Lesson 34

R. Weinberg and the Jewish State

19.02.2019

Text file

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1255">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16890" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<?xml:namespace
prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
/>
MODERN RABBINIC
THOUGHT
By Rav
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
/><st1:PersonName w:st="on" ProductID="Yitzchak Blau">Yitzchak
Blau</st1:PersonName>
<o:p> </o:p>


The previous
installments in this series can be accessed at:
<A
/modern.html">http://vbm-torah.org/modern.html</A>
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Lecture #34:  R. Weinberg and the Jewish
State
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
           
R. Weinberg combined tremendous pride in the fledgling Jewish State with
disappointment in its secular character.  Medinat Yisrael filled him with
both joy and pain.  An essay
published in Sinai in 1958 begins with an eloquent expression of the
positive elements in his orientation to the State.  Due to the significance and force of the
passage, I feel justified including a long citation. 
<o:p> </o:p>
To a Jewish person
whose heart has not yet fully frozen, there is no need to explain the full
blessing brought to us by Medinat Yisrael.  Our State, which has been renewed in the
land of our fathers, brought revival and political independence to the Jewish
nation residing in <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Zion</st1:place></st1:City> and brought glory and honor to the Jews of
foreign lands.  The debate whether
or not to recognize a secular state, not founded, to our dismay, on the basis of
Torah and mitzvot, dissipates like smoke when facing the live reality of
a nation of Jewish sovereignty with a powerful security apparatus that guards,
with unparalleled dedication, our lives and the lives of our children in Israel
and preserves our honor and our rights outside of Israel. 
<o:p> </o:p>
This renewed land is
sanctified for us.  Beyond its
inherent sanctity from the word of God, the God of our fathers, and due to the
holy mitzvot that depend upon the Land, it has also been sanctified as a
result of the holy Jewish blood, the blood of the first pioneers, who sacrificed
their bodies in the malaria filled swamps, in order to drain them and convert
them into a lush paradises for us and our descendents.  It has been sanctified with the blood of
our heroes who fought to conquer and free this land, to provide refuge in the
land of our fathers for an afflicted and persecuted nation.  I doubt that anyone with a clear head and
an honest heart could close his eyes to the wonder appearing before our eyes or
could think to denigrate the holiness of those heroes who dedicated their lives
to God, his people, and his land.<A title=""
href="#_edn1" name=_ednref1>[1]</A>
<o:p> </o:p>
           
A careful reading of the above quote reveals that R. Weinbergs pride in
the State of Israel encompasses several themes.  He values political independence and the
dignity which it brings.  He
appreciates the historically long connection Jews have with their homeland and
the fact that the Jewish State enables myriads of Jews to return to that land.
 Additionally, the Jewish State
fills Jews around the world with pride and hope.  
<o:p> </o:p>
This last point has
particular resonance given the chronological proximity of the founding of
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Israel</st1:place></st1:country-region> and the Holocaust.  In several letters, R. Weinberg
emphasizes how the Jewish State provides his sole consolation following the
destruction of European Jewry.<A title=""
href="#_edn2" name=_ednref2>[2]</A>  The point also gains force given the
modern context of Jewish assimilation. 
In an essay on education, R. Weinberg writes that the Jewish State stands
as a bulwark against assimilation. 
The mere fact of the Jewish States existence inspires national pride in
the heart of very Jew.<A title="" href="#_edn3"
name=_ednref3>[3]</A>   
<o:p> </o:p>
           
Another important theme emerges from the cited paragraphs.  We saw in an earlier lecture how much R.
Weinberg valued dedication, idealism, and self-sacrifice.  R. Weinberg admired such traits even when
exhibited by avowed secularists. 
Thus, we must praise the efforts of those who drained the swamps and of
those who fought for the Jewish State irrespective of their religious beliefs.
 In R. Weinbergs words, anyone with
a clear head and an honest heart would admit to these things.

