Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2-4

Hook

We stand at a unique and often challenging crossroads in the story of the Jewish people: the vibrant, complex, and sometimes fraught reality of modern Israel. For millennia, Jewish life was shaped by the absence of sovereignty, by the imperative to preserve tradition in exile, and by the theoretical anticipation of a messianic future where justice would finally reign. The Mishneh Torah, penned by the towering figure of Maimonides in the 12th century, is a magnificent testament to this tradition – a comprehensive blueprint for Jewish life, including the intricate workings of a Jewish state that, at the time of its writing, existed only in memory and aspiration.

Now, with the return of Jewish sovereignty, these ancient blueprints are no longer solely theoretical. They become part of the very fabric of identity and debate within a modern nation-state grappling with self-definition. How does a nation founded on ancient covenantal promises and a deep historical consciousness reconcile its foundational texts with the universalist demands of modern democracy and human rights? This isn't an abstract academic exercise; it's a living, breathing dilemma at the heart of Zionism.

Our text today, Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life, chapters 2-4, plunges us into the profound and often uncomfortable territory of capital punishment, legal liability, and the sanctity of life. It meticulously details who is liable for what kind of killing, under whose jurisdiction, and for which categories of people. Here, we encounter distinctions that challenge our contemporary moral sensibilities, particularly regarding the differential treatment of lives based on identity – Jew, Canaanite servant, resident alien, gentile, minim (Jewish heretics).

The dilemma for modern Israel is stark: How can a state, aspiring to be a "light unto nations" and a beacon of justice, embrace a heritage that, in its classical articulation, draws such seemingly stark lines between human lives? The hope, however, lies in the Jewish tradition's enduring capacity for wrestling with its own texts, for reinterpretation, and for an ongoing moral evolution driven by core values like the sanctity of life and the pursuit of justice. It’s a call to engage with our past not as a static decree, but as a dynamic source of wisdom that challenges us to build a future reflecting the highest ideals of our people and humanity.

This engagement requires both a "strong spine" to uphold Jewish peoplehood, self-determination, and the unique character of Israel, and an "open heart" to embrace universal ethics, human dignity, and the pluralism inherent in a modern society. It is a responsibility we inherit, not just to preserve our past, but to redeem it in the present and elevate it for the future, ensuring that the Jewish state embodies the deepest commitment to justice for all within its gates. This text, therefore, is not just about murder; it’s about the soul of a nation, the tension between particularism and universalism, and our enduring responsibility to craft a just society.

Text Snapshot

1. "Whenever a person kills a colleague with his hands... he should be executed by the court, for he himself has killed him. But a person who hires a murderer to kill a colleague... are all considered to be shedders of blood; the sin of bloodshed is upon their hands, and they are liable for death at the hands of God." (Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:1-2)
2. "When a Jewish king desires to slay any of these murderers and the like - who are not liable for execution by the court - by virtue of his regal authority, in order to perfect society, he has the license." (Mishneh_Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:4)
3. "If a person kills either a Jew or a Canaanite servant, he should be executed... At first, a person who killed a resident alien should not be executed by the court, as implied by Exodus 21:14... Needless to say, this ruling applies with regard to a gentile." (Mishneh_Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:10-11)
4. "It is a mitzvah to kill minim and apikorsim... If there is the possibility, one should kill them with a sword in public view. If that is not possible, one should develop a plan so that one can cause their deaths. ...With regard to a gentile idolater with whom we are not at war... we should not try to cause their deaths. It is, however, forbidden to save their lives if their lives are threatened." (Mishneh_Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:11 - Note: The Sefaria link for 2:11 does not directly contain the "mitzvah to kill minim" section. This is found later in the text, specifically in chapter 4, not chapter 2. My apologies for the initial misattribution in my thought process. The relevant section is actually Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 4:10-11, and I will correct this in the citations and discussion.)

Correction for Text Snapshot (actual location): 4. "It is a mitzvah to kill minim and apikorsim... If there is the possibility, one should kill them with a sword in public view. If that is not possible, one should develop a plan so that one can cause their deaths. ...With regard to a gentile idolater with whom we are not at war... we should not try to cause their deaths. It is, however, forbidden to save their lives if their lives are threatened." (Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 4:10-11)

Context

The Mishneh Torah, Maimonides' magnum opus, completed around 1177 CE, is far more than a simple legal code; it is a meticulously structured, comprehensive vision for Jewish life under the full purview of Halakha. Written in clear, accessible Hebrew, it sought to organize the entire body of Jewish law, encompassing everything from prayer and festivals to civil and criminal jurisprudence, into a single, cohesive work. Maimonides' ambition was to make the vast and often labyrinthine Talmudic discussions accessible to any educated Jew, thereby providing a definitive guide for practice and belief. The very act of codification was revolutionary, aimed at fostering unity and clarity within a diverse and often dispersed Jewish world.

Maimonides' Historical Setting and Legal Philosophy

Maimonides (Rambam) lived in a tumultuous 12th century, a period marked by significant intellectual and political shifts. Born in Cordoba, Spain, he experienced the intellectual ferment of Islamic Spain, but also the persecution of the Almohad dynasty, which forced his family to flee. His journey took him across North Africa, through the Land of Israel, and finally to Egypt, where he became a court physician to Saladin and a recognized leader of the Jewish community. This diaspora existence profoundly shaped his legal and philosophical outlook. As a Jew living under foreign rule, Maimonides did not operate within a sovereign Jewish state. The laws pertaining to capital punishment and judicial autonomy, therefore, were largely theoretical blueprints for an idealized future—a vision of what Jewish society should look like when it regained its sovereignty.

This context is crucial for understanding the nuances of our text. For instance, Maimonides' meticulous discussion of capital punishment by a Jewish court, including the severe evidentiary requirements, reflects a deep commitment to justice and the sanctity of life, even if its actual implementation was impossible in his time. The distinction between "death by the court" and "death at the hands of God" (Chapters 2:1-2) highlights the strict limitations on human judicial power in capital cases. Only direct, intentional killing, with prior warning and the presence of two qualified witnesses, could lead to execution by an earthly court. All other forms of "shedding blood," including killing via an agent, suicide, or leaving someone to die, were considered grave sins punishable by God. This distinction underscores a fundamental principle in Jewish law: human courts are fallible and must err on the side of mercy and caution when it comes to taking a life. The ultimate judgment, therefore, is often reserved for the divine.

The concept of the "king's authority" (Chapter 2:4) to execute beyond the court's strictures is another reflection of Maimonides' vision for a sovereign Jewish state. This regal authority (mishpat hamelucha) is not meant to be arbitrary but is granted "in order to perfect society" (letaken ha'olam). It represents an executive power to maintain order, prevent anarchy, and enforce a broader sense of justice when the strictures of formal Halakha might be too narrow to address a societal threat. This power, though extraordinary, is framed as a necessary tool for the stability and moral well-being of the collective. In a pre-modern context, where state power was less constrained by democratic norms, such authority was seen as essential for effective governance.

Social Hierarchies and Distinctions

The Mishneh Torah also reveals the social and legal hierarchies of Maimonides' era, which echo biblical and Talmudic distinctions. The text differentiates between:

• Jew: The primary focus of the legal system, with detailed rules for capital punishment.
• Canaanite Servant (Eved Canaani): A non-Jewish slave who has accepted the yoke of certain mitzvot. Maimonides explicitly states that killing a Canaanite servant is punishable by execution, "for a servant has accepted the yoke of mitzvot and has been added to 'the heritage of God'" (Chapter 2:11). This grants them a status higher than a simple gentile, demonstrating a legal recognition of their partial integration into the covenantal community, even if they remain property. This also reflects the historical reality of slavery, which Jewish law regulated rather than abolished entirely, but with unique protections not found in other ancient societies.
• Resident Alien (Ger Toshav): A gentile who has publicly committed to observing the Seven Noahide Laws (prohibitions against idolatry, blasphemy, murder, theft, sexual immorality, eating flesh torn from a living animal, and the establishment of courts of justice). While they reside within the Jewish polity, killing a ger toshav is not punishable by court execution, though it is considered a grave sin (Chapter 2:11). This category reflects a structured approach to integrating non-Jews into a Jewish society, offering protection and rights based on their adherence to fundamental moral principles.
• Gentile Idolater (Oved Kokhavim): The most distant category. Maimonides states that killing a gentile idolater with whom we are not at war is not punishable by an earthly court, and that "it is forbidden to save their lives if their lives are threatened" (Chapter 4:11). This is arguably the most challenging and controversial aspect of the text for modern sensibilities, reflecting a deep-seated theological and social concern about idolatry and the perceived threat of assimilation or subversion from outside the covenantal community in a pre-modern world.

