Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Eitan Phillips's avatar

Thank you for your service and i hope your son has a refua sheleima.

Whilst I do not subscribe to everything you wrote, I am not sure there is anything there that directly argues or contradicts what I wrote?

I would just comment none of this directly is my experience, I am far from the best example, but I have been zoche to know people who live up to what I wrote, and they far from learnt a wee bit of torah. My friend Elisha Hy"d poured through mishneh torah, in Khan Yunis, better than I did in Yeshiva.

Expand full comment
Yechiel Reit's avatar

Hello Eitan,

Thank you for your good wishes. My son is fine thank God, his injuries were relatively minor. 5 days after his APC was struck by an RPG, he was already back leading his soldiers in Gaza.

I appreciate your communicating your feelings regarding my essay. It seems like you are focusing on two points, the first is that you are not sure exactly in what way I meant to disagree with you. The second is that you held forth your friend Elisha hy"d as an example of someone who was able to undertake serious learning during combat conditions, and therefore stands in contrast to my use of the term "a wee bit of learning".

Regarding your second point, Rambam famously points out that one cannot apply oneself properly to gaining wisdom while one is constrained by the various obligations of this world. He specifically uses the example of warfare. Even without Rambam pointing this out, this is self-evident from widespread human experience. While Elisha may have been one of those very unique individuals who can apply himself at all under those circumstances, it stands to reason that he would still have accomplished much more had he been applying himself in the rarified environment of the beit medrash. So for the overwhelming majority of people combat conditions are incompatible with any serious learning, and even for the very rare individuals such as Elisha combat conditions are a great constraint on their ability to obtain wisdom. Hence my use of the term "a wee bit of learning".

Regarding your primary question of in what way I meant to differ from what you wrote, I believe that we differ on a fundamental point. While I acknowledge that properly applied, going to war with all that that entails can be a great mitzvah, it is not an end in its own right. It is a means to accomplish a greater end. And that greater end is the revelation of Hashem's glory in this world, primarily through revealing the wisdom that he revealed in the Torah. And so those who apply themselves to studying Torah in the beit medrash, are actually accomplishing the goal which gives meaning to the sacrifice of those who engage in combat. It is true that those who are fighting are performing a mitzvah with מסירות נפש, which greatly enhances its value, but it is still only a means to allow for the greater end of those who are studying Hashem's Torah in the beit medrash.

And therefore the resentment that you seem to feel towards those who are applying themselves to the very goal for which you are making such great sacrifices, seems very out of place.

That is my response to the points that you made. But in addition I think there is another issue here that you didn't express, but may lay at the root of what is disturbing you. It is a vital condition of studying Torah that one study with the intention of fulfilling that which one has studied. You believe that the state of Israel has some sort of religious meaning, which implies an obligation to fight on its behalf whether or not one would define its wars as a מלחמת מצווה. Therefore, it seems absurd to you that one would dedicate themselves to studying Torah, but not to fulfilling one of The commandments that is derived from that study.

While there are great Jewish scholars from the past two or three generations who indeed felt that the political state of Israel has religious significance, they are a small minority of the great Jewish thinkers of the past few generations. The great majority of great Jewish thinkers did not believe that the state of Israel has any Jewish significance, and it is their opinion that is followed by the majority of the Charedi community.

So according to that understanding, that there is no Jewish significance to the state of Israel, then there is no cosmic meaning to its wars. Fighting on behalf of the state of Israel is no different than fighting on behalf of any other state. A position that a Jew may one day find himself in, but not something to seek out by any means. Therefore the obligation to fight in Israel's wars does not derive from any obligation to the state itself, or any desire to promote its greater glory. It derives from the obligation to help other Jews, in other words the mitzvah of chesed, which itself is derived from the commandment ואהבת לרעך כמוך.

There is great significance to this distinction, because the rules of the obligation to fight on behalf of a Jewish state are very different than the rules of the obligation to perform chesed. Without going into the specifics, I think the root of what is disturbing you about the Charedi attitude towards fighting in Israel's wars derives from your fundamental understanding of the significance of the state of Israel. But when you appreciate that they have a very different understanding of that significance, then it all begins to fall into place.

While I don't know you, and haven't had the opportunity to discuss this issue with you, in my experience it has often been the case that when well-meaning people are at a loss to understand the Charedi attitude, the root of their wonderment lies in their not appreciating this distinction. Often times when they come to appreciate this distinction, it makes perfect sense to them and the resentment evaporates. I am speculating that what I have learned from experience with others applies to you as well.

Be well, and may the merit of your מסירות נפש stand by you and keep you safe.

Expand full comment
56 more comments...

No posts