A brief passage in the book of Deuteronomy presents the law of the “wayward and rebellious son,” whose parents may bring him before the elders of the city and testify to his bad behavior; after which the elders can sentence him to death by stoning. In the Talmud’s view, this punishment is justified because it prevents this child from growing into an adult who will commit truly heinous crimes; if executed now, “he will die innocent rather than die guilty.” The talmudic sages then go on to impose restrictions on who qualifies for this punishment: there is only a three-month age range during which the child is liable; he must demonstrate that he is, in the Torah’s words, “a glutton and a drunkard” by eating raw (or very rare) meat and drinking Italian wine; he must buy these foods with money stolen from his parents. But, writes Adam Kirsch, the rabbis don’t stop there:

[T]he clearest sign of the rabbis’ intention in introducing all of these qualifications comes in Tractate Sanhedrin 71a, where Rabbi Yehudah says: “If his mother is not suited for his father, he does not become a wayward and rebellious son.” According to the [later talmudic sages], what this means is that “if his mother was not identical to his father in voice, appearance, and height, he does not become a wayward and rebellious son.” Since no two people are ever identical, much less a husband and wife, it is apparent that the rabbis actually want to make the Torah law unenforceable. Finally, the [text] says so explicitly: “There has never been a wayward and rebellious son and there never will be one in the future.”

Here we come to the core of the issue. The Talmud has essentially canceled a provision of the Torah. But if the Torah is God’s word, by what right can the rabbis do this? The answer is that they do not believe, or admit, they are introducing any novelties into the law. Rather, they are explicating what the law always meant, and so there is no actual change in Jewish practice. No wayward and rebellious son ever existed in the past, which is why none will ever exist in the future.

But if that is so, then why did God put this law in the Torah in the first place? “Why was it written?” the Talmud asks, and gives a wonderful reply: “So that you may expound and receive reward.” Living by the law is one thing, and it is required of every Jew; but studying and analyzing the law is the real glory of Judaism. Indeed, God makes unenforceable laws simply so that scholars can analyze why they are unenforceable! If someone asked me for a talmudic passage that encapsulates the ethos of rabbinic Judaism, I think I would choose this one, in all its mercifulness, ingenuity, and love of thinking for its own sake.

On Tuesday, a Hizballah drone attack injured three people in northern Israel. The next day, another attack, targeting an IDF base, injured eighteen people, six of them seriously, in Arab al-Amshe, also in the north. This second attack involved the simultaneous use of drones carrying explosives and guided antitank missiles. In both cases, the defensive systems that performed so successfully last weekend failed to stop the drones and missiles. Ron Ben-Yishai has a straightforward explanation as to why: the Lebanon-backed terrorist group is getting better at evading Israel defenses. He explains the three basis systems used to pilot these unmanned aircraft, and their practical effects:

These systems allow drones to act similarly to fighter jets, using “dead zones”—areas not visible to radar or other optical detection—to approach targets. They fly low initially, then ascend just before crashing and detonating on the target. The terrain of southern Lebanon is particularly conducive to such attacks.

But this requires skills that the terror group has honed over months of fighting against Israel. The latest attacks involved a large drone capable of carrying over 50 kg (110 lbs.) of explosives. The terrorists have likely analyzed Israel’s alert and interception systems, recognizing that shooting down their drones requires early detection to allow sufficient time for launching interceptors.

The IDF tries to detect any incoming drones on its radar, as it had done prior to the war. Despite Hizballah’s learning curve, the IDF’s technological edge offers an advantage. However, the military must recognize that any measure it takes is quickly observed and analyzed, and even the most effective defenses can be incomplete. The terrain near the Lebanon-Israel border continues to pose a challenge, necessitating technological solutions and significant financial investment.