The Challenge of Minim and Apikorsim

Perhaps the most jarring section is the directive regarding minim (Jewish idolaters or those who transgress to anger God) and apikorsim (Jews who deny the Torah and prophecy). Maimonides states, "It is a mitzvah to kill minim and apikorsim... If there is the possibility, one should kill them with a sword in public view. If that is not possible, one should develop a plan so that one can cause their deaths" (Chapter 4:10). This severe stance reflects a profound anxiety about internal heresy and challenges to the foundational tenets of Judaism. For Maimonides, minim and apikorsim threatened the spiritual and intellectual integrity of the Jewish people from within. In his view, their beliefs and actions were not mere theological disagreements but an existential threat to the covenantal relationship and the very survival of the Jewish people as a distinct entity. This uncompromising position, while shocking to modern eyes, must be understood within the context of a faith community striving for cohesion and survival in a hostile world, where theological deviation was often seen as a direct path to communal dissolution.

Modern Israel and the Enduring Legacy

Fast forward to the 20th and 21st centuries. The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 realized the millennia-old dream of Jewish sovereignty. However, this new reality brought with it unprecedented challenges. Israel is a modern, democratic state, committed (as per its Declaration of Independence) to "absolute equality of social and political rights to all its citizens irrespective of religion, race, or sex." It operates within a global framework of international law and human rights, largely rejecting capital punishment (except for Adolf Eichmann for crimes against humanity) and certainly rejecting legal distinctions based on religion or ethnicity.

The Mishneh Torah, while not directly implemented as civil law, remains a foundational text for Jewish legal thought, particularly within religious Zionist circles. The tension between its classical pronouncements and modern democratic values is palpable. How does a "Jewish and democratic state" reconcile the historical realities reflected in Maimonides' code with its aspiration to be a just and egalitarian society for all its citizens—Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze, and others?

This text forces us to confront fundamental questions about peoplehood and responsibility. What does it mean for the Jewish people to exercise sovereignty? What are our responsibilities to those within our borders who are not Jewish, or those who may be considered "heretics" by traditional standards? The Zionist project is not merely about political self-determination; it is about building a model society, a "light unto nations." This requires a continuous, honest, and courageous engagement with our tradition, discerning its enduring ethical core while acknowledging and grappling with its historical specificities and the moral evolution of humanity. It demands that we cultivate both a strong spine to defend our unique identity and a deeply open heart to embrace universal justice and human dignity for all.

Two Readings

The Mishneh Torah's laws on murder and the preservation of life present a profound challenge for any modern Jewish state. The text, a cornerstone of Jewish legal thought, meticulously defines categories of victims and perpetrators, outlining different liabilities and punishments based on their identity and the nature of the act. These distinctions, particularly concerning gentiles, resident aliens, and minim, are often at odds with contemporary universal human rights principles. To grapple with this complexity, we can approach the text through two distinct, yet interconnected, interpretive lenses that resonate with the ongoing debates within Zionism and modern Israel.

1. A Hierarchical, Context-Specific Justice System for a Sovereign Jewish Polity (Historical-Contextual/Particularistic)

This reading interprets Maimonides' laws as a comprehensive legal framework designed for a specific historical, theological, and social context: a sovereign Jewish polity operating under divine law, with inherent distinctions between different groups based on their relationship to the covenant and the land. From this perspective, the text is not merely a collection of abstract rules but a blueprint for a fully functioning Jewish state, where the preservation of its unique character and the integrity of its covenantal relationship with God are paramount.

The core of this reading rests on the understanding that Halakha (Jewish law) is divine in origin and therefore possesses an inherent authority that transcends purely human ethical systems. The distinctions Maimonides draws are not arbitrary but reflect a divinely ordained hierarchy and specific covenantal relationships. The Jewish people, as the recipients of the Torah, occupy a unique position within this framework. Their lives and the internal cohesion of their community are seen as central to the divine plan, and the legal system is designed to safeguard this particularistic identity. This is not to diminish the value of other human lives, but to articulate a justice system structured around the unique mission and status of the Jewish people as a nation consecrated to God.

The concept of "sovereignty and social order" is central to this interpretation. Maimonides wrote the Mishneh Torah as a vision for a fully autonomous Jewish state, one that possessed the full range of governmental powers, including the administration of justice. The stringent requirements for capital punishment by an earthly court, such as direct action, prior warning (hatra'ah), and the testimony of two unimpeachable witnesses, highlight the immense gravity of taking a life. However, when these conditions are not met, the text introduces the concept of "death at the hands of God" for those who are "shedders of blood" through indirect means (e.g., hiring a murderer, suicide, placing someone before a beast). This distinction acknowledges the universal wrongness of murder while delineating the specific, limited scope of human judicial capacity under Halakha. It doesn't absolve the perpetrator but transfers the ultimate judgment to a higher authority, thereby maintaining the strict purity of human courts. The Shorshei HaYam commentary, for instance, delves into the biblical verses cited by Maimonides, noting the phrase "will I demand an account" (אדרוש) to indicate divine judgment for indirect killing, as opposed to "his blood shall be shed" (דמו ישפך) for direct killing by human courts. This detailed textual analysis reinforces the particularity of the legal categories.

Furthermore, the "king's authority" to execute individuals not liable for court execution, "in order to perfect society" (letaken ha'olam), is understood here as a necessary executive power to ensure the stability and moral fabric of the Jewish polity. This power is not viewed as an arbitrary usurpation of judicial process but as a legitimate and essential function of a sovereign ruler to prevent anarchy and maintain public order in extraordinary circumstances. In a pre-modern state, the welfare of the collective often necessitated actions that went beyond the letter of strict judicial procedure, guided by the overarching aim of societal perfection. This reflects a pragmatic understanding of governance, where the sovereign must have the tools to protect the community from both internal and external threats, even when strict legal proof is lacking.

The treatment of minim and apikorsim (Jewish heretics or apostates) is, from this perspective, a stark illustration of the imperative to protect the spiritual and ideological integrity of the Jewish people. In Maimonides' view, these individuals posed an existential threat to the very foundations of the Jewish faith and communal identity. Their denial of core tenets or their active transgression "for the sake of angering God" was seen as an internal sabotage of the covenant. The directive to "kill them" and not save their lives, while deeply unsettling to modern ethics, can be understood as an uncompromising stance required to defend the collective spiritual health and survival of a vulnerable people in a world where religious identity was often intertwined with political and physical survival. This is not about individual hatred but about protecting the very essence of Jewish peoplehood from internal dissolution. The Shorshei HaYam commentary further complicates this by discussing the principle of אין שליח לדבר עבירה (there is no agent for a transgression), which implies that an agent is fully responsible for their actions. However, the text's application regarding murder by an agent being liable to Heaven for Jews, but potentially to an earthly court for Noahides (as Maimonides rules elsewhere), shows the specific, sometimes more lenient, application of human jurisdiction to Jews in capital cases under the strictures of Halakha, while Noahides might face human judgment for a wider range of actions. This reinforces the distinct legal frameworks.

Regarding gentiles, the distinctions are seen as reflections of their relationship to the Jewish covenant and the Jewish state. A ger toshav (resident alien), by accepting the Noahide laws, gains a protected, though not fully equal, status, reflecting a degree of moral universalism within the particularistic framework. However, a "gentile idolater with whom we are not at war" is treated differently. While not to be actively harmed, the prohibition against actively saving their lives (Chapter 4:11) is interpreted as a measure of communal self-preservation and the maintenance of distinct boundaries. In a pre-modern world, where theological differences often manifested as existential threats, this approach was seen as necessary to prevent assimilation and to protect the specific character of the Jewish collective. It is a pragmatic, rather than universally humanitarian, ethic, rooted in the imperative of Jewish survival and the upholding of the unique covenantal relationship.

