Anti-Zionist Jews & the “Three Oaths”

July 22 2010 - 5:59:38:am by JDL

A disturbing amount of attention has been garnered in recent years by a small minority of vehemently anti-Israel religious Jews, and as a strongly philosophically Religious Zionist organization, JDL has a major stake in this debate. As the anti-Israel religious groups have made spectacles of themselves in the media and created venues for their views online, many Jews who naturally support the Jewish state have wondered about this category of Jew and have pondered the question of how to handle this fringe element of Jewry. But not too many Jews - even seriously Torah observant Jews - know the central religious justification for why these groups exist. Moreover, many observant Jews also don’t realize that the same religious justification used by the anti-Zionist Orthodox Jews is also one used by many rabbis in Galut (the Exile) for disregarding the explicit Torah mitzvot concerning the conquest of Eretz Yisrael.

One type of argument that is often given for anti-Zionism among some religious Jews is a political one - some groups believe it is absolutely inappropriate to support the modern state of Israel given its strongly secular founding and its normally left of center political orientation that is often hostile to Torah Judaism. The brutal truth is that many of the early leaders of modern political Zionism and subsequently Medinat Yisrael (the state of Israel) were very hostile to Judaism. Early modern Zionists sought to create a completely secular state in the Land filled with Hebrew speakers devoid of Judaism. A manifestation of that aspiration is found in the Israeli term “Complete Zionist,“ which refers to the leftist ideal of a completely anti-religious Hebrew speaking citizen of the country. A related political argument is sometimes aired that expresses rejection of Israel because of the Arab-Israeli Conflict, an argument which blames the victim and excuses the aggressor. Not supporting the state of Israel on such grounds represents political objections to the country rather than religious ones. Despite the serious problems in Israel borne of secularism, JDL counts such political objections as weak, particularly given how much Jewish sovereignty over the Land has contributed to the Torah world’s goals and objectives, even in spite of the country’s secular political biases. Torah observant Jews in Israel have the freedom to openly observe Torah and teach other Jews to do so without state oppression, and the Israeli government also carries financially the country’s Ultra-Orthodox population. As for blaming Israel for the Arab-Israeli Conflict, regardless of the country’s faults and missteps, it is mostly Arab and Islamic intransigence that perpetuates the conflict; blaming the clear victim isn’t very sensible. Thus, the political arguments made by the religious anti-Zionists are certainly debatable at best, and realistically they’re not even the driving force of this debate.

In truth, the primary claim that most anti-Zionist Orthodox Jews make is a Torah claim made on the basis of an obscure, highly contested section of the Talmud (Tractate Ketubot) known as the “Three Oaths.“ The Three Oaths are usually cited by the anti-Zionists as the excuse to oppose the state of Israel, or for that matter, any Jewish sovereignty over the Land until Mashiach (the Messiah). JDL clearly rejects that claim. But only recently did we realize how widespread this problem is: Even some percentage of rabbis in Galut communities who aren’t explicitly opposed to the state of Israel also rely on the Oaths to justify staying in Galut. They don’t necessarily make that stance well-known, but obviously they enjoy the comforts of Exile and don’t seem to mind using the excuse of the Oaths to justify a continued existence outside of the Land. The strange byproduct of that choice by some rabbis is that many Orthodox Jews who are fastidious in observing aspects of the Torah even to very complex levels of minutia simply disregard the clear Torah obligations regarding conquest of our homeland. And in the rare event that anyone asks about those mitzvot, many Orthodox Jews are content to uncritically accept the opinion of their rabbis that the Oaths are binding Halacha without doing any research for themselves. To JDL, that view and that approach to Torah could not be more wrong.

It is beyond the scope of this introductory blog post to go into an exhaustive study of the Oaths, but such content is being prepared for future publication by JDL. A short-form summary of JDL’s position is that the Oaths are weak Halacha (Jewish law), disregarded or ruled no longer in force by a number of major rabbis of antiquity; at most the Oaths are no longer in force because of a conditional violation of the third oath placed upon the nations (a position held by our founder Rabbi Kahane). Until the publication of those upcoming JDL articles that will cover all of this in depth, people wishing to research the issue should consult the fairly unbiased, relatively high quality Wikipedia article on the topic. (Although it’s seldom a good idea to rely too heavily on Wikipedia, especially for information on controversial subjects, this is a relatively mature, well-worn article in its current form. It presents both sides relatively fairly, and given the prevalence of anti-Zionist religious forces online, the opinions rejecting the Oaths appear to have trustworthy sourcing - for if they were invalid they would have been erased by those favoring the Oaths.) Stay tuned to jdl.org for more coverage on this vital concern to be posted in the coming weeks.

Comments

Name:

Email:

Location:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Next entry: New JDL Contact Options Coming

Previous entry: jdl.org subdomains for external JDL sites