DEUT1043 Respect for man also imposes a respect for his faith and religious practices. The rabbis asserted that "the righteous people of all nations have a share in the hereafter (Tosefta, Sanhedrin 13). Judaism was tolerant of all religions except paganism, with which it was incompatible. At the time when ancient Judea was a sovereign state and the nation had the jurisdiction to enforce its laws within the borders of its country, the practice of idolatry was proscribed. However, Jews never entertained a desire to forcibly root out hedonism in other countries. There were some occasions when, for humane reasons, the practice of idolatry was tolerated even in Israel. A captive pagan woman, brought home by a Jewish soldier, was permitted to continue her heathen worship for thirty days [this verse, Yevamot 48b]. According to Maimonides (Moreh Nevuchim 3:41), this dispensation was motivated by consideration for the plight of the captive woman in a desire to provide her with the solace that you might arrive from practicing her ancestral faith. At the end of thirty days, if the soldier had a change of heart, the woman was free to return to her home, without having been forced to renounce her faith (Nachmanides, this verse).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1044 as it is written [of a man's duties to his wife] (Exodus 21:10): "her food, her clothing, and her [conjugal] time he shall not diminish (Sifrei)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1045 Do not sell such a woman [i.e. a non-Jewish woman taken captive in war]. Key concept: To teach decency, as well as all other positive traits, so that we cultivate these traits and thereby make ourselves worthy of Heaven's blessings. Hashem, Who wants to bestow good upon us, desires that we be free of negative character traits, so that we will be worthy of His blessing. Without question, it is coarse and ugly to sell a woman into slavery after having had relations with her.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1046 This teaches us that [if he wishes to send her away] he must give her a bill of divorce [get] (Sifrei)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1047 Do not treat such a woman as your slave. See Deuteronomy 21:14 sell CHINUCH 345.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1048 This teaches us that if she were sick, he must wait until she recovers -- a fortiori [is this is the case] with Jewish daughters (Sifrei)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1053 The rabbis often times were forced to find ways of textually revising a biblical standard when it no longer met the standards of their own times. … In the "rebellious son" account of Deuteronomy 21:18-21, for example, the rebellious son is condemned to death by "the elders of the city" and is stoned to death according to the Bible. This law is paralleled in other Ancient Near Eastern accounts, such as the Code of Hammurabi. J.B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969) pp. 168-169). The implications of this law in both the Bible and Ancient Near Eastern codes seem to be similar. M. Powis-Smith, The Origin and the History of Hebrew Law, (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1931) pp. 50 ff. The right of parents, especially fathers, to have children put to death (infanticide) seems to have existed in limited forms throughout the Roman Empire through the fourth century CE when it was made criminal. Early Tannaitic sources devote tens of pages to explaining, fine-tuning, defining and clearly limiting the possibility of capricious application of this law allowing infanticide in Judaism. Attempts to limit the law until it is almost effectively eliminated seems to be the intention of rabbinic legislation.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1051 See [[DEUT645]] Deuteronomy 13:16 sword GREENBERG 183-4

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1050 In a number of instances the Rabbis fixed conditions which, to all intents and purposes, made a law inoperative. They did this in the case of the "disloyal and defiant son" (Deuteronomy 21:18-21) Sanhedrin 68b-71b, the law regarding capital punishment, Tosafot, Sanhedrin 15b on aymah liktala, and Sanhedrin chap. 5. Makkot 7a, and the law regarding the excommunicated city (Deuteronomy 13:13-19). Sanhedrin 111b-113a. Note particularly Rabbi Eliezer's opinion 113a, quoted also ibid. 71a.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

DEUT1049 [This verse and following] deals in very clear language, so we may think, with the case of a wayward and defiant son… By the time the Mishna – – the collection of oral legal tradition--was codified around 200 C.E. -- the terminus ad quem of the development-- the ethos of the community had rejected the pattern. Yet it was a given of scripture. How did the Aggadah, the ethos of the community, deal with the Halakhah? What is for us clear language is for aroused sensibility far less clear, or perhaps is far clearer than we recognize. First the word "son" is attended to. Exactly when does that term apply? Its specificity indicates exclusion. A daughter is not mentioned but only a son. Carrying the principle of exclusion further, it must mean only during the period when he is not a man, that is, when he is a child. More than that, not when he is a minor, that is, before the age of 13 years and a day, but he is not yet obligated to the commandments. Hence this commandment is effective only during the boy's puberty. It is not necessary to examine in detail the process of definition by which the limitations involved in "glutton and drunkard" are arrived at; the further requirements that both parents--as the biblical text indicates--must lodge a complaint, and must be physically capable of bringing him before the elders, nor the composition of the court, and so on. (See Mishna Sanhedrin, chap. 8, paras 1-5). All that is necessary is to indicate that Aggadah, the sense of existence, has apparently provided fertile soil in which Halakhah – – the thicket of the law, to use that admirable phrase placed in Thomas More's mouth in A Man for All Seasons--may spring up to offer a hiding place even for the wayward son.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT