************************************************************* THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org] In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag ************************************************************* Yehoshua - chapters 7 & 8 The sin of Achan & the battles against ha-Ai When something goes wrong, there's a natural tendency to 'blame someone else'. At first glance, this seems to happen in Sefer Yehoshua as well, as it blames one person - Achan - for Bnei Yisrael’s military defeat in their first battle against ha-Ai. Could that really be so? Does it make sense that an entire nation should be punished so severely, due to the personal sin of one individual? In the following shiur [based on a shiur that I heard from Rav Yoel Bin Nun on this topic], we take a closer look at these events in order to arrive not only at a better understanding of the theme of Sefer Yehoshua, but also at a more comprehensive appreciation of our Sages’ principle of "kol Yisrael arevim zeh la-zeh" – that 'everyone in the nation of Israel are responsible for one another'. INTRODUCTION As we explained in our introductory shiur, our study of Sefer Yehoshua rests on the assumption that it was written as a prophetic 'composition' - to explain to a doubtful nation how God had indeed kept His promise to assist Bnei Yisrael (in their conquest of the Land), while blaming the people for any of the failures of that conquest. [In consonance with the theme of "shirat Ha'azinu" - see Devarim 32:4-8, based on 31:16-20!] The events recorded in chapters six and seven certainly support this theory, for chapter six focuses on how God went out of His way to assist Bnei Yisrael in the conquest of Jericho, while chapter seven cites the 'sin of Achan' as the reason for their defeat in the battle against ha-Ai. However, when we study chapter eight, and then analyze the details of the two battles against ha-Ai, it is possible to arrive at a very different conclusion in regard to the reason for their original defeat. To appreciate this question, we begin our study with an outline that summarizes these events (in chapters 7 & 8). [It is recommended that you verify this outline by following the psukim in your Tanach.] 6:12-26 The victory of Jericho (with God's assistance) 6:27-7:1 Introductory remarks (setting the stage) God's anger with Israel for Achan's sin 7:2-3 Yehoshua sends spies to scout ha-Ai the report & suggestion that 2000 men is enough 7:4-5 Bnei Yisrael's defeat in the first battle 7:6-9 Yehoshua prays to God, noting the imminent danger 7:10-15 God’s response that the nation is to blame, and hence, command to find the transgressor 7:16-26 Singling out Achan & his punishment (by stoning) 8:1-2 God’s command to attack ha-Ai once again this time, also with instructions HOW to fight! 8:3-8 Yehoshua’s plans the battle, as God had instructed i.e. by setting up two ambushes... 8:9-17 Stage One of the battle - the 'staged' retreat 8:18-24 Stage Two of the battle - the ambush works 8:25-29 Summary information concerning this victory As you review this outline (and read the psukim), pay careful attention to the differences between the two battles. Note as well how the opening pasuk of chapter 7 is not very precise in regard to who sinned. On the one hand, it opens with a very harsh statement concerning all of Bnei Yisrael: "va-yim'alu Bnei Yisrael ma'al ba-cherem..." 'And the children of Israel transgressed by taking from the booty...' (see 7:1) However that very same pasuk continues with "va-yikach Achan..." that it was Achan who took the forbidden items, thus implying that it was only Achan who sinned. DOUBLE BLAME Later in the chapter we find a similar example of this 'double blame'. When God explains to Yehoshua WHY Bnei Yisrael had been punished, first He declares: "chata YISRAEL "- Israel has sinned" (see 7:11); but only two psukim later God instructed Yehoshua to find the 'lone individual' who had taken from the booty (see 7:13-19). So who was to blame - all of Bnei Yisrael, or only Achan? To answer this question, we must pay careful attention to the details of the SECOND battle against ha-Ai (as detailed in chapter eight), as well as to an interesting parallel to the story of the "meraglim" in chapter two. If indeed Achan’s sin was the only reason why Bnei Yisrael lost the first battle against ha-Ai, then we should expect the following sequence of events to follow after the original defeat: 1) Achan must be punished for his sin. 2) Bnei Yisrael can then resume their battle against ha-Ai 3) To prove that Achan’s sin was the ONLY reason for their defeat, the second battle should be fought just like the first, involving a frontal attack by 3000 soldiers (see 7:4). [To support this idea that an identical second battle would prove this point - see I Melachim 20:23-25!] However, after Achan’s punishment (see 7:20-26), we find quite the opposite. Instead of sending another unit of 3000 men, God instructs Yehoshua to launch a totally different style of attack. This time, Yehoshua employs a much more sophisticated military strategy, as he takes full advantage of his numeric superiority by setting