ื‘ืกืดื“

Kavanot: Unforgiven

Thoughts on Tanach and the Davening

The Givonim demand seven of Saulโ€™s descendants, and David says ืื ื™ ืืชืŸ. He will give the Givonim whatever they ask for. But he protects one of Saulโ€™s descendants:

ื•ื™ื—ืžืœ ื”ืžืœืš ืขืœ ืžืคื™ื‘ืฉืช ื‘ืŸ ื™ื”ื•ื ืชืŸ ื‘ืŸ ืฉืื•ืœ; ืขืœ ืฉื‘ืขืช ื”ืณ ืืฉืจ ื‘ื™ื ืชื ื‘ื™ืŸ ื“ื•ื“ ื•ื‘ื™ืŸ ื™ื”ื•ื ืชืŸ ื‘ืŸ ืฉืื•ืœืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื›ื:ื–

ื™ื‘ ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื™ื”ื•ื ืชืŸ ืืœ ื“ื•ื“ ื”ืณ ืืœืงื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื›ื™ ืื—ืงืจ ืืช ืื‘ื™ ื›ืขืช ืžื—ืจ ื”ืฉืœืฉื™ืช ื•ื”ื ื” ื˜ื•ื‘ ืืœ ื“ื•ื“ ื•ืœื ืื– ืืฉืœื— ืืœื™ืš ื•ื’ืœื™ืชื™ ืืช ืื–ื ืšืƒโ€ฆื˜ื• ื•ืœื ืชื›ืจื™ืช ืืช ื—ืกื“ืš ืžืขื ื‘ื™ืชื™ ืขื“ ืขื•ืœื; ื•ืœื ื‘ื”ื›ืจืช ื”ืณ ืืช ืื™ื‘ื™ ื“ื•ื“ ืื™ืฉ ืžืขืœ ืคื ื™ ื”ืื“ืžื”ืƒ ื ื•ื™ื›ืจืช ื™ื”ื•ื ืชืŸ ืขื ื‘ื™ืช ื“ื•ื“; ื•ื‘ืงืฉ ื”ืณ ืžื™ื“ ืื™ื‘ื™ ื“ื•ื“ืƒ ื™ื– ื•ื™ื•ืกืฃ ื™ื”ื•ื ืชืŸ ืœื”ืฉื‘ื™ืข ืืช ื“ื•ื“ ื‘ืื”ื‘ืชื• ืืชื•; ื›ื™ ืื”ื‘ืช ื ืคืฉื• ืื”ื‘ื•ืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื ืคืจืง ื›

(I would read ื›ื™ ืื”ื‘ืช ื ืคืฉื• ืื”ื‘ื• not as โ€œbecause of his loveโ€ but โ€œdespite his loveโ€; Yonatan wanted an oath that David would never break and did not rely on their friendship alone).

The contrast here is with Saul: David keeps his ืฉื‘ื•ืขื”, where Saul breaks the ืฉื‘ื•ืขื” that ื‘ื ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ had made with the Givonim. But that oath was only with Yonatan and his descendants; the rest of Saulโ€™s family are not under Davidโ€™s protection. Our perek puts a very different spin on the story that is told in ืคืจืง ื˜:

