11

The Neturei Karta is a group of Haredim who believe that the creation of the State of Israel is against Torah, claiming that Jews are forbidden to have their own country until Moshiach comes.

They refuse, like many Haredi Jews, to serve in the Israeli military and vote in Israeli governmental elections. Some even go as far as to praise the actions of Palestinian leaders, and advocate giving the land of Israel "back" to the Palestinians.

A lot of the people hate them.

But I suppose my question is thus: the Neturei Karta says that it is against Torah for the Jews to have their own country until the Messianic era, but where do they draw this conclusion from?

Additionally, a lot of Haredim believe it is wrong for a religious young man to serve in the Israeli army. Why would serving time in the military be against Torah for any religious Jew, other than that it detracts from the time a young man could be studying?

Note: I thought I might make it clear by saying that I am not in agreement with the Neturei Karta, although I am not Zionistic.

ezra
  • 18,664
  • 4
  • 35
  • 104
  • 4
    Need there be a halachic reason? Maybe they're just still fighting a bunch of 19th century dead secular jews, and are too stubborn to admit secular jews actually accomplished something with some value? When you see people supporting murderers and antisemites, looking for a valid traditional approach a la Elu veElu just might not be the best idea – Double AA Jun 29 '17 at 18:50
  • 2
    what about the gemara about the 3 Shvuot that they shouldn't take the land by force (שלא יעלו בחומה)? – Bach Jun 29 '17 at 19:22
  • 1
    @Bach see here for related sources – mbloch Jun 29 '17 at 19:42
  • I think they must base themselves on the gemara at the end of Kesubos about the 3 oaths -- the Satmar Rav wrote on it very extensively as well. As for serving in the army, those of the haredi establishment that do not send kids to serve in the army are afraid that they will be badly influenced and perhaps may go off the derech (most here is based on my personal statistics, spoke to many people about it) – gt6989b Jun 29 '17 at 19:57
  • I recommend you ask your two questions as separate posts instead of putting them both in here as you did. That way, each will get the attention it deserves. You can accomplish that by an [edit] to this post and creation of a new one. – msh210 Jun 29 '17 at 20:14
  • 1
    @Bach The question sought halakhic reasoning not aggadic reasoning, i think – Double AA Jun 29 '17 at 20:49
  • 1
    There are still two questions here: on what basis is the state of Israel against the Torah and on what basis is serving in the army against the Torah. I recommend splitting them – robev Jun 29 '17 at 21:50
  • related: https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/59600/what-is-the-traditional-common-haredi-non-hasidic-response-to-using-the-three – Menachem Jun 29 '17 at 22:56
  • Not sure this counts as Jews not Judaism re: close voter – DonielF Jun 30 '17 at 21:18
  • Remember to avoid jargon. – mevaqesh Jul 02 '17 at 09:35
  • https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/68493/is-it-halachically-forbidden-to-go-to-israel/70279#70279 – Sochacz Mar 05 '18 at 10:52
  • @DoubleAA does the idea of "Min HaReshaim Yotzei Resha" not apply over here? – ArtickokeAndAnchovyPizzaMonica May 16 '22 at 16:19
  • @ArtickokeAndAnchovyPizzaMonica Not sure i'm familiar with that idea. – Double AA May 16 '22 at 16:35
  • @DoubleAA, I don't have the source with me right now but it is relatively simple - "From evil ones, evil will come out." I am not arguing for/or against Zionism, but to say that good can come out of the original Zionists (who were as a rule antisemites, and knowing objectors to religion) does contradict this idea no? ( I will source this in the coming day or two, so it can be looked at in more detail) – ArtickokeAndAnchovyPizzaMonica May 16 '22 at 16:38
  • @ArtickokeAndAnchovyPizzaMonica I'm not aware of such a rule and it seems clearly incorrect. The world is not a binary where everyone is either good with only good effects or bad with only bad effects. – Double AA May 16 '22 at 16:40
  • @DoubleAA, Look at Akedat Yitzchak of R' Munk "(אלא הרעה באה מאליה על עושי הרעה)[https://www.sefaria.org/Akeidat_Yitzchak.93.1.3?ven=Akeydat_Yitzchak_by_Eliyahu_Munk&vhe=Akeidat_Yitzchak,_Pressburg_1849&lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en]," will ask the rebbi who told me this for his source later – ArtickokeAndAnchovyPizzaMonica May 17 '22 at 18:56
  • @DoubleAA First of all, the neturei karta of today are far more extreme than when they were started by R' Amram Bloi. Second of all, you say 'Maybe they're just still fighting a bunch of 19th century dead secular jews, and are too stubborn to admit secular jews actually accomplished something with some value'... What thing of value have they established? A militant secular state full of chillul shabbos, treif, promiscuity, etc? I'd hardly call that the Jewish defintion of 'value'. Value is nitzchiyus: Torah and Mitzvos. The state of Israel is not that at all. – Kovy Jacob Aug 11 '22 at 01:13
  • @KovyJacob The state of israel is objectively by far the largest supporter of torah and mitzvos ever. Maybe you are too stubborn to admit that too. – Double AA Aug 11 '22 at 05:14
  • @DoubleAA I'd argue that is only true because many, many observant Jews live there. I don't think the Israeli government cares either way and if everyone suddenly became secular, I don't think they'd push for everyone being shomeir mitzvos. – ezra Aug 11 '22 at 13:50
  • @ezra it's not a matter to argue. What others would do in different circumstances doesn't change how they behave in actual circumstances. No one said every aspect of the state is perfect. – Double AA Aug 11 '22 at 14:13
  • @DoubleAA If Hitler gave the most money to religious institutions, would he be the largest supporter of Torah and mitzvos ever? I think not. While it is undeniable that they do give money towards religious institutions, they are the anithesis of supporting Torah and mitzvos - the state actively fights Judaism. There is no need to invoke the bolshevik socialist Zionists of the early to mid 1900s - the mere fact that they allow chillul shabbos, allow all sorts of deisgusting devarim assurim to happen, allow chillul shabbos - this all makes it impossible to say they support Torah 1/2 – Kovy Jacob Aug 12 '22 at 00:00
  • @DoubleAA and mitzvos. The very opposite is true. If the state was not actively supporting and enforcing the Torah then we would be able to talk about their money (which let us not be naive and say that gov'ts give money out of the goodness of their hearts), but the current situation is Israel makes it proposterous for anyone to try to mount a support of the state of Israel in its current state. – Kovy Jacob Aug 12 '22 at 00:04
  • @Ezra you're exactly right - gov'ts don't give money out of the goodness of their hearts. But you say 'if everyone suddenly became secular, I don't think they'd push for everyone being shomeir mitzvos' - its not like they are promoting Torah now. In fact, Arachim (an Israeli kiruv organization) gave seminars in Israeli jails for a while, untill they were banned because of their high success rate. The problem is that real Zionism is based on making being Jewish a national identity, seperate from religion. That is how Zionism was started. While much has changed since the end of the 19th 1/2 – Kovy Jacob Aug 12 '22 at 00:10
  • @Ezra century, Israel still does not promote Torah, mitzvos, or much observance - it instead turns being Jewish into an identity seperate from G-d and the Torah. – Kovy Jacob Aug 12 '22 at 00:11
  • @Kovy well you've certainly proven a point above, but I'll leave the question of "whose point" to the reader. – Double AA Aug 12 '22 at 08:20
  • @KovyJacob I agree completely – ezra Aug 13 '22 at 15:09
  • @Ezra It baffles me why people support Zionism. Maybe one could say they'd support a hypothetically religious state (then you can discuss whether there should be a state), but the modern state?! I don't understand. – Kovy Jacob Aug 14 '22 at 04:44
  • @kovy ezra , only an extremist who sees everything as pure good or pure evil would be baffled as you seem to be. In reality people and things are nuanced. – Double AA Aug 15 '22 at 07:03
  • @DoubleAA I wouldn't say good and evil, but everything is either emes or sheker. And how do you understand people supporting the militantly secular anti-Torah state of Israel? This state in its current form, what makes it supportable? The Satmar shita is that the success of the state comes from the satan, but my rebbeim's mehalach is that it is not the koach of the Satan. So I'm not saying that no good or benefit comes from the state of Israel's modern existence, but I am saying its objectively bad - from all aveiros it allows/encourages, from the cultivation of Judaism as a national 1/2 – Kovy Jacob Aug 16 '22 at 22:26
  • @DoubleAA identity instead of one having to do with Hashem... So what I am saying is that I do not understand how someone could mount an honest defense of the state of Israel (or what that defense would even be), everything good that can be said is merely putting icing on a stale, moldy cake. None of it justifies the state of Israel, it is merely excuses to redirect from how rotten the roots are. – Kovy Jacob Aug 16 '22 at 22:31

