Noch keine Tags.
Before speaking about the topic itself, a few remarks are necessary to introduce this topic of ultra-Orthodox minutiae. In this text, the Three Oaths and the ‘famous’ Rebbe Yoel Teitelbaum will be discussed.
Thus, at first, let us introduce the Three Oaths. In modern times, they became very often discussed and used to legitimate any prohibition on settling in the Holy Land or initiating any planned settlements exclusively for Jews, as long as it could be connected with any messianic intentions or tensions.
These oaths were primarily mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud and are an interpretation of almost identical verses in the Song of Songs: “I charge you, O you daughters of Jerusalem, by the gazelles, and by the hinds of the field, that you stir not up, nor awake my love, until it please.” (Song of Songs 2:7, 3:5) Since then, they were always under debate of many known or unknown Jews. Two examples may suffice; they were discussed by Maimonides or by Eliezer ben Moshe of Würzburg (He was a nephew of Judah He-Ḥasid). In the modern period, the Three Oaths became very important and were also used against the Zionist’s mission. For example, even before the Zionists were known as such, already in 1837, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, the so called founder of Modern Orthodoxy (Neo-Orthodoxy), denied any settlement in the Holy Land which would lead to an independent or autonomous region for Jews. His denial was related to his personal interpretation of the Three Oaths. Another example would be the fifth Rebbe of the Ḥabad Movement, Shalom Dovber Schneerson. He combined any Zionistic attempts with the Three Oaths and concluded that, therefore, the Zionists will simply prolong the times of exile for Jews by their sinful behavior. All in all, it is, therefore, not an over-interpretation to link anti-Zionism with the usage of the Three Oaths.
The next step is to introduce the Rebbe Yoel Teitelbaum of the Satmar Ḥasidim. He was the founding father of the famous Ḥasidic group which is located primarily in the United States today. In 1905, after the death of his father, his older brother overtook the rabbinic service of the Ḥasidim in Sziget. Yoel Teitelbaum left this community and after a short stop in Satu Mare (Satmar, today in Rumania), and various other communities, he returned there and became rabbi of this Jewish community in 1932. From the beginning on, he was known for his stringent interpretation and, later, for his yeshive (Talmud-Torah school), he had opened. After a flight to Switzerland in the Kastner Train, in 1944, he went via Palestine to the United States. In New York, he re-established his yeshive and his community and was soon very successful for the same reasons as he originally became a rabbi in Satu Mare. As a post-Shoa effect, many Ḥasidic survivors of Hungary or Rumania, whose groups did not further exist, joined R. Teitelbaum. A huge and vibrant Ḥasidic community was created which was famous for its leader and its anti-Zionistic tendencies.
Now, let us dive into the topic itself. The Three Oaths are very often cited by the so called anti-Zionists of Jewish faith as a disapproval of the State of Israel. What are these so called Three Oaths? What are the consequences, if one breaks them? And, most important, what is the connection to the State of Israel? This shall be examined on probably one of the most known anti-Zionists the Rebbe of Satmar, Yoel Teitelbaum (1887 – 1979).
At first, let us see where the Three Oaths are to be found. The Three Oaths are located in the Babylonian Talmud in the tractate Ketubot 111a. In the English translation, they sound like this: “One is that the Jewish people (ישראל) should not go up [to Eretz Yisrael] in a wall (בחומה). And one is that HaKodesh Barukh Hu’ (God), adjured the Jewish people (ישראל) not to rebel against the ‘Nations of the World’ (באומות העולם). And one is that HaKodesh Barukh Hu’, adjured the idolaters (העובדי כוכבים) not to subjugate the Jewish People more than is sufficient.” These oaths were formulated by Rab Zeira who was, as a matter of fact, a Babylonian Jew.
These Three Oaths were not the only ones in this tractate: if one continues to read this tractate one stumbles over three further oaths. Thus, in total, one finds six oaths in this tractate. The other three are that one should not reveal the End (שלא יגלו את הקץ), but one should also not distance the End (שלא ירחקו את הקץ), and the last one is that one should not reveal the secret to the idolaters (שלא יגלו הסוד לעובדי כוכבים). Afterwards, it is mentioned, if one behaves like this it is good for God. Though, if not, God will punish the Jews and will put them out like gazelles or like the hinds of the field. As was already mentioned before the Three Oaths were listed. It is simply an interpretation of verses of Shir haShirim (Song of Songs) by Rab Zeira.
This part of Ketubot was interpreted by many Jews in many ways. But, one has to know, that the intention of these oaths at the time of their creation was very simple: the Babylonian Jews should rest in Babylonia and by doing so giving this community in exile more value as a Jewish place of living or a Jewish home. As above said, I will examine the interpretation of one the probably noisiest anti-Zionists, the Satmarer Rebbe Yoel Teitelbaum. By the examination of him, the questions will be answered what the assumed consequences of a broken oath are and what role the State of Israel plays in this ‘game.’ R. Yoel Teitelbaum wrote a Halakhic commentary on the Three Oaths in 1957, called Wayoel Moishe.