ื ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื“ื•ื“ ื”ื›ื™ ื™ืฉ ืขื•ื“ ืืฉืจ ื ื•ืชืจ ืœื‘ื™ืช ืฉืื•ืœ; ื•ืืขืฉื” ืขืžื• ื—ืกื“ ื‘ืขื‘ื•ืจ ื™ื”ื•ื ืชืŸืƒ ื‘ ื•ืœื‘ื™ืช ืฉืื•ืœ ืขื‘ื“ ื•ืฉืžื• ืฆื™ื‘ื ื•ื™ืงืจืื• ืœื• ืืœ ื“ื•ื“; ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื”ืžืœืš ืืœื™ื• ื”ืืชื” ืฆื™ื‘ื ื•ื™ืืžืจ ืขื‘ื“ืšืƒ ื’ ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื”ืžืœืš ื”ืืคืก ืขื•ื“ ืื™ืฉ ืœื‘ื™ืช ืฉืื•ืœ ื•ืืขืฉื” ืขืžื• ื—ืกื“ ืืœืงื™ื; ื•ื™ืืžืจ ืฆื™ื‘ื ืืœ ื”ืžืœืš ืขื•ื“ ื‘ืŸ ืœื™ื”ื•ื ืชืŸ ื ื›ื” ืจื’ืœื™ืืƒ ื“ ื•ื™ืืžืจ ืœื• ื”ืžืœืš ืื™ืคื” ื”ื•ื; ื•ื™ืืžืจ ืฆื™ื‘ื ืืœ ื”ืžืœืš ื”ื ื” ื”ื•ื ื‘ื™ืช ืžื›ื™ืจ ื‘ืŸ ืขืžื™ืืœ ื‘ืœื• ื“ื‘ืจืƒ ื” ื•ื™ืฉืœื— ื”ืžืœืš ื“ื•ื“; ื•ื™ืงื—ื”ื• ืžื‘ื™ืช ืžื›ื™ืจ ื‘ืŸ ืขืžื™ืืœ ืžืœื• ื“ื‘ืจืƒ ื• ื•ื™ื‘ื ืžืคื™ื‘ืฉืช ื‘ืŸ ื™ื”ื•ื ืชืŸ ื‘ืŸ ืฉืื•ืœ ืืœ ื“ื•ื“ ื•ื™ืคืœ ืขืœ ืคื ื™ื• ื•ื™ืฉืชื—ื•; ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื“ื•ื“ ืžืคื™ื‘ืฉืช ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื”ื ื” ืขื‘ื“ืšืƒ ื– ื•ื™ืืžืจ ืœื• ื“ื•ื“ ืืœ ืชื™ืจื ื›ื™ ืขืฉื” ืืขืฉื” ืขืžืš ื—ืกื“ ื‘ืขื‘ื•ืจ ื™ื”ื•ื ืชืŸ ืื‘ื™ืš ื•ื”ืฉื‘ืชื™ ืœืš ืืช ื›ืœ ืฉื“ื” ืฉืื•ืœ ืื‘ื™ืš; ื•ืืชื” ืชืื›ืœ ืœื—ื ืขืœ ืฉืœื—ื ื™ ืชืžื™ื“ืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ืคืจืง ื˜

The gemara has a slightly different interpretation:

(ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื›ื:ื—) ื•ึทื™ึผึดืงึผึทื— ื”ึทืžึผึถืœึถืšึฐ ืึถืช ืฉืึฐื ึตื™ ื‘ึผึฐื ึตื™ ืจึดืฆึฐืคึผึธื” ื‘ึทืช ืึทื™ึผึธื” ืึฒืฉืึถืจ ื™ึธืœึฐื“ึธื” ืœึฐืฉืึธืื•ึผืœโ€ฆื•ึฐืึถืช ื—ึฒืžึตืฉืึถืช ื‘ึผึฐื ึตื™ ืžึดื™ื›ึทืœ ื‘ึผึทืช ืฉืึธืื•ึผืœโ€ฆืžืื™ ืฉื ื ื”ื ื™? ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื: ื”ืขื‘ื™ืจื•ื ืœืคื ื™ ืืจื•ืŸ, ื›ืœ ืฉืืจื•ืŸ ืงื•ืœื˜ื•โ€”ืœืžื™ืชื”, ื›ืœ ืฉืื™ืŸ ืืจื•ืŸ ืงื•ืœื˜ื•โ€”ืœื—ื™ื™ื. ื”ืžืชื™ื‘ ืจื‘ ื—ื ื ื‘ืจ ืงื˜ื™ื ื: ื•ึทื™ึผึทื—ึฐืžึนืœ ื”ึทืžึผึถืœึถืšึฐ ืขึทืœ ืžึฐืคึดื™ื‘ึนืฉืึถืช ื‘ึผึถืŸ ื™ึฐื”ื•ึนื ึธืชึธืŸ ื‘ึผึถืŸ ืฉืึธืื•ึผืœโ€”ืฉืœื ื”ืขื‘ื™ืจื•. ื•ื›ื™ ืžืฉื•ื ืคื ื™ื ื™ืฉ ื‘ื“ื‘ืจ? ืืœื: ืฉื”ืขื‘ื™ืจื• ื•ืงืœื˜ื•, ื•ื‘ืงืฉ ืขืœื™ื• ืจื—ืžื™ื, ื•ืคืœื˜ื•. ื•ืื›ืชื™: ืžืฉื•ื ืคื ื™ื ื™ืฉ ื‘ื“ื‘ืจ? ืืœื, ืฉื‘ืงืฉ ืจื—ืžื™ื ืฉืœื ื™ืงืœื˜ื ื• ื”ืืจื•ืŸ.

ื™ื‘ืžื•ืช ืขื˜,ื

And the gemara leaves it at that. In the eyes of the gemara, David solves the trolley problem by putting in back in ื”ืณ's hands. Whoever the ืืจื•ืŸ indicates (presumably with the ืื•ืจื™ื ื•ืชื•ืžื™ื again) will be given to the Givonim. That has happened before:

ื˜ื• ื•ื™ืืžืจ ืืœื™ื”ื ืžืฉื”; ื”ื—ื™ื™ืชื ื›ืœ ื ืงื‘ื”ืƒ ื˜ื– ื”ืŸ ื”ื ื” ื”ื™ื• ืœื‘ื ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื‘ื“ื‘ืจ ื‘ืœืขื ืœืžืกืจ ืžืขืœ ื‘ื”ืณ ืขืœ ื“ื‘ืจ ืคืขื•ืจ; ื•ืชื”ื™ ื”ืžื’ืคื” ื‘ืขื“ืช ื”ืณืƒ ื™ื– ื•ืขืชื” ื”ืจื’ื• ื›ืœ ื–ื›ืจ ื‘ื˜ืฃ; ื•ื›ืœ ืืฉื” ื™ื“ืขืช ืื™ืฉ ืœืžืฉื›ื‘ ื–ื›ืจ ื”ืจื’ื•ืƒ

ื‘ืžื“ื‘ืจ ืคืจืง ืœื

ื•ื›ืœ ืืฉื” ื™ื•ื“ืขืช ืื™ืฉ:โ€ฆืืžื ื ื™ื“ืขื™? ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ื‘ืจ ื‘ื™ื–ื ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื—ืกื™ื“ื: ื”ืขื‘ื™ืจื•ื ืœืคื ื™ ื”ืฆื™ืฅ. ื›ืœ ืฉืคื ื™ื” ืžื•ืจื™ืงื•ืชโ€”ื‘ื™ื“ื•ืข ืฉื”ื™ื ืจืื•ื™ื” ืœื™ื‘ืขืœ, ื›ืœ ืฉืื™ืŸ ืคื ื™ื” ืžื•ืจื™ืงื•ืชโ€”ื‘ื™ื“ื•ืข ืฉืื™ื ื” ืจืื•ื™ื” ืœื™ื‘ืขืœ.

ื™ื‘ืžื•ืช ืก,ื‘

Thereโ€™s a priest, a minister, and a rabbi. Theyโ€™re out playing golf, and theyโ€™re trying to decide how much to give to charity. So the priest says, โ€œWeโ€™ll draw a circle on the ground, weโ€™ll throw the money way up in the air, and whatever lands inside the circle, we give to charity.โ€ The minster says no. โ€œWeโ€™ll draw a circle on the ground, throw the money way up in the air, and whatever lands outside of the circle, thatโ€™s what weโ€™ll give to charity.โ€ The rabbi says โ€œNo, no, no. Weโ€™ll throw the money way up in the air, and whatever G-d wants, he keeps!โ€

Short Circuit

But that doesnโ€™t work for charity, and it doesnโ€™t work here.

ื‘ื“ืจืš ืฉืื“ื ืจื•ืฆื” ืœื™ืœืš ื‘ื”, ืžื•ืœื™ื›ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื•.

ืจืฉืดื™, ื‘ืžื“ื‘ืจ ื›ื‘:ืœื”

David is still morally culpable for what happens. The Torah is explicit:

ืœึนื ื™ื•ึผืžึฐืชื•ึผ ืึธื‘ื•ึนืช ืขึทืœ ื‘ึธึผื ึดื™ื ื•ึผื‘ึธื ึดื™ื ืœึนื ื™ื•ึผืžึฐืชื•ึผ ืขึทืœ ืึธื‘ื•ึนืช; ืึดื™ืฉื ื‘ึฐึผื—ึถื˜ึฐืื•ึน ื™ื•ึผืžึธืชื•ึผืƒ

ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ื›ื“:ื˜ื–

ื”ื ืคืฉ ื”ื—ื˜ืืช ื”ื™ื ืชืžื•ืช; ื‘ืŸ ืœื ื™ืฉืโ€‰ ื‘ืขื•ืŸ ื”ืื‘ ื•ืื‘ ืœื ื™ืฉื ื‘ืขื•ืŸ ื”ื‘ืŸ ืฆื“ืงืช ื”ืฆื“ื™ืง ืขืœื™ื• ืชื”ื™ื” ื•ืจืฉืขืช ื”ืจืฉืข ืขืœื™ื• ืชื”ื™ื”ืƒ

ื™ื—ื–ืงืืœ ื™ื—:ื›

Only G-dโ€™s infinite knowledge allows G-d to โ€œvisit the sins of the fathers on the sonsโ€:

ื ืฆืจ ื—ืกื“ ืœืืœืคื™ื ื ืฉื ืขื•ืŸ ื•ืคืฉืข ื•ื—ื˜ืื”; ื•ื ืงื” ืœื ื™ื ืงื” ืคืงื“โ€‰ ืขื•ืŸ ืื‘ื•ืช ืขืœ ื‘ื ื™ื ื•ืขืœ ื‘ื ื™ ื‘ื ื™ื ืขืœ ืฉืœืฉื™ื ื•ืขืœ ืจื‘ืขื™ืืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืช ืœื“:ื–

What is David doing here?

ื•ื™ืงื— ื”ืžืœืš ืืช ืฉื ื™ ื‘ื ื™ ืจืฆืคื” ื‘ืช ืื™ื” ืืฉืจ ื™ืœื“ื” ืœืฉืื•ืœ ืืช ืืจืžื ื™ ื•ืืช ืžืคื‘ืฉืช; ื•ืืช ื—ืžืฉืช ื‘ื ื™ ืžื™ื›ืœ ื‘ืช ืฉืื•ืœ ืืฉืจ ื™ืœื“ื” ืœืขื“ืจื™ืืœ ื‘ืŸ ื‘ืจื–ืœื™ ื”ืžื—ืœืชื™ืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื›ื:ื—

We have to make a few minor points. First, Michal had no sons:

ื•ืœืžื™ื›ืœ ื‘ืช ืฉืื•ืœ ืœื ื”ื™ื” ืœื” ื™ืœื“ ืขื“ ื™ื•ื ืžื•ืชื”ืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื•:ื›ื’

And she wasnโ€™t married to ืขื“ืจื™ืืœ ื‘ืŸ ื‘ืจื–ืœื™; her sister was:

ื•ื™ื”ื™ ื‘ืขืช ืชืช ืืช ืžืจื‘ ื‘ืช ืฉืื•ืœ ืœื“ื•ื“; ื•ื”ื™ื ื ืชื ื” ืœืขื“ืจื™ืืœ ื”ืžื—ืœืชื™ ืœืืฉื”ืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื ื™ื—:ื™ื˜

So the gemara says that Michal had adopted them:

ืืžืจ ืœืš ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ืฉืข: ื•ื›ื™ ืžื™ื›ืœ ื™ืœื“ื”? ื•ื”ืœื ืžื™ืจื‘ ื™ืœื“ื”! ืžื™ืจื‘ ื™ืœื“ื” ื•ืžื™ื›ืœ ื’ื™ื“ืœื”, ืœืคื™ื›ืš ื ืงืจืื• ืขืœ ืฉืžื”. ืœืœืžื“ืš ืฉื›ืœ ื”ืžื’ื“ืœ ื™ืชื•ื ื‘ืชื•ืš ื‘ื™ืชื• ืžืขืœื” ืขืœื™ื• ื”ื›ืชื•ื‘ ื›ืื™ืœื• ื™ืœื“ื•.

ืกื ื”ื“ืจื™ืŸ ื™ื˜,ื‘

Second, ืจืฆืคื” ื‘ืช ืื™ื” wasnโ€™t Saulโ€™s wife; she was a concubine:

ื•ืœืฉืื•ืœ ืคืœื’ืฉ ื•ืฉืžื” ืจืฆืคื” ื‘ืช ืื™ื”; ื•ื™ืืžืจ ืืœ ืื‘ื ืจ ืžื“ื•ืข ื‘ืืชื” ืืœ ืคื™ืœื’ืฉ ืื‘ื™ืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื’:ื–

So none of these seven men were in line to inherit the throne from Saul. The only person who was in the line of succession was Yonatanโ€™s son Mephiboshet. The fact that David goes out of his way to save Mephiboshet proves that David isnโ€™t using this famine as an excuse to eliminate the competition.