For Zionism, this reading resonates with the desire to build a strong, self-determining Jewish state that prioritizes its Jewish character and continuity. It emphasizes the right of the Jewish people to define their own legal and moral parameters within their sovereign state, even if those parameters appear particularistic to outsiders. While modern Israel does not literally implement these specific capital laws, the underlying spirit of unapologetic Jewish self-determination, communal self-defense, and the prioritization of Jewish continuity and character is a powerful undercurrent in certain segments of Zionist thought. This perspective argues for the necessity of maintaining a robust Jewish identity and distinctiveness, acknowledging that universalism, while important, cannot fully subsume the particularistic mission and historical imperative of a Jewish state. It embodies the "strong spine" of Jewish peoplehood, recognizing the inherent right of the Jewish nation to forge its own destiny based on its ancient heritage.

2. An Evolving Moral Imperative Towards Universal Justice and Sanctity of Life (Universalist/Interpretive)

This reading approaches Maimonides' text through an interpretive lens that emphasizes the enduring moral principles within Judaism, seeking to align them with universal human rights and an evolving understanding of justice. It views the distinctions in the text as historically conditioned and therefore open to reinterpretation or re-contextualization in the modern era, particularly within the framework of a modern, democratic Jewish state. This perspective champions the "open heart" of the Jewish tradition, advocating for a broader, more inclusive application of its highest ethical ideals.

The starting point for this reading is the overarching principle of the sanctity of life (Pikuach Nefesh) that permeates Jewish thought. The profound gravity of murder, as meticulously detailed by Maimonides through the extensive discussion of liability and punishment (even if "by God"), demonstrates an inherent value placed on human life. The meticulousness of the laws, the insistence on stringent evidentiary standards for capital punishment by human courts, and the emphasis on divine judgment for indirect killing, all underscore a deep concern for the preservation of life and the avoidance of judicial error. The Ohr Sameach commentary, in its discussion of execution methods and the strictures surrounding hazamah (disqualification of witnesses), subtly reinforces the extraordinary caution required in capital cases. This suggests that while distinctions existed, the core impulse of the law was to protect life, making earthly executions exceedingly rare and difficult to achieve.

From this perspective, the "king's authority" to go beyond the letter of the law to "perfect society" is reinterpreted not as a license for arbitrary power, but as a recognition of the inherent flexibility within Halakha to adapt to changing social realities and moral imperatives. This executive power, hora'at sha'ah (an emergency decree) or mishpat hamelucha, is seen as a mechanism for the state to uphold the spirit of justice and ensure societal well-being when rigid application of the law might lead to greater societal harm or injustice. In a modern context, this flexibility would logically lead to more inclusive and equitable applications of justice, rather than more exclusive ones. It becomes an imperative to broaden the scope of protection and apply universal standards, seeing the "perfection of society" as encompassing all its inhabitants.

The distinctions regarding ger toshav, Canaanite servants, and other gentiles are critically examined as products of a pre-modern, non-egalitarian, and often confrontational world. These categories, with their varying degrees of legal protection, are understood as reflecting the social realities and limited universalist ethical frameworks of Maimonides' time, rather than eternal divine mandates for a modern state. The absence of Jewish sovereignty for nearly two millennia also shaped these laws, rendering them often theoretical. With the return of sovereignty and the rise of universal human rights, this reading argues that these historical distinctions must be re-evaluated through the lens of Jewish moral progress. The core Jewish value of "love your neighbor as yourself" (Leviticus 19:18), and the repeated biblical injunction to treat the stranger justly, become the guiding principles for a modern state.

The most challenging directives concerning minim and apikorsim are, from this universalist perspective, viewed as historical artifacts reflecting a specific historical anxiety about internal dissent and the fragility of a minority community's survival. In a modern, democratic society that values freedom of thought and expression, and where Jewish continuity is secured by a sovereign state, such directives are morally unacceptable and practically unworkable. This reading would argue that the "mitzvah to kill" should be reinterpreted metaphorically—as an imperative to combat dangerous ideologies through intellectual and spiritual means, through robust education and engagement, rather than through physical violence. The emphasis shifts from physical elimination to a vigorous defense of ideas and community through persuasion and example, aligning with the "open heart" ideal of intellectual openness and compassion.

Furthermore, this reading highlights the Noahide laws as a foundational universalist ethic in Judaism, extending basic moral obligations to all humanity, regardless of their covenantal status. The prophetic vision of Israel as a "light unto nations" (Isaiah 49:6) and the concept of tikkun olam (repairing the world) are central to this interpretation. Modern Israel, striving to be such a light, must champion universal human rights and apply principles of equality and justice to all its citizens and residents, regardless of background. This means actively saving lives, promoting justice, and ensuring equal legal protection for all, drawing from the spirit of texts like "One law shall be for you and for the stranger who dwells with you" (Numbers 15:16). The Shorshei HaYam commentary's discussion about Rabbi Chanina's view that Noahides are liable to human courts for various forms of indirect killing, in contrast to Israelites, could even be interpreted as a subtle recognition within the tradition of a more universal application of human justice to all, outside the specific constraints applied to the Jewish covenantal community.

For Zionism, this reading sees the establishment of Israel as the ultimate opportunity to embody Jewish moral responsibility on a global stage. It is an opportunity to build a society that transcends the limitations of past legal contexts and embraces the highest ethical aspirations of the Jewish tradition in a truly universalist framework. This means demonstrating that Jewish sovereignty can be a force for justice, human dignity, and equality for all its inhabitants. It advocates for legal equality and protection for every individual, drawing on the deepest wellsprings of compassion and justice within Jewish thought. This approach embodies the "open heart," recognizing that true strength comes not from exclusion, but from an expansive embrace of shared humanity and a commitment to justice that extends to all.

Civic Move

Sanctity of Life & Justice: Bridging Ancient Wisdom and Modern Ethics in Israel

The complex and often challenging legal distinctions found in Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, particularly regarding murder and the differing status of various individuals, present a critical opportunity for dialogue and growth within modern Israel. Rather than shying away from these tensions, an honest and hopeful educational initiative can transform them into a catalyst for strengthening Israel's identity as both a Jewish and a democratic state, committed to universal human rights and the sanctity of life for all.

Initiative Name: "Sanctity of Life & Justice: Bridging Ancient Wisdom and Modern Ethics in Israel"

Goal: To foster deeper understanding, critical engagement, and constructive dialogue within Israeli society about how classical Jewish legal texts (like Maimonides on murder) can inform, challenge, and ultimately be reconciled with modern democratic values, universal human rights, and the lived realities of Israel's diverse population. The aim is to move beyond simplistic interpretations—whether apologetic or condemnatory—towards a nuanced, future-minded approach to justice, peoplehood, and shared society. This initiative seeks to empower individuals to engage with their heritage responsibly, promoting both a "strong spine" in affirming Jewish identity and an "open heart" in embracing universal moral responsibilities.

Target Audience: This initiative is designed for a broad and diverse audience, recognizing that the questions it addresses are central to all segments of Israeli society:

• High School and University Students: The next generation of leaders and citizens.
• Educators: Teachers in both religious and secular, Jewish and Arab school systems.
• Legal Professionals and Policymakers: Those directly shaping Israel's legal framework and public policy.
• Religious Leaders and Scholars: Rabbis, imams, priests, and academic scholars of Jewish, Islamic, and Christian law and ethics.
• Civil Society Activists and Community Leaders: Individuals working on the ground in interfaith dialogue, shared society initiatives, and human rights advocacy.
• General Public: Any citizen interested in the foundational values and future direction of the State of Israel.

