Articles

by Rabbi Yisrael Kaniel — Mar. 2005

The following essay was submitted by Rabbi Yisrael Kaniel, associate director of B' Ahavat Yisrael, in an attempt to clarify current events in the light of Torah and Jewish law.

The first commentary of Rashi on the Torah has become rather well known amongst many Jews. He notes the question of why G–d begins the Torah with the creation narrative, as opposed to first mentioning His directives to us. The answer is: "The power of His acts He told to His people in order to give them the estate of nations. For if the nations of the world will say to Israel, 'You are thieves, for you conquered the lands of the seven nations,' they will respond to them, 'The whole earth belongs to the Holy One, Blessed is He. He created it and He gave it to whomever He pleased. It was His wish to give it to them, and it was His wish to take it from them and give it to us'".

G-d granted the Land of Israel to the offspring of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob — the Jewish people. And after many years of exile, G–d granted His people again the opportunity to settle and gain sovereignty over that land. Settling this land has been met, however, over the years with confrontation from Arab neighbors who, after never declaring sovereignty over the land and never doing anything to cultivate this land, have chosen to question the Jewish right to this Land as described in the Torah. In fact, much Jewish blood has been spilt in the course of military and terrorist attacks from these neighbors. And, at times, the question has arisen as to the possibility of appeasing these neighbors by means of offering them part of the land that we have gained sovereignty over.

Recently, in fact, an entire debate has broken out as a result of an unusual push by the government of the State of Israel to relinquish a part of the country gained during the 1967 Six Day War, namely Gaza, in order to — somehow — quiet tensions. The push is rather unusual because the move is to be a unilateral one with nothing received in return and, despite previous questionable and mistaken maneuvers that have only caused Jews more angst, no such totally one–sided move has ever been entertained by any Israeli government since its inception. Nevertheless, this has been proposed and pushed by the government, and, as a result, public and private debate and discussions have arisen questioning the sensibility of this proposed policy.

In most cases, discussions on the question of offering part of the Land of Israel to its neighbors has centered on personal human musings, philosophizing and attempts at logically solving the issue. Even amongst the spiritual leaders of the Jewish community, declarations have been issued based ostensibly on philosophical musings with no apparent care towards a reasoned, comprehensive and unbiased consideration of Torah sources. In some cases, certain spiritual leaders have resorted to throwing barbs at other major rabbinic figures who unquestionably base their conclusions on thoughtful analysis of the entire breath of Torah literature, albeit not so clear to the average man in the street. Consequently, a clear and comprehensive rendering of this issue, with a mind to all of Torah literature seems to be in order to clarify the Torah perspective on this matter to the Jewish public at large — at least to those who are interested.

The Torah states in Devarim 7:2, "Ve'lo tehanem," which the Talmud in Masekhet Avoda Zara 20a interprets as "do not give them an encampment in the land." On the basis of this, Rambam (Maimonides) rules in Mishne Torah, Hilkhot Avodat Kokhavim 10:3–4 that it is forbidden for a Jew to sell houses or fields in the Land of Israel to a non–Jew. It is generally accepted in rabbinic literature that this prohibition applies to all non–Jews and not only to the "seven nations". This is explicitly stated in Tosafot (Avoda Zara 20a), Sefer Ha'Eshkol (III, 123), Maharam Shik (Taryag Mitzvot, no. 426) and Hazon Ish (Shevi’it 24:1 and Hilkhot Avodat Kokhavim 65:1). Moreover, the contention that a distinction be made between selling to idolatrous gentiles and to those who do not practice idolatry and therefore permit sale to Moslems is unequivocally dismissed by such Torah luminaries as R. Shlomo Yosef Zevin (L’Or Ha’Halakha, p. 125), R. Naftali Zevi Yehudah Berlin (Teshuvot Meshiv Davar, 2:56, "Kuntres Dvar ha’Shmita") and Hazon Ish (Shevi’it 24:3 and Hilkhot Avodat Kokhavim 65:3).

