DAVAR TORAH - MARCH 1999

Distortion Of Torah Concepts Due To Living In The Exile

My sons, Michael and David: You, Michael, were named after the Angelic Protector of Israel; and you, David, were named after the King of Israel. When you were 8 days old we brought you into the Jewish people's covenant with God through brit mila, the covenant of circumcision, without your consent. Now some 13 years later, through this b'nai Mitzvah, you are, of your own free will, reaffirming your membership in the covenant. What special gift can I give you that will be worthy of this occasion? Only my thoughts -- a piece of me -- this Davar Torah.

The gentile prophet Balaam, who was commissioned, unsuccessfully, by Midian and Moab to curse our people while we were wandering in the desert, said it best at Numbers 23:9: “'For, from its origins, I see it rock-like, and from hills do I see it; behold! -- it is a people that shall dwell in solitude and not be reckoned among the nations.'”  Related to this is the well known axiom from Eicha Rabba that: “If a person tells you that there is wisdom among the nations -- believe it -- but if he tells you that there is Torah among the nations -- don't believe it.” The God of Israel established for us a system of permanent, unchangeable morality -- Torah Morality -- that is worlds apart from the artificial, malleable morality created by the nations to serve their own interests. But God knew that, because all human beings are influenced by the cultures in which they are submerged, our people could not properly understand or practice Torah Morality unless we were separated from the nations and their alien influences. God accomplished this by forcibly removing us from Egypt and bringing us to Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). As Ibn Ezra commented on Deuteronomy 4:10: “God knew they would be unable to perform His Mitzvot (Commandments) properly while in lands under foreign domination.” And Ramban noted on Exodus 3:12: “God told Moses two things. Firstly, He promised that He would descend to save the people from the hand of Egypt. Secondly, He could have saved them right in Goshen itself or nearby, yet He promised to remove them from that land entirely, to the land of the Canaanites.” God determined, in His infinite Wisdom, that only in the Land of Israel could the Jewish people be adequately isolated from the alien influences of the gentile nations and thereby be able to properly understand and practice Torah Morality as a people dwelling in solitude. Even the great Jewish sages of Babylon acknowledged this truth. In Bava Metzia 85a of the Babylonian Talmud, it relates: “When Rav Zera arrived in the Land of Israel from Babylonia, he fasted a hundred fasts to forget his previous Torah study so it would not trouble him.” This cloud of confusion was the result of our people's first expulsion from Eretz Yisrael, submerging us into the galut of Bavel (the Babylonian Exile). And that Exile lasted only 70 years! Here we are at the tail end of the 2000 year old Roman Exile; how much more should we be concerned that due to our continued presence in the Exile -- without our even realizing it -- we have lost the ability to distinguish between Torah Morality and the false morality of the nations. Yet, the Mitzvah of residing in the Land of Israel is so integral to Jewish existence that our Sages said: “Living in Eretz Yisrael equals the combined weight of all of the Mitzvot in the Torah.” (Sifri, Re'ei, 80). Furthermore, they declared: “A person should live in Eretz Yisrael , even in a city whose majority is idolaters, and not outside the Land, even in a city that is entirely Jewish .” (Tosefta, Avodah Zarah, 5:2) -- this is a proof that residence in the Land of Israel is required well-before the completion of the ingathering and the coming of the Messiah -- and, just so that there be no room for ambiguity or misunderstanding, they shouted: “Whoever lives in Eretz Yisrael is like someone who has a God, and whoever lives outside of Eretz Yisrael is like someone who has no God, as it says, 'To give you the Land of Canaan, to be a God to you' (Lev. 25:38).” (Ketuvot 110b).

In Succah 52b it says: “God regrets having created four things: Exile, Babylonians, Ishmaelites and the Evil Impulse”. God regrets having created the Exile because, although it was a just punishment for our repeated disobedience to Him, it did not fulfill its purpose of causing us to repent of our sins quickly so that we could be repatriated to the Land of Israel quickly. On the contrary, we have instead treated our long Exile as a pleasant reward with little desire to end it. We have even convinced ourselves that it matters little to God whether we observe His Mitzvot in the Exile or in Israel, this despite our Sages' statement that God admonishes us: “Although I exile you from the Land, continue performing the Mitzvot so that when you return [to Israel] they will not seem new to you” (Sifri, Ekev 43) and Rashi's later concurrence that: “Even once you are exiled, continue performing the Mitzvot. Put on Tefillin and affix a Mezuzah so that they do not seem new to you when you return [to Israel]” (Rashi on Deut. 11:18), meaning that we continue performing the Mitzvot in the Exile only to keep our memories sharp and for no other reason, which clearly indicates the lower status to which God accords the Exilic performance of the Mitzvot. And unfortunately, as might be expected after 2000 years of submergence into one alien culture after another, our minds have progressively, if imperceptibly, become dulled to those many important Torah concepts which, through lack of their continuous erudition, have slipped away towards oblivion, to the point where, nowadays, these Torah concepts actually seem foreign and, therefore, un-Jewish, to us. Our Talmudic Sages alluded to this problem when they said: “In the future, the Torah will be forgotten by the Jewish people” (Shabbat 138b).

