Thursday, December 18, 2014

The Dispute of 1538, and its Ongoing Repercussions Part 5


In 1538, everything added up. It must be the Redemption! This was the view of Rabbi Berav, and of many others. Rabbi Ben Habib didn't necessarily disagree, but felt that any attempt to act on this feeling was premature, and actually fraught with danger. Now, let's fast forward to the late 19th century. A similar situation arises, with responses remarkably similar to those of 1538.
A wave of attacks against Jews, called pogroms, swept across the Pale of Settlement; those areas of Czarist Russia where Jews were allowed to live. Murder, rape, pillage were daily occurrences well into the early twentieth century. In Western Europe, mobs were running through the streets of Paris crying "Death to the Jews!", as a result of the false accusations against Dreyfus, which I have written about elsewhere. Some Jews, largely assimilated, anti-religious Socialists decided that the Jews needed a State in order to be safe. Groups of young people began migrating to the Land of Israel, then a Turkish province. The religious Jewish community in Jerusalem and other cities was not happy about this, as it was felt that their secular, even libertine ways would weaken the ways of Torah in the Holy Land. Nearly every rabbi in the world was opposed to the new movement. But as things worsened for European Jewry in the twentieth century, more and more Jews sought refuge in the Holy Land; not only Socialist idealists, but people with simply nowhere else to go. The Revisionist leader, Ze'ev Jabotinsky preached across Europe "Jews, put an end to the Exile, before the Exile puts an end to you!" Few realized how prophetic his words would turn out to be. The end of the first World War saw Great Britain in charge of the Land Of Israel. But when the situation deteriorated in Europe, the British clamped down on Jewish immigration with the infamous "White Paper". Millions could have been saved from the Nazis had the British allowed them into the Holy Land. One British "statesman" famously quipped "the fewer Jews left after the war, the fewer problems for Great Britain". Rabbi A.I. Kook had been preaching for decades that the Zionist movement, although secular and even anti-Torah, was subconsciously a response to a religious calling; in fact, he said, it was the beginning of the Redemption foretold in Scripture. Very few rabbis agreed with him. But after World War II, when Jews had nowhere to run (even the American administration refused Hitler's offer at the beginning of the war to take the Jews), two short years later, the United Nations voted to found the State of Israel. (November 1947, taking effect May, 1948). Many religious Jews, including many rabbis, felt that this meant something much more than met the eye. The persecution of the nineteenth century, culminating in the Holocaust of the twentieth century, had now reversed itself. The "birth pangs" had largely passed. Hundreds of thousands, soon millions, of Jews had returned to the Holy Land, with the blessing of the Nations that had formerly oppressed us! Could this be the promised redemption? Some thought this a wildly premature notion. Would Israel even last? An uncle of mine was a reporter. He was covering the vote for establishing the State of Israel at the U.N. He interviewed the Israeli diplomat Abba Eben. He asked Eben if he thought Israel would still exist in fifty years. He sighed deeply and said "I hope so." Many others thought, like Rabbi Ben Habib had thought four hundred years earlier, it might be...it likely is...but let's see how it plays out. Let's pray, do good works, and wait. But some said "no! Jewish history, the very place of G-d in the world, is in our hands! We must act. We must establish facts on the ground". But how? Most rabbis were not just skeptical, but frightened at the prospect of interpreting events in a theological way, when there really was no proof. Others, including great rabbis, felt that not to recognize G-d's working in history was a perverse denial of everything we believe. Each view had, and has, its adherents. What was done? What could, and can be, done is an ongoing question. The parallels with 1538 are unmistakable. The story is still in the midst of working itself out. What was done by each side? That will be my next post.

No comments:

Post a Comment