06 Oct THE ISRAELI RAMBO; WHO IS A HERO?

The Israeli
passengers aboard
the hijacked airplane
were repeatedly
described as heroes.
In the aftermath of
the terrifying ordeal,
their courage, composure, and determination
to confront the danger were widely praised.
The Prime Minister himself referred to them
on multiple occasions as heroes, reflecting
the natural human admiration for people who
display courage in the face of mortal danger.
But what exactly makes a person a hero?
At first glance, the Torah seems to offer a very
different definition. Ben Zoma teaches in
Pirkei Avot (4:1): “Who is a hero? He who
conquers his inclination.” If so, one might
think that what we commonly call heroism—
physical courage, the ability to confront an
enemy, or the willingness to stand firm in a
dangerous situation—is not the type of
gevurah that the Torah considers truly
praiseworthy. According to this understanding,
true heroism is found not in overcoming an
external enemy, but in mastering oneself.
Yet when we examine the words of Chazal and
the verses of Tanach, the picture is far more
nuanced. The Torah and Nevi’im repeatedly
use the term “gibor” to describe people who
possess physical strength, courage, and
military ability. We find expressions such as
“gibor chayil,” “ish milchamah,” and “giborei
chayil,” all referring to people capable of
fighting and overcoming their enemies.
Indeed, throughout Tanach we find people
described as “gibborim” specifically because
of their strength and ability in battle.
Already in the Torah, we find the term “gibor”
used in reference to physical strength.
Regarding Nimrod, the Torah says: “He was a
mighty hunter before Hashem” (Bereishit
10:9). Thus, the term “gibor” itself is used to
describe a person possessing strength and
practical ability—in this case, the strength of a
hunter.
In the days of David, we find this even more
explicitly. When Shaul seeks to know who
David is, one of his attendants says: “Behold,
I have seen a son of Yishai the Bethlehemite,
who knows how to play, a mighty man of
valor, a man of war, discerning in speech, a
handsome man, and Hashem is with him”
(Shmuel I 16:18).
The word “mighty” in the pasuk here, as in
many other places, is the Hebrew word
“gibor,” explicitly describing David as a
mighty and courageous man.
Here “gibor chayil” and “ish milchamah” are
mentioned together, and it is clear that “gibor”
does not mean one who conquers his
inclination, but rather a person possessing
courage, strength, and military ability.
Similarly, regarding Gideon, when an angel of
Hashem appears to him, he says: “Hashem is
with you, mighty man of valor” (Shoftim
6:12). These words are spoken to Gideon
before he is sent to save Israel from Midian,
and the title “gibor chayil” is directly

connected to his military mission and his
ability to go to war.
We find the same regarding Yiftach: “And
Yiftach the Gileadite was a mighty man of
valor” (Shoftim 11:1), immediately followed
by the account of his war against Ammon.
Here as well, “gibor chayil” describes a person
possessing practical and military strength.
In Divrei Hayamim, we find even more
explicit expressions. Regarding the men who
came to assist David, it says: “And they were
among the mighty men, helpers in the war”
(Divrei Hayamim I 12:2). Later, regarding the
men of Gad, it says: “Mighty men of valor,
men of the army for battle, who could handle
shield and spear, whose faces were like the
faces of lions” (ibid. 12:9). It further says:
“For they were all mighty men of valor, and
they became officers in the army” (ibid.
12:22), and regarding the tribe of Shimon:
“Mighty men of valor for the army” (ibid.
12:26).
We therefore see that in Tanach itself, the
word “gibor” is explicitly used to describe
strength, courage, and military ability. If so,
how did Ben Zoma say, “Who is mighty? He
who conquers his inclination”?
It appears that the explanation is that the
Mishnah does not intend to negate the very
concept of physical heroism. Rather, it teaches
that there are different levels of gevurah.
There is external heroism—a person who is
courageous and capable of fighting and
overcoming his enemy—and there is internal
heroism—a person who masters himself and is
capable of conquering his inclination. The
Mishnah does not mean that the former is not
heroism at all, but that the latter is the greater
and higher form of heroism, the one in which
a person is truly worthy of praise.
The Bartenura explains the Mishnah
accordingly: “Who is a hero who is worthy of
being praised for his heroism? He who
conquers his inclination.” This implies that
physical courage is also considered a form of
heroism, but the person who conquers his own
nature is the one who is truly worthy of praise.
Also Rabbeinu Yonah, in his commentary on
Pirkei Avot explains that there are two types of
heroism: one is to be a mighty warrior whose
heart never fears, and the other is to conquer
one’s inclination. Ben Zoma teaches that
conquering one’s inclination is greater, for
being a mighty warrior is not such a great
accomplishment.
This is also explicit in the commentary of the
Midrash Shmuel on the Mishnah. He begins
with the question that Chazal say that at the

