“If men are fighting with each other, and the wife of one comes up to help her husband get away from the man attacking him by grabbing the attacker’s private parts with her hand, you are to cut off her hand; show no pity.” -Deuteronomy 25:11-12
From verse 25, we encounter quite a curve ball of a law concerning a wife interfering with a fight her husband is involved in.
The situation we’re presented with is of two men who are trading blows with another and all of a sudden the wife of one of the men decides to help her husband out by reaching out and clutching the genitals of his opponent.
Per the Torah, we’re told if she does such a thing, her hand is to be cut off, no questions asked.
OUCH!
You’re probably thinking to yourself could something like this even realistically happen?
If that’s what you’re thinking you’re not alone because it turns out the Rabbis thought the same thing when attempting to interpret this verse.
Here’s why.
A good majority of the laws we’ve studied in the Torah so far mainly deal with prohibiting something that regularly occurred.
The idea of a women reaching out and successfully being able to grab the private parts of a foe who was battling with her husband hardly seems to be a realistic possibility.
In addition, there are zero records in Jewish literature of such a thing occurring even once!
So what exactly are we dealing with here?
FIRST, we’re NOT talking about two soldiers fighting on a battlefield during a war.
This is about a common civil disagreement breaking out between two men that ends up erupting into a physical fight.
SECOND, the punishment of cutting the woman’s hand off seems completely disproportionate to her action of reaching out and grabbing a man’s genitals.
It doesn’t seem to fit what we know about the Lord and His justice system.
THIRD, the TORAH itself rejects bodily mutilation as a form of punishment.
Given these three factors, the Jewish sages knew they had to dig a little deeper to understand exactly what the Lord intended from these verses.
Here’s what they came up with.
They concluded these verses are NOT to be taken literally but figuratively.
They believed what was really being communicated here is the “Principle Of Fairness” which is a key aspect of God’s holiness.
A man having his genitals suddenly grabbed by a woman would be a horrible and humiliating experience for him.
In addition, there isn’t anything in these verses to indicate that the entanglement would have caused any great bodily damage to her husband.
Hence, for the woman to suddenly intervene on behalf of her husband by grabbing the genitals of the other man would be considered unfair and cheating.
Next, let’s take a look at the verses that immediately follow dealing with the correct use of weights and measures.
“Do not have two differing weights in your bag—one heavy, one light. Do not have two differing measures in your house—one large, one small. You must have accurate and honest weights and measures, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you.-Deuteronomy 25:13-15
Here’s the connection I want you to catch.
Notice that verse 12 deals with a man’s genital organs and then immediately afterwards we come to a verse dealing with two weights inside a pouch.
Actually, it literally says two “stones” inside a pouch.
I think the reference is quite obvious.
Verse 14 which follows immediately after goes on to speak about how it is wrong to have larger and smaller weights in your home.
This is of course connected to verse 13 which deals with having a large and small stone in your pouch.
Note that the conclusion of the 2nd law is a warning to use the SAME set of weights and measures when buying and selling.
Remember, I told you before that Scripture is filled with a ton of sexual illustrations and metaphors.
Well, this one is no exception.
We’re dealing with what writers call a double entendre which is the overlapping of two thoughts and words that simultaneously possess parallel meanings.
That’s right.
Verse 13 dealing with not having different weights in one pouch is really serving as interconnecting bridge for the law of an improper intervention by a woman in a fight by grabbing a man’s pouch with his stones in it.
So what’s the conclusion of the matter here?
BOTH of these laws are dealing with the matter of God’s fairness and the use of the words “stones” and “pouch” are being used to bridge the connection between a woman improperly interfering in a physical altercation between two men and the unfair use of a different set of weights and measures to trick an innocent and unsuspecting person.
And you know what, the weirdest thought just occurred to me.
I wonder if there’s a connection between all this and URIM and THUMMIM which is also I think two stones inside a pouch.
Anyway, I’m stopping here.
See you all next time.
The Bible is also concerned with the support and continual care of a woman. How can she be blamed for preserving her means of survival? An injured husband can’t work and take care of her and, if they have any, their children? Families are also encouraged to stick together. I don’t know about this one.