One of the Torah concepts that has been “forgotten” is the Mitzvah to hate Evil.  As the Prophet Amos declared in Amos 5:14-15: “Seek Goodness and not Evil ... Hate Evil and love Goodness …”  King Solomon said in Proverbs 8:13: “Fear of HaShem is hatred of Evil …”  King David said in Psalms 97:10: “You that love HaShem, hate Evil …”  God Himself commands us throughout Deuteronomy, Chapters 13-24: “You shall destroy Evil from your midst” (Deut. 13:6, 17:7, 19:19, 21:21, 22:21, 22:24, 24:7) and “You shall destroy Evil from among Israel” (Deut. 17:12, 22:22); and just so that we shouldn't think that this Commandment to destroy Evil applies only to Evil as an abstract concept, Onkelos, in his authoritative Aramaic translation of the Torah, makes sure to always translate this very Commandment as “You shall destroy Evildoers ...”  At the very least, not only are we are prohibited by the Torah from praising or honoring the Evildoer, but we are actually required by the Torah to curse the Evildoer. As it says in Bereshit Rabbah 49:1: “Whoever mentions an Evildoer without cursing him misses out on a Torah Commandment -- 'The name of the wicked shall rot' (citing Proverbs 10:7)”.   And our Sages declare:  “It is incumbent upon the individual to drink on Purim until he can no longer distinguish between praising Mordechai and cursing Haman” (Megilla 7b) -- this in recognition of the fact that, under normal circumstances, we find it virtually impossible to comprehend that cursing the Evildoer is as morally necessary as praising the Righteous.  Unfortunately, Today, in our politically-correct world, not only do we not curse the Evildoer, but, on the contrary, we even praise and honor him. In fact, anyone who dares to curse an Evildoer whom the nations have chosen to honor risks rebuke even from the leaders of our own community. Such is the legacy of the Exile. Such is the dulling of Torah.

Nothing illustrates and illuminates the point better than a specific example. For this purpose I have chosen a recent event -- the death of Hussein ibn Talal, King of Jordan, y'mach sh'mo (cursed be his name). Upon hearing of his death, the nations of the world and their media showered this man with platitudes reserved for the Messiah, describing him as a visionary, a man of extraordinary courage, a crusader for peace, and a true friend of the Jewish people. One mourning Israeli was even quoted as declaring: “He was our King too.” And truth be told, with his regal bearing, engaging smile and excellent command of the English language it is hard for us to regard the man any differently or even wonder why we should. Let us see, therefore, if Torah Morality may have a different view of the late King.

A little history is in order. The man became ruler of Jordan in 1953. Until he lost Judea, Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem to Israel in the 1967 Six Day War, he constantly permitted his troops to fire at Jews from across the 1949 armistice demarcation lines, thereby killing and maiming scores of our people. After that War, he permitted the terrorists of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to cross the new border at will in order to murder Jews. However, in 1970 the PLO repaid him for his support by attempting to overthrow him and to conquer Jordan; that ingratitude caused the king to crush the PLO and to expel its terrorists to Lebanon. During the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the king did not directly join Egypt and Syria in their coordinated invasion of Israel, but he hedged his bets by sending several troop divisions to the Golan Heights' front to fight Israel under Syrian command. Sometime after that War, he bitterly complained to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin that, while Egypt had received the Sinai, and Syria had received a portion of the Golan, as a result of each party's attack on Israel, Jordan had received nothing as a reward for its “restraint”. During the 1991 Gulf War, the king remained the closest ally of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, y'mach sh'mo, despite the latter's stated threat that he would “burn half of Israel”. When Iraq actually attacked Israel, the king stated that, while he was helpless to prevent Iraq from using Jordanian airspace to fire Scud missiles at Tel Aviv, he would nevertheless regard Israel's use of Jordanian airspace to retaliate against Iraq as an act of war against Jordan. Well after Jordan's 1994 peace treaty with Israel, the king continued to host and to protect numerous Arab terror organizations whose only purpose was, and is, to murder Jews. These groups include Hamas and even PLO-affiliated groups who were temporarily expelled from Syria under American pressure. Even after the peace treaty with Jordan, each and every Hamas suicide bombing -- murdering and injuring hundreds of Jews -- has been openly planned and initiated from the safe haven of Amman, Jordan. In fact, in late 1997, when Israel sent a Mossad team to Amman to poison Khaled Mashaal, y'mach sh'mo, Hamas' chief of operations, the king's security forces captured the Israeli agents, and the king thereupon personally threatened Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu that he would hang these Jews in public unless Israel gave Jordan the antidote to save the poisoned terrorist's life, and unless Israel also freed Sheik Ahmed Yassin, y'mach sh'mo, supreme leader of Hamas, who was then serving a life sentence in an Israeli prison for his role in terrorism against our people. Lastly, at the time of the king's death, Jordan still had a law that made it a crime -- punishable by death -- for any Jordanian citizen, including the Arabs of Judea, Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem, to sell land to a Jew. Now, go ask the nations: Where is the visionary, the man of courage, the pursuer of peace, the friend of the Jewish people?

