With independence we

completion, if so we wish.

Redemption is not one of

of the commandments.

(Dov Rappel: Pithei She'arim,

p. 213)

Is There Religious Significance to

National Independence?

The religious establishment has

struggled to shape the religious character of Yom Ha'atzmaut and Yom

Yerushalayim, and this issue continues to engage various sectors of the

religious community. It cannot be resolved without coming to an understanding

of the religious value of the historical events associated with those holidays.

Let it be said at the outset: We are not dealing here with the significance of

a "prophetic vision" or "messianic destiny" involving "the

Kingdom of Israel." Rather, we must investigate

the significance of the political creation of the actual State of Israel, which

came into existence in 1948, and the significance of the manner and conditions

of its creation, its wars and conquests. The religious attitudes towards these

days can only be based upon historical understanding, and not upon study of the

Halakhic tradition, which never contemplated such situations…

It is impossible to avoid a clear

decision regarding Yom Ha'atzmaut. This day cannot be given a partial

evaluation. One view has it that it is not a holiday, but rather a day of

mourning: the day the Jewish People rebelled against the Torah. Another view

holds that it is particularly apt for us to say the blessing for coming to this

time and to recite the Hallel and mark Yom Ha'atzmaut as a holiday, for

it is the day when the Jewish People opened the door to the possibility of

fulfilling the Torah – a gate that it may enter, if the people decide to apply

themselves to observance of the Torah. This view is not subverted by the fact

that the majority of the present generation does not want to observe the Torah.

(Y. Leibowitz, Yahadut, Am Yehudi U'midinat Yisrael pp.

90, 91, 96, 97)

Thoughts on zionism and post-zionism

Yehonatan

Chipman

As Israel enters its 64^th

year (the last square on the chess-board, for those who believe in omens; and

indeed, there is good reason to feel that the coming year will be a crucial one

for the state), there is a sense of crisis, of a lack of confidence in the

future. While the state is a successful, going enterprise, with a flourishing

economy, and in many ways a successful state, there are also far more voices

than in the past that challenge its very legitimacy or its right to exist as a

Jewish state. Both here and abroad, the terms "non-Zionist," "post-Zionist,"

and even "anti-Zionist" are bandied about. So the obvious question to

be answered is: What do we mean by Zionism anyway?

On one level, we of course live in a

post-Zionist age. The original aims of the Zionist movement: to establish a

homeland for the Jewish people – according to most views, albeit not that of

Theodor Herzl himself, in Israel's ancient homeland – to settle it, to

establish a state, to ingather the exiles of Israel (particularly those Jews

who were persecuted in their homelands), to revive the Hebrew language and

culture, and to establish viable economic, socio–political and cultural

institutions. All of these tasks have been accomplished, so that on one level

one can say that the aims of Zionism, or at least its most urgent tasks, have

been fulfilled, and that the challenges faced by Israel today are similar in

kind, if not in degree, to those faced by most Western developed countries – with

one glaring exception: the complex and painful problem of our relation with the

Arab world, and particularly the Palestinian question – a vast problem, which

we cannot discuss here.

On another level, many people would argue that

we live in a post-Zionist age because the entire concept of nationalism and

nationality is passé Particularly in Western Europe, with the growing

strength of the European community within which there are almost completely

open borders, national differences seem to make less and less difference.

But Israel Independence Day is traditionally a

time for celebration and, like every Jewish holiday, presents an opportunity

for dealing on the principled, theoretical level with inyanei de-yoma,

the meaning of the day – in this case, the question as to what we mean by

Zionism. Is a Zionist simply one who has chosen to live in Israel? Or is

he, as in the classical definition, one who believes that every Jew ought to

live in Israel?

Or may Zionism simply mean political, cultural, financial, or even simply

sentimental support of Israel?

