Shoftim ~ Protect trees, protect humankind

~ Shoftim presents limitations to four different sources of power in Torah society: Judges, Kings, Prophets and Priests. It is expected that those four sources of power will limit each other as well, in a similar idea of our checks and balances. It then moves to rules of war, among which we have to offer peace as a possibility before war.

~ For our Elul internal work, I want to add the ideas of "Shoftim veshotrim" as the impulses (see Noam Elimelech on this)

~ Our question for discussion is: how do you understand the relationship presented between the trees and the human beings in times of war? Why would the Torah bring this as something important?

(יט) כִּֽי־תָצ֣וּר אֶל־עִיר֩ יָמִ֨ים רַבִּ֜ים לְֽהִלָּחֵ֧ם עָלֶ֣יהָ לְתָפְשָׂ֗הּ לֹֽא־תַשְׁחִ֤ית אֶת־עֵצָהּ֙ לִנְדֹּ֤חַ עָלָיו֙ גַּרְזֶ֔ן כִּ֚י מִמֶּ֣נּוּ תֹאכֵ֔ל וְאֹת֖וֹ לֹ֣א תִכְרֹ֑ת כִּ֤י הָֽאָדָם֙ עֵ֣ץ הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה לָבֹ֥א מִפָּנֶ֖יךָ בַּמָּצֽוֹר׃ (כ) רַ֞ק עֵ֣ץ אֲשֶׁר־תֵּדַ֗ע כִּֽי־לֹא־עֵ֤ץ מַאֲכָל֙ ה֔וּא אֹת֥וֹ תַשְׁחִ֖ית וְכָרָ֑תָּ וּבָנִ֣יתָ מָצ֗וֹר עַל־הָעִיר֙ אֲשֶׁר־הִ֨וא עֹשָׂ֧ה עִמְּךָ֛ מִלְחָמָ֖ה עַ֥ד רִדְתָּֽהּ׃ (פ)
(19) When in your war against a city you have to besiege it a long time in order to capture it, you must not destroy its trees, wielding the ax against them. You may eat of them, but you must not cut them down. Are trees of the field human to withdraw before you into the besieged city? (20) Only trees that you know do not yield food may be destroyed; you may cut them down for constructing siegeworks against the city that is waging war on you, until it has been reduced.
(ג) כי האדם עץ השדה. הֲרֵי כִּי מְשַׁמֵּשׁ בִּלְשׁוֹן דִּלְמָא, שֶׁמָּא הָאָדָם עֵץ הַשָּׂדֶה לְהִכָּנֵס בְּתוֹךְ הַמָּצוֹר מִפָּנֶיךָ לְהִתְיַסֵּר בְּיִסּוּרֵי רָעָב וְצָמָא כְּאַנְשֵׁי הָעִיר? לָמָּה תַּשְׁחִיתֶנּוּ?:

(3) כי האדם עץ השדה FOR IS THE TREE OF THE FIELD A MAN [THAT IT SHOULD BE BESIEGED BY YOU]? — כי has here an interrogative function — "Really?" Is the tree of the field a person who is able to withdraw within the besieged city from before you, to suffer famine and thirst like the inhabitants of the city? Why should you destroy it?

(א) כי האדם עץ השדה. כבר ביארתי בספר היסוד כי יתכן בכל לשון לקצר לאחוז דרך קצרה כמו חמור לחם רק מלת לא לא יתכן להיותה נחסרת כי הטעם יהיה להפך ומדקדק גדול ספרדי אמר כי חסר ה״‎א וכן הוא הכי האדם עץ השדה וזה הטעם איננו נכון כעיני כי מה טעם לאמר לא תשחית עץ פרי כי איננו כבני אדם שיוכל לברוח מפניך ולפי דעתי שאין לנו צורך לכל זה וזה פירושו כי ממנו תאכל ואותו לא תכרות כי האדם עץ השדה והטעם כי חיי בן אדם הוא עץ השדה וכמוהו כי נפש הוא חובל כי חיי נפש הוא חובל ואותו לא תכרות דבק עם לבא מפניך במצור הנה לא תשחית עץ פרי שהוא חיים לבן אדם רק מותר שתאכל ממנו ואסור לך להשחיתו כדי שתבא העיר מפניך במצור והעד על זה הפירוש שהוא נכון שאמר וכרת ובנית מצור:

