Rabbi
Scheer - Very Misleading
By Rabbi Dovid Weiss,
November 9, 2000
Neturei Karta, an international organization
of Orthodox Jews opposed to Zionism, was the subject
of a scathing denunciation in the October 11th
issue of the Columbia Daily Spectator. In an essay
titled “Neturei Karta Misleading”
the author, Rabbi Charles Scheer, described the
group as offering a “frightening message.”
It “disgraced Judaism” and “show(ed)
no compassion for their fellow Jews.”
Indeed, the good Rabbi concludes his fiery comments
by exclaiming, “Shame!” and “praying
that he can find forgiveness in (his) heart for
the abusive message” of the Neturei Karta.
He does offer those bearing this “appalling
message” some hope. Despite their having
“belittled our campus by their presence”
he will “pray that they learn to love their
fellow Jews even when they disagree with them.”
Clearly in the person of the Columbia University
Jewish chaplain “love” of one’s
opponent has some strange means of articulation.
Nonetheless, between the expressions of affection
in the article, there are a few arguments offered
as well, to which we now turn our attention. The
Rabbi’s critique seems to revolve around
four points. 1) The Neturei Karta claim to represent
the “vast majority of Torah leaders”
is false. 2) They distort the views of those Jewish
leaders cited in their literature. 3) They are
a very small group and “unique among the
Jewish people world wide.” 4) They don’t
care if Jews are killed. Let us examine each of
these claims with dispassion.
First, although the good Rabbi made quite a show
of refusing to accept the leaflets and booklets
offered by Neturei Karta representatives when
they visited Columbia during the October 5th vigil
(perhaps, in the spirit of loving his fellow Jew
even while disagreeing?), he apparently managed
to surreptitiously acquire and read at least two
leaflets, as his direct quotation attests. “To
support their vision, they (Neturei Karta) falsely
claim that the ‘vast majority of Torah leaders’
are opposed to a modern Jewish state.” Unfortunately
his citation is truncated and thus falsified.
The full text in question reads: “Zionism
was greeted with staunch and passionate opposition
by the vast majority of Torah leaders at the time
of its inception.”
We will soon address the state of Torah opinion
today. Clearly our reference was to the state
of affairs at Zionism’s inception, around
the turn of the last century. And, we challenge
Rabbi Sheer to deny that those supporting Zionism,
as represented by the early Mizrahi movement,
were anything more than a tiny segment of observant
Jewry. Further, we are quite sure that the Rabbi
would also grant that the early Agudath Israel
movement, which was composed of “vast majority
of Torah leaders” was “passionate”
in its opposition to Zionism.
The good Rabbi apparently limited himself to
reading the leaflets we handed out. Would he have
read the booklets as well he would not have fallen
prey to the distortions he offers of the position
of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, the nineteenth
century German leader.
Rabbi Sheer contends that Rav Hirsch’s
opposition to Zionism was based on his desire
to see Jewry “involv(ing) itself within
its host countries.” This is certainly true.
However, it is only a partial truth. Rav Hirsch
also wrote “the people of Israel must never
again attempt to restore national independence
by its own power.” In his view this was
“prohibited to us.” In Horeb, Rav
Hirsch’s master work on the commandments,
he asserts, “(The Torah) forbids us to strive
for the reunion or possession of the land by any
but spiritual means.”
By focusing solely on Rav Hirsch’s depiction
of the positive tasks and hopes of exile, Rabbi
Sheer is able to posit, “We cannot presume
that he would hold similar notions in our post-Holocaust
era.” This notion is tenable only if one
is aware of (or quoting) selective parts of Rav
Hirsch’s teachings, those partaking of,
what we may see in retrospect as, myopic hopes
for Europe. His other quotes show that his opposition
to Zionsim was first and foremost rooted in its
violation of the intrinsic terms of Jewish exile.
Assuredly those terms cannot change over the years.
Rabbi Sheer admits that our reference to Rabbi
Elchanan Wasserman, a world renowned Torah leader,
as a staunch anti- Zionist is correct. In order
to somehow get around this fact he tells us that
Rabbi Wasserman’s son was his (Rabbi Sheer’s
rebbe) and that the younger Wasserman would have
been “appalled at the message and presence
of Neturei Karta on my campus.” Of course,
what Rabbi Simcha Wasserman has to do with the
citation of his father’s views is never
explained.
By the time the Rabbi got to his second paragraph
on the Wasserman matter he had become confused
by his own distortion. He writes, “The reference
by Neturei Karta to Rabbi Simcha Wasserman and
other sages is presumptuous, deceptive or irrelevant.”
Of course, we have never made reference to Rabbi
Simcha Wasserman, rather to his father, who Rabbi
Sheer admits was a staunch anti –Zionist.
As to “other sages” Rabbi Sheer leaves
us in the dark as to who he is referring to. For
the moment we have only Rabbi Sheer’s speculation
that Rav Hirsch would have changed his mind today
in accordance with the good Chaplain’s views.
We on the other hand stand by what Rav Hirsch
actually wrote time and time again including his
description in a well known letter of Zionism
as “no small sin.”
In addition, our booklets, which the good Rabbi
refused to touch, offer extensive quotes with
sources covering a diverse selection of early
20th century Torah leaders ranging from Brisk
(mitmagdim) to Lubavitch (Chasidim), all vehement
in their rejection of Zionism.
