The Hottie and the Torah Plan
Question: What happens to a woman captive or a woman who was raped?
Sources: Deuteronomy 21:10 When you go out to battle against your enemies, and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands, and you carry away captives…
21:11 …and see among the captives a beautiful woman, and you have a desire for her, take her for yourself as a wife…
I saw a Facebook friend post that he’s FURIOUS (in caps) about the Torah portion of Ki Tetzeh, that the text (Deuteronomy 21:11) calls the woman taken captive “The Beautiful Woman” and that is how she has been known throughout history. He wrote that since October 7, 2023, he thinks this part of the text, when read as part of the weekly selection, should be done in an embarrassed whisper and she should henceforth be known as the “Captive of War Woman” rather than the other description. Many of his friends responded to this post and agreed that this is a travesty because the woman is a hostage, taken against her will as spoils of war. He wrote, “The possibility of a captive woman being forced to marry her jailor and the murderer of her family is so horrific, it makes me sick to my stomach.” (I hope I’m doing this argument justice.)
From a 21st Century perspective, perhaps he is correct and there is nothing more to say. But the text wasn’t written in the 21st Century and it might be worthwhile to dive deeper into the topic and see if the Torah is getting at something that may have been overlooked that wouldn’t cause such outrage.
I responded to the post with the following comment: “I appreciate your remarks and don't have difficulty with them for today. I agree with you, especially in light of what's occurring in Gaza. The context needed is why this law was written. In those times the average war (and the Bible records more than a few genocidal wars carried out by the Israelites) was open season on women, which meant soldiers could and would rape, then kill them or leave them to die. The humanity within this law, for those times is that the Israelites wanted to do away with that kind of conduct. When you're running through a village, you have death on your mind and swing your sword at everything that moves. When you're done killing all the males, what's left are the females. That's when the party would typically begin. But the Torah is saying, don't do that. In fact, look around, see if there's a pretty girl who catches your eye not to rape, but to take home, not to be your slave, but…to be your wife? Are you kidding me? No one would even think of that. But the Torah does. If you look at it from that perspective (again, from the perspective of those times) it's pretty revolutionary.”
And it is revolutionary. But there is more to the Torah perspective on this case.
The Torah is asking an important question and proposing a solution. To the 21st Century reader, this solution might sound anathema. Who would ever agree to marry their captor, who slaughtered their family? I can’t argue with that because he’s 100% correct.
What is overlooked is the dilemma that the Torah is addressing. In the case of a war, you fight to the death with your enemy. It would be safe to assume that everyone in the population hates each other. The men hate everyone from their enemy, including the women and children.The women hate everyone too and probably the children are educated in this hatred of the enemy too. Then the day comes when the war begins and one side storms the other side’s village and burns it to the ground. Of the men, whoever hasn’t fled has likely died. Of the remaining women, the victorious soldiers would reward themselves by raping the women and probably killing them when done. It’s horrific.
Here is where the Torah enters into the picture in a very unusual way. The Bible wants to address the issue of what will happen to the remaining women who have just lost their families, or at least the males in their families? What will become of a woman who no longer has a village, a husband, a father, a brother and possibly even a nation any longer? What does she do? Where does she go? What happens to her life? These are the issue the Torah is addressing. The solution the Torah offers is that if one of the soldiers sees a pretty girl whom he otherwise might have raped and possibly killed, or taken into captivity as a slave, he should take her and make her his wife. Even though she was part of your enemy’s entourage moments earlier, someone you hated, despised and wanted to kill, you need to flip the switch and accept her into your life as a full fledged wife, if you desire her. The Torah is saying, “We don’t know what will happen to her if you leave her behind. She has nothing left. Take her as a wife, and give her a life.”
It’s true that a modern reader might think this insane, to have a captor want to marry a captive and make her happy seems farfetched if not flagrantly wretched.
But this is very similar to the issue of the rapist in the Bible. The Torah has a very hard-to-swallow law about a rapist. He must marry the girl he raped - unless she declines the marriage. This sounds insane. But the Torah is asking the same question: what will happen to this poor girl who just lost her virginity? In their society, no one would marry a non-virgin, her likelihood of marriage was zero. What can we do with her? Who will take her and allow her a life where she can have security and a family? No one will do that. Her life is over. She will remain a spinster forever. The Torah resolves this issue and says, “We won’t let that happen. We know someone who wanted her and was prepared to sleep with her. It’s the rapist.” Unless she declines the marriage, they will wed and he will have to take care of her and provide for her. It definitely sounds crazy to us today, but what are the other alternatives for her to have a full life, in a society that defines a woman’s success as only being through the production of offspring?
Let’s postulate based on a theoretical case in more modern times. Let’s say the year is 1945 and there’s a small town in Germany, let’s call it Kugel, that was known as a Nazi stronghold. As the allies advanced, they neared Kugel, knowing that every last person within, men, women, and children were staunch advocates and supporters of the Nazis. The American army entered the town, but was faced with heavy multiple sources of machine gun fire, which surprised it and US soldiers were killed. The army regrouped and then went door to door, killing everyone who showed themselves as hostiles to the army. Indeed, in wiping out all the Nazi fighters, there were women and children caught in the crossfire who were killed. But by the end of the day, no more men were alive in the village between the ages of 16-60. It was a complete victory. The American soldiers rounded up the women and children of whom there were 50 of each.
Let’s stop the story here.
What do you suppose the Americans would do with these 100 people? On the macro side, the American government would create and impose a Marshall Plan to rehabilitate Germany, maybe committing part of the budget to rebuild Kugel. On the micro side, the Americans would likely put these 100 people into a prisoners’ camp, where they would be fed while mourning their dead and hating the Americans even more than they previously did.
In Biblical times, there was no Marshall Plan. What did people do? Usually, nothing. The victors left, taking spoils and unconcerned about what happened to the survivors, who would hate the victors even more for killing their families and burning their village and fields. Or perhaps they would take some of the healthier looking survivors to serve them as slaves and concubines. After all, there is a price to be paid for being the losers in war. To think everyone returned home carefree is naive.
The Torah offers an interesting solution. Take care of the women - if you find a beautiful one - and bring her into your family. Offer a Torah Plan of rehabilitation that ends the hatred (hopefully) and allows for growth of a family. Is this better or worse than the case of the Nazis? Neither one seems all that palatable in the 21st Century, but that wasn’t the question. The question was which is better or worse and the answer to me isn’t all that clear.
Now what about Gaza?
In the case of Hamas, the hostages they seized were taken because of hatred of Israel. These were people they wanted to torture and enjoyed raping. The women who were taken are indeed “Captive of War Women.”
This is a non-parallel case.
In the case of the Torah, the women my friend wants to rebrand as “The Captive of War Women” is the opposite. The Torah law, which was written thousands of years ago, which, in itself is incredible, is trying to prevent her rape and end the hatred between the peoples. That her physical beauty is the conduit to this happening is a normal comprehension of human nature. What soldier would take a woman they didn’t think was a “hottie” back home with them?
I want to say categorically that this rebranding idea is misleading and ignores the part of the Torah that has been overlooked in this case, that of intent. The Torah wants to find these women a place. Maybe it’s not the happiest place in the world, but it’s a place of security and peace. Perhaps you’re an advocate of a detention camp and a Marshall Plan. Perhaps you will reconsider the Torah Plan. Or maybe you have your own solution that is even better. But I don’t think we need to whisper this section of the Torah when it is read on Shabbat in synagogues and Temples across the world. I think if we understand the goodness of the intent to help within an ugly atmosphere of war and hatred, we should be comfortable reading this selection in a regular voice.