(1) man is a tree of the field ... in my view this interpretation is not correct, because it makes no sense to explain a prohibition against destroying a fruit tree, on the grounds that a tree is not a man (and is thus incapable of running away). In my opinion there is no need for any of this. The meaning, rather, is as follows: You may eat of them, but do not cut them down, for man is a tree of the field (i.e., the life of man depends on the trees of the field). A similar construction appears in “for it is taking a life in pawn” [24: 6], which clearly means “it is taking the means of a man’s livelihood in pawn”. The phrase but do not cut them down is conceptually tied to the phrase to come before you in the siege, to wit: You may not destroy fruit-bearing trees, which are a source of life to mankind, but you may eat of their fruit; you are forbidden to destroy them so that the besieged city will surrender before you. The subsequent phrase cut to build up siegeworks is proof that this is the correct interpretation.

The dispute is not just grammar - but the outlook on the place of trees in our lives. Rashi seems to understand that all trees are supposed to be protected, since no tree can run away - this is the idea that all Creation needs our compassion.

Ibn Ezra makes it explicit that it has to do with the function of the tree for humans.

And I want to defend that Rashi actually knows what he's talking about, because of how these verses become in our tradition.

ספרי על דברים כ יט

כי ממנו תאכל . מצות עשה.

ואותו לא תכרות . זו מצות לא תעשה.

כי האדם עץ השדה. שחייו של אדם (אינו אלא) מן האילן. ר' ישמעאל אומר, מכאן חס המקום על פירות האילן, ק"ו מאילן. ומה אילן שעושה פירות, הזהירך הכתוב עליו; פירות עצמם, על אחת כמה וכמה.

Sifri on Devarim 20:19

You may eat of them - a positive mitzvah.

But you must not cut them down - this is a negative mitzvah.

Is the tree a person? - That the life of a person only comes through the tree. Rabbi Ishmael says: from here we learn that the Place has pity on the fruits of the tree, all the more so the Place has pity on the tree itself. And if you are being warned about the tree that makes fruit, all the more so you are being warned regarding the fruit.

מצות לא תעשה תקכ"ט: שנמנענו מלכרות האילנות כשנצור על עיר, כדי להצר לאנשי העיר ולהכאיב ליבותם, ועל זה נאמר: "לא תשחית את עצה... ואותו לא תכרות" וכמו כן נכנס תחת זה הלאו שלא לעשות שום הפסד, כגון לשרוף או לקרוע בגד, או לשבור כלי לבטלה וכל ענינים אלה וכל כיוצא שיהיה בם השחתה, ואמרו ז"ל תמיד בגמרא: "והא קעבר משום 'בל תשחית'!"...

שורש המצוה ידוע, שהוא כדי ללמד נפשנו לאהוב הטוב והתועלת ולהדבק בו ומתוך כך תדבק בנו הטובה ונרחיק מכל דבר השחתה, וזהו דרך החסידים ואנשי המעשה, אוהבים השלום ושמחים בטוב הבריות, ומקרבין אותם לתורה, ולא יאבדו אפילו גרגיר של חרדל בעולם, ויצר עליהם בכל אבדון והשחתה שיראו, ואם יוכלו להציל, יצילו כל דבר מהשחית בכל כוחם; לא כן הרשעים אחיהם של מזיקין, שמחים בהשחתת העולם, והם משחיתים את עצמם. במדה שאדם מודד גם מודדין לו, כלומר: בה הוא נדבק לעולם, וכענין שכתוב "שמח לאיד לא ינקה". והחפץ בטוב ושמח בו – נפשו בטוב תלין לעולם. זה ידוע ומפורסם.