Components and Steps:

1. Curriculum Development:

   • Modular Learning Units: Develop flexible, scaffolded learning units focused on core texts like Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life, alongside other foundational Jewish texts that emphasize universal justice, the sanctity of life (e.g., Genesis 1:27 on humanity created in God's image; Leviticus 19:33-34 on loving the stranger; prophetic calls for justice), and Noahide laws.
   • Diverse Commentaries and Perspectives: Integrate a wide array of classical and modern commentaries. This would include traditional mefarshim (like Ohr Sameach and Shorshei HaYam from the provided source, which reveal internal debates and interpretive complexities), alongside modern Israeli thinkers, legal scholars, ethicists, and even non-Jewish perspectives on universal ethics. Translations and explanations for all Hebrew/Aramaic texts must be provided.
   • Historical and Socio-Political Context: Crucially, each unit will thoroughly contextualize the texts within Maimonides' historical era, explaining the social, political, and theological realities that shaped his rulings. It will then bridge this to the historical development of Zionism, the Israeli Declaration of Independence, key Israeli Supreme Court rulings on human rights, and the contemporary challenges of a diverse citizenry.
   • Comparative Ethics: Incorporate elements of comparative legal ethics, exploring how other religious traditions (e.g., Islam, Christianity) and international human rights law grapple with similar dilemmas of justice, legal distinctions, and capital punishment. This broadens the perspective and highlights both common ground and unique challenges.
   • Critical Thinking and Application: Each unit will include structured prompts for critical thinking, encouraging participants to ask: "How would this text be understood and applied in contemporary Israel?" "What are the ethical challenges it presents for a modern democratic state?" "How do we derive enduring moral values from this ancient wisdom, while acknowledging its historical limitations?"

2. Facilitator Training Program:

   • Expert Cohort: Recruit and train a dedicated corps of highly skilled facilitators capable of navigating sensitive and potentially contentious topics. These facilitators will be drawn from diverse backgrounds—religious, secular, Jewish, Arab—and possess expertise in textual analysis, historical literacy, and an understanding of contemporary Israeli society.
   • Dialogue and Conflict Resolution Skills: Training will heavily emphasize techniques for fostering respectful dialogue across differences, active listening, empathy-building, and non-confrontational conflict resolution. Facilitators will learn how to create safe spaces for participants to express challenging views and engage in profound ethical inquiry without resorting to sensationalism or personal attacks.
   • Deep Textual Immersion: Facilitators will undergo intensive study of the curriculum, ensuring a deep grasp of the texts, commentaries, and historical contexts, enabling them to guide participants through complex legal and moral arguments.

3. Multi-Platform Dialogue Forums & Workshops:

   • School-Based Programs: Implement regular, structured workshops in high schools across Israel (both Jewish and Arab, religious and secular). These programs will bring students together to study the texts, share their perspectives, and discuss the implications for their lives and for the future of their shared society.
   • University Seminars: Offer advanced, credit-bearing seminars at universities for students in law, philosophy, Jewish studies, and political science. These seminars will engage with the material with academic rigor, encouraging deep research and critical analysis, potentially leading to publications or policy recommendations.
   • Public Lectures and Panels: Organize a series of high-profile public lectures and panel discussions featuring prominent scholars, legal experts, policymakers, and public figures. These events will tackle specific dilemmas raised by the texts, bringing the conversation to a wider audience and fostering public intellectual discourse.
   • Inter-Communal Dialogue Groups: Establish ongoing, facilitated dialogue groups for religious leaders, community activists, and local residents from different backgrounds. These groups will focus on building bridges, fostering mutual understanding, and identifying shared values and common challenges in applying principles of justice and human dignity in their daily lives.

4. Policy and Legal Roundtables:

   • Bridging Halakha and State Law: Convene regular, closed-door roundtables for legal scholars, sitting judges, attorneys, and policymakers. The purpose is not to advocate for the direct implementation of Maimonides' capital laws, but to explore the ideological, philosophical, and moral implications of these classical texts for contemporary Israeli law and public policy.
   • "Jewish and Democratic" Nexus: These discussions will critically examine the tension points between Israel's "Jewish" character and its "democratic" principles, using these texts as a lens. The aim is to contribute to a sophisticated understanding of how Israel can strengthen its democratic foundations and commitment to human rights while honoring and drawing inspiration from its Jewish heritage in ethically responsible ways. Topics might include the role of religion in public life, equality before the law, and the state's responsibility to all its citizens.

5. Digital Platform and Resource Hub:

   • Accessible Online Repository: Create a user-friendly, multilingual (Hebrew, Arabic, English) online platform. This hub will host the complete curriculum, translated texts with commentaries, video lectures, interviews with experts, discussion prompts, and a curated library of relevant articles and resources.
   • Interactive Forums: Implement moderated online forums for participants to continue their discussions, share insights, and pose questions, fostering a vibrant, ongoing community of learners.
   • Showcase Success Stories: Feature testimonials and success stories from participants and communities engaged in the initiative, inspiring broader participation and demonstrating the positive impact of courageous dialogue.

Potential Partners:

• Sefaria: As a primary textual resource and potential platform partner, offering its vast library and permalinks for all cited texts.
• Israeli Government Ministries: Ministry of Education, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Religious Affairs.
• Academic Institutions: Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv University, Bar-Ilan University, University of Haifa, Al-Qasemi Academic College of Education, etc.
• Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs): Organizations dedicated to interfaith dialogue, shared society, human rights, and legal reform (e.g., Abraham Initiatives, Adalah, Tag Meir, B'Tselem, Sikkuy – Afor All).
• Religious Councils and Leadership Bodies: The Chief Rabbinate of Israel, local religious councils, and representatives of Muslim, Christian, and Druze communities.
• International Human Rights Organizations: To provide a comparative and global perspective on legal ethics and human rights.

Expected Outcomes:

• Enhanced Textual Literacy: Participants will develop a deeper, more nuanced understanding of classical Jewish legal texts and their historical context.
• Critical Engagement and Moral Agency: Individuals will be empowered to engage critically with challenging aspects of their heritage, developing their moral agency in navigating the complexities of modern identity.
• Increased Empathy and Mutual Understanding: The dialogue platforms will foster greater empathy and understanding among diverse segments of Israeli society, breaking down stereotypes and building relationships.
• Richer Understanding of Israeli Identity: The initiative will contribute to a more robust and nuanced understanding of what it means to be a "Jewish and democratic state," exploring the creative tensions and potential syntheses between these two pillars.
• Contribution to a Just Society: By encouraging thoughtful engagement with these profound ethical questions, the initiative will contribute to Israel's ongoing journey toward becoming a society that embodies justice, equality, and the sanctity of life for all its inhabitants.

This "Civic Move" is an act of hope, a belief that by honestly confronting the complexities of our tradition, we can draw from its deepest wellsprings of wisdom to build a more just, compassionate, and resilient future for all in Israel.

Takeaway

The Mishneh Torah on murder and the preservation of life forces us into an uncomfortable but essential confrontation with profound ethical questions at the heart of Jewish nationhood. Maimonides' meticulous code, while a towering achievement, reflects a specific historical context and legal philosophy that embraced distinctions in legal status and liability. For modern Israel, a state striving to embody both its particularistic Jewish heritage and universal democratic values, these texts present a critical challenge.

However, this challenge is also an opportunity. It compels us to move beyond simplistic interpretations, to cultivate historical literacy, and to engage in candid, compassionate dialogue. The lesson is clear: the "strong spine" of Jewish self-determination, which champions the unique identity and security of the Jewish people, must be inextricably paired with the "open heart" of universal responsibility, embracing human dignity, equality, and justice for all. The path forward for Israel lies in continuous learning, ethical interpretation, and a courageous commitment to building a society where the sanctity of every human life is paramount, drawing from the deepest ethical wellsprings of our tradition to inform a truly just and hopeful future.

Citations

• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:2: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.2?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:4: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.4?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:10: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.10?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:11: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.11?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 4:10: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.4.10?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 4:11: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.4.11?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Ohr Sameach on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:1:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Ohr_Sameach_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.1.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Shorshei HaYam on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:1:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Shorshei_HaYam_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.1.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:1:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.1.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:10:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.10.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:10:2: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.10.2?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:11:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.11.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:11:2: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.11.2?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:11:3: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.11.3?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Genesis 9:6: https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.9.6?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Genesis 9:5: https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.9.5?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Exodus 21:14: https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.21.14?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Exodus 21:21: https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.21.21?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Exodus 21:20: https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.21.20?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Numbers 35:17-18: https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.35.17-18?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Numbers 35:16: https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.35.16?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Numbers 35:21: https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.35.21?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Numbers 35:20: https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.35.20?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Leviticus 24:17: https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.24.17?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Proverbs 28:17: https://www.sefaria.org/Proverbs.28.17?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• I Kings 21:25: https://www.sefaria.org/I_Kings.21.25?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• I Kings 22:21: https://www.sefaria.org/I_Kings.22.21?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Leviticus 19:16: https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.19.16?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Deuteronomy 19:19: https://www.sefaria.org/Deuteronomy.19.19?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Numbers 15:16: https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.15.16?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Leviticus 19:18: https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.19.18?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Leviticus 19:33-34: https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.19.33-34?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Genesis 1:27: https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.1.27?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en## Hook

We stand at a unique and often challenging crossroads in the story of the Jewish people: the vibrant, complex, and sometimes fraught reality of modern Israel. For millennia, Jewish life was shaped by the absence of sovereignty, by the imperative to preserve tradition in exile, and by the theoretical anticipation of a messianic future where justice would finally reign. The Mishneh Torah, penned by the towering figure of Maimonides in the 12th century, is a magnificent testament to this tradition – a comprehensive blueprint for Jewish life, including the intricate workings of a Jewish state that, at the time of its writing, existed only in memory and aspiration.

