Surrendering to the Yetzer Harah or Fighting Against It | Rabbi Neil Winkler | January 8th 2026

I want to go back and just to keep you up to date, I should say, but what we where we left off about the mitzvah of Asia Torah of the um the Torah's somewhat real troubling laws of a um of an Israelite um soldier who wants to uh marry. He was a uh P of a a pagan rel you know of a foreign nation. Um we went through um first we were discussing this law which begins in as we said we showed that in the sectioning of um there is a section of the laws of war there all there also the section after this mitzvah the law of a family familial war uh laws. So, we were trying to fit in where this mitzvah was. Is it the law of war or is it a law that has to do with uh society and for the family? Uh it is a question, but it's a very important question because it gets us a better idea of what this specific law really is. And it is not what we assume it was and not what many of the forim say that it is. Um [snorts] and Ra um Yan Yoni Gman who has really gave a given a very fascinating approach to this uses the Maporim um those uh mafim that are well known although the Ibenezar and the Rambam is the Rambam we get through them also um to bring out what this law truly is and what it was meant to be. Is it a war of a law of war? Is it of family? Is it both? In going through that, we especially focused on the law that came before this law, the law at the end of the para of a chauffet. And that is the law of the um egra ela arufa that when there is a um a murdered corpse found between two cities ritual that they have to go through so on and so forth and so forth. Um and that seems to be also as many of the foram say a law of war. Uh specifically they may say that well look it is a part of law. This is a a a personal a personal war between one and another killing somebody else. How strong that is is >> [singing] >> um we don't know. one one can feel very satisfied with that type of response and that answer. Others can say well maybe it's something but maybe not. Um but now I want to go ahead um and I want to go to the approach of the clear the clear fascinating push and the clear when I first studied the kakar I started reading And as a pulpit rabbi, I said, "Boy, this sounds like this is one of his uh he he he gave a wonderful uh sermon on chabas and then he he wrote it down on Sunday and I looked at it and indeed I found out he was a ra of bashul and much of this came from his dashas which is interesting but he's always a fascinating fascinating approach to things. So the view of the um cleakar um we find here on source number um six and it's 6 C. I don't know if you have the Okay, so I'm going to give it to you so that you can um you know follow along now you wish okay you'll see it it under I have here is six and we're going to go to C which is a clear and unfortunately why did I not give the let me just see if I have the ones with the translation I thought I did record this. You give them your bar to written. >> No, I was never told I I could do such a thing or how I did it, but I ah here it is. Good. I know I had English. There we go. Here it is. All right. Ah, very end. Good. Here we go. The excellent. I'm sorry. >> Thank you. >> On top [snorts] of here. Okay. There you have the English also. So, we can all understand it. In discussing the law of the egg arufa, this strange ritual upon discovering a um a murdered corpse and no one knows who the murderer was. Um has an interesting approach and he says he starts with now he said he said look it literally means lift your eyes means look carefully at mashal what kazal say and what do kazal say and you have it here in the English um says the following why am I all so difficulty that I don't have the the uh stuff. Um six I'm up to seven and uh 7 66. Okay. So the cleakar says the following. The rabbis say that the reason for this law, this strange ritual that we say uh is that the calf that could not produce fruit, you know, this is what Rashi says. By the way, no it be was not a calf that was not allowed to live long enough to produce his own fruit, her own fruit um is taken um down to a field uh that has not yet uh either given out fruit uh so that um and the um and he is I'm say beheaded in effect uh as a atonement for the fact that whoever this murderer was did not allow this person the victim to have his own fruits is have his own children and grandchildren. Okay. So um this reason the reason is logically based upon not simply this but the preceding law the law before before um eggla arufah is the one that says that you're not allowed to destroy you're not allowed to destroy a fruit tree during the uh um during a time of war when one is surrounding uh a a city, right? Um when he's not allowed to um in doing so and laying and in surrounding a a city, I'm losing the words laying a well, those who are here know what word I'm speaking to. uh uh around the city, one is not allowed to destroy a fruit tree, right? And um thear says, well, this is a connects very clearly to the bo the next law of the arufah and what they have to do. In effect, he says, what is the difference between a tree and a person? And that's what the Torah itself says. Uh Sad he said um and uh he said if a man is like eight and a man is like a tree so if you can't destroy a tree you know so certainly in that allowed to destroy a human being and he ends by saying interesting he said in Hebrew he says I'll call which in English means I am surprised that the commentators did not see this connection. I saw it but they did not. So he saw that connection and um it's a very interesting thing but Roni Gman adds something to that which I think is going to help us understand the entire mitzvah and hopefully have we'll have time to do just that and give you a whole different approach to what this is about. um looking at the text itself and we have that in the beginning I believe I have it as number five is it um he might say hello yeah number five uh if you look number five I think with the English I don't know if you have that I