To not destroy fruit trees: That we have been prevented from chopping down trees when we besiege a city to distress the people of the city and to sadden their hearts. And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 20:19), "you may not destroy its tree, etc. and you shall not chop it down." And likewise not to do any damage - such as burning or ripping a garment or breaking a vessel for no reason - entered under this negative commandment And in all of these matters and in all that is similar to them, they, may their memory be blessed, would always say in the Gemara (Kiddushin 32a), "But behold, he is transgressing on account of 'do not destroy'"...

The root of this commandment is well-known - it is in order to teach our souls to love good and benefit and to cling to it. And through this, good clings to us and we will distance [ourselves] from all bad and destructive things. And this is the way of the pious and people of [proper] action - they love peace and are happy for the good of the creatures and bring them close to Torah, and they do not destroy even a grain of mustard in the world. And they are distressed by all loss and destruction that they see; and if they can prevent it, they will prevent any destruction with all of their strength. But not so are the wicked - the brothers of the destructive spirits. They rejoice in the destruction of the world, and they destroy themselves - [since] in the way that a person measures, so is he measured; which is to say that he clings to it forever, as the matter that is written (Proverbs 17:5), "the one who rejoices in calamity, will not be cleared (of evil)." And the one who desires the good and rejoices in it, 'his soul will dwell in the good' forever. This is known and famous.

The tree here is merely an example, a prototype. The sages understand the prohibition of destroying fruit trees as a prohibition to destroy anything that has benefit for humankind:

(ח) אֵין קוֹצְצִין אִילָנֵי מַאֲכָל שֶׁחוּץ לַמְּדִינָה וְאֵין מוֹנְעִין מֵהֶם אַמַּת הַמַּיִם כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּיבְשׁוּ. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כ, יט) "לֹא תַשְׁחִית אֶת עֵצָהּ". וְכָל הַקּוֹצֵץ לוֹקֶה. וְלֹא בְּמָצוֹר בִּלְבַד אֶלָּא בְּכָל מָקוֹם כָּל הַקּוֹצֵץ אִילַן מַאֲכָל דֶּרֶךְ הַשְׁחָתָה לוֹקֶה. אֲבָל קוֹצְצִין אוֹתוֹ אִם הָיָה מַזִּיק אִילָנוֹת אֲחֵרִים. אוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמַּזִּיק בִּשְׂדֵה אֲחֵרִים. אוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁדָּמָיו יְקָרִים. לֹא אָסְרָה תּוֹרָה אֶלָּא דֶּרֶךְ הַשְׁחָתָה:

(ט) כָּל אִילַן סְרָק מֻתָּר לָקֹץ אוֹתוֹ וַאֲפִלּוּ אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לוֹ. וְכֵן אִילַן מַאֲכָל שֶׁהִזְקִין וְאֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה אֶלָּא דָּבָר מוּעָט שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לִטְרֹחַ בּוֹ מֻתָּר לָקֹץ אוֹתוֹ. וְכַמָּה יְהֵא הַזַּיִת עוֹשֶׂה וְלֹא יְקֻצֶּנּוּ. רֹבַע הַקַּב זֵיתִים. וְדֶקֶל שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה קַב תְּמָרִים לֹא יְקֻצֶּנּוּ:

(י) וְלֹא הָאִילָנוֹת בִּלְבַד. אֶלָּא כָּל הַמְשַׁבֵּר כֵּלִים. וְקוֹרֵעַ בְּגָדִים. וְהוֹרֵס בִּנְיָן. וְסוֹתֵם מַעְיָן. וּמְאַבֵּד מַאֲכָלוֹת דֶּרֶךְ הַשְׁחָתָה. עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַשְׁחִית. וְאֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה אֶלָּא מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם:

(8) Fruit-bearing trees must not be cut down outside of the city43Under siege in order to pain them. nor do we block their irrigation water causing the trees to dry up, as it says, “do not destroy her trees” (Deut. 20:19). Anyone who cuts down a tree receives lashes. This is not only at times of a siege, but anyone at anytime who chops down a fruit-bearing tree by for destructive purposes receives stripes. The tree may be cut down if it is damaging other trees or it is damaging another’s field, or because the tree is more valuable for its wood than its fruit. The Torah only forbids wanton destruction.