Now, with the return of Jewish sovereignty, these ancient blueprints are no longer solely theoretical. They become part of the very fabric of identity and debate within a modern nation-state grappling with self-definition. How does a nation founded on ancient covenantal promises and a deep historical consciousness reconcile its foundational texts with the universalist demands of modern democracy and human rights? This isn't an abstract academic exercise; it's a living, breathing dilemma at the heart of Zionism.

Our text today, Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life, chapters 2-4, plunges us into the profound and often uncomfortable territory of capital punishment, legal liability, and the sanctity of life. It meticulously details who is liable for what kind of killing, under whose jurisdiction, and for which categories of people. Here, we encounter distinctions that challenge our contemporary moral sensibilities, particularly regarding the differential treatment of lives based on identity – Jew, Canaanite servant, resident alien, gentile, minim (Jewish heretics).

The dilemma for modern Israel is stark: How can a state, aspiring to be a "light unto nations" and a beacon of justice, embrace a heritage that, in its classical articulation, draws such seemingly stark lines between human lives? The hope, however, lies in the Jewish tradition's enduring capacity for wrestling with its own texts, for reinterpretation, and for an ongoing moral evolution driven by core values like the sanctity of life and the pursuit of justice. It’s a call to engage with our past not as a static decree, but as a dynamic source of wisdom that challenges us to build a future reflecting the highest ideals of our people and humanity.

This engagement requires both a "strong spine" to uphold Jewish peoplehood, self-determination, and the unique character of Israel, and an "open heart" to embrace universal ethics, human dignity, and the pluralism inherent in a modern society. It is a responsibility we inherit, not just to preserve our past, but to redeem it in the present and elevate it for the future, ensuring that the Jewish state embodies the deepest commitment to justice for all within its gates. This text, therefore, is not just about murder; it’s about the soul of a nation, the tension between particularism and universalism, and our enduring responsibility to craft a just society.

Text Snapshot

1. "Whenever a person kills a colleague with his hands... he should be executed by the court, for he himself has killed him. But a person who hires a murderer to kill a colleague... are all considered to be shedders of blood; the sin of bloodshed is upon their hands, and they are liable for death at the hands of God." (Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:1-2)
2. "When a Jewish king desires to slay any of these murderers and the like - who are not liable for execution by the court - by virtue of his regal authority, in order to perfect society, he has the license." (Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:4)
3. "If a person kills either a Jew or a Canaanite servant, he should be executed... At first, a person who killed a resident alien should not be executed by the court... Needless to say, this ruling applies with regard to a gentile." (Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:10-11)
4. "It is a mitzvah to kill minim and apikorsim... If there is the possibility, one should kill them with a sword in public view. If that is not possible, one should develop a plan so that one can cause their deaths. ...With regard to a gentile idolater with whom we are not at war... it is, however, forbidden to save their lives if their lives are threatened." (Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 4:10-11)

Context

The Mishneh Torah, Maimonides' magnum opus, completed around 1177 CE, is far more than a simple legal code; it is a meticulously structured, comprehensive vision for Jewish life under the full purview of Halakha. Written in clear, accessible Hebrew, it sought to organize the entire body of Jewish law, encompassing everything from prayer and festivals to civil and criminal jurisprudence, into a single, cohesive work. Maimonides' ambition was to make the vast and often labyrinthine Talmudic discussions accessible to any educated Jew, thereby providing a definitive guide for practice and belief. The very act of codification was revolutionary, aimed at fostering unity and clarity within a diverse and often dispersed Jewish world.

Maimonides' Historical Setting and Legal Philosophy

Maimonides (Rambam) lived in a tumultuous 12th century, a period marked by significant intellectual and political shifts. Born in Cordoba, Spain, he experienced the intellectual ferment of Islamic Spain, but also the persecution of the Almohad dynasty, which forced his family to flee. His journey took him across North Africa, through the Land of Israel, and finally to Egypt, where he became a court physician to Saladin and a recognized leader of the Jewish community. This diaspora existence profoundly shaped his legal and philosophical outlook. As a Jew living under foreign rule, Maimonides did not operate within a sovereign Jewish state. The laws pertaining to capital punishment and judicial autonomy, therefore, were largely theoretical blueprints for an idealized future—a vision of what Jewish society should look like when it regained its sovereignty.

This context is crucial for understanding the nuances of our text. For instance, Maimonides' meticulous discussion of capital punishment by a Jewish court, including the severe evidentiary requirements, reflects a deep commitment to justice and the sanctity of life, even if its actual implementation was impossible in his time. The distinction between "death by the court" and "death at the hands of God" (Chapters 2:1-2) highlights the strict limitations on human judicial power in capital cases. Only direct, intentional killing, with prior warning and the presence of two qualified witnesses, could lead to execution by an earthly court. All other forms of "shedding blood," including killing via an agent, suicide, or leaving someone to die, were considered grave sins punishable by God. This distinction underscores a fundamental principle in Jewish law: human courts are fallible and must err on the side of mercy and caution when it comes to taking a life. The ultimate judgment, therefore, is often reserved for the divine.

The concept of the "king's authority" (Chapter 2:4) to execute beyond the court's strictures is another reflection of Maimonides' vision for a sovereign Jewish state. This regal authority (mishpat hamelucha) is not meant to be arbitrary but is granted "in order to perfect society" (letaken ha'olam). It represents an executive power to maintain order, prevent anarchy, and enforce a broader sense of justice when the strictures of formal Halakha might be too narrow to address a societal threat. This power, though extraordinary, is framed as a necessary tool for the stability and moral well-being of the collective. In a pre-modern context, where state power was less constrained by democratic norms, such authority was seen as essential for effective governance.

Social Hierarchies and Distinctions

The Mishneh Torah also reveals the social and legal hierarchies of Maimonides' era, which echo biblical and Talmudic distinctions. The text differentiates between:

• Jew: The primary focus of the legal system, with detailed rules for capital punishment.
• Canaanite Servant (Eved Canaani): A non-Jewish slave who has accepted the yoke of certain mitzvot. Maimonides explicitly states that killing a Canaanite servant is punishable by execution, "for a servant has accepted the yoke of mitzvot and has been added to 'the heritage of God'" (Chapter 2:11). This grants them a status higher than a simple gentile, demonstrating a legal recognition of their partial integration into the covenantal community, even if they remain property. This also reflects the historical reality of slavery, which Jewish law regulated rather than abolished entirely, but with unique protections not found in other ancient societies.
• Resident Alien (Ger Toshav): A gentile who has publicly committed to observing the Seven Noahide Laws (prohibitions against idolatry, blasphemy, murder, theft, sexual immorality, eating flesh torn from a living animal, and the establishment of courts of justice). While they reside within the Jewish polity, killing a ger toshav is not punishable by court execution, though it is considered a grave sin (Chapter 2:11). This category reflects a structured approach to integrating non-Jews into a Jewish society, offering protection and rights based on their adherence to fundamental moral principles.
• Gentile Idolater (Oved Kokhavim): The most distant category. Maimonides states that killing a gentile idolater with whom we are not at war is not punishable by an earthly court, and that "it is forbidden to save their lives if their lives are threatened" (Chapter 4:11). This is arguably the most challenging and controversial aspect of the text for modern sensibilities, reflecting a deep-seated theological and social concern about idolatry and the perceived threat of assimilation or subversion from outside the covenantal community in a pre-modern world.