Various questions have been raised in latter–day rabbinic literature as to what extent a "sale" constitutes "encampment". While some maintain that there is no prohibition against selling land to a non–Jew who already owns land, Rav Kook and Hazon Ish reject this claim. While some condone exchanging land, Hazon Ish, in a letter to R. Betzalel Zolti, unequivocally forbids this. While some feel that sale for a limited period of time is permitted, Hazon Ish (Shvi’it 24:4 and Hilkhot Avodat Kokhavim 65:4) also rejects this. And while some have questioned whether ceding land to Arab sovereignty is considered a "sale", this is strongly repudiated by R. Betzalel Zolti, former Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem ("Torah she’beal Peh" 11, pp. 44–54) and R. Ovadiah Hadaya ("Noam" 11, pp. 183–184), and even those who question this predicate it upon the assumption that Jews are allowed to remain in their land and only political sovereignty is transferred. Unilateral handing over of sovereignty in conjunction with removing Jews from their homes is assumed prohibited without question.

Consequently, in light of the above, any form of providing any non–Jewish individual, let alone an entire group, with the acquisition of real estate in the Land of Israel is riddled with serious objections by major rabbinic authorities and toys with the transgression of a Torah prohibition. Like most of Torah law, such a law as "lo tehanem" can only be suspended in the case of preservation of life. It is only such a consideration of preservation of life that motivated R. Yohanan Ben Zakkai and his contemporaries to surrender to Rome, as described in the Talmud (Gittin 56a). At that time, the rabbis calculated that victory over Rome had no reasonable chance, and the Jews at the time would be wiped out if they continued to confront Rome, while there was a strong chance for a relatively peaceful outcome if this were attempted. On the other hand, as Rabbi J. David Bleich points out in Contemporary Halakhic Problems, II, p. 220, "Assuredly, return of territory cannot be countenanced in a situation in which the return of land may, in itself, contribute to increased danger by rendering the military situation even more precarious." To think that, in today’s day, transferring of land to our neighbors is being done to preserve life clearly ignores the readily apparent danger that this will only bring more bloodshed.

One may ask whether all land under Jewish sovereignty is considered by Jewish law to be part of the Land of Israel, or can certain parts be considered by Jewish law as not part of the Land of Israel and, therefore, not subject to the aforementioned Torah prohibition. Commenting on the verse, "Every place where your foot shall tread shall belong to you" (Devarim 11:24), The Tannaitic source known as Sifre (Ekev 51) indicates that the Torah is thereby declaring that all conquered territories, even those lying outside the biblical boundaries of the Land of Israel, are endowed with its sanctity. Rambam (Mishne Torah, Hilkhot Melakhim 5:6), however, stipulates that such sanctity can be garnered only if the land is acquired by a king acting upon the directive of the Sanhedrin. Nevertheless, Rabbi Avraham Y. HaKohen Kook, first Chief Rabbi of the Land of Israel, argues (Mishpat Kohen, 145), based on a discrepancy in Rambam’s language in Mishne Torah, Hilkhot Terumot 1:2, that sanctification is conditioned upon the Sanhedrin only in non–obligatory wars, whereas in obligatory wars no such condition exists. Therefore, Rabbi Shiloah Raphael (5733 issue of "Torah she’beal Peh") points out that territories conquered as a result of the Six–Day War, since it was a defensive war, are automatically endowed with the sanctity of the Land of Israel. This argument is echoed by Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg (Tzitz Eliezer, X, 1:18). And although Rambam states that conquered territory lying outside the borders of the Land of Israel becomes sanctified only if conquered by a king, Rabbis Waldenberg and Raphael as well as Rabbi Judah Gershuni ("Or HaMizrah", Nissan-Tammuz 5733) all affirm that the reference does not apply exclusively to a monarch but includes any government of Israel. It should be noted, moreover, that Gaza, in particular, has been asserted in Teshuvot Radvaz, V, no. 1105 to have definitely been conquered at the time of Joshua by the people of Israel who ascended from Egypt.

