Yehoshua - Perek 7 – “Taking from the Spoils”
Part 1: The breaking of the cheirem (7:1-15)
Summary
Points to Ponder
What is the meaning of Hashem’s response to Yehoshua and who is actually to blame for this disaster?
The Almighty’s reaction is "kum lach," – ‘Yehoshua, get up.’ It sounds as almost as if Hashem is shifting the blame back to Yehoshua. Why would this be so? Rashi presents several options. The first is that Yehoshua is being chastised for not being personally present in the battle when he should have been. He is being told that he has no right to complHa’ain if he was not involved.
A more dramatic approach is found in Rashi’s second answer. Rashi explHa’ains that the Almighty turned to Yehoshua and sHa’aid, “Yehoshua, who enacted the prohibition on the spoils? It was you! I did not say that this should be done. Yehoshua, if you want to levy a prohibition on the people, you must be completely sure that the people can withstand that. But if you want to go the extra mile and put a stringency upon the entire community and make an example of not taking any of the spoils, you have to be absolutely sure that everybody is going to abide by that.” The Almighty tells Yehoshua to take a good look in the mirror and absorb the message that the leader who is responsible for this loss is the one who did not estimate his people properly. This is a very shocking idea which addressees the core of leadership and how leaders are expected to understand where their their constituency truly stands.
Why was the loss of thirty-six people, in the grand scale considered quite so huge?
The Radak quotes the gemara in Sanhedrin and points out that it does not actually say that thirty six people were killed, it says, "k'shloshim v'sheish ish," – ‘like thirty six people.’ Perhaps it was not the case that they actually lost thirty six people, rather they lost a leader, somebody who was as critical as thirty six people. The gemara explHa’ains that they lost Ya'ir the son of Menashe, one of the elders of the previous generation. He was a very powerful man who had established a number of cities on the East Bank of the Yarden and was killed in this battle. Why was he ‘like’ thirty-six? The gemara explHa’ains he was such an important leader, such a wise man, that he was equivalent to the majority of the great court of the Sanhedrin. The great court numbered seventy one judges. In order to get a majority, a vote of thirty six is needed. It is for this reason that the Tanach emphasizes that it was a critical spiritual loss. In light of this, it makes a lot of sense that Yehoshua tore his garments in mourning too.
Part 2: The Goral and the Public Admission (7:16-26)
Summary
Who exactly was killed with Achan and why?
There is a very unclear impression from the verses as to whether Achan, the perpetrator of the crime was the only one killed. It can be read that his children were also killed with him. This is a very difficult concept to fathom. If they were killed, the obvious question would be as follows: Were they guilty by association or is there a notion of punishment which extends beyond the perpetrator? It could be that they knew about and benefited from their father’s crime, making them accomplices or at least associates to this crime. The concept of mutual responsibility is resounding within the chapter, as Yehoshua also made a mistake which had implications for other people.
Summary
- Achan the son of Karmi, from the tribe of Yehuda, took spoils from Yericho, despite the plunders of the city having been forbidden.
- In their next battle, the Israelites suffer a loss as their small army of three thousand men are forced to flee from the inhabitants of the small city of Ha’Ha’ai. Thirty-six men are killed.
- Yehoshua tears his clothing in mourning and blames no one but himself for the spiritual calamity which he realizes must have triggered this defeat.
- Yehoshua asks Hashem how He could do this, given the image this would portray to the other nations. Hashem tells him that the fault is with the people of Israel who violated taking from the spoils
- Yehoshua is instructed to perform a goral, a lottery to discover the guilty party.
Points to Ponder
What is the meaning of Hashem’s response to Yehoshua and who is actually to blame for this disaster?
The Almighty’s reaction is "kum lach," – ‘Yehoshua, get up.’ It sounds as almost as if Hashem is shifting the blame back to Yehoshua. Why would this be so? Rashi presents several options. The first is that Yehoshua is being chastised for not being personally present in the battle when he should have been. He is being told that he has no right to complHa’ain if he was not involved.
A more dramatic approach is found in Rashi’s second answer. Rashi explHa’ains that the Almighty turned to Yehoshua and sHa’aid, “Yehoshua, who enacted the prohibition on the spoils? It was you! I did not say that this should be done. Yehoshua, if you want to levy a prohibition on the people, you must be completely sure that the people can withstand that. But if you want to go the extra mile and put a stringency upon the entire community and make an example of not taking any of the spoils, you have to be absolutely sure that everybody is going to abide by that.” The Almighty tells Yehoshua to take a good look in the mirror and absorb the message that the leader who is responsible for this loss is the one who did not estimate his people properly. This is a very shocking idea which addressees the core of leadership and how leaders are expected to understand where their their constituency truly stands.
Why was the loss of thirty-six people, in the grand scale considered quite so huge?
The Radak quotes the gemara in Sanhedrin and points out that it does not actually say that thirty six people were killed, it says, "k'shloshim v'sheish ish," – ‘like thirty six people.’ Perhaps it was not the case that they actually lost thirty six people, rather they lost a leader, somebody who was as critical as thirty six people. The gemara explHa’ains that they lost Ya'ir the son of Menashe, one of the elders of the previous generation. He was a very powerful man who had established a number of cities on the East Bank of the Yarden and was killed in this battle. Why was he ‘like’ thirty-six? The gemara explHa’ains he was such an important leader, such a wise man, that he was equivalent to the majority of the great court of the Sanhedrin. The great court numbered seventy one judges. In order to get a majority, a vote of thirty six is needed. It is for this reason that the Tanach emphasizes that it was a critical spiritual loss. In light of this, it makes a lot of sense that Yehoshua tore his garments in mourning too.
Part 2: The Goral and the Public Admission (7:16-26)
Summary
- The lottery identifies the tribe of Yehuda sa being guilty, and then more specifically on the family of Zerach. It then hones in on the family of Achan, and then upon Achan himself.
- Upon discovery, he admits to having stolen some gold and silver and buried it under his tent.
- He and his belongings and descendants are taken out and burnt with the items that he stole. A pile of stones is placed over their graves.
Who exactly was killed with Achan and why?
There is a very unclear impression from the verses as to whether Achan, the perpetrator of the crime was the only one killed. It can be read that his children were also killed with him. This is a very difficult concept to fathom. If they were killed, the obvious question would be as follows: Were they guilty by association or is there a notion of punishment which extends beyond the perpetrator? It could be that they knew about and benefited from their father’s crime, making them accomplices or at least associates to this crime. The concept of mutual responsibility is resounding within the chapter, as Yehoshua also made a mistake which had implications for other people.