two ambushes (one of 5000 men and another of 30,000) before the main army would engage ha-Ai head on. (See 8:1-9 for more complete details.) A NEW STRATEGY It appears that Yehoshua has changed his military strategy because the tactics he used in his first battle had failed. But this entire new strategy was not his own idea, God Himself commanded him to do so! Note once again how chapter 8 begins with precisely this new battle plan: "And God commanded Yehoshua: Do not fear... Take with you the ENTIRE fighting nation and go up to HA-AI - see I have given you the king and his people... Put an AMBUSH behind the city." (8:1-2) Based on this new battle plan, it seems rather obvious that Bnei Yisrael lost the first battle due to poor military planning, and not because of Achan's sin. If this is indeed true, then the message implicit from chapter eight appears to contradict the book's explicit message at the beginning of chapter seven in regard to who was to blame! So why did God change the battle plan? And why does Sefer Yehoshua provide us with so much detail that would cause us to reach these conflicting conclusions? To answer this question, we must take a closer look at the reason for the first battle plan, and its thematic connection to Achan’s sin. OVERCONFIDENCE Recall that Yehoshua’s decision to send only 3000 men in the first attack against ha-Ai was based on the report of the spy mission that he had commissioned (see 7:2-3). As you review those psukim, note the air of confidence that echoes in their report: "...DON’T take up the ENTIRE army. 2000 men or 3000 men [will be sufficient]- no need to weary out the entire army, for they [HA-AI] are small in number" (see 7:3). Considering that ha-Ai was a WALLED city with a population of approximately 12,000 (see 8:25), the spies’ strategy for a small frontal attack of only 2000 or 3000 men reflects a certain degree of overconfidence in their own military ability. What led to this mistaken conclusion? There are two possibilities. Either they were overconfident in GOD; or they were overconfident in THEMSELVES! To determine which possibility is correct, we need only to compare the report of these spies to the report of the spies that Yehoshua had sent earlier to assist him in forming his battle plans against Jericho (see chapter two). Let’s compare their report to the report of the spies sent to ha-Ai : * Spies sent to Jericho (2:24): "And they said to Yehoshua: for GOD has given the entire land in our hands, and in fact, all the inhabitants of the land are quaking before us." * Spies sent to the HA-AI (7:3): "And they reported to Yehoshua: Do not send up ALL of the troops - two thousand men or three thousand men [should be enough] to go up and attack HA-AI - do not trouble all of the troops, for the people are few." One can assume that when the spies returned to Yehoshua, their reports were much more detailed than these 'one line' versions that Sefer Yehoshua records. After all, it was their duty (as military spies) to provide their commander with as much information as possible. Nevertheless, Sefer Yehoshua prefers to succinctly summarize these two reports in a manner that reflects their prophetic significance Just like the headlines of a newspaper story, these 'one- liners' reflect the gist of their reports. Note how the spies who scouted Jericho saw the 'hand of God' behind all of the events which they had observed. [For example, Rachav’s willingness to hide them, the fear of the local population, the ability to hide in the mountains, etc.] All this led them to conclude that God had indeed prepared the 'ground work' for Bnei Yisrael’s attack. In contrast, the spies who scouted ha-Ai don't even mention God in their report! Instead, their report reflects their confidence in their own military might. But what may have led them to this feeling of overconfidence? WHO FOUGHT THE BATTLE OF JERICHO? One could suggest that the victory over Jericho, even though it was won with the help of God’s miracle, left the army overconfident in their own military capabilities. Even though God helped them make a breach in the wall, they did fight the remainder of the battle on their own (see 6:20-21). However, as we explained in the last shiur, this was the precise reason why God found it necessary to perform a miracle in the first battle of the conquest of Eretz Canaan - in order that the people realize that even as they fought, they needed to relate that victory to God’s assistance. For this very reason, it was forbidden for them to take from the booty of Jericho. Refraining from taking of the booty would demonstrate their recognition that God was fighting for them. (Recall that the spoils of war belong primarily to the soldiers who did the fighting. Since breaching the wall of Jericho constituted the primary battle, the booty belonged to God, for He alone caused the wall to fall!) Therefore, by not taking from the booty of Jericho, Bnei Yisrael would show their recognition that God had fought for them. Consequently, when Achan actually took from that "cherem", his action reflected his belief that HE truly deserved the booty. In other words, Achan