Core Concept: The ending of Sanhedrin Chapter 6 (נגמר הדין) focuses on the characterization of Yoav because the rabbis attempt to balance the obligations between secular, political law from their host society and religious law found in Torah.
גֹּאֵ֣ל הַדָּ֔ם ה֥וּא יָמִ֖ית אֶת־הָרֹצֵ֑חַ בְּפִגְעוֹ־ב֖וֹ ה֥וּא יְמִיתֶֽנּוּ׃
(יט) וַיִּרְדֹּ֥ף עֲשָׂהאֵ֖ל אַחֲרֵ֣י אַבְנֵ֑ר וְלֹֽא־נָטָ֣ה לָלֶ֗כֶת עַל־הַיָּמִין֙ וְעַֽל־הַשְּׂמֹ֔אול מֵאַחֲרֵ֖י אַבְנֵֽר׃ (כ) וַיִּ֤פֶן אַבְנֵר֙ אַֽחֲרָ֔יו וַיֹּ֕אמֶר הַאַתָּ֥ה זֶ֖ה עֲשָׂהאֵ֑ל וַיֹּ֖אמֶר אָנֹֽכִי׃ (כא) וַיֹּ֧אמֶר ל֣וֹ אַבְנֵ֗ר נְטֵ֤ה לְךָ֙ עַל־יְמִֽינְךָ֙ א֣וֹ עַל־שְׂמֹאלֶ֔ךָ וֶאֱחֹ֣ז לְךָ֗ אֶחָד֙ מֵֽהַנְּעָרִ֔ים וְקַח־לְךָ֖ אֶת־חֲלִצָת֑וֹ וְלֹֽא־אָבָ֣ה עֲשָׂהאֵ֔ל לָס֖וּר מֵאַחֲרָֽיו׃ (כב) וַיֹּ֧סֶף ע֣וֹד אַבְנֵ֗ר לֵאמֹר֙ אֶל־עֲשָׂהאֵ֔ל ס֥וּר לְךָ֖ מֵאַֽחֲרָ֑י לָ֤מָּה אַכֶּ֙כָּה֙ אַ֔רְצָה וְאֵיךְ֙ אֶשָּׂ֣א פָנַ֔י אֶל־יוֹאָ֖ב אָחִֽיךָ׃ (כג) וַיְמָאֵ֣ן לָס֗וּר וַיַּכֵּ֣הוּ אַבְנֵר֩ בְּאַחֲרֵ֨י הַחֲנִ֜ית אֶל־הַחֹ֗מֶשׁ וַתֵּצֵ֤א הַֽחֲנִית֙ מֵאַחֲרָ֔יו וַיִּפָּל־שָׁ֖ם וַיָּ֣מָת תחתו [תַּחְתָּ֑יו]
(19) And Asahel ran after Abner, swerving neither right nor left in his pursuit of Abner. (20) Abner looked back and shouted, “Is that you, Asahel?” “Yes, it is,” he called back. (21) Abner said to him, “Turn to the right or to the left, and seize one of our boys and strip off his tunic.” But Asahel would not leave off. (22) Abner again begged Asahel, “Stop pursuing me, or I’ll have to strike you down. How will I look your brother Joab in the face?” (23) When he refused to desist, Abner struck him in the belly with a backward thrust of his spear and the spear protruded from his back. He fell there and died on the spot. ;
(32) Thus Adonai will bring his blood guilt down upon his own head, because, unbeknown to my father, he struck down with the sword two men more righteous and honorable than he—Abner son of Ner, the army commander of Israel, and Amasa son of Jether, the army commander of Judah.
According to the biblical text, how is Yoav portrayed?
Yoav seems to have acted out of vengeance for his brother, a system of blood guilt set up in Num. 35:12 and Deut. 19:12. But the narrator, David, and Solomon use their power to demonstrate their disapproval of the system of blood-guilt and therefore Yoav is seen as a murderer who acts out on his emotions instead of following the decrees of the king.
How does the biblical text feel about the system of blood guilt?
According to Torah, the blood-guilt system is legal and appropriate. But according to the Book of Samuel and the Book of Kings, the system is problematic and ethically compromised.
בור וסירה גרמו לו לאבנר שנהרג - בור צפחת מים שלקח דוד מראשותיו של שאול כשהיה ישן במעגל וכשאמר להם דוד בני מות אתם שלא שמרתם את אדוניכם שכבר הייתי יכול להורגו (שמואל א כו) ראו נא איפוא חנית המלך ואיה צפחת המים וגו' היה לו לאבנר למחות בשאול ולומר לו ראה כמה צדיק הוא שלא הרגך ולא מיחה אלא אמר שמא אחד מבני הצבא נתנם לו: וסירה - קוץ. כשכרת דוד את כנף מעילו של שאול במערה היה לו לאבנר ללמד זכות על דוד ולומר לשאול ראה כמה חס עליך ולא הרגך בהיותך יחד עמו במערה ולא לימד זכות אלא אמר שמא כשעברתם אצל הקוצים והסירים נכנס אחד מן הקוצים בכנף מעילך והוא היה טמון שם וחתכו:
How do the rabbis see Avner's death as a self-fulfilling prophecy?
Yoav avenges his brother's death, a deed allowed according to Torah. Avner was not loyal to his commander Saul and his disloyalty foreshadows his punishment by being murdered by Yoav. Therefore, in this understanding, Avner is the focus and the character to blame, saving Yoav from accusation. In this understanding, Torah laws are superior its secular counterpart.
Yoav is described as deceptive with the intent to murder Avner. He is seen as not respecting the secular law and therefore supersedes his authority as David's second-in-command. Yoav breaks both ethical and political laws; his character is blameworthy.
Here, the rabbis see Yoav as not only ignoring secular, political law but also its religious counterpart. He follows orders blindly, without considering the moral consequences. Avner and Amasa listen to royal orders but when they comprehend they are unethical, they do not obey. A similar law exists within the Israeli army that allows soldiers to disobey their commanding officer if their command is deemed unethical. In this light, Yoav deserves to be punished not because of the system of blood guilt that the secular courts deem unlawful, but because Yoav's character is compromised ethically.
Why would this chapter end with a redemption of Yoav's character?
The rabbis want to compromise on their understanding of civil law. They desire to redeem Yoav's character as a soldier who followed the words of Torah. He was allowed to avenge his brother's death according to the system of blood guilt and the rabbis respect the biblical law. But the Amoraim also want to support the rulings of the monarchy in Babylon. Similar to דינא דמלכותא דינא (the law of the land is the law), the secular, political system, which outlaws the system of blood-guilt, holds weight in the eyes of the rabbis' eyes. They cannot support Yoav's actions. But they can redeem his character, which is how the chapter ends.
It becomes a fitting ending for a chapter on the process after capital punishment happens because it supports the rabbi's understanding that תלוי (hanging) and קבורה (burial) are processes of teshuvah. Anyone's character can be redeemed even if their actions cannot.