For many, the need to clarify
what the Torah’s attitude is to Zionism will be surprising. The aim to build a
nation in Eretz Yisrael is clear throughout the Torah and the rest of Tanach,
and even the partial achievement of this aim is surely something to be
celebrated.
The necessity to explain further
stems from two things. Firstly, to a large percentage of the Jewish People the
point above is far from obvious. Secondly, even the rest of us should be able
to appreciate that what is clear to us is based at least partly on hindsight.
Before Ben Gurion declared the forming of the State of Israel, it was far from
clear whether the move would result in anything positive. Many claimed the risk
simply was not worth it.[1]
There are three basic questions
here:
1) Were the Jewish People in
exile supposed to attempt to bring redemption actively, or just to wait for
Hashem to do it?
2) Based on or despite the answer
to the first question, was it correct to risk so much in 1948 without knowing
what the outcome would be?
3) Based on or despite the
answers to the first two questions, is it appropriate to thank Hashem and/or
celebrate what happened?
The first question is answered by
the Ramban unambiguously. We are obligated to conquer Eretz Yisrael, and must
not let others possess it.[2] The
Rambam does not list such a mitvah, and seemingly his view is that this is not
an obligation. Whether or not he would consider the struggle to achieve this
aim as something positive or not is unclear,[3] but
there certainly is no evidence to suggest that he forbids it.
The only source for such a
position is what the gemara tells us, that Hashem imposed on us oaths not to
ascend (to Eretz Yisrael) ‘like a wall’ and not to rebel against the other
nations.[4] Much
has been written already about this, and with the exception of Satmar it has
generally been accepted that this gemara is not of halachic significance.[5] In my
mind what Chazal meant to say here is that without us realising, Hashem removed
from us the will to fight for independence until an auspicious time for this.
Assuming therefore that
conquering Eretz Yisrael is something positive or at the very least optional,
the second question is mainly an issue of historical analysis. It is impossible
to prove whether more or fewer lives would have been lost had the State not
been declared. Even if fewer lives would have been lost in the short term, when
it comes to national issues the calculations that need to be taken are more
complicated (see “War and
Peace”).
With hindsight, I certainly agree
with the decision made in 1948 although I respect the legitimacy of dissenting
views. But one thing I would expect all to agree with is the fact that those
responsible for making this decision did so with the best physical interests of
the Jewish People in mind.
The effect on Torah and
Mitzvos
The answer to our third question
is not necessarily dependent on the answer to the first two questions, whatever
it is. Some may agree with what I have written above but nevertheless object to
celebrating the achievements of those who were far from G-d and the Torah.
Furthermore, many believe that these achievements are outweighed by widespread
spiritual decline they see as resulting from the State of Israel.
These claims must be taken
seriously. We cannot ignore the fact that many of the early leaders of Zionism
saw it as a replacement to the Torah and mitzvos. This aim also had some degree
of success, with the most famous example being the treatment of Yemenite Jews
and others from similar ‘unenlightened’ backgrounds.[6]
For simplification, let us
pretend that all those who helped found the State of Israel were irreligious
and that net Torah observance is less than what it would have been without the
State (although the first statement is wrong and the second mere conjecture).
My firm belief is that even if this were true, and even if the decision made by
Ben Gurion and his advisers in 1948 was ‘wrong’, it would still be correct both
to thank Hashem and to celebrate on Yom Ha’atzmaut.
It is rather obvious that we must
thank Hashem for all the good that He gives us, even if we afterwards decide to
misuse it. In case anyone might argue that thanking Hashem does not include
celebrating, the Torah tells us regarding the mitvah of bikurim (bringing the
first fruits to the Beis Hamikdash):
ושמחת בכל הטוב אשר נתן לך ה' אלהיך ולביתך.
(דברים כו)
You shall rejoice over all the
good that Hashem your G-d has given to you and your household.
(Devarim 26)
What exactly are we
celebrating?
Believe it or not, some argue
that having control over Eretz Yisrael and the right for any Jew to live here
is not something inherently good. They claim that this repetitive blessing in
the Torah is only a means to keeping Torah and mitzvos. Although to most
thinking people I know this claim is intuitively wrong, it is not immediately
obvious how to refute it. The best way to do so is to show that our intuition
was shared by our prestigious predecessors.
The Rambam describes what we
celebrate on Chanuka:
“In the (time of) the Second Beis
Hamikdash, while the Greeks ruled, they made decrees against Israel, nullified
their religion, did not allow them to occupy themselves with Torah and mitzvos,
took from their money and daughters, entered the Temple and breached it, and
defiled the pure items. Israel had much distress because of them, and they
pressurised them greatly until the G-d of our fathers had mercy on them and
saved them (the Jews) from their (the Greeks) hands.
The children of the Hasmonean
Kohanim Gedolim prevailed and killed them (the Greeks), saved Israel from their
hands and appointed a king from the Kohanim. The kingdom was restored to Israel
for more than two hundred years, until the Second Destruction.”
(Megila and Chanuka 3:1)
Although the majority of the
troubles caused by the Greeks were religious ones, for Rambam the focus of the
salvation brought about by the Hasmoneans is national. To him it was obvious
that the self-rule achieved was something to celebrate. And a brief read of any
of the historical accounts of the Hasmonean dynasty is enough to show that for
most of this two-hundred year period, the leaders were far from perfect
spiritually.[7]
Is this ‘Aschalta deGeula’
(the start of redemption)?
To answer this we first have to
define what we mean by redemption. The term ‘Geula’ can refer simply to
deliverance from troubles,[8] in
which case calling the State of Israel ראשית צמיחת
גאולתנו (‘the beginning of the sprouting of our redemption’) seems to
be a huge understatement. The question that is far harder to answer is whether
we are living through the start of the final redemption after which
there will be no further exile.[9]
In fact, my belief is that only a
prophet can know the answer to this question. There is no assurance that we
could not (G-d forbid) experience another exile after the current redemption,[10] and
indeed we have seen several retreats in recent years. We daven and actively try
to prevent further such events, but we must also recognise that not everything
is in our hands.
I also believe that the stubborn
insistence of some to limit Zionism to decades-old teachings of some of the
previous leaders of the Religious Zionist movement has had some much unwanted
effects. Many to whom these teachings are foreign to (this is especially common
amongst those born and raised outside Israel) are presented with a choice of
accepting them unquestionably, or rejecting Zionism altogether. They often
choose the latter.
This process is not limited to
those unversed in these teachings. A few years ago a prominent and learned Rosh
Yeshiva, who for many years was part of the Religious Zionist world, witnessed
the destruction of Gush Katif and came to the conclusion that much of what he
had learned and taught for years was mistaken. As his Zionism was based only on
the concept of ‘Aschalta deGeula’ and the restoration of the Kingdom of G-d, he
decided to stop celebrating Yom Ha’atzmaut, drawing his yeshiva and other
institutions with him.
The phenomenon of Rabbis who
claim to have a clear understanding of historical processes, even if it is
based on their reading of the words of Chazal, can have far-reaching
consequences. Often much division and animosity arises from talmidim who
believe that only their rav is the one who truly understands, and the
inevitable result is that those who represent the Torah have great difficulty
in influencing those in positions of power.
May we learn to thank Hashem and
rejoice over all the good that He has given us, and witness and bring about the
ultimate redemption!
[1] The
historical precedent of Bar Kochva’s ultimately disastrous uprising against the
Romans shows how hard decisions like these are to make.
[4] Kesuvos
111a
[5] As
none of the Rishonim quote it in their halachic works. However, in and prior to
1948 this was a matter of considerable debate.
[6] I
have not quoted sources here, as the extent of what happened is the matter of
some debate and I do not pretend to be an historian. However, it is clear that
the phenomenon described above existed to some degree. On the other hand, I
believe it would be naïve to imagine that had the State of Israel not been
founded, Eastern Jewish communities would have maintained their devotion to the
Torah entirely. The challenges of modernity has taken its toll on the entire
world (Jewish and non-Jewish), and no-one is immune to this.
[7] In
fact, according to the Ramban the mere fact that they reigned as kings was a
violation of the command never to remove this power from the tribe of Yehuda.
See his commentary to Bereishis 49:10.
[8] See Rashi
to Megila 17b
[9] See Yeshaya
60:20, Amos 9:15, and Yerushalmi Shvi’is 6:1.
[10] Some
have claimed that an assurance to this can be seen in the Yerushalmi referenced
in the previous footnote, but the truth is that the cryptic nature of such
texts precludes any solid proof. See “Drush
and Divrei Agada”. When I say the phrase ראשית צמיחת
גאולתנו in davening, I mean a
general redemption.
