Difference between revisions of "Philosophy:Collective Punishment/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic is currently in progress
m |
|||
| Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
<point><b>Biblical cases of collective punishment</b> – This position is supported by the many cases in Tanakh in which people appear to be punished collectively. In many of these cases, these commentators, nonetheless, attempt to show how there too those who were punished were actually deserving.</point> | <point><b>Biblical cases of collective punishment</b> – This position is supported by the many cases in Tanakh in which people appear to be punished collectively. In many of these cases, these commentators, nonetheless, attempt to show how there too those who were punished were actually deserving.</point> | ||
<point><b>Biblical Cases of Vicarious Punishment</b><ul> | <point><b>Biblical Cases of Vicarious Punishment</b><ul> | ||
| − | <li><b>Achan and death of the 36</b> – Ralbag, Abarbanel and Malbim assert that when Achan sinned, Divine providence departed from the nation as a | + | <li><b>Achan and death of the 36</b> – Ralbag, Abarbanel and Malbim assert that when Achan sinned, Divine providence departed from the nation as a wholק, leavingthem to chance. As such, those who went to battle found themselves in danger and died, but Achan, who happened not to place himself in danger, did not.</li> |
</ul> | </ul> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
| − | <li><b>Plague in time of David </b>– </li> | + | <li><b>Plague in time of David </b>– R. Saadia, Ralbag and Abarbanel all maintain that the nation died for their own sins, and not for those of David.  Ralbag even says that Hashem </li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Collective salvation?</b> Just as one individual's sin can harm the nation as a whole, one person's merits can save them. This makes sense if one thinks of the nation as being one body; the actions  of any part, whether god or bad, affect the rest.  Similarly, just as an undeserving individual might get caught up in a general catastrophe,  a wicked person might nonetheless benefit from general good fortune.</point> | <point><b>Collective salvation?</b> Just as one individual's sin can harm the nation as a whole, one person's merits can save them. This makes sense if one thinks of the nation as being one body; the actions  of any part, whether god or bad, affect the rest.  Similarly, just as an undeserving individual might get caught up in a general catastrophe,  a wicked person might nonetheless benefit from general good fortune.</point> | ||
Version as of 06:58, 24 July 2015
Collective Punishment
Exegetical Approaches
Only the Sinners are Punished
Hashem only punishes the deserving and does not collectively punish anyone for someone else's crime.
Divine justice? This position is motivated by the understanding that justice demands that each person be punished for their own sins and not those of another.
Individual providence? This approach must maintain that Hashem watches over every being individually, and knows each of their actions so He can reward and punish each according to their deeds.
Reward and Punishment
Biblical Cases of Collective Punishment – These commentators try to explain away all the cases in Tanakh where there seems to be collective punishment by suggesting that in each instance the people who suffered were in fact guilty:
- The flood – These sources assert that the entire world was destroyed in the flood because, with the exception of Noach, everyone, animals included, had sinned.1 As support, they point to the verse, " כִּי הִשְׁחִית כׇּל בָּשָׂר אֶת דַּרְכּוֹ עַל הָאָרֶץ" understanding בָּשָׂר to refer to animals and not just people.2
- Sedom – Rashi points out that the text specifies that "כָּל הָעָם מִקָּצֶה" surrounded Lot's house, proving that there was not even one righteous man amongst them.3 R"Y Bekhor Shor adds that had there been, Hashem would have saved them individually;4 Avraham's complaint, "הַאַף תִּסְפֶּה צַדִּיק עִם רָשָׁע" was based on an erroneous understanding of Hashem's plan.5
- Plague of first-borns – Rashi explains that even the firstborns of maidservants and captives were killed because they, too, had enslaved the Israelites and were happy in their sorrow.
- Sin of golden calf – According to Rashi, drawing off Bavli Yoma 66b, Hashem plagued only those who were guilty of worshiping the calf. Those who had escaped punishment by the Levites on technical grounds that they had not been warned beforehand were killed by Divine plague instead.
- Sin of Spies – R"Y Bekhor Shor explains that only those of age to enter the military were punished because they were the ones who complained, being afraid to fight the Canaanites.
- Moshe's discussion during Korach's rebellion – According to R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, Moshe mistakenly believed that Hashem planned to kill the innocent "congregation of Israel" , but in fact Hashem had really referred to the guilty "congregation of Korach" alone. Rashi, in contrast, presents Hashem as originally planning to punish even the innocent, but when Moshe reminds Him that since he knows men's thoughts, there is no need for collective punishment, Hashem agrees. See Dialogue with the Divine During Korach's Rebellion for elaboration.
- City of Idolaters –
Biblical Cases of Vicarious Punishment
- Achan and death of the 36 – This approach could explain either that the 36 men were accomplices to Achan, helping him to hide the booty or the like, or that they had sinned in some other capacity and were being punished for those crimes.
