The Rambam's Shocking Teaching About Christianity and Islam - Rabbi Yitzchak Breitowitz

Okay, everybody again, just remind people again of the big machlokes, very fundamental machlokes I wasn't marich on it that much, between the Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam regarding the status of Christianity under the Noahide Code. According to the Rambam, Christianity is considered to be avodah zarah, and therefore, even under the Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noach, a Christian by definition could not be a righteous gentile because Chazal do tell us chasiddei ummos ha'olam, righteous gentiles who keep the seven laws of Noach have a chelek in olam haba. That indeed is our teaching, and the Rambam brings such a thing. But according to the Rambam, even a righteous Christian could not get olam haba apparently simply because technically he would be an oved avodah zarah, and that is because number one, the duality or the trinity, in other words, more than one god, and number two, the physicality, the idea that somehow divinity was incarnated within a within a body. Now, keep in mind that Christianity itself is very, very big, and there may be denominations of Christianity that even the Rambam might admit is not avodah zarah. For example, I don't want to get into all of the chilukim, but Unitarianism, which came much, much, much later, actually does not believe in a trinity, and and as a result, perhaps it would not be avodah zarah. We don't have to get into that, but certainly mainstream Catholicism and the like, according to the Rambam, would certainly be avodah zarah. This is the shitta se Rambam. Mashein Kein, Rabbeinu Tam, who lived in France, it's interesting, the Rambam lived in Spain and then Egypt, which were Islamic countries, and yet the Rambam opines on Christianity that it's idolatry. Rabbeinu Tam, who's Rashi's grandson, actually lived in France, which was a Catholic country, and Rabbeinu Tam was machadesh that uh Christianity, which meant Catholicism, of course, in France, for sure, that's the only Christianity that existed there, Roman Catholicism, uh Catholicism was not idolatry under the Noahide laws, it was called shituf, meaning there's a belief in an ultimate God combined with intermediaries. And even though that's mistaken, Rabbeinu Tam is not saying it's emes, God forbid, but he says it's a mistaken belief that's non-idolatrous. And as a result, a um a gentile who is a Christian can theoretically still be a righteous Noahide observer who could have a chelek in olam haba. Now, I do want to point out right off the bat, and again, I often say these things so I don't I don't want to get mail correcting me, so I want to forestall the corrections, that there is indeed a machlokes how to learn Rabbeinu Tam. Uh again, Rabbeinu Tam is referring to a specific context, am I allowed to do business with a Christian if the Christian will take an oath in the name of Yashka. So, Rabbeinu Tam says, I'm allowed to do business with a Christian, so the standard understanding is because the Christian belief is not idolatry. That's the way I presented Rabbeinu Tam. The Noda B'Yehuda wants to suggest it is avodah zarah, but you as a Jew don't have to worry about it. So, there is a narrower interpretation of Rabbeinu Tam that limits him to doing business, so I am aware of that, I'm aware of the Noda B'Yehuda, uh so please do not write me, as I say to the audience there. Uh but, but the mainstream understanding of Rabbeinu Tam is the way I presented it, that and that's how the Rama paskens, that uh Christian belief is not considered idolatry under the Noahide uh code. Uh but as I say, uh this is a very, very important machlokes because technically from a halachic standpoint uh a non-Jew who does not accept the seven commandments. Now good, I don't kill them. It's not like the seven nations, of course. But nevertheless, they're not allowed to reside in Eretz Yisrael. That is a halacha. So technically, according to the Rambam uh Christians, non-Unitarian Christians would not be allowed to live in Eretz Yisrael. Uh according to Rabbeinu Tam, l'chatchila it would be allowed because they could have the status so to speak of righteous Gentiles. So it's a very uh it's a very very important machlokes. Now of course where you still get into trouble is if you consider Eastern religions like Buddhism or let's say Hinduism which has statues and all sorts of things. There, l'chatchila the whole machlokes Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam is not going to be relevant because there you're