Another consideration that must be considered is the serious view taken by Jewish law with regards border towns or cities. Jewish law, as recorded in Shulhan Arukh (Orah Hayim 329:6), sanctions military defense of "a city close to the border" even on the Sabbath against occupation by the enemy even when the enemy seeks only to plunder it for "straw and hay" because security considerations designed to defend against future danger to Jewish lives require that border areas remain in Jewish hands. As Rabbi Bleich notes in Contemporary Halakhic Problems, III, p. 304, "Applying the selfsame consideration to the current dilemma, it may well be the case that return of territory, the retention of which is essential for purposes of security, may only enhance the danger to the inhabitants of the State of Israel in any future conflict. Similarly, present concessions may not appease the enemy but, on the contrary, may whet his appetite and enhance his strategic capabilities in demanding surrender of additional territory."

One last matter of consideration is a rather peculiar historical note recorded in the Biblical book of Melakhim I (9:10-11): "And it was at the end of twenty years during which Solomon had built the two houses, the Temple of the L–rd and the king's house. Hiram, the king of Tyre, had supplied Solomon with cedar wood, and with cypress wood, and with gold, as according to all his wishes, then King Solomon gave Hiram in return twenty cities in the land of Galilee." While one or more contemporary rabbis have chosen to ignore all that was previously said, and choose to use this anecdote as proof that territorial concessions are permissible, the great medieval Jewish scholar and leader R. Isaac Abravanel, in light of the Torah prohibition as delineated above, questions Solomon's giving away cities in the Land of Israel contrary to the Torah. Upon serious, deep and searching analysis of the relevant events described, Abravanel concludes that Hiram had been contracted to supply lumber and gold for the construction of Solomon's Temple and palaces. In return, he received his annual payment of produce, as recorded in other verses. At the completion of the construction, Solomon wished to renew the contract by giving Hiram twenty cities from which to extract the wheat, barley, oil and other produce contracted upon. He chose particularly the region of Galilee, which is noted for these products. The cities were to remain part of the Land of Israel. Hiram's sole jurisdiction over these cities was for the purpose of extracting the produce during the period of the contract. Upon inspecting these cities, Hiram was displeased. He thought them unproductive, and consequently returned them to Solomon, rejecting the new method of payment and renewing the contract with the previous method of paying the produce itself. Solomon, in order to prove to Hiram that he had not attempted to swindle him, settled his countrymen in 20 other cities that Hiram had given to Solomon to demonstrate that they would make the land productive. This interpretation is also followed by the 19th century Torah great known as Malbim and disputed by no known Torah exegete of note.

In summation, there is an undisputed Torah prohibition of handing over possession of any part of the Land of Israel to a non–Jew. No rabbinic authority of any note has ever entertained the possibility of unilaterally handing over any parcel of the Land of Israel if it meant that the current Jewish owner of the property would have to leave it. And any other form of handing over parts of the Land of Israel is met with severe objections by rabbinic authorities of note. Major rabbinic luminaries and decisors on Jewish law, the likes of Rabbis Kook and Waldenberg assert unequivocally that any parcel of land conquered under the auspices of any Jewish government during an obligatory war retains sanctity as part of the Land of Israel — let alone Gaza that has a history of Jewish sovereignty going back to Joshua. Moreover, jeopardizing border cities or towns and the concomitant fear of any possibility of endangering Jewish lives are treated with great severity by Jewish law. And historical narratives such as that of R. Yohanan Ben Zakkai and Solomon cited above pose no serious difficulty upon careful and concerted study of the sources.

In light of the aforementioned, the view of Torah and Jewish law as expressed through the Talmud and rabbinic scholars over the ages appears rather apparent. Land granted to the Jewish people by G–d is not a soccer ball to be kicked back and forth in an attempt to score points against opponents. And Jews living in Jewish sovereign land are not players in a poker game taking limited risks to gain an advantage. Any portion of the Land of Israel is a gift of G–d to the Jewish people to be cherished and embraced and not to be relinquished. And the Jewish people living in the Land of Israel are a conglomerate of Jewish individuals whose lives may not be put at risk without carefully calculated thought. The idea that "we have to try something," as is bandied about amongst proponents of the government's disengagement plan from Gaza, is clearly not carefully calculated thought or strategy. In fact, it does not take a major military strategist to recognize the monumental dangers that such a plan can lead to. And it treats the lives of Jews in the Land of Israel with a cavalier abandon that is contrary to Torah and Jewish law.