think you have you may not have the page uh with number five on it but uh if you don't have it I'll give it to anyway it is uh number five or it says says I will I don't think you have that page. I think you have just from six on let me tell or maybe you do number five uh it should be yeah number five four five what six seven you see I'm so tight >> 46 78 >> how about here's five okay there okay there was it was clearly it was stapled incorrectly >> nice speaking you'll need a person again Okay. So there number five in you know in in the mitzvah of the egg and just quickly to go through this what it says there. He says, "Look, if in the land a murdered corpse is found lying in the open and the identity of the slayer is not known, then your elders and uh judges shall go out and measure the distances from the corpse to the nearby towns. Then the elders of the nearest town shall take a hepher which has never been worked nor ever pulled in. O yoke and uh bro bring bring her down to an untilled and unsewn um wadi and there in the wadi they shall break the heer there. This is all what we already know. And the the importance here while I'm taking down the text is unfortunately not found here in the English translation. The term that is used here that the Torah pointedly does not use the simple word of someone who died which is a a mate. A mate is a >> question. How do they know this man was murdered? Let's say he fell off the horse and and he died and he's in the middle of now place. What would they do for him then? No, but then that's not a murder. You have to clearly know it was a murder. >> Know the guy was murdered. >> Very simple. Because you can't you cannot commit suicide with a with a a rifle. You know, [laughter] there are certain things that you clearly see exactly that you you can't do yourself. Um, so you see that it's done in a in a way that's clearly a murder, you know, and that's when this happens. And you're right, there might be places where, like I said, someone falls off the horse. That wouldn't be the law. >> What period of time are we talking about with their gods going way back? people got killed with. >> Of course, it's in the Torah. So, it's a time of the ancient to whatever they had swords, they had shields, they had um knives, they had things like that that were used in war, they had they had arrows also. Remember that? That's right. >> Right. So anyway, um usually when we talk about someone who's dead and even someone who was, you know, is dead, you know, as a corpse, we use the word mate. And we have it in a number of places. But instead of the word mate, let me read key. The first three words in Hebrew key. The third word isal, not mate. And you find it at the end of the second verse where it says we vote four times in the story or in the law of the um I'm sorry they use not mate butalal. Is there a difference with between mate and kalal? Well, the fact that they only use kalal here and not mate would seem to indicate there's a specific meaning of kalal mostly and indeed it is a kalal is not simply um someone who's dead or a corpse. In fact, um when we go to uh this the paradum when it talks to paradum there uh I didn't leave this I do I have 6A maybe um no I don't think I have it here uh something yeah and um it there it talks about the paradum is someone who is something which is after that ritual. It's ashes and it's mixed with water and the water is sprinkled on someone who had been made impure through uh any type of involvement with a a dead person. Okay? With a corpse. And there when we have oh hell this is the law. If a person dies in a tent, whoever comes into that tent and everything in a tent becomes tame for seven days and uh every uh utensil that is not properly covered also [clears throat] becomes tame. And then it said the following [clears throat] or anyone who touches somewhere in the fieldalate whether a mate a corpse oral one killed by a sword. In other words, halal would seem to indicate and define not just a corpse but a murdered corpse. Which is why here all it says is a murdered corpse. That's why infa he only usesalal it says oh or other types of dead. Right? And again at the end then says anyone who touches a corpse or a grave or a bonesal or a murdered person. So the Torah now differentiates between mate and halal. The mate refers to a corpsees corpse someone who died whereas kalal refers almost exclusively by the way to one who was killed usually in war but it's one who killed anyway. Um I would go to also which no reason for me to do it but you have there in the para of where speaks about of the the blood of a murdered corpseal. Anyway, it would seem therefore that the ongoing usage of the wordal here in Egla is uh not coincidental, but it's quite intentional. Um it means therefore that if we're trying to figure out what part of the what section of does this go into? Then indeed it would seem it belongs to the laws of war because it talks about someone killed in war, you know, or the it defines kalal as someone who'd been killed and therefore uh that would be the laws of kalal and of arufah. Fine. That's not what we're talking about. We're talking about the um the um P who's being taken by this Israelite soldier. This P, right? Um the the war obviously requires killing the enemy. It's not nice. It's not good. One, one has to defend himself to kill the enemy who wants to kill you. Correct? That's not simply you're allowed to. You have an obligation not to allow yourself to simply go around and getting killed. Israel as a nation would never have uh survived if all they did is says, "Okay, we'll let everybody kill us." When it was strong enough, they had to. and they were had the mitzvah, they're obligated to I mean nowadays everybody says war is okay and people understand they get get killed but since Jews are supposed to just die by themselves you we're not Jews aren't allowed to kill in war they're only allowed to die in war but that's not true the fact is that this is what war is that's understandable so what the Torah is saying with this law of the aset So it's