you're you are dealing with pure avodah zarah. So according to all opinions, uh technically Hindus or Buddhists would not be permitted to live in Eretz Yisrael because they are in violation of the Sheva Mitzvos B'nei Noach, namely the prohibition against idolatry. Now, Buddhism is a little complicated. Bu- Buddhists themselves claim that it is not um avodah zarah. Uh they're worshipping a spirit, etc. Uh Hinduism it's very very very very hard not to look at it as avodah zarah mamash. In fact, you may recall if you follow halachic news, you may recall that there was a controversy and there actually still is a controversy a little bit about human hair sheitels. Very very very interesting. You know, human you know, used to be in the old old-fashioned days when women wore wigs uh it was artificial, you know, rayon, nylon, whatever it was. But now they use human hair which looks much nicer. Some are against it precisely because it looks nicer. If a the woman wears a wig that looks nicer than her natural hair, is that really considered to be the mitzvah of covering a married woman covering hair? But be it as it may, one of the sources of human hair sheitels were India. Now, the hair the hair hair came from women who cut their hair and sold it uh for money. Now, it turned out, fascinatingly enough, that this was part of a religious service. They would go to the Tim Temple. They would cut their hair like a Nazir in honor of the idol. And then the church, or whatever they call it, the temple, would sell the hair for money. So, it turns out that the human hair sheitels that come from India may have been sacrifices that were made to avodah zarah. Now, the halakha is that sacrifices that were made to avodah zarah are assur b'hana'ah. You're not allowed to have any benefit from them. And they have to be burnt. So, there were poskim who actually said, imagine this, one day, uh all human hair sheitels that come from India, and that's usually the dark hair, meaning to say, yeah, the blonde-haired ones tend to be from, you know, Sweden or whatever it is, but the uh the dark straight hair uh actually came from a lot of it came from India. You must immediately uh take it off your head and you must burn it. You must destroy it. So, poskim debated it, debated it, and they still debate it. And uh for whatever reason, there were a number of people who who said this really wasn't a sacrifice. This was not a korban. This was just a donation, right? A donation to a temple that they should sell for money is not the same as making a sacrifice to the idol. So, if this isn't a guy I don't think is anyone married here. Uh it's not uh if it's not noge'a l'ma'aseh right now, uh you know, you don't have to have a definitive answer, but when you me'at shem you and your wife wants a human hair sheitel, you should be sure to ask a rabbi. >> It saves money. >> Huh? Saves Well, that's true because these are these are expensive. The human hair sheitels are are very very expensive. But anyway, the truth of the matter is many post-commentators well anyway are against sheitels against sheitels anyway, no matter where the wig comes from because they say you have to just have like uh a tichel, you know, a kerchief or a hat and they're against uh any type of sheitel because if it looks too much like your hair like the woman's hair, it's not proper. But the American minag of Benei Torah, the Lakewood minag, the Chabad minag is that women do wear wigs. And if they do wear the wig, then you have to be aware of this controversy about It's interesting how sometimes common you know Hilchos Avodah Zarah uh are not one of the things that you study for smicha. You know, it doesn't come up that much. The laws of benefiting from korbanos that are brought to Avodah Zarah. So, we know them as theoretical halachos, you know, kashrus, Shabbos, Pesach, mikvah. These are things we learn, nidah. These are things we learn halacha l'maaseh. Hilchos Avodah Zarah is not a familiar area. So, it's very very fascinating. It's almost as if Hakadosh Baruch Hu wanted poskim to explore kind of a a lesser-known area of halacha so that every part of the Torah should be learned. So, this is my first sheilah in Teshuvos Avodah Zarah uh which was almost the first time. Now, here as I say, this has nothing to do with Rambam or Rabbeinu Tam because that's a machlokes regarding Christianity. But with respect to Hinduism, there's no question whatsoever that Hinduism is treated as Avodah Zarah. Yeah. >> Um just regarding Rabbeinu Tam's shittah, um what's the actual word he would use for Christians in >> Yeah, he