(9) It is permitted to cut down a non-fruit-bearing tree even if the tree itself is not needed. Similarly, an old fruit-bear tree which only produces a small yield and is not worth the effort to maintain can be cut down. And how much olive yield must an olive tree produce for it not to be cut down? A quarter of a Kav of olives. A palm tree which produces a Kav of dates may not be cut down.

(10) And not only regarding trees, but even one who destructively breaks vessels or rips up clothing or tears down a building or seals up a spring or wastes food violates the Negative Commandment of “Do not destroy”. However, he only receives stripes for disobedience, in accordance with the Rabbis.

אימר דשמעת ליה לרבי יהודה במתקן במקלקל מי שמעת ליה אמר רבי אבין האי נמי מתקן הוא דקעביד נחת רוח ליצרו וכהאי גוונא מי שרי והתניא רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר משום חילפא בר אגרא שאמר משום רבי יוחנן בן נורי המקרע בגדיו בחמתו והמשבר כליו בחמתו והמפזר מעותיו בחמתו יהא בעיניך כעובד עבודה זרה שכך אומנתו של יצר הרע היום אומר לו עשה כך ולמחר אומר לו עשה כך עד שאומר לו עבוד עבודה זרה והולך ועובד אמר רבי אבין מאי קראה לא יהיה בך אל זר ולא תשתחוה לאל נכר איזהו אל זר שיש בגופו של אדם הוי אומר זה יצר הרע
The Gemara asks: Say that you heard that Rabbi Yehuda rules that one is liable for performing a labor not needed for its own sake in the case of a constructive act; did you hear him deem one liable in the case of a destructive act? Rabbi Avin said: This case, where one rends his garment in anger, is also constructive, because in doing so he assuages his anger. Rending his garment calms him; therefore, it can be said that he derives benefit from the act of rending, and it is consequently a constructive act. The Gemara asks: And is it at all permitted to tear in that manner? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says in the name of Ḥilfa bar Agra, who said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri: One who rends his garments in his anger, or who breaks his vessels in his anger, or who scatters his money in his anger, should be like an idol worshipper in your eyes, as that is the craft of the evil inclination. Today it tells him do this, and tomorrow it tells him do that, until eventually, when he no longer controls himself, it tells him worship idols and he goes and worships idols. Rabbi Avin said: What verse alludes to this? “There shall not be a strange god within you, and you shall not bow to a foreign god” (Psalms 81:10). What is the strange god that is within a person’s body? Say that it is the evil inclination. One may not rend his garments in anger, because in doing so he is deriving pleasure from satisfying the evil inclination.

So anger is considered to be an altar to idolatry: the idolatry of oneself. In that sense, this discussion hearkens us back to how Noam Elimelech explained the first verse in our parsha: what is the impulse that you, middling, is allowing to take over?

And in contemporary terms, when we see the despicable destruction of trees in the Amazon forest, we should well remember: our sages already were warning us that out very lives are intertwined with that of trees.As this week we saw the destruction brought by Hurricane Dorian, I hope we will as a collective, be defenders of trees everywhere.

The Bahamas is presently at war and being attacked by Hurricane Dorian. And yet, it has no weapon at its disposal to defend itself during such an assault by this enemy. We have only God.

Bahamas Prime Minister Dr. Hon. Hubert Minnis, interview on Wednesday, September 4th, 2019