At times, it is important to remind oneself of

old, basic truths, simple but forgotten. Beyond the practical tasks of

settlement and so forth enumerated above, Zionism was based upon a fundamental

revolution in Jewish self–understanding. As I see it, the basic insight of

Zionism was that the Jews are a people or a nation (for the purposes of our

discussion, I will ignore the niceties of distinction between these two). Judaism

is not a religion in the accepted sense of the word. True, throughout Antiquity

and the Middle Ages the two concepts of nation and religion were intertwined,

so that the distinction between the two didn't really matter. In the famous

words of Rabbenu Saadya Gaon, "Our nation is only a nation by virtue of

its Torah." But in wake of the Enlightenment, Jewish Emancipation and the

secularization of society, this "package" broke up. Jews were no

longer defined as a religious collectivity in the various countries in which

they lived. Certainly in Western Europe and, later on, in North

America and elsewhere, Jews were both seen and perceived

themselves as individuals, free in theory to affiliate with whatever religion

they chose. Increasingly, particularly for third- and fourth-generation

American Jews, anti-Semitism was seen as a vestige of the past.

Nevertheless, the religious definition of

Jewishness is in a sense a Christian one. As someone once said, a Christian is

always in some sense a convert, whereas a Jew is born a Jew. Paradoxically,

this is even the case of the ger tzedek, the righteous proselyte who

converts to Judaism: he or she does not so much adopt a new faith as to join a

new family, or even to be reborn as a Jew, almost literally. The waters of the

mikveh, which serve as the Halakhic instrument of conversion, are seen as

equivalent to the amniotic fluid of the mother's womb. Hence, the concept of a

person being a secular, agnostic or even atheistic Jew is not a contradiction

in terms, an oxymoron. Indeed, some of the greatest Jewish scientists,

intellectuals and creative figures, particularly of the twentieth century, have

been secular Jews, and many of us, this author included, are rightfully

proud of them, notwithstanding their secularism.

In truth, there is something peculiar about

Jewish peoplehood, as those who would deny the notion of a Jewish people, such

as Professor Shlomo Sand (author of The Invention of the Jewish People)

are quick to note. Until Zionism, Jews throughout the world had neither a

common territory nor a common language. Moreover, it is difficult to claim that

Jews are a race or ethnic group, by any scientific ethnographic standard. Hence,

the nationhood or peoplehood of the Jewish people is in some sense sui

generis. It often lies in an undefined sense of being Jewish, of belonging

to that amorphous entity called the Jewish people, of participating in its

continuity and its common history. Interestingly, the Dalai Lama, the leader of

the Tibetan people in exile (a group which itself identifies itself

simultaneously as both religious and national) sees the Jews as a phenomenon of

survival under conditions of exile – and some years ago even met with a group

of rabbis and Jewish leaders to learn from them the "secret of survival."

There are several different approaches or

ideologies which oppose what I would describe as this central Zionist

perception. One group consists of those who quite simply adopt the "Palestinian

narrative." Another approach argues that in the State of Israel a new, "Israeli"

nation has emerged, based upon language and territory, distinct from the

historical Jewish people, and that "Israeliness" ought to be

separated from "Jewishness" – a latter-day version, if you will, of

the "Canaanite" movement of the early days of the State.

Recently, Israeli author Yoram Kaniuk, in an

interview for Ha-Aretz, made the interesting comment that "there

used to be real Jews in Israel"

– by which he meant, secular Jews who were rooted in Jewishness, but that "today

Judaism has become a religion." If I understand correctly, he meant by

this that, on the one hand, the younger generation of secular Israelis are

distant from Jewish culture in a way that their parents and grandparents were

not and that, on the other hand, Judaism has been preempted by the Rabbinic

establishment, who de facto have a monopoly on the definition of

Jewishness. The present controversy over conversion, in which the Rabbinate

defines Jewishness in a strict, narrow way, is perhaps the most striking

expression of this. As an Halakhic Jew, who treasures Torah, I find this both

unfortunate and misguided. There is a long list of aharonim, of Orthodox

poskim of the 19^th and 20^th centuries who,

understanding the secularization of much of the Jewish people, and the dangers

posed by intermarriage, did everything they could to implement a liberal

approach to conversion – including such respected figures as Rav David Zvi

Hoffman, Rav Ben-Zion Meir Hai Uziel, and Rav Eliezer Waldenberg, all ztz"l.