he uses term. He calls it shituf. Shituf means partnership. Shituf shem shamayim im davar acher. They're making a mistake by combining divine power with some other intermediary force. >> Cuz one questions whether in Judaism there groups that do that. I mean that's a good question. And he says that even though that's forbidden for a Jew, >> it is not nichlal in the prohibition of of B'nei Noach. >> That's Rabbeinu Tam's shittah. That's the broader reading. As I say, Noda BiYehudah has a much narrower reading of Rabbeinu Tam. But the broader reading of Rabbeinu Tam is that shituf is not assur for B'nei Noach. Yeah. >> So, is that a problem with wearing like a shaitel and um um which is a real head covering like a what's it called? >> I'm Sorry, I'm just having trouble hearing. Say again. >> Is it a problem to So, is it a problem for a woman to wear like a head covering like hair that looks better than her own hair? >> No, no. So, this is So, this is a big machlokes. In other words, uh I don't know if you I don't know if you bothered to read the wall posters uh although pashkvilim they're called, but uh you know, every other pashkvil is talking about this. Meaning, Sefardim take the position generally that any type of wig that looks equal or better than the woman's hair is is assur. Is assur. And many Ashkenazic poskim say the same thing. So, in Eretz Yisrael, many, many poskim uh actually absolutely say that anything any attractive wig is going to be assur. However, the minhag among Ashkenazim in America, B'nei Torah, I'm talking about B'nei Torah, I'm talking about uh Lakewood and the like, is that these wigs are worn. And uh so, it's it's a very lively machlokes. But then they have to confront the question of avodah zarah if it comes from India. >> So, which building in America permit like the wigs that women wear today? Like the ones that look better than their own hair? >> Well, uh you know, I don't know if I could find you posekim that openly say much or but but most posekim don't say that it's us or meaning to say. They don't come out against it. So, by silence they're apparently uh approving it. Now, I don't want to get into wig styles again. Now there's another controversy about what's called a lace uh lace sheitel which even looks more like real hair. Uh some are saying that goes beyond permissibility. Other people say that's okay also. Uh there are many many gradations. Some say sheitels are okay only if it the hair doesn't go below the shoulder line. If it goes below the shoulder line, it's too too wild whatever it is. That's a whole issue of tznius which is not our our topic. I just brought up sheitels because of the avodah zarah aspect uh of of it and and and the like. Um okay. Uh yeah. >> Why don't they use different standards for avodah zarah for juvenile delinquents? >> Yeah, so you're correct. Obviously, it's not a different definition of truth. It's not that oh, Christianity is true if you're a Christian. I mean, that doesn't make sense. It's either true or not true. And our position is it's not true. Uh but I think the concept would be the way to look at it is Hashem has a greater tolerance of erroneous thinking. Meaning, the non-Jewish people are not expected to reach the same level of theological sophistication. So, essentially God says, all right, for a Noahide we will allow certain mistakes. Which actually means, if you are a conscientious Noahide, you should very definitely distance yourself from Christianity because you want to approach truth. In other words, it's not that we're saying, oh, l'chatchila a Noahide could be a Christian. By definition, that wouldn't make any sense because the Noahide is living a falsehood. But it means b'di'eved, he can still be a Noahide in good standing, even though he has erroneous thinking. But, uh if I don't know how to feel if he's a seeker of truth, he would move away from it. And that is why you find, I had mentioned, that there are congregations of righteous Noahides uh all over the world, and they by and large are not They're not Christian groups. I mean, they're basically a righteous Noahide will not be a Christian, even though, according to Rabbeinu Tam, they're not violating avodah zarah. Okay? So, that's how I think you would understand it. It certainly is not based on a double truth paradigm. That that that would not make logical sense in theology. Some have tried to do that, by the way. I think Jonathan Sacks uh zichrono livracha tried to kind of say, "Well, Christianity is MS to the Christians, and it's not MS to the Jews." But, you're running into a lot of trouble there. That's not That's not a logical foundational principle for looking at different different religions. Yeah. >> So, why don't the poskim comment on it? Because if the other poskim just say that it's a problem, then why are they not addressing it? >> Well, you know, uh >> But, the poskim say it is. If the poskim say it is. >> I I I think there is I think there is an idea that uh you know, poskim don't want to openly encourage what may be possibly immodest behavior. Meaning, something may be technically permitted, but a posek doesn't not necessarily want to say, "Go ahead and do it." He doesn't want to encourage things, even if things are not going to be kosher. Meaning, I'll I'll tell you an interesting story about this. Um there's a very chashuv posek in New York, uh Rav Dovid Cohen. Some of you might know me. He is in in Flatbush. Very very chashuv posek. There are two Rav Dovid Cohens. There's Yeshiva of Chevron here is Rav Dovid Cohen, who's also a gadol baTorah, but I'm talking about an older man in New York with David Cohen in Flatbush. So, somebody called him up with a shaila to want to do something and it was a very, very difficult shaila. And Rabbi Cohen just hung up on him. So, he sees him 2 weeks later and Reb Dovid Cohen says, "So, did you do what you wanted to do?" So, he says, "Well, Rebbi, you hung up on me. I'm assuming that means that it's assur." He says, "No, no, no. If it would have been assur, I would have told you assur. If I hung If I hung up on you, I just meant I didn't want to say mucher. But, it doesn't mean you can't do it." I'm not sure how you fully explain that, but sometimes there's a concept that a posek does not always want to say something is mucher. But, by not protesting, he's saying, "You know, okay, if you do it, it's going to be okay." You may That may not make sense That may not make sense to you, but l'maaseh, that is the way some some things sometimes work because they don't want to give an open approval of things that are a little questionable, but they also don't feel that al pi halacha, something is going to be assur, so they're not going to say that it's going to be assur. But, be that as it may, in Eretz Yisrael, the only people who wear sheitels are really the American Yeshivish community. Or Or South Africa And the Anglo The Anglo Yeshivish community. That includes South Africa. That includes other countries. Uh but, the Israeli Chareidi does not wear it. Does not wear a sheitel because indeed Reb Elyashiv didn't like it. And among Shteinman, Shteinman, Michlal don't like it. Reb Wosner uh didn't like it. Uh so, uh the people who wear sheitels will be from the Anglo Yeshiva Yeshivish Yeshivish community. In fact, the Even in the Dati Leumi world, the Israeli Dati Leumi world, they don't they don't wear sheitels. It's really only the um the Anglo Yeshivish uh crowd. Now, the Bobover Rebbi had a sheitel that he actually felt a sheitel it better than a tichel. He felt it covered hair. Tefillin things come out. Okay. I don't want to get into that. I just wanted to mention the avodah zarah issue which was an interesting problem of takrubas avodah zarah being assur b'hana'ah, you're muchayev to burn. Yeah. >> So, that means according to Rabbeinu Tam's shita, if you go to like Europe and you see a church, you say, "Wow, what a beautiful building." Whereas, Rambam >> No, I I I think you have a problem there because even though it's not avodah zarah vis-a-vis a it is avodah zarah vis-a-vis you. You're a Jew. So, you're not allowed to go to the church. You're not allowed to pray praise the church. In other words, that is a double perspective. Hashem allowed to live under that misconception. Hashem does not allow me to live under that misconception. So, the laws about not going into a church are still, even like Rabbeinu Tam, those halachos are inviolate. People ask questions all the time, "Can I go into because a lot of cathedrals are works of art. Can I go into the cathedral of Notre Dame? Can I go to the Sistine Chapel that has Michelangelo's paintings on the roof? Vatican City, right? Even in the old city here, right? There are famous churches in the in the Christian quarter that, you know, Christians come from all over the world to go to these famous churches. And if you go on a tour and your tour guide is not religious, you know, they'll go to those places. Halachically, I'm not allowed to go in. I can stand outside really and but even to admire it is is a bit of a problem. Um that gets us to a whole other question because um that particularly if you're a chief