Being an issue of a Torah prohibition, it is rather apparent that anyone asked to lend a hand in violating this prohibition should treat the situation just as if he were asked to violate other Torah prohibitions such as theft, eating pork or transgressing Shabbat.

We read in Proverbs (19:21), "Many are the thoughts in the heart of man, but the counsel of G–d will stand." May all members of the Jewish people put aside personal thoughts and musings, and learn to act solely according to the counsel of G–d. And may G–d see fit to bring true peace to all of the Jewish people with the speedy arrival of His long–awaited messenger, the Messiah.

by Yosef Ben Tzion (Joel Busner) — June 2006

As Ehud Olmert, Prime Minister of the not–so–democratic State of Israel, addressed the politicians in Washington, B'Ahavat Yisrael representatives were busy unloading supplies for the Shavuot holiday for some of our brothers and sisters who are temporarily residing in a very secluded community called Shekef. These residents of Shekef were living in various communities in Gaza / Gush Katif until the end of August 2005. This particular group is composed of families formerly of Tel Katifa, Neve Dekalim, Atzmona, and Netzer Hazani. I remember stopping along the way at a store and noticing the hullabaloo on the television that the Israeli media was making about the Olmert trip to the United States. Ehud Olmert wowed them by convincing President Bush how the latest expulsion plan now known as 'convergence' will be a great boon for the Middle East. Later, as I helped unload the truck, I could not help but stop and feel the incredible irony.

On the same day that the Prime Minister of Israel was begging the United States to endorse his suicidal retreat from huge parts of the Holy Land and with it to expel tens of thousands of Jewish residents, there we were struggling to subsidize some of those from the last group of expellees. Our objectives are completely at odds with our government! Some have been convinced that it's over and it's not so bad. After all, the government — it is assumed — has compensated these people. Really? Well, we conducted an interview in Shekef with Ms. Orit Odes, spokeswoman for the group, and we uncovered a number of facts about this particular group and what appears to be the case with the majority of the expellees from Gush Katif.

The majority of the group has been moved three (3) times in nine (9) months. First, they were cramped into over–crowded hotel rooms. Then they were told to go to a small community called Even Shmuel. At Even Shmuel, the local girls school, known as the Ulpana, assisted the families by giving up their caravans in order to give these poor families a modicum of space. The caravans averaged 60 square meters or about 650 square feet. They were in Even Shmuel with no assistance for five (5) months. They were then transferred once again to their current location in Shekef where they have been for the last three (3) months. At Shekef the dwellings — made from very low quality material — range from 60 to 110 square meters. The government representatives have informed them that they should expect to stay in these shabby dwellings for about two years. The expellees believe that this stay will probably be for much longer. How much have they received towards moving expenses? Zero (0) — nothing.

Ms. Odes and her friends explained to me other factors worthy of consideration. Each time they move, they need different types of furnishings or storage for temporary use. The Odes family, for example, purchased a small closet for storage in Even Shmuel. This small closet now had to be replaced by a larger closet–type dresser in Shekef. The larger dresser that they have purchased had to replace the one they had before their expulsion because the government's movers destroyed it in transport. Moreover, all of these dwellings come with little land and none of the land has been cultivated in any way. There is no grass. There are no patios. If the residents want to hang laundry outside, they have to construct their own patios at their own expense. This is especially absurd in light of the fact that they will be forced to leave the premises in a few years.

Half of the group had houses in Gush Katif with mortgages from Israeli banks. The houses are no more, but the mortgages continue. The banks have not been paid by the government; so they want their money. In the meantime, the former home owners are paying mortgages for houses that do not exist! To add insult to injury, the residents are compelled to pay rent for these temporary dwellings.

Most of the residents in Shekef have found some sort of employment. Some have not. Those who have found employment usually have to travel great distances since Shekef is approximately forty (40) minutes by car from the nearest substantial population centers and many commutes are much further. During the interview we were told that the situation in Nitzan (a large new community that the government has established for many of the expellees) is even worse. Approximately 60% of the expellees there are unemployed.