time of a person’s formation, it is decreed
whether he will be strong or weak. The Tanna
therefore comes to teach that it should not be
assumed that the one who was decreed to be
strong is considered a gibor. Rather, the greater
hero is the one who conquers his inclination.
He writes:
“Certainly, both are called mighty, because
both are fighting—one against his inclination
and the other against his enemy.”
The Midrash Shmuel therefore states explicitly
that both types of people are called giborim:
the one who fights his inclination and the one
who fights his enemy.
He continues:
“One who possesses this heroism, the one who
conquers his inclination, also possesses the
other form of heroism, the heroism of
defeating enemies.”
The Tiferet Yisrael likewise explains the
Mishnah in a way that clearly distinguishes
between possessing physical strength and
possessing the type of heroism that deserves
praise. Physical strength or power, in itself, is
not something to be praised. Courage,
however, is indeed a form of heroism.
Nevertheless, the greater praise belongs to
those who are able to overcome their desires
and master their own inclinations.
He writes:
“For if we praise a mighty man, it is not
because he has the strength to strangle and
murder tens of thousands of human beings like
doves and young pigeons, for if so, how is he
more praiseworthy than wild beasts, lions and
tigers, together?”
“But his praise is that he is not fainthearted,
and he uses his strength for a lofty purpose. He
does not fear bodily harm, and he is even
willing to risk his life, solely in order to
achieve that lofty purpose that he seeks to
accomplish.”
His words make clear that the existence of a
courageous person is not in question. A person
can be a “gibor” because he possesses courage,
because he is not fainthearted, and because he
is capable of standing in the face of danger and
even risking his life. What makes such strength
praiseworthy, however, is not the strength
itself. Heroism becomes a virtue when a
person uses it “for a lofty purpose.”
We can now understand the verse that Ben
Zoma brings as his proof: “He who is slow to
anger is better than the mighty, and he who
rules his spirit than he who captures a city”
(Mishlei 16:32). The verse does not say that
the one who captures a city is not a gibor. On
the contrary, it presents the conqueror of a city

as an example of a person possessing great
strength—a person capable of fighting,
overcoming enemies, and capturing a city. It
merely teaches that there is a form of heroism
greater than this: “he who rules his spirit.”
Capturing a city is heroism directed outward;
conquering one’s inclination is heroism
directed inward. The first overcomes others,
while the second overcomes himself. This is
why Ben Zoma said, “Who is mighty? He who
conquers his inclination”—not because there
are no other forms of heroism, but because this
is the higher form of heroism.
This is also the deeper meaning of the words
of David HaMelech: “Who trains my hands
for battle, and my fingers for war” (Tehillim
144:1). David does not view the ability to fight
as something that contradicts the service of
Hashem. On the contrary, he thanks Hashem
for training his hands for battle and his fingers
for war. There is therefore a proper place for
physical and military ability when it is used
for a worthy purpose.
At the same time, David himself teaches that a
person may not become arrogant because of
his strength or place his trust in it as the source
of his salvation. Rather: “Some trust in
chariots and some in horses, but we will
invoke the Name of Hashem” (Tehillim 20:8).
A person may possess chariots and horses,
weapons of war, and physical ability, while
nevertheless recognizing that his strength is
merely a tool in his hands, and that salvation
comes from Hashem.
From here, we can also understand the
meaning of heroism in a time of danger. The
Torah does not demand that a person remain
helpless when he or another person is facing
danger. On the contrary, it says, “Do not stand
idly by the blood of your fellow” (Vayikra
19:16), and Chazal derive from this (Sanhedrin
73a) that one who sees his fellow drowning in
a river, or being attacked by bandits, is
obligated to save him. Courage and the ability
to act in a time of danger can therefore be part
of a person’s obligation.