 |
| Anti Zionist Reconstructionist Rabbi, Brant Rosen (Tzedek Chicago) |
As the term is used today it is a reference to the ideals of Israel’s founding fathers. That essentially means that the land of Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people with a goal of developing it and repopulating it with the Jewish people who are currently dispersed throughout the world.
There is nothing inherent in that definition that is controversial. It does not contradict anything in Halacha. What makes it controversial in the eyes of the Charedi world is the fact that these ideals were espoused by non observant Jews that had no intention of applying Halacha as its governing principles. That is when Religious Zionism stepped in. Their goal was to join Zionists in that effort showing that being religious did not contradict doing that.
A lot of people may not know that in the early days of the state, the Charedi world was at first divided about joining Zionists. Many Gedolei Yisroel at the time actually signed a document that supported the establishment of a Jewish state - even though it would not be in religious control. If I remember correctly it was the Chazon Ish (R’ Avrohom Yeshaya Karelitz) that soon disabused them of that notion. So they backed off.
Point being that it wasn’t always the case that all Charedi leaders were opposed to a state founded by Zionists. One such leader was R’ Avrohom Yitzhok HaKohen Kook, (acknowledged as the Gadol hador by R’ Isser Zalman Metlzer, himself considered the Gadol HaDor of that time and who was also R’ Aharon Kotler’s father in law.) R’ Kook – who was about as Charedi as anyone can get - never departed from his view that the return of Israel into Jewish hands was a step in the right direction. Despite the fact that it was founded by non observant Zionist Jews. R’ Kook was the Gadol Religious Zionists saw as their leader.
The Charedi world, however, considered the Chazon Ish the undisputed Gadol HaDor. All other Charedi Gedolim fell into line – never daring to question him.
But even the Chazon Ish did not go as far as the Satmar Rebbe did. Ish Tzar V’Oyev were the words he used with respect to R’ Kook. Those are the exact words used in Megilas Esther about a man who wished to annihilate the Jewish people in his day much the way Hitler did in his own day.
It might seem that Satmar is about as anti Zionist as could be. But it gets worse. Aside from verbally attacking the Jewish state as a clear violation of the will of God (even if it were fully Halachic) they did not act on it. That was left to groups like Neturei Karta, some of whose leaders have joined Palestinian protesters waving flags at anti Israel rallies. One of their leaders was actually offered a government position by Yassir Arafat in a future Palestinian state. Which I believe he accepted.
The funny thing is that it isn’t only extremist religious Jews that are anti Zionist. There are non Orthodox Jews who are anti Zionist too. As noted in the Forward:
Tzedek Chicago, an independent congregation of about 200 families, appears to have become the nation’s first to officially oppose modern Israel’s existence as a core principle. Nearly three quarters of the members voted this week to decry the Jewish state as “an injustice to the Palestinian people – an injustice that continues to this day.” The synagogue, like a handful of others across the country, had previously considered itself non-Zionist and emphasized its support for Palestinian rights, but this was a step further.
Normally it wouldn’t concern me what members of a heterodox synagogue think. Sadly they have no clue what Judaism is really all about. Their mission statement is basically a statement of humanistic values restated as Jewish values. Not that all humanistic values are anathema to Judaism. They are not. Many of them overlap with the values of Judaism. It’s just that there is nothing specifically Jewish about them.
I couldn’t help noticing the irony of their ideological agreement with Satmar about the evils of Zionism. They should join forces. Strength in numbers you know...
What about the rest of the Charedi world? Do they still oppose – even Religious Zionism? I am sorry to say they do.
Now I do not consider myself a Religious Zionist. But I do not oppose the ideology. I just disagree with some of their tenets. Namely their belief that the restoration of the land of Israel into Jewish hands after 2000 years of exile is the first flowering of our final redemption. I do not see it that way. Never did.
I am, however, mindful of the Zionist fathers physically building up the Medina (the modern state of Israel) and making it possible to live there in comfort. I am mindful of the military protecting all of its residents. Religious or not. Jewish or not. I am mindful of the explosion of Torah study. The quantity of which surpasses even that of the US. Including Lakewood. And perhaps even surpassing the quality of Torah study in the US too. All of it enabled by Zionism.
It is with this I mind that I am dismayed at the current Charedi attitude toward the Medina. They are all living in the past. That attitude might have been understandable at a time when no one was certain what Israel’s future would look like developed at the hands of non observant Jews – some of whom were anti religious. But their worst fears never materialized. The opposite happened and now they are flourishing.
And yet their attitude did not change and they pass it on to their children. At home and in the classroom. Whenever they talk warmly about Israel, they do not mean the Medina. They mean Eretz Yisroel - the land of Israel. Any reference to Zionism is only to condemn it.
In some ways that disgusts me even more than Tzedek Chicago or Satmar. They both reject Zionism and want nothing to do with a Zionist state. At least in theory. That is their right - ignorant though that may be. But the rest of the Charedi world has everything to do with the state. They have people representing them in government. They benefit from its military protection. They benefit from its infrastructure; their social services; and their financial support. And yet they remain as opposed to the Medina as they ever were.
It disgusts me because I believe in the same Torah they do and study it the same way. I observe the same Mitzvos they do. And yet I understand what Zionism has done for the observant Jews of Israel and I appreciate it. They refuse to consider Zionism having any value at all.
To teach young people to hate – even religious Zionism - is not a Jewish value to my mind. They don’t have to agree with them. But that does not mean they can't apprecitate the benefits they get. Or worse -hate them.
I recall one such teacher proudly saying how she teaches her students to love Eretz Yisroel and hate the Zionist Medina. That is the Charedi party line. And it makes my stomach turn.