל־פִּיהֶם שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת אִישׁ… וַיֹּאמֶר ה׳ בִּשְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת הָאִישׁ הַמְלַקִּים אוֹשִׁיעַ אֶתְכֶם… (Judges 7:5–7) God selects those who drink like dogs as the small fighting force. Why is this the sign? Rashi explains that God rejects those bowing down to drink the water because it shows that they were accustomed to bowing down. This means that they secretly were idol worshipers. Ralbag believes the test had nothing to do with idol worship, but instead had to do with zealousness. Those that went on their knees were too lazy and careful, and those that lapped like dogs were trying to drink the fastest way possible. If God was concerned about the idol worshipers, then that should have been the first “cut” that God proposed. Ralbag’s interpretation matches the first cut of those who were fearful. Both cuts help to isolate those warriors who would be fearless and zealous in battle. Josephus argues the opposite. He says that those drinking like dogs did so because they wanted to finish quickly to avoid the enemy. God chose them because it would make the miraculous victory even greater if the small fighting force were those who were the most nervous. The issue with Josephus’s opinion is that it does not match the first cut that God made. One would assume these 300 would have self selected out with those nervous for battle. With all of these conflicting reasons, the main reason may actually have nothing to do with the actions of the people themselves, but in the use of the hand. Verse 2 of the chapter states: “פֶּן־יִתְפָּאַר עָלַי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר יָדִי הוֹשִׁיעָה לִּי” Lest Israel vaunt itself against Me, saying, ‘My own hand saved me. Perhaps, then, God specifically chooses those who do not use their own hands to drink as a way to show that the hand of the people will not be responsible for the victory, only the hand of God.