rabbi of a country, like chief rabbi of England or something, or what do you call it, United Kingdom, so you always have this problem because you know, there are church weddings of the royal family of uh well, Cha- Charles and Diana, you know, years ago, which was like like after, you know, whatever it would be. And then you had um who's the new guy? William and and Kate Middleton, whatever it would be. So, uh when Jonathan Sacks, one of the Rabbis, was Chief Rabbi, and even before him, Rabbi Jacobowitz, who was even more to the right, uh they So, Rabbi Jacobowitz never went. He never entered Westminster Abbey. He never entered a church for a church wedding. Uh Rabbi Sacks did. And the question is, up to Halakha, how are you allowed to enter a church? You're not even allowed to enter a church just to look at the architecture. To enter the church during a religious ceremony? That's that's the worst of the worst. It's almost during a religious ceremony. So, Rabbi Sacks invoked a a cloud in the Gemara that did allow certain Jewish people who were interveners on behalf of their people, that for Shalom Malchus, in order to have a good relationship with the government, uh they were permitted to to enter [clears throat] certain places. So, Rabbi Sacks uh invoked the rationale of Shalom Malchus. Problem is, it's not so clear that Shalom Malchus really applies today. You know, in the olden days, Shalom Malchus meant if you didn't show up to the king's wedding, you know, he might execute you. Or might kill kill the Jewish population. You know, those things are not necessarily the same today. But that's the controversy about Shalom about Shalom Malchus. Uh and uh and and and the like. But other than that, uh the issue of entering a church is uh is not totally under Rambam and the Rabbeinu Tam. Now, one other thing I want to mention, though, that in spite of the fact that the Rambam has a very negative characterization of Christianity in the sense that he considers it to be Avodah Zarah, he then turns around and says a very startling idea that both Christianity and Islam serve positive functions in Hashem bringing the world to a better place. Because he says that Christianity is indeed an idolatrous belief, but it was much closer to monotheism than the paganism and idolatry of the ancient world. So, the Rambam says, Hashem allowed the spread of Christianity. And the Rambam's lashon is to the farthest islands of the world. Like the missionaries go to uh Tahiti or whatever it would be, Samoa. Because that way even the idolater gets exposed to the notion of one transcendent God who cares about ethics and morality. So, this is very fascinating that the Rambam sees a historically importance significance in the spread of Christianity and Islam. That these were ways of weaning idolatrous cultures away from pure paganism towards some idea approximating one God. So, that's an interesting point. That's in spite of the Rambam's characterization of this as avodah as avodah zarah. Okay. So, now let's examine uh the story of Rahab. Again, uh this is what I wanted to do yesterday. Hopefully, I'll I'll get to it today. We have a little bit a little bit of time. And that is Joshua not Joshua, the two spies. By the way, who were the two spies? Their names are not given uh in the narrative, but according to Hazal, they are none other than Caleb and Pinchas are the two spies who went to Jericho. Caleb. Now, Caleb we know for sure is not a young man because Calev was 40 years old when he was sent on his first spying mission. And then we have 40 years in the desert. And you probably 39 years. So, Calev is around 80 years old. Pinchas, we don't know exactly how old he is, but he's kind of up there up there as well. Maybe they chose two old men. Well, two reasons. Number one, last time they sent spies, it was disastrous. So, they wanted to show choose the one spy who was not nishal. Yeshua couldn't go because Yeshua was the leader. So, he was not eligible for spy duty, so to speak. So, you take the other good spy who is Calev who was not nishal in lashon hara. And Pinchas was the great zealot for God's honor. So, those two spies went. And they made an agreement with Rachav to spare her life and anyone that she brings into her house. And she put the chud shani, she put the red threads outside the window as a sign. So, here's the question. The question is, if there's a mitzvah to kill the seven nations of Canaan, then how is there a heter to be mikayem Rachav and the like? You're making an agreement, even if it's an oath, against the Torah. So, now this will