#4 War

Rotzeach uShmirat Nefesh - Chapter One

By Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon ("Maimonides");

5 When a murderer kills willfully, he should not be killed by witnesses or observers until he is brought to court and sentenced to death, as implied by Numbers 35:12 "A murderer should not be put to death until he stands before the congregation in judgment."

This law applies to all those liable for execution by the court, who transgressed and performed the forbidden act. They should not be executed until their trial is completed by the court.

6 When does the above apply? When the person has already transgressed and performed the transgression for which he is liable to be executed by the court. When, however, a person is pursuing a colleague with the intention of killing him - even if the pursuer is a minor - every Jewish person is commanded to attempt to save the person being pursued, even if it is necessary to kill the pursuer.

7 What is implied? If the rodef was warned and continues to pursue his intended victim, even though he did not acknowledge the warning, since he continues his pursuit he should be killed.

If it is possible to save the pursued by damaging one of the limbs of the rodef, one should. Thus, if one can strike him with an arrow, a stone or a sword, and cut off his hand, break his leg, blind him or in another way prevent him from achieving his objective, one should do so.

If there is no way to be precise in one's aim and save the person being pursued without killing the rodef, one should kill him, even though he has not yet killed his victim. This is implied by Deuteronomy 25:11-12, which states: "If a man is fighting with his brother, and the wife of one... grabs the attacker by his private parts, you must cut off her hand; you may not show pity."

8 There is no difference whether she grabs "his private parts" or any other organ that imperils his life. Similarly, the rodef may be a man or a woman. The intent of the verse is that whenever a person intends to strike a colleague with a blow that could kill him, the pursued should be saved by "cutting off the hand" of the rodef. If this cannot be done, the victim should be saved by taking the rodef's life, as the verse continues: "you may not show pity."

9 This, indeed, is one of the negative mitzvot - not to take pity on the life of a rodef.

On this basis, our Sages ruled that when complications arise and a pregnant woman cannot give birth, it is permitted to abort the fetus in her womb, whether with a knife or with drugs. For the fetus is considered a rodef of its mother.

If the head of the fetus emerges, it should not be touched, because one life should not be sacrificed for another. Although the mother may die, this is the nature of the world.

...

13 When a person could prevent a murder or a rape by maiming the rodef's limbs, but did not take the trouble and instead saved the victim by killing the rodef, he is regarded as one who shed blood and is liable for death. Nevertheless, he should not be executed by the court.

14 Whenever a person can save another person's life, but he fails to do so, he transgresses a negative commandment, as Leviticus 19:16 states: "Do not stand idly by while your brother's blood is at stake."

Similarly, this commandment applies when a person sees a colleague drowning at sea or being attacked by robbers or a wild animal, and he can save him himself or can hire others to save him. Similarly, it applies when he hears gentiles or mosrim conspiring to harm a colleague or planning a snare for him, and he does not inform him and notify him of the danger.

And it applies when a person knows of a gentile or a man of force who has a complaint against a colleague, and he can appease the aggressor on behalf of his colleague, but he fails to do so. And similarly, in all analogous instances, a person who fails to act transgresses the commandment: "Do not stand idly by while your brother's blood is at stake."

15

When a person sees a rodef pursuing a colleague to kill him, or a woman forbidden as an ervah to rape her, and he has the potential to save the victim and yet fails to do so, he has negated the observance of the positive commandment: "You must cut off her hand," and has transgressed two negative commandments: "You may not show pity," and "Do not stand idly by while your brother's blood is at stake."

16

Even though lashes are not given as punishment for the transgression of these prohibitions - because they do not involve committing a forbidden deed - they are nevertheless very severe. For whoever causes the loss of a Jewish soul is considered as if he destroyed the entire world, and whoever saves a Jewish soul is considered as if he saved the entire world.

Sanhedrin 72A
MISHNA: A burglar who is found breaking into a house may be killed by the owner of the house with impunity (see Exodus 22:1)...

GEMARA: Rava says: What is the reason for this halakha concerning a burglar who breaks into a house? He explains: There is a presumption that a person does not restrain himself when faced with losing his money, and therefore this burglar must have said to himself: If I go in and the owner sees me, he will rise against me and not allow me to steal from him, and if he rises against me, I will kill him.

והתורה אמרה אם בא להורגך השכם להורגו

And the Torah stated a principle: If someone comes to kill you, rise and kill him first.

Mishneh Torah (Rambam) Sefer Nezikin Genevah - Chapter Nine

By Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon ("Maimonides");

7 When a person breaks into a home - whether at night or during the day - license is granted to kill him. If either the homeowner or another person kills him, they are not liable.

The license to kill him applies both on the Sabbath and during the week; one may kill in any possible manner. This is all implied by Exodus 22:1, which literally reads: "He has no blood."

8 The license mentioned above applies to a thief caught breaking in or one caught on a person's roof, courtyard or enclosed area, whether during the day or during the night. Why does the Torah mention "breaking in," because it is the general practice for thieves to break in at night.