In the late king's defense, as far as we know, he never personally murdered or maimed a Jew. But then neither did Hitler, y'mach sh'mo. Perhaps then it is a question of degree, but no -- the Torah doesn't condone even the murder of one, let alone of hundreds. According to Torah Morality, a ruler, even a popular one, bears ultimate responsibility for the actions -- either ordered or permitted -- of those under his control. The proof comes from, among other sources, the Hebrew Bible at I Samuel 15. There we find that King Saul, although ordered by God to destroy all of the Amalekites as punishment for their earlier unprovoked attacks against our people, nevertheless spared its ruler, King Agag, y'mach sh'mo, because Saul had pity on the defeated monarch. When the Prophet Samuel learned of this, he, at the instruction of God, stripped Saul of his crown and demanded that the Amalekite king be brought before him. As the text continues at verses 32-33: “And Agag went to him submissively. And Agag said, 'Surely, the bitterness of death has passed.' And Samuel said, 'As your sword made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women.' And Samuel cut Agag into pieces before HaShem in Gilgal.”

As uncomfortable as 2,000 years of Exile have made us with this concept, this is the Torah's judgment upon an evil gentile ruler who has Jewish blood on his hands, even as the nations of the world all shout that: “Surely, the bitterness of death has passed.” At the very least, we should know to curse such a person's name whenever it is uttered.

Michael and David: Know to love Goodness and hate Evil; and be strong in all Torah concepts, especially the neglected ones that have been pushed aside in deference to the sensibilities of the nations and the squeamishness of our own people.

© Mark Rosenblit

 

[For more commentary on the importance of the Torah Commandment to hate the Evildoer, please read on! -- Mark Rosenblit]

The pope and the Holocaust deniers

By [Rabbi] Shmuley Boteach

(Jerusalem Post, January 1, 2007) [Deposed Iraqi dictator] Saddam Hussein's execution reminded us that some crimes are so heinous no society can tolerate them, and that when you murder more than one million people, even traditional opponents of the death penalty might just applaud when you hang.

It is a lesson the Catholic Church would do well to contemplate. Last week, the church broke ranks with nearly every moral voice and came out publicly against Saddam's execution. But if that were not enough, Pope Benedict XVI granted a private audience to a delegation of Iranian officials, led by Iranian Foreign Minister Manoucher Mottaki, whose ministry sponsored the recent Holocaust denial conference in Teheran.

The pope is the foremost spiritual leader on Earth. It shocks every moral sensibility that he would choose to legitimize a wretch like this. More troubling yet, the pope conveyed warm greetings to Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad through the delegation.

Warm greetings? Ahmadinejad is calling virtually every week for Israel's annihilation. Does the pope have anything to share with this man aside from his contempt? One would hope that a pope who witnessed the Holocaust and the destruction of the Jewish people would practice extra caution before hanging out with those who wish to renew Hitler's efforts.

LET'S NOT finesse this. Ahmadinejad is an international abomination who can lay strong claim to being the single most hate-filled man alive. Surely the pope can find more worthy recipients of his time and graciousness?

Pope John Paul II was a man of great courage who helped to challenge and defeat communism. Yet even he made the repeated mistake of legitimizing terrorists, repeatedly meeting with Yasser Arafat. But if one might excuse those meetings on the grounds that other World leaders did the same, the pope's actions at the time of Arafat's death were jarring and incomprehensible. He praised Arafat as "a leader of great charisma who loved his people and sought to lead them toward national independence. May God welcome in His Mercy the soul of the illustrious deceased and give peace to the Holy Land."

Did anyone seriously believe that God was going to welcome this baby-killer into heaven rather than placing him in hell? Why would virtuous and righteous men like John Paul and Benedict make such outrageous mistakes?

The Catholic Church seems to spend a great deal of time upholding its standards of sexual morality, like condemning gay unions and contraception, and comparably little time condemning the tyrants and dictators who slaughter the children whose lives the church declares to be holy. So why the omission?

It bespeaks an unfortunate and continuing pattern on behalf of our Christian brethren to refuse to hate evil. Many of my Christian brothers and sisters mistakenly believe that God forbids hatred. They quote Jesus' teaching to turn the other cheek and his admonishment to love your enemies as proof that we dare never hate.

AS A radio host, I am called by many evangelical Christians who say that in God's eyes we are all sinners, and thus from a heavenly perspective Osama bin Laden and the average housewife from Kansas are equal. Bin Laden must indeed face justice for his crimes, but we dare not hate him seeing that Jesus still loves him.

But this is a travesty of Jesus' teachings. It would make this great Hebrew personality into someone who had contempt for his victims as he extended love to their murderers. Jesus advocated turning the other cheek to petty slights and affronts to honor, not to mass graves and torture chambers.

Likewise, while Jesus taught that we ought to love our own enemies, this did not apply to God's enemies. Our enemies are people who take our parking spot or who are our rivals for a promotion at work. God's enemies are those who slaughter his children.

Let not any Christian think that Jesus' sympathy was for anyone other than the oppressed and the poor. True, the Bible commands us to "love our neighbor as ourselves," but the man who kills children is not our neighbor. Having cast off the Image of God, he has lost his Divine Spark and is condemned to Eternal Oblivion, from which not even a belief in Salvation will rescue him.

He who murders God's children has been lost to God forever and has abandoned all entitlement to love, earning eternal derision in its stead.

AMID MY deep and abiding respect for the Christian faith, I state unequivocally that to love the terrorist who flies a civilian plane into a civilian building, or a white supremacist who drags a black man three miles while tied to the back of a car is not just inane, it is deeply sinful. To send warm greetings to an Iranian president who has just hosted a former head of the KKK is an affront to blacks throughout the world just as much as it is to Jews.

To love Evil is itself evil, and constitutes a passive form of complicity.

We are all known by the company we keep. If Ahmadinejad of Iran called for the extermination of all the World's Catholics, the pope might
think twice before meeting his representatives. He ought to accord the same respect to his Jewish brethren.

The writer is host of The Learning Channel's television program "Shalom in the Home," whose second season begins on January 21. He is currently writing a book on the necessity of hating Evil.

(©) The Jerusalem Post

 

A time to hate

By JONATHAN ROSENBLUM

(Jerusalem Post, January 4, 2007) [Deposed Iraqi dictator] Saddam Hussein's death by hanging came too late to provide much satisfaction -- too late for the hundreds of thousands of human beings killed on his orders -- hundreds at his own hands. The taking of his miserable life can neither bring back the lives he so callously snuffed out nor compensate for them.

Still, there was rejoicing at the sight of Saddam on the gallows, though personally I would have been far happier had he fallen into one of the meat grinders into which he, and his equally sadistic sons Uday and Qusai, dropped so many of his subjects.

My satisfaction has nothing to do with bloodlust. I would not have been one of the thousands of Iraqis vying for the post of Saddam's executioner. Rather it derives from being witness to the turning of the wheels of Divine Justice. The Midrash states that the Divine throne only became firmly established in the world when the Jewish people sang God's praises at the Sea. Their joyous song was a consequence of watching the precision with which the suffering of each drowning Egyptian was meted out: The Egyptians either died instantaneously or slowly and painfully, according to the degree with which they had afflicted the Jews in Egypt.

Divine vengeance, then, is the righting of an imbalance in the world, and refers equally to the punishment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. When we merit witnessing the enactment of justice, our belief that there is both Justice and a Judge is strengthened.

Three times daily, we call in our prayers for God to "destroy speedily all His enemies." Can there be a greater enemy of God than one who murders hundreds of thousands of His creations? From the beginning of human history, God proclaimed the rule, "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God He made man" (Genesis 9:6).