totally misunderstood the significance of God’s miracle at Jericho. THE WORST OF THE BUNCH Even though Achan was the only person who actually took from the "cherem", there were probably many more who didn’t view this as anything so terrible. Achan may have been the 'worst of the bunch', but his actions most likely reflected a general feeling within the army that they deserved some of the credit for the victory at Jericho. This somewhat arrogant attitude can be seen once again in the spies’ report to Yehoshua, and in the military’s own decision to accept that report and its subsequent poor battle strategy. Therefore, Achan’s sin and the spies’ misguided report both stemmed from the same problem - overconfidence caused by lack of full appreciation of God’s assistance in the battle of Jericho. Obviously, Achan’s sin’s was much more severe, and hence his punishment was harsher. However, Bnei Yisrael as a whole were also at fault, albeit to a much lesser degree. Hence, they too were punished by losing their first battle against ha-Ai. This explanation will allow us to answer our original questions. Who was to blame? BOTH Achan & Bnei Yisrael, each for different sins that reflected different degrees of the same failure. Therefore, the chapter explicitly connects Achan’s personal sin to the more general sin in the nation’s attitude (see again 7:1 and 7:11). One could even suggest that the national mood of overconfidence provided the setting that allowed Achan to take the extreme step of actually taking from the "cherem". From this perspective, it is easy to understand why the entire nation carried collective responsibility for Achan’s sin. This would also explain the importance of punishing Achan publicly (7:12-26), as well as publicly displaying the items that he had taken. Why was the battle plan changed? Once again, based on our analysis, this change makes perfect sense, since the original plan itself was a result of the basic sin of national overconfidence. God’s revised battle plan for the defeat of ha-Ai (8:1-8) reflected a more conservative military approach, based on the true relative strengths of the armies involved. Not only did God need to teach Yehoshua how to plan his battles, He also needed to remind the people not to overestimate their military abilities. (This may also explain why Sefer Yehoshua dedicates such intricate detail to this new battle plan.) THE TELLTALE SPEAR We can find additional support for the above interpretation in the Navi’s closing remarks concerning this battle. After summarizing the enemy’s casualties (8:24-25), we find a very interesting detail: "And Yehoshua did not put down his outstretched hand holding the KIDON (his spear) until all the inhabitants of HA-AI were defeated." Now, we know from 8:18 that Yehoshua first raised his hand with this "kidon" to provide a signal for the ambush to attack the city. However, once the soldiers received that signal and began their mission, there appears to be no reason for Yehoshua to keep his hands raised high. Why then did he hold his hand outstretched during the entire battle? Most likely, the answer lies in the obvious parallel to Moshe’s uplifted hands during Bnei Yisrael’s battle against AMALEK (Shmot 17:8-12). Recall that when Moshe lifted his hands high (a sign for Bnei Yisrael to recognize that their victory is truly from God - see Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 3:8) - they were victorious in battle. In a similar manner, and for the same reason, Yehoshua also kept his hands outstretched, holding the "kidon" for the duration of the entire battle. This was a symbol for the soldiers to recognize that even though they were doing the fighting, their victory was due to God’s protection. Considering that their original defeat in the first battle against ha-Ai was because they had forgotten precisely this critical point, this detail concerning Yehoshua’s outstretched hand carries a key prophetic message. KOL YISRAEL AREVIM ZEH LA-ZEH Based on the above shiur, we can arrive at a very important conclusion concerning Chazal’s principle of "kol Yisrael arevim zeh la-zeh". Collective responsibility for the sin of an individual becomes logical when that individual’s sin stems from the nation’s general attitude (even though their sin may be at a much lower level). Individual behavior is highly influenced by the public mood and national standards; and hence the public becomes responsible for the behavior of the individual within that society. ======== FOR FURTHER IYUN A. Recall from our introductory shiur that one of Yehoshua’s primary military problems was taking walled cities. How does the battle plan for the second battle against HA-AI solve this problem? B. Note from 8:27 that unlike Jericho, the booty from the battle of HA-AI belonged to the people (not to Hashem). Can you explain why? (In your answer, relate to WHO actually did the critical fighting in each of these two battles.) C. In Parshat Korach, Moshe Rabeinu asked: Should ONE MAN sin and the ENTIRE NATION be punished?" (Bamidbar 16:22). Relate this question (and God’s response) to the above shiur. (See also TSC shiur on Parshat Korach.)