9 Why did the Torah permit the blood of such a thief to be shed, although he is only attempting to steal money? Because it is an accepted presumption that if the house-owner arises and attempts to prevent the thief from stealing, the thief will slay him. And thus the thief entering his colleague's house to steal is in effect a pursuer seeking to kill his colleague. Therefore, he should be killed, whether he is an adult or a minor, or a man or a woman.

10 If it is clear to the house-owner that the thief who breaks in will not kill him and instead is only seeking financial gain, it is forbidden to kill the thief. If the house-owner kills him, the house-owner is considered to be a murderer. This is alluded to by Exodus 22:2, which states: "If the sun shines upon him..." - i.e., if it is as clear to you as the sun that he is at peace with you, do not kill him. Therefore, a father who breaks into his son's home should not be killed. But a son who breaks into his father's home may be killed.

11 Different rules apply with regard to a thief who stole and departed, or one who did not steal, but was caught leaving the tunnel through which he entered the home. Since he turned his back on the house and is no longer intent on killing its owner, he may not be slain.

Similarly, if he is surrounded by other people, or by witnesses, he may not be killed, even if he is still located within the domain which he broke into. Needless to say, if he is brought to the court he may not be killed.

12 Similarly, a person who breaks into a garden, a field, a pen or a corral may not be killed, for the prevailing presumption is that he came merely to steal money, for generally the owners are not found in such places.

Limitations of applying law of Rodef
When self-defense is mandatory Jewish law does not permit one to a) kill an innocent third party in order to save a life, b) compel a person to risk his or her life to save the life of another, c) kill the pursuer after his or her evil act is already accomplished as a form of punishment, or d) use more force than is absolutely minimally needed.

Code of Jewish Law 329:6

Regarding non-Jews who besiege Jewish cities: if they come for money, we do not desecrate the Shabbat [to protect ourselves], but if they came to kill or come with no presented reason, we go out with weapons and desecrate the Shabbat. In a city that is near the border, even if they just come for straw or hay, we desecrate the Shabbat. Rem"a: Even if they haven't come but they want to come (Or Zarua).

Jewish Law's View of Secular Nations at War. Three views.
A. War is only allowed under the general principle of self-defense, whose rules are as applicable to the defense of a group of people as they are to the defense of a single person.

B. Wars of aggression are never permitted to secular nations; however, the institution of "war" is distinct from the pursuer rationale in the context of defensive wars.

C. the institution of "war" is legally recognized as a distinct moral license (independent of the laws of pursuer and self-defense) to terminate life according to Jewish law, even for secular nations

Types of Wars for Secular Nations

(1) War to save the nation that is now, or soon to be, under attack. This is not technically war but is permitted because of the law of "pursuer" and is subject to all of the restrictions related to the law of pursuer and the rules of self-defense.

(2) War to aid an innocent third party who is under attack. This too, is not technically war, but most commentators mandate this, also under the "pursuer" rationale, while some rule this is merely permitted. In either case, it is subject to all of the restrictions related to the "pursuer" rationale.

(3) Wars of self defense and perhaps territorial expansion. A number of commentators permit "war" as an institution even in situations where non-combatants might be killed; most authorities limit this license to defensive wars.

Melachim uMilchamot - Chapter 5

By Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon ("Maimonides"

1A king should not wage other wars before a milchemet mitzvah- (Commanded war). What is considered as milchemet mitzvah? The war against the seven nations who occupied Eretz Yisrael, the war against Amalek, and a war fought to assist Israel from an enemy which attacks them.

Afterwards, he may wage a milchemet hareshut, - (permissible war) i.e., a war fought with other nations in order to expand the borders of Israel or magnify its greatness and reputation.

2 There is no need to seek the permission of the court to wage a milchemet mitzvah. Rather, he may go out on his own volition and force the nation to go out with him. In contrast, he may not lead the nation out to wage a milchemat hareshut unless the court of seventy one judges approves.

Mishneh Torah (Rambam) Sefer Shoftim Melachim uMilchamot Melachim uMilchamot - Chapter 4

By Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon

1 The king is granted license to levy taxes upon the nation for his needs or for the purpose of war. He may also fix a duty on merchandise. It is forbidden to avoid paying this duty. The king has the right to decree that if someone does not pay these duties, his property will be seized or he will be killed.

These laws are derived as follows: I Samuel 8:17 states: "You will be servants to him, the king." Previously, Deuteronomy 20:11 states: “They shall be subject to your levy and they shall serve you.” From this association, it is derived that the king may levy taxes and fix duties.

The statutes that he establishes in these and related matters are accepted as law for all the matters mentioned in the Biblical passage concerning the king are rights to which the king is entitled.