<o:p> </o:p>
           
This may also explain R. Weinbergs admiration for Herzl.  He wrote an essay praising Herzl,
portraying the Zionist leader as a religious person who had not yet found his
way back to religion.  Externally,
Herzl was a politician; internally, there beat a religious heart.  Jews did not revere Herzl because of his
impressive appearances in gentile halls of power, but rather because of his good
will, selflessness, and message of hope.<A title=""
href="#_edn4" name=_ednref4>[4]</A>  R. Weinberg esteemed a person who
dedicated his life to improving the lot of the Jewish
People.
<o:p> </o:p>
           
At the same time, R. Weinberg expressed dismay at the irreligious
character of the Jewish State.  A
the end of an essay on R. Hirschs thought, he writes that a state cannot
survive if it merely serves an administrative function; to flourish, a state
must have an animating spirit. 
Endorsing this assumption generates concern regarding the young Jewish
State, since <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Israel</st1:place></st1:country-region> currently lacks a deep
connection with Judaism, the eternal spirit of Jewish nationalism.  Due to the absence of authentic Jewish
ideas, the secular state ultimately simply follows the winds blowing from Europe
or <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>.  
<o:p> </o:p>
This last point
reflects another important theme in R. Weinbergs thought, a degree of disdain
for Jewish ideology that merely mimics that of other peoples.  In his letter to David Ben Gurion, he
characterizes Reform and liberal Judaism as lacking religious faith and national
vigor while distorting Judaism in order to find favor in the eyes of the
gentiles and to mimic their Christian counterparts.  Ultimately, this attempt failed to stem
the tide of either assimilation or antiSemitism.  R. Weinberg argues that progressive
Judaism was destined to fail since imitation is a lowly character trait.<A
title="" href="#_edn5" name=_ednref5>[5]</A>

<o:p> </o:p>
           
The same theme appears in R. Weinbergs essay on Mikha Yosef
Berdyczewski.  While in
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Germany</st1:place></st1:country-region> in the 1920s, R. Weinberg
wrote essays for the Jewish periodical Yeshurun on both Achad Haam and
Berdyczewski.<A title="" href="#_edn6"
name=_ednref6>[6]</A>  In the course of his essay on the
latter, R. Weinberg faults Modern Hebrew literature for lacking originality and
copying European writers. Strikingly, R. Weinberg prefers Berdyczewski to Ahad
Haam, since the formers writings indicate a stormy and struggling spirit,
while the latter abandons religion with a cold heart.  It was not Achad Haam heresy that upset
R. Weinberg, but rather the cold tone in which he expresses it.  Achad Haams religious and moral
choices lacked tears and suffering. The preference for Berdyczewski coheres with
R. Weinbergs emphasis on sacrifice and suffering.  
<o:p> </o:p>
We cannot compare
Jewish nationalism with that of any other nation because only our nationalism is
inherently intertwined with a religious vision.  English, French, and German nationalism
lack this religious dimension: therefore, different religious groups can jointly
share in their nationalistic aspirations. Since R. Weinberg links nationalism
with matters of race and bloodlines, he assumes that a person can not truly
adopt a different nation as his own. 
As much as an Irishmen admires <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">France</st1:place></st1:country-region>, he cannot truly become a
Frenchman.  Yet none of this applies
to Jewish national identity.  Since
such an identity ultimately depends upon our religious message, any gentile who
converts assumes full Jewish national identity.  R. Weinberg cites R. Yehudas position
in the Yerushalmi (Bikkurim 1:4) that a convert can bring the
bikkurim and make the accompanying declaration, including the relevant
biblical passage, which includes a reference to God swearing to our
forefathers.  Once the convert
enters the Jewish religion, he fully identifies with our nation and its
history.<A title="" href="#_edn7"
name=_ednref7>[7]</A>
<o:p> </o:p>
           
