[Avodah] The Halakhos of Humanitarian Pauses

[Micha Berger]

On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 3:24pm EST, U asked:
> So, are these "Humanitarian Pauses" obligatory?

R Ari Zivotofky sent me notes of a shiur by R Asher Weiss, which I put
in Avodah's collection* at
<https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/Noach_HilkhotMilchamah.pdf>
Question alif is the one I asked.

He also mentions the Sifri (#199), and adds Rashi (Devarim 10:12) as among
those who cite it lahalakhah.

But then he quotes a contradictory Sifri (#200), which instead of "velo"
says "ve'af"!` He uses Rashi to be machria like the first Sifri.

Lemasqanah, RAW holds this din is only when conquering a city to add
land to Israel. And not when laying seige as part of a greater war.

And I see R Gil Student covered the topic, and my sources were among
R Goren's. Seea any of a number of American Jewish newspapers, or
<https://www.torahmusings.com/2023/10/the-siege-of-gaza-in-halakhah>

In that article we find counter-arguments. R Shaul Yisraeli holds that's
only in a milkhemes reshus. He notes the Rambam gives the context of
surrounding a city to conqeur it, impllying that this is a case of conquering
new land -- milkhemes reshus.

Personally, I don't see the implication from either RSY's formulation
or RAW's. The Rambam doesn't say it's about conquering for land, and
there are are other reasons to conquer. Like nidon didan... Tzahal
determined a need to conquer a city for milkhemes mitzvah reasons. It's
not laying seige in order to fight combatants within it, it's claiming --
or in this case, reclaiming -- a city to force a regime change. So where
do we know that the Rambam was limiting himself to territory gains? If
he only meant milkhemes reshus, I would think iqar chaseir min hasefer.

All I can say is that this isn't causing soldiers to die for the
milchamah, but to limit it. I woud therefore think piquach nefesh would
be docheh such a din either way. So perhaps de facto it wouldn't come up
in a milkhemes mitzvah (aside from 7 Amim or Amaleiq) that often anyway.

RSY also cites the the Mechekh Chokhmah (Bamidbar 31:7), who notes the
Rambam doesn't count this among the lavin of Seifer haMitzvos, but the
Ramban does (after asei #5). From this he suggests that leaving open a
siege may be -- in the Rambam's opinion -- a strategic suggestion from
the Almighty. Not to force them to fight to the last man. And not a
din at all.

Here too I am unconvinced. After all, it does appear in Hilkhos Melakhim
6:7. So it would seem to be a din of one of the 613, eve if the Rambam
does not count it as a lav in-and-of itself.

RGS's presentation also quotes the MC noting that the maqor for leaving an
escape route open is in instructions for the war with Midian! Which gets
RGS and RSY into a machloqes about whether the dinim of milkhemes mitzvah
could ever apply outside of EY. Which is not an issue WRG Azza, but would
get you into a debate about the halachic borders of Israel bizman hazeh with
some other targets. How much if any of Lebanon included?

Both RAW and RSGoren link this mitzvah to that of calling for peace first.
A linkage R Shaul Yisraeli questions.

I highly recommend seeing both inside, rather than sticking to just the
parts that most intrigued me.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

(*A sign of age... The collection of PDFs and images for Avodah is named
"faxes", because in our early years, scanning and attaching to an email
wasn't a thing yet. People didn't have that kind of bandwidth.)

Cc: RAZZ, RGS

-- 
Micha Berger                 Life isn't about finding yourself
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   Life is about creating yourself.
Author: Widen Your Tent                   - Bernard Shaw
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF