RANSOMING A KIDNAPED EXECUTIVE 1993

QUESTION: A young Jewish man has been kidnaped and has been held for ransom in a South American country. The family and the corporation for which he works are seeking his release. The American government has discouraged payment of the large ransom as it would encourage further kidnapings. The family is concerned about his health as he was abducted several months ago. What path should the family take? Is there some traditional Jewish guidance?

ANSWER: Unfortunately this is not a modern problem, but has been faced endlessly through the centuries. One of the earliest tales connected with Abraham (Gen. 14) had him gathering a posse in order to force the release of his nephew Lot. He was successful. That may be an option for a government, but is clearly not the path in this instance. We should note that it was the road taken by the Israeli government in the daring and highly successful rescue at Entebe , Uganda in 1976, taken despite the disastrous effort by the German government at the Munich Olympics in 1972. Less dramatic rescue operations have also been mounted by Israeli military and by other nations in their native lands and in every area of the world.

Captives and their rescue has been a major concern of the Jewish tradition. It is considered so important that it over-rides any other concerns and is an obligation placed upon the entire community. The biblical statement of Exodus(21:16) considers kidnaping a capitol offense and imposes the death penalty. The Mishnah understood this as a common danger and so in its discussion of obligations assumed by a husband on his marriage included ransoming his wife from possible captivity(Ket. 4:8), a sad commentary on insecurity of that period. This discussion was expanded in considerable detail in the Talmud (Ket 46b, 52 a and b). Other acts of ransoming were not discussed at all, but, obviously taken for granted. The main caveat in these discussions was the caution of paying an excessive ransom expressed by R. Gamliel, so that further acts of kidnaping would not be encouraged. The obligation expressed here rested upon the family or the individual himself, if he possessed the means.

We can sense how common such acts were in the ninth and tenth centuries through the documents of the Cairo Genizah. They