Of course, the point can be taken too far.  After all, a born Jew who abandons his
religion does not forfeit his Jewish identity.  In reference to such Jews, R. Weinberg
writes that the sanctity of his father and grandfather falls upon him against
his will and in opposition to his mistaken consciousness.<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn8" href="#_edn8" name=_ednref8>[8]</A>
 Those born into a Jewish home
maintain their national status irrespective of their religious choices, but
those who wish to join from afar must adopt our religion.
<o:p> </o:p>
This idea animates R.
Weinbergs response to David Ben Gurion. 
In the late 1950s, Prime Minister Ben Gurion wrote to many prominent
Jewish figures for advice regarding the Who is a Jew controversy.  Some members of government wanted to
grant Israeli citizenship to interested gentiles who did not accept Torah and
mitzvot.  R. Weinberg
categorically rejected this notion. 
Our national identify depends upon our Jewish religion, and accepting the
responsibilities of that religion remains the sole path to taking on a Jewish
identity.<A title="" href="#_edn9"
name=_ednref9>[9]</A>    
<o:p> </o:p>
           
According to R. Weinberg, our States political leaders have not
successfully utilized the resources of our great tradition.  Talking about the Jewish heritage and
citing biblical verses alone do not constitute an authentic encounter with
Judaism.  Lacking any commitment to
Torah and mitzvot renders phrases about our Jewish heritage as empty.<A
title="" href="#_edn10" name=_ednref10>[10]</A>
<o:p> </o:p>
           
R. Weinberg compares the current situation of religious Jewry to the
reaction of the elders at the time of the return from the Babylonian exile.  Those who remembered the first <st1:City
w:st="on">Temple</st1:City> cried upon seeing the newly built <st1:City
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Temple</st1:place></st1:City> (Ezra
3:12).  Why did they cry?  R. Weinberg asserts that they surely
took joy in the return of Jews to the Holy Land and in the rebuilt <st1:City
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Temple</st1:place></st1:City>.  On the other hand, they worried that the
second <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Temple</st1:place></st1:City>
would not match the glory of the first. 
More specifically, they were concerned that the joy and celebration of
the earthly, material renewal will not diminish the thirst and yearning for a
spiritual revival.<A title="" href="#_edn11"
name=_ednref11>[11]</A>  The parallel to twentieth-century Jewish
life rings clear.  With all the joy
in our physical return to the land and to sovereignty, the danger remains that
the Jewish spirit will remain neglected in the Jewish
State.
<o:p> </o:p>
           
A 1966 letter to R. Simha Elberg, editor of Ha-Pardes, conveys R.
Weinbergs mixed feelings.  On the
one hand, R. Weinberg expresses joy about renewed Jewish life in the Jewish
State.  This is my joy in life that
I merited to see the building of Eretz Yisrael after years of anger and
the flames of hell which I passed through. 
This is the one consolation in my life.  Here, joy in our countrys founding and
its significance given the historical context find powerful expression.  On the other hand, the very same letter
sates that R. Weinberg instructed his congregation not to celebrate Yom
Haazmaut, and he mentions three objections.  First, Rabbinic giants such as the
Chazon Ish and R. Isser Zalman Meltzer opposed this innovation.  Second, the chief rabbinate in
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Israel</st1:place></st1:country-region> lacks the authority to make
such decisions for Diaspora Jewry unless it consults with the broader rabbinic
world.  Finally, a secular state
should not have a hand in religious matters.  The last reason highlights his
disappointment that <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Israel</st1:place></st1:country-region> did not adopt a more religious
character.<A title="" href="#_edn12"
name=_ednref12>[12]</A>   
<o:p> </o:p>
           
Does R. Weinbergs emphasis on the governments need for religious ideals
mean that he envisioned state enforced religious coercion?   
<o:p> </o:p>
No one demands that a
democratic government will act coercively in the lives of individuals.  Yet a cultured state must take upon
itself the responsibility of spiritual guidance and forging a spiritual-national
character in the peoples collective existence.<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn13" href="#_edn13" name=_ednref13>[13]</A>