But major point is the injustice: how could the Givonim demand revenge on the family of Saul, how could David have done this, and how could ื”ืงื‘ืดื” allow that to happen?

Abarbanel gives the ืื™ื•ื‘ answer: we canโ€™t understand ื”ืณ's reasons:

ื•ืื™ืŸ ืœืชืžื•ื” ืžืื™ื—ื•ืจ ื”ืขื•ื ืฉ ื”ื–ื” ื›ืœ ื›ืš ืžื”ืฉื ื™ื, ื›ื™ ืžืฉืคื˜ื™ ื”ืณ ืืžืช ืฆื“ืงื• ื™ื—ื“ื• ื•ืžื—ืฉื‘ื•ืชื™ื• ืขืžืงื•, ื•ื”ื•ื ื”ื™ื•ื“ืข ืœืžื” ื™ืขื ืฉื• ื”ื—ื•ื˜ืื™ื ื‘ื–ืžืŸ ื–ื•ืœืช ื–ืžืŸ ื•ืžื™ ื”ื•ื ืจืื•ื™ ืžื”ื‘ื ื™ื ืœืงื‘ืœ ืขื•ื ืฉ ื”ืื‘.

ืื‘ืจื‘ื ืืœ, ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื›ื:ื

Levinas looks at it differently. He focuses initially on the Givonim themselves, and the fact that they are being asked to forgive Israel.

ื•ื™ืชื ื ื‘ื™ื“ ื”ื’ื‘ืขื ื™ื ื•ื™ืงื™ืขื ื‘ื”ืจ ืœืคื ื™ ื”ืณ ื•ื™ืคืœื• ืฉื‘ืขืชื™ื (ืฉื‘ืขืชื) ื™ื—ื“; ื•ื”ื (ื•ื”ืžื”) ื”ืžืชื• ื‘ื™ืžื™ ืงืฆื™ืจ ื‘ืจืืฉื ื™ื ืชื—ืœืช (ื‘ืชื—ืœืช) ืงืฆื™ืจ ืฉืขืจื™ืืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื›ื:ื˜

ื”ืณ didnโ€™t command the death of Saulโ€™s descendants. ื”ืณ commanded that the injustice done to the Givonim be remedied. How it is remedied is up to the human beings involved, especially the victims themselves. He starts with the gemara in Yoma, about the requirement to ask forgiveness when we offend another, and the requirement to forgive when asked. There is a story about Rav:

ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื” ืคืกื™ืง ืกื™ื“ืจื ืงืžื™ื” ื“ืจื‘ื™. ืขื™ื™ืœ ืืชื ืจืณ ื—ื™ื™ื ื”ื“ืจ ืœืจื™ืฉื. ืขื™ื™ืœ ื‘ืจ ืงืคืจื ื”ื“ืจ ืœืจื™ืฉื. ืืชื ืจืดืฉ ื‘ืจื‘ื™ ื”ื“ืจ ืœืจื™ืฉื. ืืชื ืจืณ ื—ื ื™ื ื ื‘ืจืณ ื—ืžื, ืืžืจ ื›ื•ืœื™ ื”ืื™ ื ื”ื“ืจ ื•ื ื™ื–ื™ืœ? ืœื ื”ื“ืจ. ืื™ืงืคื™ื“ ืจืณ ื—ื ื™ื ื. ืื–ืœ ืจื‘ ืœื’ื‘ื™ื” ืชืœื™ืกืจ ืžืขืœื™ ื™ื•ืžื™ ื“ื›ืคื•ืจื™ ื•ืœื ืื™ืคื™ื™ืกโ€ฆ

ื™ื•ืžื ืคื–,ื-ื‘

One can, if pressed to the limit, forgive the one who has spoken unconsciously. But it is very difficult to forgive Rab, who was fully aware and destined for a great fate, which was prophetically revealed to his master. One can forgive many Germans, but there are some Germans it is difficult to forgive. It is difficult to forgive Heidegger. If Hanina could not forgive the just and humane Rab because he was also the brilliant Rab, it is even less possible to forgive Heidegger. Here I am brought back to the present, to the new attempts to clear Heidegger, to take away his responsibilityโ€”unceasing attempts which, it must be admitted, are at the origin of this colloquium.