NEEDLESS TO say much of the world does not view matters as I do. And I don't just mean the Palestinians who benefited from Saddam's generous
subsidies to the families of suicide bombers or to Saddam's erstwhile partner in various oil scams, the notorious Russian xenophobe Vladimir Zhirinovsky. The latter labeled Saddam's execution "the greatest crime of the 21st century." The so-called civilized world joined in the chorus of condemnation. The European Union and its member states expressed their repugnance at the imposition of the death penalty in all circumstances. Tim Hames, writing in the The Times of London, went so far as to proclaim Saddam's execution "as ethically tainted as the crimes that produced that sentence."

Following that logic, the execution of Nazi war criminals tried at Nuremberg was as "ethically tainted" as Hitler's crimes. Those who hold that position no doubt are convinced of their superior humanity. To my mind, however, the opposite is true. Their narcissistic back-patting partakes of a certain inhuman coldness.

The critics refuse to enter imaginatively into the world of Saddam's victims and to contemplate the true nature of his evil. They do not wish to contemplate what it is like to be a parent forced to watch your child tortured to extract your "confession," what it is like to spend your entire life afraid to enter into an intimate conversation with another human being for fear that he or she might be one of Saddam's informers, what it is like to have parents, siblings or children taken away in the middle of the night, never to be seen again. And then multiply such scenarios millions of times over.

During Saddam's 23-year reign of terror, nearly 300,000 Iraqis disappeared -- more than 12,000 a year, 240 a week. And that number does not even include the hundreds of Iraqi athletes crippled and maimed for life in Uday Hussein's torture chambers for failing to bring sufficient glory to the regime, or the thousands of girls seized off the streets to satisfy the lusts of the Husseins.

At his trial, Saddam neither denied his crimes nor expressed the slightest repentance. The equation of Saddam's execution, after trial, to his crimes is on a par with those pat moral equivalencies so beloved of Left intellectuals during the Cold War -- Soviet imperialism vs the cultural imperialism of Hollywood.

Yale computer scientist David Gelernter, who had a bomb sent by the Unabomber blow up in his face, made mincemeat of this moral equivalency in his book Drawing Life: Surviving the Unabomber:  It is through capital punishment of murders -- and not by running to forgive them -- that we as a society "show our respect for the dead and proclaim the value of human life," he writes.

Among those rushing to condemn Saddam's execution was the Vatican, which pronounced his hanging "tragic." Few issues so distinguish the Torah viewpoint from that of many Christian groups as that of forgiveness for mass murderers.

Shmuley Boteach rightly noted the consanguinity between the Vatican's condemnation and Pope Benedict XVI's reception of the Iranian foreign minister, who was fresh from organizing Teheran's conference of Holocaust deniers, and his conveyance of warm regards to [Iranian president] Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who boasts of his plans for the next Holocaust.

The condemnation and the warm regards share a certain moral obtuseness, and provide proof of our Sages' insight: "He who is merciful when he should be cruel will end up being cruel when he should be merciful."

What is lost in the pat equation of Saddam's life with those of his victims is horror of Evil. And that loss of horror paves the way for further evil.

The contrast between Jewish and Christian attitudes to forgiveness was recently highlighted by the response of an Amish community to the cold-blooded murder of five schoolgirls and the serious wounding of 10 more. At the funeral of one of the slain girls, her grandfather spoke and said of the perpetrator, "We must not think evil of this man." The neighbors and friends of the victims' families professed to feel no hatred towards the girls' killer.

In contrast to the Vatican's cheap sympathy for Saddam, the attitude of the Amish, at least, manifests spiritual grandeur. They offered forgiveness to the murderer of their own children and grandchildren, not to the mass murderer of distant victims.

Jews too are instructed to hate the sin and not the sinner. But sometimes the two are inextricably bound, as in Saddam's case. And often, easy forgiveness of the sinner diminishes the horror of his crimes. As Rabbi David Gottlieb of Baltimore pointed out in the wake of the Amish tragedy, even God Himself does not forgive sins committed against a fellow human being until the victim's forgiveness has been secured. No one can confer forgiveness on behalf of the victim, and all the more so when no forgiveness was sought.

Ecclesiastes reminds us that there is also "a time to hate [see Ecc. 3:1-11]." Would we really wish to live, asks Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby (an observant Jew), in a society in which no one gets angry when children are slaughtered, a society in which there is an instantaneous dispensation for the most horrific acts of cruelty? I would not. And that is why I was glad to see Saddam hanging at the end of a noose.

(©) The Jerusalem Post

 

 

 

Return to main page