teaching you listen to me you soldier man who has gone to war a man who had to kill is telling you soldier don't bring the values of war that you had to battle into your house when you get home. This is so powerfully important nowadays. Nebaka, how many did we go through? How many suicides of from wonderful Israeli soldiers? It's a horrible thing. They come back and they can't deal with it. And the Torah says, understandable, you shouldn't you should hopefully deal with it. But they're struggling with with that with that problem. Don't bring these uh war act activities behavior. When you come back home in a time of peace, when you come back to your society, this is not acceptable. And that's why right before this, we learned about what happens when one person makes a war with another. They were telling you in a whether it's in a war or whatever, you cannot kill somebody else. Um, you know, soldiers are apt to do things in war that they should not be doing when it's not in war. Um, they they get I think the word I use is desensitized and they have to be desensitized. How often you have stories stories from World War I. I remember of Jewish of Jewish soldiers who who are filing on the who were fighting within the in the German army who suddenly are shooting at the enemy in the French army and he hears the person he's shot. He runs over to him and here's the person saying the Israel as he's dying. He he never he couldn't take it anymore. He couldn't take it anymore. Th this idea this concept of war is very difficult and people in war are have to be desensitized to kill the enemy lest they be killed. And what the Torah is saying here, you can't do that. When you return from war to a society, you must desensitize. You must reensitize yourselves from what you did when you went into law. And that's why the Torah here commands a formal public ceremony with the eggla to underscore the tragedy of a loss of life. And now we come into the fat to now I've to a certain degree misled you. Remember earlier I told you that the grammatically they use the second the second person um and the laws of war. And you know the fact is if you look at perk um where where this story is where it begins with when you go to um fight against your enemies and you you know don't be afraid right because God is with you so on and so forth. But when you look in the Hebrew and look carefully and I believe I don't know I don't know if you have page the source number three um 3A you could say >> thank you so much in 3A and u the till the English tells us clearly um when you go out right um when you Go to battle against your enemies and see horses and chariots, forces larger than yours. Have no fear and for Hashem who brought you out of Egypt is with you and before you could battle the Cohen shall go forward and address the troops and says, "Listen, O Israel, you're about to join so on and so forth." That's what it says over there. But again talking about grammatic grammar you have and virita and you see um a a the army of your enemy that's very big and they're greater greater than you don't you be afraid because God is with you. All of is a second uh person. Correct? You you you but as you know in English you is not only a singular thing >> it's plural. >> It's a plural thing. So when it says over here if you are going to war and you see who is it referring to? >> Everybody. >> Everybody. All of Israel. That's correct. 100% correct. So that's this is true also even though it's in second person. This is found in all the other laws. If you are going to um lay thing around again the same story, the same word um um again around a city, you must call for a first a treaty. Not a treaty, but peace. You know, if you allow us to come in and you pay us taxes and we want and who was you again here again? It's the entire army we're talking to. Um, if you go and uh and Tatsur again the city do not destroy a uh tree. Again, it's not the individual. We're talking about the people in the army. The people in the army. Um so that is true also in the army and and the world war the laws of the wars and battle. The second person refers to the nation the army itself and the exception to that rule is the law we have been discussing. If you see a woman a P and you want to run here, it's not talking about the entire nation. God's talking to the individual here. this ata, you know, where it says here that uh um that you see among the the um PS the prisoners and you and you yearn for her and you can't take her. This is all the individual. The Torah is now talking in a singular second person and not in the plural. And so although the laws of the asetto use the the second you know the person uh you know sale when if you're going out to war starts that for the entire was for the entire army but over here you can't call it the laws of war because it's not talking to the whole army. This part of the war is talking to the individual. So although the law of fat is closely connected to the laws of war um then you know this now is not during the war. This is what's happening post battle after when you have now prisoners and you want them. It isn't during a war itself. Um, it's more connected not to war, but that after the war, meaning when after you leave the army and you're going back to your society and your family and your community, when you're returning and you want to take this P as a wife, you want to take her as another wife. Remember, you can have more than one. You want that? We have to argue and I think powerfully that this is not a law of a section of war but of family of society and that's something that at first glance we don't seem to be that because what rashi says and the says and things like that seem to indicate this is how you have to do when you have a war what's you know but when you go down very carefully of the laws and all of the words used for those laws. Note the first thing when you go back to civilian life, the Torah tells you, you want to bring this woman, you bring her to your house. You don't put her someplace in a a a in a a barn or in a prison. You want