The so–called Disengagement Authority, purportedly set up by the government to help the expellees, is doing everything possible not to help them. The expellees explained that they were promised compensation in proportion to the amount of time they lived in Gaza / Gush Katif. The only problem is that the government wants 'proof'. In the case of Ms. Odes, her family lived in Tel Katifa for ten years. The authorities want ten years of past electric bills. The problem is that the electric company only keeps the last two (2) years of charges. This is the same with the history of property tax payments and so forth. Anybody with any common sense knows very well that the government through the tax authority and car registrations etc., knows exactly how long each of the expellees resided in his / her community.

Can a government led by Jews be so insensitive to some of its most loyal citizens? With deep regret, the answer appears to be in the affirmative. The question that begs for an answer is why?

It appears that those in power who orchestrate the expulsion of Jews do not want any opposition to this disastrous plan. By scattering them to out of the way locations, we have a situation of "out of sight, out of mind". And tiresome bureaucratic contrivances along with their desperate need to rebuild their lives leave these unfortunate expellees too weary to protest and awaken public awareness.

Countless times, ordinary people here in Israel mention about the plight of poor people in their respective cities and towns and they want to know what makes these "settlers" so special? Why do these settlers deserve more than the poor of their own towns? It would not be right to advise someone not to give to the poor of their community. They definitely should give to the poor of their towns. Nevertheless, the majority of Jews do not seem to give the requisite ten percent of their income to tzedaka. If they would, there probably would not be too many of their brothers and sisters in desperate need of assistance in so many places. As Jews, we have a responsibility for all of our brethren. These Jews have suffered greatly from terrorists, and instead of the terrorists being punished and banished from the Land of Israel the government has rewarded the terrorists by expelling Jews. Most of these people were self–sufficient before the expulsion. Only one family from the group in Shekef has received some land to farm some forty five (45) minutes from Shekef. No one else has received anything else.

If one believes in authentic Judaism, one cannot evict a Jew from his / her home and destroy it, especially in the Land of Israel. Even if one feels that some other humanistic or so–called realistic values should take precedence over Jewish law and therefore there is no choice, you can not do so without compassion and you must take care of these people. This situation is a crisis that is essentially being ignored and played down not only by the mainstream media internationally and in Israel as well, but from most Jewish publications. Demand that the Israeli government stop rewarding terror. Feel the pain of your brothers and sisters. Hold off on those State of Israel bonds for a moment and think. Unfortunately much of Jewish donations are going to causes that in effect are hurting Jews instead of helping Jews. Now is not the time for indifference. Now is the time for individuals to stand up and do something. Take a stand and show you care. Why? Because you are Jew!

by Yosef Ben Tzion (Joel Busner) — Aug. 2006

Nahariya by the Sea: Not a day at the Beach

For the second time in a week, we were back in Nahariya. The beautiful boardwalk was still beautiful, yet it was missing something — life. There wasn't a single person walking along the beach. Virtually nothing was open. No shops, nor restaurants nor cafes. The same theme as our prior visit prevailed. With few exceptions, the city is closed. Going through the now familiar neighborhoods, I noticed more physical damage from the ongoing katyusha rocket attacks. We entered an apartment building where we could see that some apartments were destroyed from the rockets. One elderly resident who didn't leave, because he had nowhere to go, told us that this very building is the same building where terrorists entered thirty two (32) years ago and murdered people in their own apartments. The bomb shelter of this building has no running water, nor air conditioning, etc. There are many, many, shelters that are in horrible condition in this city. Distribution in this city is very time consuming as the warning alarms are continually sounding and we have to continually pull over and run for cover. Of course the noises that follow, and sometimes that precede, the alarms are more frightening than the alarms since the rockets make a loud, thudding, noise as they land.