โ€ฆSince you still grant me a few minutes, I will compare this page, in which the issue was not murders but verbal offenses, to a more-tragic situation, in which forgiveness is obtained at a greater price, if it is still possible to obtain it.

[Levinas then summarizes our perek]

โ€ฆDo admire the savage greatness of this text, whose extreme tension my summary poorly conveys. Its theme is clear. It is about the necessity of talion, which the shedding of blood brings about whether one wants it or not. And probably all the greatness of what is called the Old Testament consists in remaining sensitive to spilled blood, in being incapable of refusing this justice to whoever cries for vengeance, in feeling horror for the pardon granted by proxy when the right to forgive belongs only to the victim.

Emmanuel Levinas, Nine Talmudic Readings, Toward the Other, pp. 25-26
talion
1. The principle that punishment should be equivalent or identical to the offense committed.
2. The imposition of such a punishment.
The Free Dictionary, Talion

If we take the text at face value, the ืคืฉื˜ says ืืฉืจ ื”ืžื™ืช ืืช ื”ื’ื‘ืขื ื™ื. That is a capital crime, and cannot be appeased by money:

ืœ ื›ืœ ืžื›ื” ื ืคืฉ ืœืคื™ ืขื“ื™ื ื™ืจืฆื— ืืช ื”ืจืฆื—; ื•ืขื“ ืื—ื“ ืœื ื™ืขื ื” ื‘ื ืคืฉ ืœืžื•ืชืƒ ืœื ื•ืœื ืชืงื—ื• ื›ืคืจ ืœื ืคืฉ ืจืฆื— ืืฉืจ ื”ื•ื ืจืฉืข ืœืžื•ืช; ื›ื™ ืžื•ืช ื™ื•ืžืชืƒ ืœื‘ ื•ืœื ืชืงื—ื• ื›ืคืจ ืœื ื•ืก ืืœ ืขื™ืจ ืžืงืœื˜ื• ืœืฉื•ื‘ ืœืฉื‘ืช ื‘ืืจืฅ ืขื“ ืžื•ืช ื”ื›ื”ืŸืƒ ืœื’ ื•ืœื ืชื—ื ื™ืคื• ืืช ื”ืืจืฅ ืืฉืจ ืืชื ื‘ื” ื›ื™ ื”ื“ื ื”ื•ื ื™ื—ื ื™ืฃ ืืช ื”ืืจืฅ; ื•ืœืืจืฅ ืœื ื™ื›ืคืจ ืœื“ื ืืฉืจ ืฉืคืš ื‘ื” ื›ื™ ืื ื‘ื“ื ืฉืคื›ื•ืƒ ืœื“ ื•ืœื ืชื˜ืžื ืืช ื”ืืจืฅ ืืฉืจ ืืชื ื™ืฉื‘ื™ื ื‘ื” ืืฉืจ ืื ื™ ืฉื›ืŸ ื‘ืชื•ื›ื”; ื›ื™ ืื ื™ ื”ืณ ืฉื›ืŸ ื‘ืชื•ืš ื‘ื ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœืƒ

ื‘ืžื“ื‘ืจ ืคืจืง ืœื”

Now ื•ื”ื’ื‘ืขื ื™ื ืœื ืžื‘ื ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื”ืžื” and they are not concerned with the halachic niceties of witnesses, and ืœึนื ื™ื•ึผืžึฐืชื•ึผ ืึธื‘ื•ึนืช ืขึทืœ ื‘ึธึผื ึดื™ื. But Levinas points out that ื”ืณ still respects that โ€œthe right to forgive belongs only to the victimโ€. And if we accept the interpretation of the ื‘ื‘ืœื™, that ืžืชื•ืš ืฉื”ืจื’ ื ื•ื‘ ืขื™ืจ ื”ื›ื”ื ื™ื ืฉื”ื™ื• ืžืกืคื™ืงื™ืŸ ืœื”ื ืžื™ื ื•ืžื–ื•ืŸ, ืžืขืœื” ืขืœื™ื• ื”ื›ืชื•ื‘ ื›ืื™ืœื• ื”ืจื’ืŸ, then the Givonim were even more unreasonable, and unjust. But still, ื”ืณ demands that they be appeased.