The Challenge of Minim and Apikorsim

Perhaps the most jarring section is the directive regarding minim (Jewish idolaters or those who transgress to anger God) and apikorsim (Jews who deny the Torah and prophecy). Maimonides states, "It is a mitzvah to kill minim and apikorsim... If there is the possibility, one should kill them with a sword in public view. If that is not possible, one should develop a plan so that one can cause their deaths" (Chapter 4:10). This severe stance reflects a profound anxiety about internal heresy and challenges to the foundational tenets of Judaism. For Maimonides, minim and apikorsim threatened the spiritual and intellectual integrity of the Jewish people from within. In his view, their beliefs and actions were not mere theological disagreements but an existential threat to the covenantal relationship and the very survival of the Jewish people as a distinct entity. This uncompromising position, while shocking to modern eyes, must be understood within the context of a faith community striving for cohesion and survival in a hostile world, where theological deviation was often seen as a direct path to communal dissolution.

Modern Israel and the Enduring Legacy

Fast forward to the 20th and 21st centuries. The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 realized the millennia-old dream of Jewish sovereignty. However, this new reality brought with it unprecedented challenges. Israel is a modern, democratic state, committed (as per its Declaration of Independence) to "absolute equality of social and political rights to all its citizens irrespective of religion, race, or sex." It operates within a global framework of international law and human rights, largely rejecting capital punishment (except for Adolf Eichmann for crimes against humanity) and certainly rejecting legal distinctions based on religion or ethnicity.

The Mishneh Torah, while not directly implemented as civil law, remains a foundational text for Jewish legal thought, particularly within religious Zionist circles. The tension between its classical pronouncements and modern democratic values is palpable. How does a "Jewish and democratic state" reconcile the historical realities reflected in Maimonides' code with its aspiration to be a just and egalitarian society for all its citizens—Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze, and others?

This text forces us to confront fundamental questions about peoplehood and responsibility. What does it mean for the Jewish people to exercise sovereignty? What are our responsibilities to those within our borders who are not Jewish, or those who may be considered "heretics" by traditional standards? The Zionist project is not merely about political self-determination; it is about building a model society, a "light unto nations." This requires a continuous, honest, and courageous engagement with our tradition, discerning its enduring ethical core while acknowledging and grappling with its historical specificities and the moral evolution of humanity. It demands that we cultivate both a strong spine to defend our unique identity and a deeply open heart to embrace universal justice and human dignity for all.

Two Readings

The Mishneh Torah's laws on murder and the preservation of life present a profound challenge for any modern Jewish state. The text, a cornerstone of Jewish legal thought, meticulously defines categories of victims and perpetrators, outlining different liabilities and punishments based on their identity and the nature of the act. These distinctions, particularly concerning gentiles, resident aliens, and minim, are often at odds with contemporary universal human rights principles. To grapple with this complexity, we can approach the text through two distinct, yet interconnected, interpretive lenses that resonate with the ongoing debates within Zionism and modern Israel.

1. A Hierarchical, Context-Specific Justice System for a Sovereign Jewish Polity (Historical-Contextual/Particularistic)

This reading interprets Maimonides' laws as a comprehensive legal framework designed for a specific historical, theological, and social context: a sovereign Jewish polity operating under divine law, with inherent distinctions between different groups based on their relationship to the covenant and the land. From this perspective, the text is not merely a collection of abstract rules but a blueprint for a fully functioning Jewish state, where the preservation of its unique character and the integrity of its covenantal relationship with God are paramount.

The core of this reading rests on the understanding that Halakha (Jewish law) is divine in origin and therefore possesses an inherent authority that transcends purely human ethical systems. The distinctions Maimonides draws are not arbitrary but reflect a divinely ordained hierarchy and specific covenantal relationships. The Jewish people, as the recipients of the Torah, occupy a unique position within this framework. Their lives and the internal cohesion of their community are seen as central to the divine plan, and the legal system is designed to safeguard this particularistic identity. This is not to diminish the value of other human lives, but to articulate a justice system structured around the unique mission and status of the Jewish people as a nation consecrated to God.

The concept of "sovereignty and social order" is central to this interpretation. Maimonides wrote the Mishneh Torah as a vision for a fully autonomous Jewish state, one that possessed the full range of governmental powers, including the administration of justice. The stringent requirements for capital punishment by an earthly court, such as direct action, prior warning (hatra'ah), and the testimony of two unimpeachable witnesses, highlight the immense gravity of taking a life. However, when these conditions are not met, the text introduces the concept of "death at the hands of God" for those who are "shedders of blood" through indirect means (e.g., hiring a murderer, suicide, placing someone before a beast). This distinction acknowledges the universal wrongness of murder while delineating the specific, limited scope of human judicial capacity under Halakha. It doesn't absolve the perpetrator but transfers the ultimate judgment to a higher authority, thereby maintaining the strict purity of human courts. The Shorshei HaYam commentary, for instance, delves into the biblical verses cited by Maimonides, noting the phrase "will I demand an account" (אדרוש) to indicate divine judgment for indirect killing, as opposed to "his blood shall be shed" (דמו ישפך) for direct killing by human courts. This detailed textual analysis reinforces the particularity of the legal categories.

Furthermore, the "king's authority" to execute individuals not liable for court execution, "in order to perfect society" (letaken ha'olam), is understood here as a necessary executive power to ensure the stability and moral fabric of the Jewish polity. This power is not viewed as an arbitrary usurpation of judicial process but as a legitimate and essential function of a sovereign ruler to prevent anarchy and maintain public order in extraordinary circumstances. In a pre-modern state, the welfare of the collective often necessitated actions that went beyond the letter of strict judicial procedure, guided by the overarching aim of societal perfection. This reflects a pragmatic understanding of governance, where the sovereign must have the tools to protect the community from both internal and external threats, even when strict legal proof is lacking.

The treatment of minim and apikorsim (Jewish heretics or apostates) is, from this perspective, a stark illustration of the imperative to protect the spiritual and ideological integrity of the Jewish people. In Maimonides' view, these individuals posed an existential threat to the very foundations of the Jewish faith and communal identity. Their denial of core tenets or their active transgression "for the sake of angering God" was seen as an internal sabotage of the covenant. The directive to "kill them" and not save their lives, while deeply unsettling to modern ethics, can be understood as an uncompromising stance required to defend the collective spiritual health and survival of a vulnerable people in a world where religious identity was often intertwined with political and physical survival. This is not about individual hatred but about protecting the very essence of Jewish peoplehood from internal dissolution. The Shorshei HaYam commentary further complicates this by discussing the principle of אין שליח לדבר עבירה (there is no agent for a transgression), which implies that an agent is fully responsible for their actions. However, the text's application regarding murder by an agent being liable to Heaven for Jews, but potentially to an earthly court for Noahides (as Maimonides rules elsewhere), shows the specific, sometimes more lenient, application of human jurisdiction to Jews in capital cases under the strictures of Halakha, while Noahides might face human judgment for a wider range of actions. This reinforces the distinct legal frameworks.

Regarding gentiles, the distinctions are seen as reflections of their relationship to the Jewish covenant and the Jewish state. A ger toshav (resident alien), by accepting the Noahide laws, gains a protected, though not fully equal, status, reflecting a degree of moral universalism within the particularistic framework. However, a "gentile idolater with whom we are not at war" is treated differently. While not to be actively harmed, the prohibition against actively saving their lives (Chapter 4:11) is interpreted as a measure of communal self-preservation and the maintenance of distinct boundaries. In a pre-modern world, where theological differences often manifested as existential threats, this approach was seen as necessary to prevent assimilation and to protect the specific character of the Jewish collective. It is a pragmatic, rather than universally humanitarian, ethic, rooted in the imperative of Jewish survival and the upholding of the unique covenantal relationship.

For Zionism, this reading resonates with the desire to build a strong, self-determining Jewish state that prioritizes its Jewish character and continuity. It emphasizes the right of the Jewish people to define their own legal and moral parameters within their sovereign state, even if those parameters appear particularistic to outsiders. While modern Israel does not literally implement these specific capital laws, the underlying spirit of unapologetic Jewish self-determination, communal self-defense, and the prioritization of Jewish continuity and character is a powerful undercurrent in certain segments of Zionist thought. This perspective argues for the necessity of maintaining a robust Jewish identity and distinctiveness, acknowledging that universalism, while important, cannot fully subsume the particularistic mission and historical imperative of a Jewish state. It embodies the "strong spine" of Jewish peoplehood, recognizing the inherent right of the Jewish nation to forge its own destiny based on its ancient heritage.

