To release, or not to release? That is the question all Israel is asking these days. It concerns the price Israel must pay for the hostage deal, namely releasing hundreds of Palestinian terrorists with blood on their hands, who would interpret it as their victory, ready to continue their bloody rampage.
Many arguments for and against the deal have been raised. It turns out, they echo a debate which has been going on within Jewish communities for centuries. The commandment of redeeming captives has been extensively discussed in halakhic literature, which sadly reflects the prevalence of kidnapping and captivity throughout the long history of the Jewish people.
The primary position was articulated by Maimonides, the 12th century Sephardic scholar, who said: “There is no greater commandment than redeeming captives.” He goes on to say: “Redeeming captives (pidyon shvuyim) takes precedence over feeding the poor and clothing them, since the captives are included among the hungry, thirsty, and naked, in danger of losing their lives. And one who averts his eyes from redeeming them transgresses against the commandments ‘do not harden your heart or shut your hand’ (Deuteronomy 15:7) and ‘do not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor’ (Leviticus 19:16) … and nullifies the commandment ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’ (Leviticus 19:18) and many similar precepts.”
It would seem from the above that pidyon shvuyim is an absolute commandment, which must be followed at all times. But there is one major exception, as explained in the Mishnah (Gittin 4:6):
“One does not ransom captives for more than their value because of Tikkun Olam (for the good order of the world; as a precaution for the general good).” One of the reasons for this ruling is that otherwise, the kidnappers would be encouraged to continue abducting people because it pays.
The debate in Jewish tradition revolves around attempts to balance these two contradictory principles. When does one pay more than fair value? There are many stories in the Talmud which illustrate the case. It seems that the ransom was often paid in higher than reasonable value. On the other hand, there are stories showing that the opposite also applied. For instance, rabbi Meir of Rothenburg, born 1220 in Worms, Germany, who had become a known and respected leader, was kidnapped when he tried to travel to the Holy Land. The Jewish community wanted to pay high ransom as he was considered an important leader, but he refused because of the high amount. He died in prison, and only 14 years after his death, a wealthy Jew paid an exorbitant sum for the return of his body. Both are now resting next to each other at the cemetery in Worms.
We can find many stories illustrating both sides of this dilemma. As usual, the Jewish tradition does not provide one authoritative answer. It just shows the pros and cons, and one has to come to his own conclusion.
It is worth noting that all these quotes from Jewish halakha stem from the time of the exile, when Jews lived as a minority in foreign lands, often subject to harassment, persecution and kidnapping.
In the Bible, stories describing the rescue of hostages paint a different picture. In Genesis 14, Abram set out to rescue Lot after he had been taken hostage in the war of the kings. He pursued the kidnappers and “he brought back all the goods and also brought back his brother Lot and his goods, as well as the women and the people” (Genesis 14:16).
Another successful rescue operation is described in 1 Samuel 30 when the Amalekites invaded the South and burned the city of Ziklag and took captive all the women and those who were there, from small to great. When David returned, he was greatly distressed. But he strengthened himself in the Lord (v. 6). Then they went on a rescue mission and with the help of an Egyptian slave who had been abandoned by the Amalekites they received intelligence, and went in to rescue all the hostages, including David’s wives.
These two cases represent clear military victories, where the enemies were totally defeated. Then, we have the great rescue story of the Exodus from Egypt, a demonstration of God’s own miraculous deliverance of a whole nation from slavery, accompanied by a stunning military victory.
In the modern history of Israel, there have been several successful rescue operations, the most famous being the daring raid at Entebbe, Uganda, in July 1976. Here, Israeli commandoes led by Jonathan Netanyahu, the only casualty, surprised the enemy and rescued 102 hostages (three were killed) at an airport thousands of kilometers from home soil.
In light of these stories, it is evident that the current deal is not the case of a complete military victory. Since Israel had to negotiate with the murderers, it rather resembles the stories from the time of exile, where Jews were scattered and had to pay for the release of hostages. A sobering thought, which makes the question under which conditions is the release justified even more relevant.
Opinions regarding the current deal go in both directions. One argument is that the release of terrorists clearly poses danger to the community, and the limitations to the price paid is meant to prevent this. And it is true. These hundreds of murderers are emboldened and will try to carry on their murderous vision.
On the other hand, the events of October 7 are unique and out of proportion. Discussions about redeeming hostages in Jewish tradition usually deal with the kidnapping of one or a few persons. On October 7, hundreds were kidnapped. Therefore, it is not about weighing the interest of an individual versus the community. Both courses of action affect the community, so that one legitimate interest of the community is pitted against another legitimate interest of the community.
Another argument says that the fact that the hostages are in danger of life is a certainty: ultimately, they would die in captivity, whereas the possibility of future terrorist acts is just that – a possibility, which can be mitigated by preventative measures, heightened vigilance and security. Therefore, it speaks for the deal.
From a Christian perspective, one sentence by Maimonides rings familiar: “The captive is included among the hungry, thirsty, and naked, in danger of losing their life.” It reminds us of the words Jesus says in Matthew 25:
I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me… inasmuch as you did to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.
Jesus considers each hostage as though they were brothers and sisters and those who contend for their release as if they did it for Him.
Let us pray for Israeli society as they grapple with this sad and humiliating dilemma. And let us continue to give hope, knowing that the day will come when the One will be revealed who was “sent to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound.” (Isaah 61:1) May He come quickly, in our days.
Main photo: Released hostages return to Israel in January 2025 as part of the hostage deal. (Credit: IDF)