to have her as a wife, you must take her into your house. And then uh that's where you live and that's when she will live also. That's where your family might be living and that's where she will become part of that family. That's number one. It says she will dwell in your house. These are not laws of war. These are laws of society and of family. What do you do? The term by the way, you know, does not mean he sat there and it doesn't even mean he he was he lived there. It means he really dwelt there for a while. It means somewhere that you stay. He you she must remain in your house. Um so what's the Torah doing here with these laws? The Torah is simply taking the soldier out of war and bringing him back to the family. And the fact that the Torah interrupts the dil the laws of the war they interrupted with the eggla where it's just an individual murdering another individual indicates that now the Torah isn't really focusing only on the whole war thing but it's on post battle behavior. And that's what's happening. Just like who is going to kill one another. It's very possible though you come back from a being in the army where you'll be killing everybody. You may come and murder someone else even though it's not a war. That's why we have to make sure you stop that. And then it says speaking of postwar problems there's the there's also the asetto the p that you want. how you must behave with her, what you must do for her. And um certainly it was true and clearly there is a connection to having the P and the laws of war but um it's also perhaps primarily laws of family of normal family existence. Okay. Because we are created in the image of Hashem. You can be a very good person, but if you do something when you're in another situation where it seems to be you got a yahara, you have to remember that Hashem wants you to behave the same way when you're there as when you're at home and which is very applicable today when people at home are in a you know they're on the yasha they go someplace. Oh, nobody's going to see me. I can do this that you can't do that. you expanded what we said, but I think it's very true. You're correct. Here it's saying the danger is the assumption is you're a good guy and you're good wherever you are, but within war you may not be. But you're right. There are other things that might have somebody feel that okay, I can do this because now it isn't ABCDE. You are correct. So over here um we go back to what the original thing that Kazal said and I don't know if you recall what Rashi brings and the Garra brings that the only reason that God allowed or set up these laws of the it says which we usually define as um that the Torah was talking against the Yates and it says later on Rashi pointed out because God knows that if he doesn't give you some way to marry that you'll marry her anyway and it'll be terrible so we'll we'll give in to the Sahara and as I'm going to show you well go that's not true um because when you look about it the demands that they make here. Not so much on the soldier, but on the woman, right? She must shave her hair. She has to grow. She has to grow her fingernails. She has to remove her prisoner's garb and simlim. She has to stay in his house. She has to cry for the loss of her parents for a month. Only then may he marry her. So Rashi sees these requirements as an attempt to make her as unra attractive as she could be. So the guy won't go through the wedding. You know, he won't indeed marry her and he let him have a second thoughts. And after 30 days and she's uh bald and has long fingernails and not very nice uh you know clothing um she's in her worst state put simply right and um that logic Rashi would say is simple since he only wanted to pick up this woman he didn't say cuz she he sat down with her at a sheer and she was so smart he decides he wants to marry her. He saw he saw this woman and it was only a physical attraction and therefore says the Torah is trying to remove that physicality from her. So you'll have a second thought about whether you really want to go ahead and marry the person and and it's not Rashi's opinion says that very clearly. Um and uh that's why maybe the says indeed at the end of this law it says and if you do not want to have her and you sent her out this is what you have to do right. So it's a law that ends with what what happens when you want to get rid of her. So clearly the Torah is seemingly hinting that we want you to get rid of her and that's perhaps why Rabak and then Rashi quotes that says you were trying to fight your letting you take her but you got to do all these things so maybe you won't take her after all that's what it is um and however there are different things okay the different approaches to um that all of these things you're told to do by the Torah to this woman is not to make her unattractive. In fact, um both the Rambam and the Ramban explain the laws completely opposite. Um, but it says you should shave her head. It doesn't mean like it was for the Levium when before they were um made in Levim. Uh, not to shave her head, give her a haircut. She should look good. And um all of the steps that she's told to do are steps to make her feel more attractive and more comfortable in her new environment, her new nation, her new religion, her new family, says Ramban. This is why we're doing these good things. not to make her ugly but to make her more to adapt to her new life and feel less than a stranger. Um I wrote down the in the um talks about the restraint in war and restraint after war as well. But um when we look at it detail for detail and you'll find this very very interesting a totally different approach um to what we've learned. But the Ramban says very good that um these laws were not to make her look unattractive but rather to make her look attractive and make her a part of the family. If you're taking her, you must now treat her as yours and as you would any member of the family. And the proof of that, by the way, is the very ending. The ending says if in the end you want to get rid of her, you cannot sell her as if