As far as the size of Neturei Karta there is
no way to posit a membership figure as there is
no formal organizational structure anywhere in
the world. Nonetheless, if Rabbi Sheer is claiming
that Jews who oppose the very existence of the
Jewish state are a minor, “unique”
sect, this clearly speaks of some degree of ignorance
of Jewish demographics in the Holy Land and around
the world. Among those groups in the forefront
of anti - Zionism we find Satmar, with probably
close to a seventy thousand followers across the
globe, Toldos Aharon and Avroham Yitzchok with
tens of thousands, all those who accept the halachic
authority of the Beis Din Zedek of Jerusalem,
the Kasho and Nitra movements and settlements
here in America, the huge educational system of
Torah V’Yirah in Meah Shearim in Jerusalem
and various Brisker yeshivas throughout the Holy
City. We may also add the Viznitz-Monsey Hasidic
group, whose Rebbe is profoundly anti-Zionist
and most Williamsburg based Hasidic groups in
America. The list could go on and on.
Thus, Rabbi Sheer’s claim that those opposing
the state of Israel are smaller in number “than
Jews affiliated with Columbia” certainly
bodes well for on campus Jewish activities.
Incidentally, it is worth noting, all the above
mentioned anti-Zionist groups refuse to accept
any moneys dispensed by the Israeli state.
In addition to these overt anti-Zionists there
is the Agudath Israel world movement which was
also opposed (in most of its factions) to the
establishment of an Israeli state. Post-1948 the
Agudah leaders (as best expressed in Reb Reuven
Grozosky’s Beyos HaZman) concluded that,
given the state’s existence, it was best
to work through it to further Torah interests.
The segment of the Israeli population that favors
this position is enormous. They have no use for
the symbols of Zionism (the flag and national
anthem are meaningless to them) and they strenuously
avoid military service. In fact, what most distinguishes
them from the anti-Zionists is that the latter
refuse to benefit from the Israeli government,
while the non-Zionists are quite content to accept
the state’s largess.
In our view this non-Zionist position has its
moral inconsistencies. Nevertheless, it is clearly
not a Zionist position and left to its own devices
would never have produced a state of Israel.
Hence, Rabbi Sheer’s claim, that opposition
to Zionism is a fringe persuasion amongst observant
Jews, is demonstrably in error. We suspect that
Rabbi Sheer is well aware of all the above facts
and can offer no explanation as to why he would
wish to conceal them from his readers.
Lastly, the good Rabbi claims that we “show
no compassion for our fellow Jews.” We realize
that he is referring to the recent violence, but
before discussing that question, a few facts need
be noted. The hundreds of thousands of anti and
non-Zionist Jews in the Holy Land and around the
world are well known for their extraordinary acts
of chesed (kindness) towards all Jews. The scurrilous
charge that Neturei Karta adherents are not given
to “compassion for their fellow Jews”
is laughable and damnable.
Once again we think that the good Rabbi knew
all this. He knows that the demonstrators at Columbia
two weeks ago would be the first to assist any
Jew in a time of need. What motivated his wild
accusation of “no compassion”?
Simply stated the Rabbi was irked by the fact
that Neturei Karta chose to show sympathy for
Palestinian dead.
Of course, it is a tragedy when a Jew is killed.
But, it is also a tragedy when any human being
and especially children are killed. And it is
particularly troubling when they have been killed
by one’s own people. It is precisely at
such a moment, that the situation demands the
people of the Torah step in and proclaim to the
world that this is not the work of Jews imbued
with the spirit of our faith.
Rabbi Sheer, it is very easy to offer support
for yet another pro-Israel demonstration. On the
other hand it requires real moral courage to stand
with those who have been wronged by your own people.
That, we suggest is true kiddush Hashem (sanctification
of G-d’s name). There is a time and a place
to offer sympathy for one’s own. Two weeks
past was the time to seize the moment to offer
kindness to the Other. We are disappointed that
you did not wish to join us!
We are as traumatized as the good Rabbi by the
recent scenes of brutality emanating from Ramallah
late last week. The burning of synagogues on the
West Bank is condemnable by all men of good will,
Jewish and Palestinian. But none of this relates
to the question of whether Jews should participate
in a vigil for Palestinians or whether it is somehow
evil to condemn brutality on the part of the Israeli
government.
Rabbi Scheer was angered by our proclamations
of universal morality, yet, at root there is a
more basic issue between us. It concerns the nature
of Jewish exile and redemption.
He describes our position as based upon the notion
that the “dispersion of the Jewish people
from the land at the time of the Roman conquest
. . . was a punishment by God for the sins of
the Jewish people” The reader is seemingly
to believe that this is a radical notion unique
to Neturei Karta. In reality, it is basic Judaism,
enshrined throughout the ages in our holiday prayer
service, “Because of our sins we were exiled
from our land.”
The Rabbi further asserts “while Jews have
been praying for return to the land of Israel
since the Roman conquest, world conditions for
such a return always made it impossible to implement.”
Here we arrive finally at the crux of the matter.
Was it “world conditions” which Jews
for over two thousand years saw as preventing
their return or was it a lack of Divine intervention?
Where does Rabbi Scheer find in the vast literature
of exilic Jewry, including hundreds of selichos
prayers (where exile as punishment is a frequent
theme) any attribution of exile to “world
conditions”? Surely, what Rabbi Scheer has
fallen prey to is the emotional transformation
of the traditional Jewish understanding of exile
into a secular belief in geopolitics and material
power.
Perhaps, Rabbi Sheer reveals much about his perspective
when he writes in the second paragraph of his
essay that we “disgraced Judaism”
and then in the very next sentence something quite
different., “They disgraced my Judaism.”
Maybe it is the self assurance that “my
Judaism” and “Judaism” are one
and the same that needs to be reflected upon.
Indeed, this reflection may help us to really
“love our fellow Jews even when (we) disagree
with them.”
Rabbi David Weiss is the American spokesman for
Neturei Karta International
|