A Rough Day In Shlomi

It was a sunny day with intermittent showers. Not rain showers. It doesn't rain in the holy land in August. The showers were a combination of mortar fire and katyusha rockets. Shlomi, the small town that lies very close to the Lebanese border was under attack once again. As we approached our first bomb shelter I noticed that people were leaving. Warning alarms were going off; yet these people were leaving the shelter! We asked them why they were leaving. They told us that they were going to their homes since there was a report that terrorists had entered the village and it would be safer to be in houses as opposed to the shelter where more people congregating would mean more targets for the terrorists. Is this what the national anthem Hatikva was written for? "To be a free Nation in our land". Hardly.

The horrible sounds of mortar fire and katyushas never really abated throughout the day. Apparently the terrorists didn't show up and the shelters filled up again. We distributed diapers, baby wipes, toilet paper, plastic plates, forks, knives and spoons, spring water, and other necessities. Overall the shelters were in better condition than those in Nahariya.

We went street after street, block after block. It was exhausting as we rushed from shelter to shelter. We wanted to give out the supplies as quickly as possible and that was becoming difficult as we were forced over and over again to take cover from rocket attacks. Finally, as our truck was nearly empty, we approached one more building. We quickly went to the shelter in the basement of the building. We spoke with the residents who were in the shelter and they were very happy to receive the spring water as there wasn't any running water in the shelter. After I handed out one of the last toys to a child, I told our group that it was time to go. We climbed the stairs and began to exit the building when suddenly, "boom!" A katyusha landed. But where? It sounded as if it landed above us in the building. Everyone ran downstairs to the shelter. After several minutes we realized that all members of our party were un–injured. We waited an additional five minutes. Slowly and with trepidation we went outside where we realized that the rocket hadn't landed on the building but had landed in the middle of the street about a hundred (100) feet from where we had been exiting the building. Another few seconds of walking towards our vehicles and we could have been finished. I looked at the members of our group and didn't know what to tell them. Despite the fear of nearly being hit, the majority of our volunteers still want to continue with the deliveries.

What Will Be?

Several people have encouraged us to continue with this badly needed service. Many are critical of us and particularly of me as I am the director of B'Ahavat Yisrael. Recently, when I was trying to raise money for the deliveries, an American Jew said to me, "What, are you crazy?" I pondered his question / statement and then I responded as follows:

I don't agree with the government's policy. They knew what was going on with Hezbollah and they did nothing. It was not about two abducted soldiers, as Hezbollah has made several attacks on the north since Israel cowardly ran away from Lebanon in 2000. Many soldiers have been killed in attacks and there was a fatal kidnapping. There were several rocket attacks and I remember going to Shlomi to the shiva of a boy who was killed by a katyusha three summers ago. There have been several infiltrations into Israel by Hezbollah terrorists. All the while, Hezbollah attempted to block water flow into Israel as they built up a massive arsenal of rockets and other war weaponry. The government knew and did not react. That is a shame. Many Israelis are dead and unfortunately many more will die. Now the north of Israel is a mess and hundreds of thousands of people's lives have been financially destroyed. If unabated, this will ruin Israel's overall economy. Hezbollah can continue rocket attacks on Israel's civilian population with relative impunity. Unfortunately the Israeli government still does not get it. They still value world opinion over the physical well being of her loyal citizens. Double Shame. Proof positive of this disastrous policy was the latest horrible attack on Haifa. Where did those rockets come from in Lebanon? They came from Qana. Remember Qana? Twenty eight (28) civilians were accidentally killed by the Israeli air force a couple of weeks ago and the Israeli government deeply regretted it. I also regretted it. I regretted the fact that they didn't wipe out the entire village. No Qana, no rockets from Qana.

One can visit a cemetery in Tsfat. Besides some great rabbis' graves, there is a section that is often ignored. This section of seven (7) graves is where members of the Irgun and Stern group are buried who were hung by the British in Acre prison. Their mesirut nefesh (self sacrifice) fueled the revolt that sent the British and many Arab Jew haters running from the Holy Land. They didn't have to do what they did. They were seen by many establishment types to be crazy. Thanks to "crazy" people like them we have a State of Israel. To all of you crazies who died for the Land of Israel (there are far too many to mention here), thanks for being crazy. And if we are crazy for what we are doing, it's the least we can do at this point for what they did for all of us.

PREVIOUS ARTICLES                                 MORE ARTICLES