depend just give the quick answer. This will depend on the machlokes Rambam and Rashi. Not not about Christianity, but about kriyas shalom. According to the Rambam that says, even after we cross the army, and even after we begin milchama, there is the option of kriyas shalom. We offer them peace. And peace means what? The acceptance of the seven mitzvahs and Jewish sovereignty and national service. So, the p'shat is that essentially Rahab, as an individual, accepted the shalom. She accepted this. Cuz I'll actually say Rahab even converted and Yeshua married her, but even if she didn't convert or if she converted and the rest of the family didn't convert, but if they were mekabel shalom, kriyas shalom works even for the seven nations of Canaan. Right? So, like the Rambam, the ability to make a peace treaty with Rahab and her family is not a problem because we would simply call that a kriyas shalom. Question is, according to Rashi, who says there's no kriyas shalom for the seven nations, how does this work? So, there are two possible answers. You'll recall that even Rashi says, even Rashi says that we do offer them shalom before we cross the Arnon. Cuz there is a chazal that said Yeshua sent three letters to the population. Um well, or three three options. Be mekabel shalom, leave the country, or we're going to wage war. So, even according to Rashi, kriyas shalom is going to be permitted if we have not yet crossed the Arnon. So, so keep in mind the following. The two spies crossed the Arnon, of course, but the Jewish nation had not. The Jewish nation's still on the other side. So, as a result, there is still opportunity, even according to Rashi, for there to be kriyas shalom. If Rahab agrees to accept the seven mitzvahs and uh Jewish sovereignty, and she does even Well, she doesn't mention in the text it doesn't say the seven mitzvahs, but she does say we know that a God has given you the land. The acceptance of Jewish sovereignty is actually the favorish in the sukkum themselves. So, even like Rashi, so it turns out that Rahab is not much of a problem because like Rashi, there's Krias Shalom even after we cross the Yarden. I'm sorry, like the Rambam rather, there's Krias Shalom even after we cross the Yarden. And like Rashi, there's Krias Shalom before you cross the Yarden. And this was a Krias Shalom or an acceptance of Shalom before the Jewish people cross the Yarden and actively engage in war. Now, the Maisha, there's a third answer that Tysus in Masachas Saita says, which is a little bit of a chiddish. He says, Rahab was not a Canaanite. Rahab was from some other nation who happened to be living in Eretz Canaan. And as a result, there was never a chiyuv to wipe out Rahab because Rahab was a non-Canaanite who happened to be living in Canaan. There is no chiyuv of Lo Sachayekh Kol Neshamah, right? The chiyuv of Lo Sachayekh Kol Neshamah is referring specifically to the seven nations of Canaan. Rahab was not one of the seven nations. So, with respect to Rahab, we have three good answers. Uh, like Rambam, it's Krias Shalom. Like Rashi, it's Krias Shalom before you cross the Yarden. And like Tosfos, she wasn't of the seven nations of Canaan, right? So, that would be the teretz of how this was how this was possible. In fact, the emes is Tysus's teretz, although it's not necessary See, there are two questions here. Question number one is how could they spare Rahab? So, Tosfos's answer is she wasn't of the seven nations. Now, that teretz is not necessary for that kasha. Because we have the krias shalom answers. But lemaseh, Tosafos' teretz is necessary for another kasha. Which we didn't even discuss. And that is, the Torah says by the seven nations, lo tischaten bam. Do not marry them. And the Gemara Yevamos says, this is a new gezeirah sakasiv. That [clears throat] even if they convert to Judaism, they convert to Judaism. So, there's no mitzvah to kill them. We are not allowed to marry them. They're pesulei kahal. That's the Gemara Yevamos says. There's a love of chasanus to the seven nations, even big geirusan. So, the question you'll have there is not the question of how could they spare her? Spare her krias shalom, and we gave that answer. The question is, the chazal that says Yehoshua married Rachav. And that's another totally other different question. How could Yehoshua marry Rachav, even if she converted to Judaism? >> [clears throat] >> The Gemara Yevamos says, there would be a special love of lo tischaten. On that, the only answer, the only answer you have to that question is Tosafos. That she wasn't of the seven