Vital Stats:
Verses: 23
Is It Read At Synagogue?: No.
Famous Quotes/Phrases: There are numerous times when the enemy nations of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, and Hivites are mentioned in the Torah in rapid succession. Here they finally make an appearance, as Joshua vanquishes them as the Torah foretells.
Basic Plot: This chapter should feel familiar to anyone who has been reading the book of Joshua up until this point: several kingdoms band together to try to defeat the Israelites, and Joshua and his army defeat them completely. What’s different is that now, finally, the battles appear to be over, as “the land had rest from war.” Israel’s dominance while conquering the Promised Land is thorough and complete.
What’s Strange: Joshua pays special attention to the city of Hazor, which, our text tells us, had been the central kingdom in the overall area. He destroys Hazor in every way possible, including burning it entirely. Verse 13 tells us, however, that Joshua had not taken this latter step with other cities he had vanquished. Yes, the cities’ inhabitants are killed and their goods are captured, but the structures remain intact. Not so with Hazor. Why?
The Midrash Bereshit Rabbah teaches that Joshua follows this command because Moses had told him personally before Moses’ death. It is not recorded in the Torah (as opposed to the command to defeat the Amorites, etc., as I mentioned above) but rather transmitted orally.
This is far from the only time that we are told that certain directives are transmitted by writing and others by speaking. In fact, the Mishnah, the great collection of laws assembled about 2,000 years ago, was traditionally considered to be the Oral Law — rules and details of rules not mentioned in the Torah but rather passed down through the generations until they appeared in print after the Second Temple period.
What’s Spectacular: With peace finally at hand, it behooves us to say one more thing about the brutality we’ve read about over the last several chapters. In his book Biblical Literacy, Rabbi Joseph Telushkin reminds us that it’s natural to feel uncomfortable with the extremes the Israelites seem to go to in order to conquer Canaan: “The Bible itself has sensitized us to high standards of respect for human life, especially in its commands to love our neighbor and to love the stranger. … the Bible's disturbing ethics of warfare can perhaps be best explained in terms of monotheism's struggle to survive. Monotheism started out as a minority movement with a different theology and ethical system than the rest of the world. It expanded and developed because it had one small corner in the world where it could grow unmolested. Had the Hebrews continued to reside amidst the pagan and child-sacrificing Canaanite culture, monotheism itself almost certainly would have died.”
Is this a satisfying explanation? I guess it’s up to each of us to decide. As for me, I struggle with it; the notion of total war feels over the top and unnecessary. Still, in the midst of war, the line between enough and too much isn’t always clear. Displays of complete domination potentially prevent the likelihood subsequent conflict, which likely saves more lives in the long run. And ensuring one’s survival sometimes means doing more than the bare minimum. If anything, there is value in knowing what we are fighting for, rather than committing violence for its own sake.
Shabbat Shalom!