Comentario sobre Números 31:17

וכל אשה ידעת איש AND EVERY WOMAN WHO KNOWS MAN — i.e., who is fitted for cohabitation, even though she has never experienced it (Sifrei Bamidbar 157:6). As a test they made them (the women) pass in front of the Golden Plate, and if anyone was fitted for cohabitation her face turned green (Yevamot 60b).

ועתה הדגו….הדוגו. "and now kill!…..kill." Why did the Torah have to repeat the command to kill separately for young male Midianites and for females who were no longer virgins? Sifri quotes Rabbi Yishmael as saying that the second הרוגו was necessary to separate this verse from the following verse. Had the Torah not written this word in between I would have understood the words וכל אשה in our verse as capable of referring either to what is written in verse 18 or to what is written in our verse. This seems problematical. If Rabbi Yishmael were correct, why did the Torah not interpose a statement such as החיו לכם, "keep alive for yourselves," as it did at the end of verse 18? If the Torah had done this there would have been no need to write the word הרוגו twice! Perhaps the Torah was afraid to write החיו לכם at this juncture as it would have appeared then that Moses commanded the Israelites to keep these Midianite virgins alive. Actually, Moses only gave permission to keep them alive. This is why the words וכל הטף introduced verse 18 to inform the Israelites of the status of these survivors, not to order them to keep these people alive.

Capable of intimate relations. Such as a girl aged three years and one day. Anyone younger than this is not capable of intimate relations.

VV. 17 u.18. Da mit diesem Akt dem Verpflanzen heidnisch unzüchtiger Elemente in Israel vorgebeugt werden sollte, so müssen wir annehmen, dass die nationale Entartung wesentlich im männlichen Geschlechte wurzele, das weibliche Geschlecht aber, wenn in früher Kindheit unlauteren Einflüssen und Eindrücken entzogen, des vollen Eingehens in reine Sittlichkeit fähig bleibe. Ähnlich wird Dewarim 23, 4 hinsichtlich der Aufnahme von Ammonitern und Moabitern zwischen dem männlichen und weiblichen Geschlechte unterschieden; während das erstere ausgeschlossen ist, ist dem weiblichen die Aufnahme בקהל ד׳ selbst in reiferen Jahren gestattet.

!וכל אשה יודעת איש למשכב זכר הרוגו, “and kill any woman that has known a man by having carnal relations with him!”Rashi questions why the Torah had to repeat the command: “kill” in this verse. He bases himself on Sifri, item 157, where it is explained that without this repetition wemight have misunderstood due to the Torah also having stated that certain categories of females were allowed to live. In other words, we would not have known if to understand the word: כל as “each” or as “any.” The repetition makes it clear that the meaning is: “any.”An alternate explanation for why the word: הרוגו, “Kill!” had to be repeated at the end of this verse. If any woman old enough had to be killed even though she was still a virgin, surely a woman who had already experienced carnal relations would have had to be killed also! We have a rule that logic is not sufficient to allow us to apply a penalty to someone guilty of such. Therefore the Torah had to spell out that such women had to be killed, and we could not simply use our logic to act upon in such a case. If you were to reason that the Torah could have avoided using this word at the beginning of the verse and written as follows: 'ועתה כל זכר וכל אשה יודעת איש וגו, “and therefore now, every male and every woman who has had carnal knowledge of a man, etc.,” the problem we would have had if the Torah had written this would be that we might have thought that as long as a minor male, not yet capable of indulging his libido, would not become liable to death until he had done so. We would have to deliberately present him with this opportunity in order to justify executing him and his partner. Considering all this, the Torah wrote: ועתה הרגו כל זכר בטף, “therefore kill now every male amongst the children,” i.e. immediately, without waiting, and kill every female if examination proves that she is no longer a virgin, seeing that this is proof that she had carnal knowledge of a male.

הרגו [AND EVERY WOMAN THAT MAY KNOW MAN] … KILL — Why does it say this word again after having used it in the first half of the sentence? It is to show where the pause comes in the paragraph. So is the opinion of R. Ishmael (Sifrei Bamidbar 157:6). For if I read (omitting the word הֲרֹגוּ‎),‎ הרגו כל זכר בטף וכל אשה ידעת איש‎ ... וכל הטף בנשים וגו׳ ‎ “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones … and every woman … and all the little ones among the women … keep alive”, I would not know whether they were to kill “every woman” together with the “males among the little ones” or were to keep them alive together with the “little ones among the women’. On this account הרגו is stated (added) at the end of the verse.

Even if she never actually had relations. Because if it were not so, the verses would apparently be contradictory. For it is written, “Every woman with intimate knowledge of a man” which implies that only an adult who had relations [was executed], but an adult who had not had relations would be kept alive. [Also that] a minor whether she had relations or not would be kept alive. Then it is written (v. 18) “All the children among the females without intimate knowledge of a man, keep alive for yourselves.” This implies specifically a minor who had not had relations, but a minor who had relations, or an adult whether she had relations or not would be killed. Consequently, the first and second verses are apparently contradictory. Therefore Rashi was forced to explain “capable…”

We also need to understand the word הרגו at the beginning of verse 17. Why did the Torah not content itself with the word הרוגו at the end of this verse? Perhaps the Torah wanted to write the words ועתה הרגו together to teach the people that the rehabilitation of the nation which had been the objective of the whole campaign could not be achieved until the people mentioned in our verse had been killed. The sooner this would be accomplished, i.e. ועתה, "now," the sooner would the Israelites be completely rehabilitated concerning the sin at Shittim. Alternatively, the Torah may have wanted to write together the words הרגו לטף on the one hand and הרוגו לאשה, to indicate that we are dealing with two separate commandments. Or, the words simply allude to the fact that these people should be executed forthwith, i.e. ועתה.

For when I read… “And all the children among the females.” You might ask: If so [that we might assume they were kept alive], why is it necessary to write (v. 18), “All the children among the females without intimate knowledge of a man, keep alive for yourselves”? For now even a woman who had intimate knowledge of a man was kept alive, so certainly who had not, was kept alive. Rather, we see that since the verse needed to write, “And all the children among the females without intimate knowledge [of a man], keep alive for yourselves,” [it implies] that a woman who had intimate knowledge of a man was killed. One might say that Scripture had to write, “All the children among the females…” because if it had not I would not know whether “Every woman with intimate knowledge of a man” referred to someone who was capable of intimate relations, even though they had not had relations, or perhaps only to one who actually had relations. For the reason why we establish it as referring to someone capable of having relations is because otherwise the verses are apparently contradictory, as explained. Re’m answers in a different vein.

This is why “[you must] execute” is said. You might ask: Nonetheless, why is it necessary to write “Now execute every male” at the beginning of the verse? The answer is that if it had not written “execute” referring to the males in the beginning of the verse, I would have said that regarding them there was also a difference between someone capable of intimate relations, [i.e.] an adult, and someone who was incapable, [i.e.] a minor. Therefore, the verse said “now execute” in every case. Mahari answers that if it had not written “execute” the implication of the verse would be that we expound “every woman” with reference to that which is written afterwards. Now, once it refers to the section afterwards we would reverse our logic [as follows]: We would say that if it had only written, “Every woman with intimate knowledge of a man” but it had not written about the children, I would not have used a kal vachomer (a fortiori argument) to learn that they be kept alive. For I would have said that since she was capable of intimate relations but did not engage in relations, therefore she was kept alive, because she was capable of causing Yisroel to sin but did not do so. However, regarding the children, who were not capable of intimate relations, they have no merit to be kept them alive. Therefore, the Torah wrote “execute” in order to separate [the two].