Recently there has been another disturbing

trend, which sees itself as "super-Zionist," but which seems to

ignore one of the important principles of Zionism. I refer to certain rabbis

and others who openly deny the legitimacy of basic democratic institutions of

the State of Israel: the Knesset, the chain of command within the IDF, and

especially the courts. One hears in these circles a call for the exclusive rule

of the Halakhah. But they forget the saying of our Sages said: "Jephthah

in his generation is like Samuel in his generation" (b. Rosh Hashana 25b) – that is to say, even

if one's leaders fall short of the ideal, one must accept those whom one has at

any given time.

This relates to another important principle of

Zionism: the acceptance of the real Jewish people, as they are in the world

today – and not only some abstract, Platonic, metaphysical ideal of "Knesset

Yisrael." We are not yet living in the ideal future messianic

world, under the reign of Heaven. This is one of the important implications of

the Zionist conception that Jews must "reenter history" – meaning, to

accept the concrete situation of the Jewish people, with all its imperfections

and anomalies, as the embodiment of Jewish national existence in this world.

One final point: Menahem Elon – former Deputy

Chief Justice of the Israel Supreme Court, himself a learned and pious Jew, one

of the important legal thinkers of our day, and an advocate of the introduction

of concepts of Jewish law within Israeli civil law – once commented to me (in

private conversation; and the idea appears in various places in his writings)

that he considers Israel's Knesset to be equivalent to the institution of shivah

tuvei ha-ir. By that, he was referring to the institutions of secular

self-government that existed in medieval Jewish communities, in Europe and elsewhere, which acted in parallel to the authority

of the rabbis, who served as poskim in specifically Halakhic matters. These

secular leaders had broad executive and even legislative powers in the form of

edicts and decrees that were introduced to further various social ends and

needs of the community for which existing Halakhah made no provision. According

to Elon, the Knesset – and the other arms of Israeli government, including the

judiciary – deserves at least the same standing as the exilic communal

leadership!

Rabbi Jonathan Chipman is a professional

translator who specializes in Jewish studies. He writes a commentary in English

on the Portion of the Week, which he calls The Arrows of Jonathan. Those who

wish to receive a sample or to subscribe may write to yonarand@internet-zahav.net

Our Is A Torah Of Life

Ancient and modern paganism likes very much to associate

religion and religious matters with death and thoughts of death. For them where

Man ends, the Kingdom

of God begins. For them

death and dying are the real manifestations of the godhead, who to them is a

god of death and not of life. A god who kills and does not animate, and sends

death and its forerunners, illness and wretchedness, so that men should fear

him and recognize his power and their impotence. The places they dedicate to

temples are therefore around about graves, the foremost place of their priests

is near the dead…

Not so is the Jewish priest, for not so is the Jewish

teaching of God, the Jewish religion. God, Whose Name assigns the Jewish priest

to his office, is a God of life. His most sublime manifestation is the

elevating power of Life, freeing, animating, raising Man to free will and to

eternal life, not the crushing power of death – not how one is to die, but how

one is to live, how, living, one must victoriously conquer death, death in

life, how one will overcome thralldom, enslaved by one's physical urges, moral

weakness…

When Death summons the people to come to busy themselves

with acts of love, with the body, empty of nefesh, the soul

that God called home, the Kohanim must remain apart, and by standing apart,

hold aloft the Standard of Life next to the corpse. By thoughts of what life

really is, they prevent thoughts of death from overpowering the truths that the

real Man himself is morally free and not subject to forces that kill his power

over his own moral free will… they

the idea of Death.

(Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Lev. 21:5)

And

God seeks the pursued"

"And

God seeks the pursued" (Kohellet 3:15)

– Rav Huna said in the name of Rav Yosef: "Forever 'God seeks the

pursued'. The wicked pursues the righteous, "And God seeks the

pursued"; the wicked pursues

the wicked, "And God seeks the pursued"; and even when the

righteous pursues the wicked, "And God seeks the pursued". In

every case, "And God seeks the

pursued".

Said

Rabbi Yehudah ben Rabbi Simon in the name of Rabbi Yehudah ben Rabbi Nehorai:

"God always demands the blood of the pursued from the pursuers. Know that

this is so, for Hevel was pursued by Cain, and The Holy One, Blessed Be He,

chose Hevel, as is written "God had regard for Hevel and his

gifts". Noah was pursued by his generation, and The Holy One, Blessed

Be He, chose Noah, as is written: "For you I have seen as righteous

before me in this generation." Avraham was pursued by Nimrod, and The

Holy One, Blessed Be He, chose Avraham, as is written, "You are the Lord

God who chose Avraham". Yitzhak was pursued by the Philistines, and The

Holy One, Blessed Be He, chose Yitzhak, as is written, "For I have

observed that God is with you." Yaakov was pursued by Esav, and The

Holy One, Blessed Be He, chose Yaakov, as is written, "For God chose

Yaakov for himself." Yosef was pursued by his brothers, and God chose

Yosef, as is written, "He imposed it as a decree upon Yosef." Moshe

was pursued by Pharaoh, and The Holy One, Blessed Be He, chose Moshe, as is

written"… had not Moshe, his chosen one." David was pursued by

Shaul, and The Holy One, Blessed Be He, chose David, as is written "And

he chose David, his servant."Shaul was pursued by Philistines, and The

Holy One, Blessed Be He, chose Shaul, as is written, "Have you seen him

whom God has chosen."Israel

is pursued by the nations, and The Holy One, Blessed Be He, chose Israel, as is

written, "For you are a people holy to the Lord your God, your God has

chosen to be for him a specially-treasured people."

Rabbi

Eliezer ben Rabbi Yossi ben Zimra said: "It is so also with offerings. Said The Holy One,

Blessed Be He: 'The ox is pursued by the lion, the goat is pursued by the

leopard, the sheep by the wolf; do not bring me offerings from the pursuers,

but from the pursued, as is written: "An

ox or a sheep or a goat, when it is born."

(Vayikra Rabba, Chap. 27)

Hassidim

relate:

The

story is told of Rebbi David of Lalov, who came on Rosh Hashanah to pay respect

to his rabbi, the "Seer" of Lublin.

Before the [shofar] blasts, his fellow Hassidim noticed that Rebbi David was

not present. They went to his inn to seek him out. Upon arrival, they

discovered Rebbi David standing in the stable, feeding hay to the horses. The

stablekeeper, engaged in prayer and the shofar sounding, had lingered at the

synagogue, and had forgotten to give the horses fodder and drink. Rebbi David

arose and claimed the mitzva for himself.

(Ibid., p.454)

If

you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards its

publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition

  distributed in Israel

  $700

• English

  edition distributed via email $ 100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an

event, person, simcha, etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to

appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in advance to appear in the English email.

About us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a

movement dedicated to the advancement of a civil society in Israel. It is

committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice,

concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a

deep attachment to the land

of Israel and it no less

views peace as a central religious value. It believes that Jews have both the

religious and the national obligation to support the pursuit of peace. It maintains

that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a fair and just society, and that

co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option but an imperative.

4,500 copies of a 4-page peace oriented

commentary on the weekly Torah reading are written and published by Oz

VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel and are

sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il.

Shabbat Shalom is available on our

website: www.netivot-shalom.org.il