2 He may also send throughout the territory of Eretz Yisrael and take from the nation valiant men and men of war and employ them as soldiers for his chariot and cavalry. Similarly, he may appoint them as his body guard and as footmen to run before him as I Samuel 8:11 states: “He shall place them among his charioteers and his horsemen and they shall run before his chariot.” He may also take the choicest of them to be his servants and attendants as ibid.:16 states: “He shall take... your finest young men... to do his work.”

...

5 He may force those who are fit to serve as officers, appointing them as leaders of thousands and leaders of fifties as ibid.:12 states: “He shall appoint them as leaders of thousands and leaders of fifties for himself.”

Jewish law regarding wars by the Jewish government can be divided into three (different) categories:

1) Defending the people of Israel from attack by an aggressive neighbor. This is an Obligatory war. (2) Fighting offensive wars against belligerent neighbors. (3) Protecting individuals through the use of the laws of"pursuer" and self defense from aggressive neighbors. This is not a "war" according to the Jewish tradition

Mishneh Torah (Rambam) Sefer Hamada Yesodei haTorah

Yesodei haTorah - Chapter Five

By Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon ("Maimonides");

1The entire house of Israel are commanded regarding the sanctification of [God's] great name, as [Leviticus 22:32] states: "And I shall be sanctified amidst the children of Israel." Also, they are warned against desecrating [His holy name], as [the above verse] states: "And they shall not desecrate My holy name."

What is implied? Should a gentile arise and force a Jew to violate one of the Torah's commandments at the pain of death, he should violate the commandment rather than be killed, because [Leviticus 18:5] states concerning the mitzvot: "which a man will perform and live by them." [They were given so that] one may live by them and not die because of them. If a person dies rather than transgress, he is held accountable for his life.

2

When does the above apply? With regard to other mitzvot, with the exception of the worship of other gods, forbidden sexual relations, and murder. However, with regard to these three sins, if one is ordered: "Transgress one of them or be killed," one should sacrifice his life rather than transgress.

When does the above apply? When the gentile desires his own personal benefit - for example, he forces a person to build a house or cook food for him on the Sabbath, he rapes a woman, or the like. However, if his intention is solely to have him violate the mitzvot, [the following rules apply:] If he is alone and there are not ten other Jews present, he should transgress and not sacrifice his life. However, if he forces him [to transgress] with the intention that he violate [a mitzvah] in the presence of ten Jews, he should sacrifice his life and not transgress. [This applies] even if [the gentile] intended merely that he violate only one of the [Torah's] mitzvot.

3

All the above [distinctions] apply [only in times] other than times of a decree. However, in times of a decree - i.e., when a wicked king like Nebuchadnezzar or his like will arise and issue a decree against the Jews to nullify their faith or one of the mitzvot - one should sacrifice one's life rather than transgress any of the other mitzvot, whether one is compelled [to transgress] amidst ten [Jews] or one is compelled [to transgress merely] amidst gentiles.

4

If anyone about whom it is said: "Transgress and do not sacrifice your life," sacrifices his life and does not transgress, he is held accountable for his life.

When anyone about whom it is said: "Sacrifice your life and do not transgress," sacrifices his life and does not transgress, he sanctifies [God's] name. If he does so in the presence of ten Jews, he sanctifies [God's] name in public, like Daniel, Chananiah, Mishael, Azariah, and Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues. These are those slain by [the wicked] kingdom, above whom there is no higher level. Concerning them, [Psalms 44:23] states: "For Your sake, we have been slain all day, we are viewed as sheep for the slaughter," and [Psalms 50:5] states: "Gather unto Me, My pious ones, those who have made a covenant with Me by slaughter."

When anyone about whom it is said: "Sacrifice your life and do not transgress," transgresses instead of sacrificing his life, he desecrates [God's] name. If he does so in the presence of ten Jews, he desecrates [God's] name in public, nullifies [the fulfillment of] the positive commandment of the sanctification of [God's] name, and violates the negative commandment against the desecration of God's name.

Nevertheless, since he was forced to transgress, he is not [punished by] lashing, and, needless to say, is not executed by the court even if he was forced to slay [a person]. The [punishments of] lashes and execution are administered only to one who transgresses voluntarily, [when the transgression is observed by] witnesses, and [when] a warning [was given], as [Leviticus 20:5] states concerning one who gives his children to [the worship of] Molech: "I will turn My face against that person."

The oral tradition teaches [that we can infer]: "that person" and not one who is forced [to transgress, who transgresses] inadvertently, or [who transgresses] because of an error. If, concerning the worship of false gods, which is the most serious [of sins], a person who is forced to worship is not liable for karet, nor, needless to say, execution by a court, how much more so [does this principle apply] regarding the other mitzvot of the Torah? [Similarly,] regarding forbidden sexual relations, [Deuteronomy 22:26] states: "Do not do anything to the maiden."

One who could, however, escape and flee from under the power of a wicked king and fails to do so is like a dog who returns [to lick] his vomit. He is considered as one who worships false gods willingly. He will be prevented from reaching the world to come and will descend to the lowest levels of Gehinnom.