she were a a slave, a maid in on the slave block. You're not allowed to do that. You can't sell her. Rather, you let her go free as a free person. The fact that it says that indicates that the Torah is not trying to make her look terrible and get rid of her, but rather to make her comfortable and part of the nation. It's a wonderful concept for gaim how we take um you know gay those who are conversant convert to Israel. Converts, converts must be treated in this such a way. Make them part of you, part of your family. Now when you look at this view when you take what the Rambam said that it is not as said that we're trying to um hold back your your your should but rather to educate you. It's not to let you give into your but you are to fight that. Never do this there. It's against does not mean to let you go go in but it's against the to make sure that your just won't do this and it does that not because it makes her un ugly but rather to see her as a person as an individual and that's what you know I have here in the moral or it says uh but that approach approach helps us uh shall I say sit more comfortably with a law that at first glance seems to be a very shrug of the shoulders. Well, if you got to do this, I guess you could do it, but you got to do it this way. But saying if you're doing that, good, but you have to take her in like a person. Don't treat her like a slave. Once they that you've taken her, then you must treat her like an isha. And that's what we're seeing here about all of the laws. When you when laws of war, when you you must offer an enemy peace terms before you lay siege. I found the word siege to a a city. Um, when you're laying seeds to a to a city, do not destroy fruit trees. Um, and here too, don't allow the culture of war, of murder, of violence to seep into our society. That is the basic idea of what this is all about. Restraint and proper treatment of a P. Even the required requirement to shave her hair is explained as a way of making her look better. Um and uh it's also even if you don't want to put it that way, do you know who has to shave his head completely? You have a Nazir at the conclusion of his nizzy uh time. He does that to return to his society because a Nazir is out of the society for 30 days. He comes back. He shaves his head. uh a mitsora, right? A leper has to shave his or her hair on the conclusion of her or his time of uh impurity because only then he's been out of the mah and now he returns to society. Levim, as I pointed out before, the Levites had to shave shave their hair when they entered into the service of Mishan, into that new world of them. So the symbolism of having her shave her head is not a matter of making her ugly because as these other people who must shave the head, it's a matter of they're beginning like an infant who's usually bald. H who now is beginning again now entering society for the first time. That looking at that concept that you shave the head because she is now returning. She's now entering a society she had not been in makes the laws so much more logical and also so much more sensitive to this woman. And that's what it is, reborning. So there you have it. It fits in and connects yes to the laws of war. But this is better if we say it's part of the laws of war and postwar. And why? Because the next laws, as I mentioned last time, right after this talks about when one has has married two wives but finds one better than the other and what law he cannot give the and and the one he less prefers has the elder son, he must give the bakor to her that that son anyway. And after that the um rebellious son. In other words, right after this are all the laws of family. So here what's a bridge. It's a bridge between war and family and society. And how brilliant is it the Torah has given us here the understanding of moving moving from a very uh violent place to now into back to the family. There's a bridge for that. There are things you have to again soften on whether it's bea be being be careful with trees whether it is ask for peace right all these things is part to say yes there is a war but there's something good and nice and proper about it a proper way to deal with that and that's what this is so that's where I wanted to keep I'm glad we finished that part um so I do hope that this really made things better, more understandable for you. And were you able to see the um the reasoning behind this the asetto because means that it fights against the you know usual um Yateshara as we call it right. Um, it's legislating against the Torah is legislating against the Yates that by the way the expression of KGA the Yates has to do with the three other things and I'm not going to go into the the three things but each and every one of them and four things actually and each of them was be combating fighting against the natural inclination that you have. You have a natural inclination to do this. No, don't do that. You know, it's a natural inclination. We are told, you know, you you're a farmer. You finally after three years have gotten your fruit. There's a law of orai. You're not you're not allowed to take it the first three years. You have to wait till the fourth year and then bring that to you. So, you have to wait almost 5 years to be able to en enjoy your fruits. Says the Torah that you can't tell us. You're fighting the Yates. I mean, it's against you. Don't use your Yates. Says I have to write to it. It's my field. I've been working so long. This fruit is mine. He says, "No, no, no, no, no. It's against the in the same way. And I'm not going to go through the other three, but that this it's against the so that you don't do these things." So, let's do that. And we'll keep it that way. And we're going to start and a god please god next time a very holy completely different uh s uh I say book we're going to uh close varim and do the next book the book of Yahosua and hashem going to start with the introduction to safer Yoshua and Yoshua himself and then we'll be able to go in some of the fasc fascinating things in Sri Yoshua. I wish you all a Shabbat. Shalom.