nations. Meaning, the krias shalom will not give you an answer to that particular question. So, lemaseh, Tosafos, in a sense, is much rach. But not because of the kasha of lo sachaya kom hashama, but because of the kasha of lo stitzchaten bam, which is a different a totally different question. Uh you had a question? >> Were the seven nations fearful of the Jewish people on the other side of the river? So, >> [snorts] >> once again, if you look at Rahab, Rahab's communication to the spies, she had a conversation with the spies. She actually said, "We have all heard We have all heard what Hashem did for you in Mitzrayim. And our hearts are melted like water." In fact, if you think about this, this is an interesting question. Yeshua sends spies. What did the spies actually do? I mean, I mean, you know, the first mission of spies, which turned out bad, they spent 40 days. They went through the land. They They looked at here and there and the weak points and the strong points. They were able to give a report. Now, the maiseh, they were mekalel with lashon hara, but they had information to give a report. What did these meraglim do? They go to Yericho. They spent one night there. They talked to one person, and then they leave. Meaning, what did the mission even accomplish? As far as I can see, the only thing the mission accomplished was to reassure the meraglim that the local population is afraid. And that's all they needed to know. They didn't need to know here and there, weak points, strong points. They just needed to know that psychologically, the population was debilitated. So, lechayira, Rahab did say that they were afraid of the Jewish people. That was And, you know, >> [clears throat] >> she was a prostitute. And she She actually knew a lot of the leaders in Yericho, and she is reporting to the meraglim based on her first-hand knowledge that the people are terrified. Yeah. >> Um seems like this mission's kind of complicated the matters a bit more because that means there'd be most likely be more non-Canaanites living in Canaan. So, how how would the Jewish people now go about >> Yeah, so so we actually we actually find in in in the book of Yeshua itself we actually find a very interesting thing that there were descendants of Yisro Midianites who did not all convert to Judaism but they were righteous and they were living in Canaan and Yehoshua actually sent them warning before a certain battle to get out of the way. So I don't think we have any other record of that in particular uh but apparently it was the practice when there were identified groups of non-Canaanites they would be given advanced warning to get out of the battleground. Now, if they didn't leave and they got killed in the course of war then unfortunately that is the familiar phenomenon that exists in Jewish wars as well of collateral damage meaning to say uh you know, as we have now. You're targeting the enemy but there are going to be people who unfortunately are going to get killed but at least the favored for the Bnei Yisrael were given warning to leave ahead of time and and and the like. So this is the three answers. Now the next issue though is the Gibeonites and the Gibeonites we don't necessarily have uh the same answers. I guess once again I'm going to have to hold it over but just just to introduce the question remember Gibeon is a village very near Jerusalem. Gibeon is very very close to Jerusalem. The Anshei Gibeonites had heard about the conquest of Jericho and other cities in Eretz Yisrael and they were very afraid. They heard that the Jewish people exterminated the local population so they wanted to make a covenant of peace but they felt if they would have identified themselves as the Gibeonites were the Canaanites from next door they would have been eradicated. So what the Anshei Giv'on did was they dressed up as if they came from very far away. So, their clothes were torn. Uh they got bread that was moldy and stale as if to say, "We have been carrying this bread for a very, very long time." Right? So, they went to some Yeshiva's kitchen and, you know, got got the bread and and and the like. And they basically said, "We're non-Canaanite people. We come from a far away country and we want to make peace with the Jewish nation." And uh Yehoshua and these Zekenim, the elders, the Nesi'im, the heads of the tribes, swore with the Giv'onim a covenant of peace, a peace treaty, and the like. And then what happened was they discovered that the Giv'onim are in fact Canaanites. And Yehoshua basically said, "We're stuck. We can't do anything because we swore a peace