2. An Evolving Moral Imperative Towards Universal Justice and Sanctity of Life (Universalist/Interpretive)

This reading approaches Maimonides' text through an interpretive lens that emphasizes the enduring moral principles within Judaism, seeking to align them with universal human rights and an evolving understanding of justice. It views the distinctions in the text as historically conditioned and therefore open to reinterpretation or re-contextualization in the modern era, particularly within the framework of a modern, democratic Jewish state. This perspective champions the "open heart" of the Jewish tradition, advocating for a broader, more inclusive application of its highest ethical ideals.

The starting point for this reading is the overarching principle of the sanctity of life (Pikuach Nefesh) that permeates Jewish thought. The profound gravity of murder, as meticulously detailed by Maimonides through the extensive discussion of liability and punishment (even if "by God"), demonstrates an inherent value placed on human life. The meticulousness of the laws, the insistence on stringent evidentiary standards for capital punishment by human courts, and the emphasis on divine judgment for indirect killing, all underscore a deep concern for the preservation of life and the avoidance of judicial error. The Ohr Sameach commentary, in its discussion of execution methods and the strictures surrounding hazamah (disqualification of witnesses), subtly reinforces the extraordinary caution required in capital cases. This suggests that while distinctions existed, the core impulse of the law was to protect life, making earthly executions exceedingly rare and difficult to achieve.

From this perspective, the "king's authority" to go beyond the letter of the law to "perfect society" is reinterpreted not as a license for arbitrary power, but as a recognition of the inherent flexibility within Halakha to adapt to changing social realities and moral imperatives. This executive power, hora'at sha'ah (an emergency decree) or mishpat hamelucha, is seen as a mechanism for the state to uphold the spirit of justice and ensure societal well-being when rigid application of the law might lead to greater societal harm or injustice. In a modern context, this flexibility would logically lead to more inclusive and equitable applications of justice, rather than more exclusive ones. It becomes an imperative to broaden the scope of protection and apply universal standards, seeing the "perfection of society" as encompassing all its inhabitants.

The distinctions regarding ger toshav, Canaanite servants, and other gentiles are critically examined as products of a pre-modern, non-egalitarian, and often confrontational world. These categories, with their varying degrees of legal protection, are understood as reflecting the social realities and limited universalist ethical frameworks of Maimonides' time, rather than eternal divine mandates for a modern state. The absence of Jewish sovereignty for nearly two millennia also shaped these laws, rendering them often theoretical. With the return of sovereignty and the rise of universal human rights, this reading argues that these historical distinctions must be re-evaluated through the lens of Jewish moral progress. The core Jewish value of "love your neighbor as yourself" (Leviticus 19:18), and the repeated biblical injunction to treat the stranger justly, become the guiding principles for a modern state.

The most challenging directives concerning minim and apikorsim are, from this universalist perspective, viewed as historical artifacts reflecting a specific historical anxiety about internal dissent and the fragility of a minority community's survival. In a modern, democratic society that values freedom of thought and expression, and where Jewish continuity is secured by a sovereign state, such directives are morally unacceptable and practically unworkable. This reading would argue that the "mitzvah to kill" should be reinterpreted metaphorically—as an imperative to combat dangerous ideologies through intellectual and spiritual means, through robust education and engagement, rather than through physical violence. The emphasis shifts from physical elimination to a vigorous defense of ideas and community through persuasion and example, aligning with the "open heart" ideal of intellectual openness and compassion.

Furthermore, this reading highlights the Noahide laws as a foundational universalist ethic in Judaism, extending basic moral obligations to all humanity, regardless of their covenantal status. The prophetic vision of Israel as a "light unto nations" (Isaiah 49:6) and the concept of tikkun olam (repairing the world) are central to this interpretation. Modern Israel, striving to be such a light, must champion universal human rights and apply principles of equality and justice to all its citizens and residents, regardless of background. This means actively saving lives, promoting justice, and ensuring equal legal protection for all, drawing from the spirit of texts like "One law shall be for you and for the stranger who dwells with you" (Numbers 15:16). The Shorshei HaYam commentary's discussion about Rabbi Chanina's view that Noahides are liable to human courts for various forms of indirect killing, in contrast to Israelites, could even be interpreted as a subtle recognition within the tradition of a more universal application of human justice to all, outside the specific constraints applied to the Jewish covenantal community.

For Zionism, this reading sees the establishment of Israel as the ultimate opportunity to embody Jewish moral responsibility on a global stage. It is an opportunity to build a society that transcends the limitations of past legal contexts and embraces the highest ethical aspirations of the Jewish tradition in a truly universalist framework. This means demonstrating that Jewish sovereignty can be a force for justice, human dignity, and equality for all its inhabitants. It advocates for legal equality and protection for every individual, drawing on the deepest wellsprings of compassion and justice within Jewish thought. This approach embodies the "open heart," recognizing that true strength comes not from exclusion, but from an expansive embrace of shared humanity and a commitment to justice that extends to all.

Civic Move

Sanctity of Life & Justice: Bridging Ancient Wisdom and Modern Ethics in Israel

The complex and often challenging legal distinctions found in Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, particularly regarding murder and the differing status of various individuals, present a critical opportunity for dialogue and growth within modern Israel. Rather than shying away from these tensions, an honest and hopeful educational initiative can transform them into a catalyst for strengthening Israel's identity as both a Jewish and a democratic state, committed to universal human rights and the sanctity of life for all.

Initiative Name: "Sanctity of Life & Justice: Bridging Ancient Wisdom and Modern Ethics in Israel"

Goal: To foster deeper understanding, critical engagement, and constructive dialogue within Israeli society about how classical Jewish legal texts (like Maimonides on murder) can inform, challenge, and ultimately be reconciled with modern democratic values, universal human rights, and the lived realities of Israel's diverse population. The aim is to move beyond simplistic interpretations—whether apologetic or condemnatory—towards a nuanced, future-minded approach to justice, peoplehood, and shared society. This initiative seeks to empower individuals to engage with their heritage responsibly, promoting both a "strong spine" in affirming Jewish identity and an "open heart" in embracing universal moral responsibilities.

Target Audience: This initiative is designed for a broad and diverse audience, recognizing that the questions it addresses are central to all segments of Israeli society:

• High School and University Students: The next generation of leaders and citizens.
• Educators: Teachers in both religious and secular, Jewish and Arab school systems.
• Legal Professionals and Policymakers: Those directly shaping Israel's legal framework and public policy.
• Religious Leaders and Scholars: Rabbis, imams, priests, and academic scholars of Jewish, Islamic, and Christian law and ethics.
• Civil Society Activists and Community Leaders: Individuals working on the ground in interfaith dialogue, shared society initiatives, and human rights advocacy.
• General Public: Any citizen interested in the foundational values and future direction of the State of Israel.

Components and Steps:

1. Curriculum Development:

   • Modular Learning Units: Develop flexible, scaffolded learning units focused on core texts like Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life, alongside other foundational Jewish texts that emphasize universal justice, the sanctity of life (e.g., Genesis 1:27 on humanity created in God's image; Leviticus 19:33-34 on loving the stranger; prophetic calls for justice), and Noahide laws.
   • Diverse Commentaries and Perspectives: Integrate a wide array of classical and modern commentaries. This would include traditional mefarshim (like Ohr Sameach and Shorshei HaYam from the provided source, which reveal internal debates and interpretive complexities), alongside modern Israeli thinkers, legal scholars, ethicists, and even non-Jewish perspectives on universal ethics. Translations and explanations for all Hebrew/Aramaic texts must be provided.
   • Historical and Socio-Political Context: Crucially, each unit will thoroughly contextualize the texts within Maimonides' historical era, explaining the social, political, and theological realities that shaped his rulings. It will then bridge this to the historical development of Zionism, the Israeli Declaration of Independence, key Israeli Supreme Court rulings on human rights, and the contemporary challenges of a diverse citizenry.
   • Comparative Ethics: Incorporate elements of comparative legal ethics, exploring how other religious traditions (e.g., Islam, Christianity) and international human rights law grapple with similar dilemmas of justice, legal distinctions, and capital punishment. This broadens the perspective and highlights both common ground and unique challenges.
   • Critical Thinking and Application: Each unit will include structured prompts for critical thinking, encouraging participants to ask: "How would this text be understood and applied in contemporary Israel?" "What are the ethical challenges it presents for a modern democratic state?" "How do we derive enduring moral values from this ancient wisdom, while acknowledging its historical limitations?"