And appeasing them publicly declares: We, ื‘ื ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ, were wrong in our injustice to the Givonim. We will pay any price to restore justice. And that is a ืงื™ื“ื•ืฉ ื”ืณ.

ื•ื”ื ื›ืชื™ื‘ (ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ื›ื“:ื˜ื–): ืœึนื ื™ื•ึผืžึฐืชื•ึผ ืึธื‘ื•ึนืช ืขึทืœ ื‘ึธึผื ึดื™ื [ื•ึผื‘ึธื ึดื™ื ืœึนื ื™ื•ึผืžึฐืชื•ึผ ืขึทืœ ืึธื‘ื•ึนืช; ืึดื™ืฉื ื‘ึฐึผื—ึถื˜ึฐืื•ึน ื™ื•ึผืžึธืชื•ึผ]? ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื—ื™ื™ื ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ: ืžื•ื˜ื‘ ืฉืชืขืงืจ ืื•ืช ืื—ืช ืžืŸ ื”ืชื•ืจื”, ื•ืืœ ื™ืชื—ืœืœ ืฉื ืฉืžื™ื ื‘ืคืจื”ืกื™ืโ€ฆื•ื”ื ื›ืชื™ื‘ (ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ื›ื:ื›ื’): ืœึนื ืชึธืœึดื™ืŸ ื ึดื‘ึฐืœึธืชื•ึน ืขึทืœ ื”ึธืขึตืฅ! ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ื™ื”ื•ืฆื“ืง: ืžื•ื˜ื‘ ืฉืชืขืงืจ ืื•ืช ืื—ืช ืžืŸ ื”ืชื•ืจื”, ื•ื™ืชืงื“ืฉ ืฉื ืฉืžื™ื ื‘ืคืจื”ืกื™ื. ืฉื”ื™ื• ืขื•ื‘ืจื™ื ื•ืฉื‘ื™ื ืื•ืžืจื™ื: ืžื” ื˜ื™ื‘ืŸ ืฉืœ ืืœื•? ื”ืœืœื• ื‘ื ื™ ืžืœื›ื™ื ื”ื. ื•ืžื” ืขืฉื•? ืคืฉื˜ื• ื™ื“ื™ื”ื ื‘ื’ืจื™ื ื’ืจื•ืจื™ื. ืืžืจื•: ืื™ืŸ ืœืš ืื•ืžื” ืฉืจืื•ื™ื” ืœื”ื“ื‘ืง ื‘ื” ื›ื–ื•. ื•ืžื” ื‘ื ื™ ืžืœื›ื™ื ื›ืšโ€”ื‘ื ื™ ื”ื“ื™ื•ื˜ื•ืช ืขืœ ืื—ืช ื›ืžื” ื•ื›ืžื”! ื•ืžื” ื’ืจื™ื ื’ืจื•ืจื™ื ื›ืšโ€”ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืขืœ ืื—ืช ื›ืžื” ื•ื›ืžื”! ืžื™ื“ ื ืชื•ืกืคื• ืขืœ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืžืื” ื•ื—ืžืฉื™ื ืืœืฃโ€ฆ

ื™ื‘ืžื•ืช ืขื˜,ื

โ€ฆLast question: How were people able, in opposition to the strict prohibition of the Torah, to leave human corpses exposed for so many months and to profane the image of God they bear? Same answer: โ€œIt is better that a letter of the Torah be damaged than that the name of God be profaned!โ€ The image of God is better honored in the right given to the stranger than in symbols. Universalism has a greater weight than the particularist letter of the text; or, to be more precise, it bursts the letter apart, for it lay, like an explosive, within the letter. We have here then a biblical text which the Midrash spiritualizes and interiorizes but which it preserves in its unusual power and harsh truth. David is not able to oppose a victim who cries out for justice, even if this justice is cruel. To the one who demands โ€œa life for a lifeโ€, David answers, โ€œI shall giveโ€.

Emmanuel Levinas, Nine Talmudic Readings, Toward the Other, p. 28

But the text emphasizes ื”ื’ื‘ืขื ื™ื ืœื ืžื‘ื ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื”ืžื”. Theirs is not a โ€œJewishโ€ answer to injustice. And Levinas turns to that side of our story.