Ep1290 Shoftim 8:7-9

0:00So we're holding by a safe a shayf, dim where a parachez, pastexa, and the shaper started as the squs, ilanish masyaches, qas, qas, qas, qa, bana, vram, yuhudah, shah, sfi, asqus, fran, ilanish, shama, fran, dhani, ala, qa, m'laz, m'n'ch'm, shanar, ya, asqus, fras, qa, m'laz, shl'yum, And so we saw yesterday that Guidoyn is chasing after Zavakh Insaamuno, the two kings of Midjan that escaped, and his men are tired, his men are hungry, so he asks the men of Sukahes for assistance. However the men of Sukahes refuse to help him, and only that, and they mock him, they say, have you captured Zavakh Insaamuno that you now are worthy that you are able to demand assistance from us, distance from us. So pausok zayin, wa yame gida insagida inses to them. Lakhain, therefore, besay sashem e zevach viasamuna biyadi, when eventually asham does deliver zevach insamuna into my hand, vedashdiya spesarchem, I'm going to return, and I'm going to thrash your flesh, as kojcia midbavya sabarkonem, using desert thorns and thickets, I'm going

1:03to thrash your body, I'm going to harm you with these plants. The reason for this punishment is that sukais was located in an area full of thorns and thickets, and the redak even suggests that it was named sukais because the word has a connotation of thorns as we find in say for eo even peric men pausoklamid alif. It could also be that it was amida kinegidmida that gida wanted to show them that they behaved like those plants, those plants which cause pain, but do not provide any source of nourishment, these people acted like those plants and therefore they deserve to feel the kind of pain that they had inflicted on others. The mechaktan explains that had they simply refused to help gidaen and his men to provide bread and resources for them to rest, that wouldn't alone make them chai of misa, because they don't want to help, okay, it's not a good mida, they're losing out on gamilis chasodem on doing sedaka, but that doesn't make a person chai of misa. The problem was deeper, the problem was when they said aghaf zevach vitsamuna biyanchha,

2:06have you captured zevach insamuna, they were showing they doubted gidaen's ability to follow through and complete the capture of zevach insamuna to finish off the medyanem, that was an act of kfirah on their part, they were doubting, they were denying ashyem's ability to bring about that success in the battle, and therefore gidaen judged them much more harshly than if they had simply refused to provide bread, water and rest. So continuing in pasochers, vayami shampinuel, so gidaen then, and his men went up to the city of panuel, vaya dhabar alayem kasois and he spoke similarly to them, asking them for assistance so that he can go and pursue zevach insamuna, vayanu ausayanchha, panuel kasher anu anchha sukais, and the men of panuel gave the same response as the men of sukais, they also refused to do so, and they also questioned gidaen's ability to capture zevach insamuna. So pasochers, they responded in a similar fashion to sukais, so gidaen responds to them in a similar fashion that he responded to the men of sukais, vaya yoy megan lanchha, panuel

3:11laymar, gidaen responds to the men of panuel, saying, bishuvi vishalem, when I return in peace, after having accomplished my mission of capturing the two kings of medyan, etzo it's a migdal azam going to break down this tower that was a very large tower that defended the city of panuel, and gidaen promised that when he returned he was going to smash that tower and break it down. So we see in the case of panuel as well, that gidaen's threat fit the crime that it was also amida knegedmida here, because the people of panuel, their reason why they felt no need to participate in the battle against medyan, no need to join gidaen's forces is because they felt very safe and secure protected by their defensive tower. And so gidaen responds to their arrogance by saying, guess what, I'm going to destroy that tower, which is the source of your confidence, and it's going to force you to realize you are no less vulnerable than other members of klaisra. Maubam explains a little differently, the tainan puru ali says, sukais, the men of sukais were afraid to assist, because they were afraid of potentially retaliation by the medyanim

4:15if they were to regroup and come back in interities, so all they would retaliate against anyone who had assisted gidaen in his rebellion. So the men of sukais were afraid, they did not have a tower protecting them. However, the men of panuel did, and so therefore they don't have the excuse that they are afraid of persecution by the medyanim, because they have a tower protecting them. And so therefore, gidaen had a bigger tain on them. You don't have the same excuse as sukais that you are afraid of retaliation, and therefore there's a bigger tain on you while you're not assisting. Makhaktan explains that the tainan, the men of panuel, was that they are worse than the men of sukais. They should have learned a lesson from what happened with sukais. That sukais refused, and gidaen leveled a threat against them. And the men of sukais were partially beshagate, because they didn't know that there was going to be a punishment for their refusal. But the men of panuel, once they saw how gidaen dealt with the men of sukais, they should have all come forward and happily assisted gidaen, and by them refusing and now learning for the men of sukais, that's an even more severe avera, and therefore even if they are shaygakes, as the Makhaktan was considered like an amazet, and therefore gidaen deals

5:17with them much more harshly, he executes the men of the city, as opposed to sukais where he only punished the leaders of the sarim. The al-Shikh says that the difference between the men of sukais and the men of panuel, why sukais wasn't punished in its entirety, but panuel was, is because in the city of sukais, the only responders that adamantly refused gidaen had spoke to him harshly were the sarim, were the leaders, so that's why the punishment was focused on that. Whereas here in the city of panuel, everyone responds, so it's vayalmi shun panuel, vay dhabar alay, and vayanu isay, and shay panuel, all the men of panuel united in their answer, in their refusal to help them, and therefore when gidaen comes to punish panuel, he's punishing the entire city. Now although his punishment was to destroy the tower and to kill the people, but he only spells out that he's going to destroy the tower, he doesn't mention anything about putting them to death, even though that's going to be part of their punishment. And the reason says the al-Shikh is because he didn't want to tell them this, because

6:20maybe if they understood that they were going to be killed, they were going to be executed, that they might join forces with the men of sukais and gang up together against gidaen, and easily defeat him in his small force of 300 men. And so therefore he doesn't spell out that he's going to kill them, he just says, I'm going to destroy the tower, so they thought, okay, he's going to take his anger out on the tower, but we'll be safe, we'll be safe. And therefore they won't join forces with the men of sukais, and gidaen will be able to do what he needs to do to punish them. Finally, the kliyakar, the kliyakar says that the words of gidaen, bishuvi, bishalayim, is not in accordance with the gmaren brochus, which tells us that ideally a person should say bishuvi, bishuvi, bishuvi, bishuvi, bishalayim is when I return in peace, but it's only going to be peaceful for me. bishuvi, bishuvi, bishalayim would mean even peaceful for you, but that's not true. He wasn't going to make things peaceful for the men of pinouel, rather he was going to be harmful to them, was going to be a punishment for them.

7:22And therefore he only says bishuvi, bishalim, when I return, it's going to be good for me, but it's certainly not going to be good for you. But it's certainly not going to be good for you. But it's certainly not going to be good for you. But it's certainly not going to be good for you. But it's certainly not going to be good for you. But it's certainly not going to be good for you. But it's certainly not going to be good for you. But it's certainly not going to be good for you. But it's certainly not going to be good for you.