<o:p> </o:p>
While he did not
offer a fully worked-out theory, it sounds like R. Weinberg would oppose
legislation forcing individuals to keep mitzvoth, but he would be in
favor of the Jewish government adopting national policies that reflect our
tradition, such as Shabbat as a day of rest.
<o:p> </o:p>
           
R. Weinberg also contends that a government promoting particular
religious messages does not violate norms of freedom and democracy.  Every state is founded on certain
principles that are not open to democratic revision.  Such principles reflect the essential
character of the state; therefore, they do not depend on popular vote.  For example, Hebrew remains the national
language of the Jewish People and the government will not call for a vote
deciding between Hebrew, English, and Yiddish.  The same idea justifies the state
standing for religious ideas.<A title=""
href="#_edn14" name=_ednref14>[14]</A>

<o:p> </o:p>
           
Finally, we should take note of an essay R. Weinberg wrote in memory of
R. Yitzchak Yaakov Reines, the founder on Mizrachi.  He praises his older rabbinic
colleagues idealism and willingness to follow his convictions even when they
created conflict with R. Rienes rabbinic peers.  R. Reines started a yeshiva that
incorporated secular studies and he joined forces with the secular Zionist
movement.  Although the essay does
not endorse all of R. Reines positions, it coveys significant esteem for this
courageous rabbi.<A title="" href="#_edn15"
name=_ednref15>[15]</A>

<o:p> </o:p>
           
This issue also highlights the complexity of R. Weinbergs views and the
difficulty in placing him squarely in a given camp.  He stresses the immense significance of
the Jewish State even as he harshly criticizes its secular nature.  Both themes emerge forcefully from his
writing.  
<DIV> 
<HR align=left SIZE=1>

<DIV id=edn1>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn1" href="#_ednref1" name=_edn1>[1]</A> Lifrakim, p.
293.  The translation is my own.
</DIV>
<DIV id=edn2>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn2" href="#_ednref2" name=_edn2>[2]</A> See the letters
published by Marc Shapiro in KItvei Ha-Gaon Rabbi Yechiel Yaakov
Weinberg, vol. 2, pp 307-308.</DIV>
<DIV id=edn3>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn3" href="#_ednref3" name=_edn3>[3]</A> Ibid., p.
330.</DIV>
<DIV id=edn4>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn4" href="#_ednref4" name=_edn4>[4]</A> Ibid., pp. 298-306.  </DIV>
<DIV id=edn5>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn5" href="#_ednref5" name=_edn5>[5]</A> Lifrakim, p.
302.</DIV>
<DIV id=edn6>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn6" href="#_ednref6" name=_edn6>[6]</A> Kitvei Ha-Gaon
Rabbi Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg, vol. 2, pp.
264-282.</DIV>
<DIV id=edn7>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn7" href="#_ednref7" name=_edn7>[7]</A> Lifrakim,
297-299.</DIV>
<DIV id=edn8>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn8" href="#_ednref8" name=_edn8>[8]</A> Ibid. p.
298.</DIV>
<DIV id=edn9>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn9" href="#_ednref9" name=_edn9>[9]</A> Ibid., 301-
311.</DIV>
<DIV id=edn10>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn10" href="#_ednref10" name=_edn10>[10]</A> Ibid., p.
330.</DIV>
<DIV id=edn11>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn11" href="#_ednref11" name=_edn11>[11]</A> Ibid., p.
294</DIV>
<DIV id=edn12>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn12" href="#_ednref12" name=_edn12>[12]</A> Kitvei Ha-Gaon
Rabbi Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg, vol. 2, pp.
308-309.</DIV>
<DIV id=edn13>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn13" href="#_ednref13" name=_edn13>[13]</A> Lifrakim, p.
331.</DIV>
<DIV id=edn14>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn14" href="#_ednref14" name=_edn14>[14]</A> Ibid., p.
296</DIV>
<DIV id=edn15>
<A title=""
style="mso-endnote-id: edn15" href="#_ednref15" name=_edn15>[15]</A> Ibid., pp.
140-150.</DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>
, full_html

This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!