- Plague in time of David – As the story opens with the fact that "וַיֹּסֶף אַף י"י לַחֲרוֹת בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל", these sources can easily explain that the nation had done something unconnected to David's deeds which had incurred the wrath of Hashem, and it was for this that they were plagued.6
What about babies? As it is difficult to say that infants or toddlers should be culpable for any sin, this approach must explain their deaths/punishments as being of a different nature, related to the principle of "פֹּקֵד עֲוֹן אָבֹת עַל בָּנִים", that children at times are punished for the sins of their parents.7 For a variety of approaches to this principle see Are Children Punished for Parents' Sins?
Divine vs. human retribution – These sources do not address the issue.
- It is possible that they do not differentiate between Divine and human retribution and assume that collective punishment is never allowed. As such, to explain the actions of Shimon and Levi in Shechem, this position must either posit that the brothers were wrong,8 or that the rest of the city had somehow participated in the crime. For elaboration and a discussion of the story, see Sin and Slaughter of Shekhem.
- Alternatively, they might posit that, unlike Hashem, humans are not always certain who is guilty or innocent, and thus, at times, collective punishment is warranted.
Collective salvation
Slightly Guilty also Punished
When Hashem inflicts punishment, those who are totally innocent are never included. However, individuals who are guilty by association, or culpable to even a small degree, might be included in the punishment of a worse sinner.
Sources:Bavli Shabbat, Radak, Rif on Yehoshua, Abarbanel on Korach
Even the Innocent Punished
Sometimes Hashem collectively punishes the entire group and the innocent suffer together with the guilty.
Natural order or Divine intervention? Most of these commentators suggest that collective punishment is built into the natural order of the world, but differ in the details of how it works:
- Removal of Providence – According to Ralbag, Abarbanel and Malbim, collective punishment is not caused by active Divine intervention, but rather by passive removal of Divine providence. All members of a collective which merit Hashem's providence will suffer if that providence is removed due to the sin of just one or a few. In such a case, natural order takes over and might lead to the suffering of innocents.
- Collateral Damage – R. Saadia and R. Hoffman do not frame the issue in terms of providence, stating more simply that any general punishments, such as plague or war, by their nature will automatically also hurt innocents.9 Thus, R. Saadia points out that the flood, enslavement in Egypt and even the present exile and delay of the Mashiach affect the righteous as well.10 Netziv and R. D"Z Hoffman add that once there is such an expression of collective punishment, miraculous intervention is needed to save the righteous individual, and only an extraordinary person will merit that.
Divine justice? These commentators offer several justifications for the notion of collective punishment:
- Reward in world to come – R. Saadia and R. Hoffmann explain that if innocent people suffer in this world it it not unjust for they will receive compensation in the world to come.
- Punishment and warning to wicked – R. Hoffmann adds that the collective suffering of the righteous should be viewed as part of the sinner's punishment.11 Not only have the wicked caused themselves to perish, but they have also brought disaster on their entire generation who now lack a righteous role model. The all encompassing tragedy further serves as a warning to onlookers of the magnitude of the consequences of evil.12
- One body – Ralbag, Akeidat Yitzchak, Abarbanel and Malbim explain that all members of the nation are connected, and constitute one body. Thus, it is only natural that if one "limb" sins, it will affect the rest.
- Collateral damage - Sometimes an innocent is hurt simply through collateral damage. They are not active targets of the punishment, but suffer by being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Majority vs. minority of sinners?
- No distinction –Those commentators who understand collective punishment as being related to the unity of Israel, would not distinguish between cases in which the sinners were a minority or majority of the whole. Any part of the whole, no matter how small, can affect the rest.
- Affected by number of sinners –Those who view collective punishment as no more than the natural result of a collective disaster, though, might limit the principle to cases where the majority is evil. It is only in such a case that there should have been reason for the calamity to begin with. As such, they would have to explain that the 36 people who died when Achan took of the spoils were equally culpable and that the nation were being punished for their own sins in the time of David's census.
Biblical cases of collective punishment – This position is supported by the many cases in Tanakh in which people appear to be punished collectively. In many of these cases, these commentators, nonetheless, attempt to show how there too those who were punished were actually deserving.
Biblical Cases of Vicarious Punishment
- Achan and death of the 36 – Ralbag, Abarbanel and Malbim assert that when Achan sinned, Divine providence departed from the nation as a wholק, leavingthem to chance. As such, those who went to battle found themselves in danger and died, but Achan, who happened not to place himself in danger, did not.
- Plague in time of David – R. Saadia, Ralbag and Abarbanel all maintain that the nation died for their own sins, and not for those of David. Ralbag even says that Hashem
Collective salvation? Just as one individual's sin can harm the nation as a whole, one person's merits can save them. This makes sense if one thinks of the nation as being one body; the actions of any part, whether god or bad, affect the rest. Similarly, just as an undeserving individual might get caught up in a general catastrophe, a wicked person might nonetheless benefit from general good fortune.
Individual providence?
- Ralbag maintains that there is only general providence, but not individual providence. Such a stance logically leads to the conception that collective punishment exists.
- Netziv and R. D"Z Hoffmann suggest that there is individual providence, but that in times of anger or collective catastrophe, it will only come into play if the person is extremely meritorious.
Divine vs. human retribution