1 Answers1

9

This question is far too broad to answer here but the essence of what they follow is based upon the teachings of Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum.

There are two primary sources that lay out their approach. The first is קונטרס על הגאולה ועל התמורה which is, as best I can tell, not available on the internet.

The second is ויואל משה which can be found here. It is heavily sourced from all parts of the Torah and is something that should be read, if only from the perspective of being able find a way to not hate them. They too are trying to be G-d fearing Jews and to serve HaShem even if according to many, they are misguided.

The essence of the argument is that the final redemption is only supposed to be by G-d directly, unlike all the previous periods of redemption. There is no mitzvah currently to settle the land and that those Jews who have taken possession of the land have done this not to fulfill the Torah, but to deny it. The secular government of the state of Israel is viewed as a government that to a large extent is based upon apikorsus. So all the halachic ideas behind milchemet mitzvah (like a defensive war) for a halachically legitimate government do not apply, particularly with the danger to life by serving in the army. The argument of Bitul Torah only reinforces that position. They also view the effort to establish the state of Israel as an attempt to force the Keitz (the final redemption) which they say was one of the primary causes of the Holocaust.

Opposition to secular Zionism is something that many Orthodox leaders, including the 5th Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Shalom Dovber, advocated prior to the Holocaust. But this was specifically in regard to the anti-religious aspect of secular Zionism.

From the Alter Rebbe through the fourth Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Shmuel, there have been many efforts to establish and strengthen the Orthodox settlement of the land of Israel. This was also the position of many of the followers of the Vilna Gaon.

Following the Holocaust, Rabbi Shalom Dovber's son, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchok and his son-in-law, the current Rebbe, took a view that the facts on the ground over-road any opposition from the previous generation. Because so much had been lost, it was essential that Jewish communities be built and strengthened wherever they might be.

There are others, like Rabbi Avraham Yitzchok HaKohen Kook, who compared the secular Zionist settlement movement to the covering of the tachashim used for the Mishkan. It was something needed in the beginning, but then needed to be folded up and put away so that the Mikdash could be built permanently.

Yaacov Deane
  • 14,809
  • 22
  • 64
  • Interesting perspective. What you said in the 3rd paragraph is important and reinforces the concept that people can hate another person's philosophy or behavior while still liking the person, himself. – DanF Jun 29 '17 at 21:23
  • 1
    @DanF It doesn't mean that's true in this case though. It may actually be a big Mitzva to hate people that support murderers and terrorists who target Jews, even if they dress 'frum', wear big beards and peyos, and think they are practicing Judaism. – Double AA Jun 29 '17 at 21:54
  • @DanF What you're saying is the primary focus of the 'heart of the Tanya', chapter 32 of Sefer Likkutei Amarim from the Alter Rebbe. – Yaacov Deane Jun 29 '17 at 21:57
  • 3
    "danger to life by serving in the army", it's pretty clear that the army saves more lives than it endangers. – Heshy Jun 29 '17 at 22:48
  • @Heshy I agree with you. But consider what your view might be if you were placed in forced conscription with the Islamic State (ISIS). It's a wild idea, but a decent analogy. People of this view believe the secular government of the state of Israel is an enemy, even a threat to the Jewish people as a whole. They believe secular Zionism incurs Divine wrath. – Yaacov Deane Jun 30 '17 at 03:16
  • @YaacovDeane. So how do they rationalise living in such a country and benefitting from government subsides? Do they believe God has created an entire world that is a threat to Jews that they can’t find any safe place? – JJLL Jul 04 '17 at 23:47
  • @JJLL It's not my place to imagine how 'they' rationalize anything. But just considering the situation as an observer, it would seem logical that they view the secular government just like any other one in the world. So can you imagine any government in the world that allows it's citizens to be conscientious objectors who refuse to participate in the military? And if they are citizens, would it be a surprise that they might demand every possible benefit that any citizen would be entitled to? There is a huge welfare/entitlement class in the US. The same exists in Western Europe. – Yaacov Deane Jul 04 '17 at 23:59
  • @YaacovDeane. Not sure if ISIS permits anyone to be conscientious objectors. I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that most countries have no such status. Can a left-wing, secular Israeli avoid military service? I’m asking seriously. – JJLL Jul 05 '17 at 02:33
  • 1
    @JJLL That depends upon whether they are female or Arab. You might find this link informative. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscientious_objector – Yaacov Deane Jul 05 '17 at 02:44
  • @YaacovDeane. Thank you for the terrific link. I want to look at it in more detail. – JJLL Jul 05 '17 at 02:57
  • @YaacovDeane I thought they were technically littaim though, so why would they be following the Grand Rebbe of Satmar ? – SAH Sep 27 '17 at 23:23
  • @SAH I don't understand what you are asking. You thought 'who' were for their time? The secular Zionists discussed by Rav Kook? – Yaacov Deane Sep 28 '17 at 03:21
  • @YaacovDeane Sorry I meant Neturei Karta – SAH Sep 28 '17 at 03:33
  • @SAH If I understand what you are asking, it is that you think the teachings of Reb Yoel were only applicable to the time of the six day war. But from what I have learned of them, although they were composed for that time, the view continues to be valid. Particularly in the introduction to Kuntress HaGeulah v'HaTemurah, many of the views stated by the Lubavitcher Rebbe about the Six Day War and what followed are rejected outright. – Yaacov Deane Sep 28 '17 at 03:46
  • @YaakovDeane Thanks. However I was simply wondering why Neturei Karta base their positions on such a cruical issue (for them) on something that is from a completely different shitah. Or isn't it? – SAH Sep 28 '17 at 04:00
  • @SAH My impression is that the teaching of Reb Yoel is the foundation of their view. If you want to understand it, you should learn the two books I mentioned. May you be sealed completely for good both spiritually and physically. – Yaacov Deane Sep 28 '17 at 10:11
  • @YaacovDeane Amen! So should you. – SAH Sep 28 '17 at 14:29