treaty with them. So, we're stuck. And these Giv'onim uh became like a servant class. They became chotzvei eitzim, cutters of wood, sho'avei mayim, drawers of water for the Kohanim. They essentially worked in the Mishkan. They They in fact uh there were large populations. The Giv'onim in the In the book of Yehoshua, they're called Giv'onim. In Chazal and actually in the book of Ezra, Nehemiah, they are called Nethinim. If I don't know how many of you are planning uh I know you're learning Kiddushin, right? The Ish MeKadesh. Um is there a plan to uh finish the Masechtas or learn other other Prakim in Kiddushin, too? No? >> Not this one. >> Not this one. Okay. But if you learn the uh let's say the fourth Perek of Kiddushin, which talks about the different groups in Qualis film. I'm saying there are different types of groups that are much in a merry, not much in a merry. So, you'll see a lot of references to Nisinim. [snorts] Nisinim is another word for Gibeonim. It appears in Tanakh. Why are they called Nisinim? Cuz Nisinim means they were placed. They were Nasun because Yoshua made them placed them to be Chotzvei Eitzim u'Shovei Mayim. And indeed, if you read the book of Ezra that talks about the return to Eretz Yisrael after the 70 years of Babylon of Galus of Bavel, and it talks about the Nisinim, many Nisinim returning, and it even says where they lived. They actually lived They were like the janitors of the Beis Hamikdash. They lived in very close proximity to the Beis Hamikdash itself. The Nisinim actually hung around there because they were on call on call all night. Now, obviously, when when when it comes to the Nisinim, you can't go with Tosafos' answer, they're not from the seven nations. It's absolutely clear they are of the seven nations. So, the question becomes what's going on? So, like Ra- So, you have a Kasha on this Ma'aseh both according to Rashi and according to the Rambam, but the Kasha is going to be different. Like the Rambam, the Jewish people already crossed the Ar- I'm sorry, like the Rashi first. Like Rashi, like Rashi, the Jewish people already crossed the Ardan. Everybody of the seven nations are Chayav Misa. If that's the case, the Shvua that was made to the Giv'onim is a Shvua to violate the Torah, albeit unintentionally. The Shvua should be null and void. So, according to Rashi, the kasha is how could the Gibeonites be spared? There is a mitzvah to eradicate the seven nations. And there's no option of krias shalom. So, according to Rashi, the kasha is how could they be kept alive? The reason for their deception actually makes sense. The Gibeonites knew the halakha. They knew if we identified ourselves as the seven nations, we would have been killed. So, what they were trying to accomplish is is very, very good. That's not a kasha. But the question is, after the fact, we should kill them. So, that's the kasha on Rashi. Like the Rambam, the kasha is exactly the opposite. The kasha is, if according to the Rambam, there's krias shalom even after we crossed the Arnon. So, why did the Gibeonites have to masquerade? They could come and say, "Hey, we are from the village next door. And we know that God has given you the lands. And we accept the Zion mitzvahs of Noah. And we accept the Jewish sovereignty. So, on Rashi, the kasha is how could they be kept alive? Like the Ramban, the kasha is not how could they be kept alive, but why was there a need for a deception? Why couldn't they just say who they are? And that would have been acceptance of shalom. Since according to the Rambam, krias shalom works even after we crossed the Arnon. Yeah, yeah, quite, yeah. >> How do we presume that they knew the halakha? Like what if they thought that like there was no krias shalom? >> So, so that's that's a possibility. Uh the possibility might be that hey, they saw a lot of I don't want to use the genocide, but they saw a lot of the nations being killed. So, they're not Lomdanim, right? They didn't sit in Yeshiva. They figured we're in trouble. That's a possibility. So, that that that might be a simple answer. Meaning to say, the whole ruse was unnecessary. But we may well they didn't know that, so they did it. All right. So, so we'll talk a little bit more about how to understand this. But the Gevanim, once again, needs at least some explanation both according to Rashi and according to the Rambam, but the question is going to be a different question like each like each one. Okay. >> Thank you for listening to this awesome production. >> [music] >> To find out more and to partner in our mission, please visit ohr.edu.