2. Facilitator Training Program:

   • Expert Cohort: Recruit and train a dedicated corps of highly skilled facilitators capable of navigating sensitive and potentially contentious topics. These facilitators will be drawn from diverse backgrounds—religious, secular, Jewish, Arab—and possess expertise in textual analysis, historical literacy, and an understanding of contemporary Israeli society.
   • Dialogue and Conflict Resolution Skills: Training will heavily emphasize techniques for fostering respectful dialogue across differences, active listening, empathy-building, and non-confrontational conflict resolution. Facilitators will learn how to create safe spaces for participants to express challenging views and engage in profound ethical inquiry without resorting to sensationalism or personal attacks.
   • Deep Textual Immersion: Facilitators will undergo intensive study of the curriculum, ensuring a deep grasp of the texts, commentaries, and historical contexts, enabling them to guide participants through complex legal and moral arguments.

3. Multi-Platform Dialogue Forums & Workshops:

   • School-Based Programs: Implement regular, structured workshops in high schools across Israel (both Jewish and Arab, religious and secular). These programs will bring students together to study the texts, share their perspectives, and discuss the implications for their lives and for the future of their shared society.
   • University Seminars: Offer advanced, credit-bearing seminars at universities for students in law, philosophy, Jewish studies, and political science. These seminars will engage with the material with academic rigor, encouraging deep research and critical analysis, potentially leading to publications or policy recommendations.
   • Public Lectures and Panels: Organize a series of high-profile public lectures and panel discussions featuring prominent scholars, legal experts, policymakers, and public figures. These events will tackle specific dilemmas raised by the texts, bringing the conversation to a wider audience and fostering public intellectual discourse.
   • Inter-Communal Dialogue Groups: Establish ongoing, facilitated dialogue groups for religious leaders, community activists, and local residents from different backgrounds. These groups will focus on building bridges, fostering mutual understanding, and identifying shared values and common challenges in applying principles of justice and human dignity in their daily lives.

4. Policy and Legal Roundtables:

   • Bridging Halakha and State Law: Convene regular, closed-door roundtables for legal scholars, sitting judges, attorneys, and policymakers. The purpose is not to advocate for the direct implementation of Maimonides' capital laws, but to explore the ideological, philosophical, and moral implications of these classical texts for contemporary Israeli law and public policy.
   • "Jewish and Democratic" Nexus: These discussions will critically examine the tension points between Israel's "Jewish" character and its "democratic" principles, using these texts as a lens. The aim is to contribute to a sophisticated understanding of how Israel can strengthen its democratic foundations and commitment to human rights while honoring and drawing inspiration from its Jewish heritage in ethically responsible ways. Topics might include the role of religion in public life, equality before the law, and the state's responsibility to all its citizens.

5. Digital Platform and Resource Hub:

   • Accessible Online Repository: Create a user-friendly, multilingual (Hebrew, Arabic, English) online platform. This hub will host the complete curriculum, translated texts with commentaries, video lectures, interviews with experts, discussion prompts, and a curated library of relevant articles and resources.
   • Interactive Forums: Implement moderated online forums for participants to continue their discussions, share insights, and pose questions, fostering a vibrant, ongoing community of learners.
   • Showcase Success Stories: Feature testimonials and success stories from participants and communities engaged in the initiative, inspiring broader participation and demonstrating the positive impact of courageous dialogue.

Potential Partners:

• Sefaria: As a primary textual resource and potential platform partner, offering its vast library and permalinks for all cited texts.
• Israeli Government Ministries: Ministry of Education, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Religious Affairs.
• Academic Institutions: Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv University, Bar-Ilan University, University of Haifa, Al-Qasemi Academic College of Education, etc.
• Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs): Organizations dedicated to interfaith dialogue, shared society, human rights, and legal reform (e.g., Abraham Initiatives, Adalah, Tag Meir, B'Tselem, Sikkuy – Afor All).
• Religious Councils and Leadership Bodies: The Chief Rabbinate of Israel, local religious councils, and representatives of Muslim, Christian, and Druze communities.
• International Human Rights Organizations: To provide a comparative and global perspective on legal ethics and human rights.

Expected Outcomes:

• Enhanced Textual Literacy: Participants will develop a deeper, more nuanced understanding of classical Jewish legal texts and their historical context.
• Critical Engagement and Moral Agency: Individuals will be empowered to engage critically with challenging aspects of their heritage, developing their moral agency in navigating the complexities of modern identity.
• Increased Empathy and Mutual Understanding: The dialogue platforms will foster greater empathy and understanding among diverse segments of Israeli society, breaking down stereotypes and building relationships.
• Richer Understanding of Israeli Identity: The initiative will contribute to a more robust and nuanced understanding of what it means to be a "Jewish and democratic state," exploring the creative tensions and potential syntheses between these two pillars.
• Contribution to a Just Society: By encouraging thoughtful engagement with these profound ethical questions, the initiative will contribute to Israel's ongoing journey toward becoming a society that embodies justice, equality, and the sanctity of life for all its inhabitants.

This "Civic Move" is an act of hope, a belief that by honestly confronting the complexities of our tradition, we can draw from its deepest wellsprings of wisdom to build a more just, compassionate, and resilient future for all in Israel.

Takeaway

The Mishneh Torah on murder and the preservation of life forces us into an uncomfortable but essential confrontation with profound ethical questions at the heart of Jewish nationhood. Maimonides' meticulous code, while a towering achievement, reflects a specific historical context and legal philosophy that embraced distinctions in legal status and liability. For modern Israel, a state striving to embody both its particularistic Jewish heritage and universal democratic values, these texts present a critical challenge.

However, this challenge is also an opportunity. It compels us to move beyond simplistic interpretations, to cultivate historical literacy, and to engage in candid, compassionate dialogue. The lesson is clear: the "strong spine" of Jewish self-determination, which champions the unique identity and security of the Jewish people, must be inextricably paired with the "open heart" of universal responsibility, embracing human dignity, equality, and justice for all. The path forward for Israel lies in continuous learning, ethical interpretation, and a courageous commitment to building a society where the sanctity of every human life is paramount, drawing from the deepest ethical wellsprings of our tradition to inform a truly just and hopeful future.

Citations

• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:2: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.2?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:4: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.4?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:10: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.10?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:11: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.11?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 4:10: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.4.10?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 4:11: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.4.11?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Ohr Sameach on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:1:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Ohr_Sameach_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.1.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Shorshei HaYam on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:1:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Shorshei_HaYam_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.1.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:1:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.1.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:10:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.10.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:10:2: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.10.2?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:11:1: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.11.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:11:2: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.11.2?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Murderer and the Preservation of Life 2:11:3: https://www.sefaria.org/Steinsaltz_on_Mishneh_Torah%2C_Murderer_and_the_Preservation_of_Life.2.11.3?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Genesis 9:6: https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.9.6?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Genesis 9:5: https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.9.5?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Exodus 21:14: https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.21.14?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Exodus 21:21: https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.21.21?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Exodus 21:20: https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus.21.20?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Numbers 35:17-18: https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.35.17-18?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Numbers 35:16: https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.35.16?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Numbers 35:21: https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.35.21?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Numbers 35:20: https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.35.20?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Leviticus 24:17: https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.24.17?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Proverbs 28:17: https://www.sefaria.org/Proverbs.28.17?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• I Kings 21:25: https://www.sefaria.org/I_Kings.21.25?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• I Kings 22:21: https://www.sefaria.org/I_Kings.22.21?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Leviticus 19:16: https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.19.16?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Deuteronomy 19:19: https://www.sefaria.org/Deuteronomy.19.19?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Numbers 15:16: https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.15.16?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Leviticus 19:18: https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.19.18?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Leviticus 19:33-34: https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.19.33-34?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
• Genesis 1:27: https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.1.27?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en