His major claims are, inter alia, that the State of Israel is nothing more than a negative consequence of the Holocaust or a step further towards the direction of the devil. The Shoa itself was a divine punishment for the sinning Jews (the Zionists!) by their demands of an own and independent Jewish nation state. The State of Israel and all her war victories are just a deal with the devil himself (as was later written by Yoel Teitelbaum in his second major work Al HaGeula weAl HaTmurah).
A Jewish nation state is prohibited, if one reads the tractate Ketubot in the section 111a with the eyes of the Satmarer Rebbe. The first oath prohibits the Jews to go up in a wall. Rashi, a very important and often cited medieval interpreter, explained that this should be understood that go up in a wall, is like a forceful mass immigration to the Holy Land. In detail, SheLo` Ya’alu baḤoma (שלא יעלו בחומה), was explained by him as Yaḥad BeYad Ḥazaka (יחד ביד חזקה): together by force. Hence, just baḤoma is, according to Rashi, by force. R. Yoel Teitelbaum used this interpretation and gave it a sharper touch. Basically, it means for R. Teitelbaum that a self-erected settlement of Jews or even an autonomous nation made in the Holy Land is against the will of God. And if a Jew has broken one oath, the punishment will follow or will become executed before the sin is done (see the Shoa).
According to R. Yoel Teitelbaum, the Jews broke the first oath already by going to Palestine and trying establishing there an autonomous region and fighting with the Arabs in Palestine. In his first book, he claimed the Other Nations ‘agreed’ with the Jews that the Jews will not go up to the Land of Israel and will not rebel against the Other Nations. Thus, one should not wonder, according to Teitelbaum’s opinion, that the only ones who broke the oaths were the Zionists.
Though, he gives no right to the Other Nations to judge on the Jews, as well. As he continued that as soon as the Messiah will come, the Messiah will not bother himself to ask for the opinions of the Other Nations. In contrary, the Other Nations will ask the Messiah on what shall be done.
The second oath is that Israel as a people is not allowed to rebel against the Other Nations. This is very easy to understand, the Jewish people shall not rebel and demand the same rights for them as the Other Nations have – the right to an independent state. But, the Zionists already rebelled against the Other Nations by their being in Palestine.
The third oath is very interesting. It is meant for the Other Nations and they are pledged not to oppress the people of Israel too much. One assumes that with the Holocaust the third oath was definitely broken. But, one also has to take into consideration that this tractate was meant to be only read by Jews and not by the Other Nations. In other words, the intention was that if you read this oath as a Jew you feel relieved. The Jew knows that for the Jewish people, it shall be guaranteed to live peacefully in places of their exile (בגולה). It is some kind of a warranty for security in exile.
The purpose is also that the third oath builds some kind of hindrance (עכבה) for the Jew to urge the end and leave the exile, as is also seen in the other oaths which are written in the Talmud tractate. R. Teitelbaum’s opinion is clearly expressed that for him the Shoa is the consequence of the sin of, on the one hand, the Yishuv (the proto-state) and on the other, the State of Israel, as a Jewish nation state. R. Teitelbaum wrote almost seemingly frustrated that the heretics (Zionists) violated all the oaths with intention before the time is ripe and the Messiah would be already here. But no, the Zionists demanded to break the oaths and, therefore, God punished the whole Jewry.
However, one still likes to conclude that there happened the Holocaust and by this the Other Nations violated the three oaths. Though, in the thinking of R. Teitelbaum, the conclusion that the Other Nations annulled or broke their oath, is wrong. R. Teitelbaum openly rejected the annulment through Other Nations.
R. Teitelbaum concluded the violation of the oaths by the Zionists was the reason for the Shoa. The evidence for the violation of the Three Oaths was the existence of the State of Israel, hence, God’s wrath happened ‘before’ the sin was done.
In the thinking of R. Yoel Teitelbaum, the motivation of existence of these oaths are simply to keep the Jews in line and even if the Other Nations had to swear to God, it is not relevant to the Jews. They have no right to say, they broke their oath, now we have the right to violate our oaths. God will also punish the Other Nations.
R. Teitelbaum wants to emphasize that the Jews are in exile for good, even if it may be bitter and harmful. God banned the Jews not only into exile for their committed sins, but He also sent them into exile to collect the Holy Sparks and to teach Torah and their faith everywhere on earth. The oaths for Jews are some kind of hindrance with the danger of punishment, as happened with the Shoa. But as long as they remain in exile and collect the Holy Sparks (נצוצות) and teach Torah and belief faithfully in God, the time will come that the Messiah arrives and the redemption will start. The State of Israel, as a Jewish nation state is only a hindrance now, to the coming of the Messiah. But as soon as the State of Israel will be abolished without any Jew hurt, the Messiah will come – even if this may be utopian.
At LMU Munich, Josef Herbasch is currently working on his dissertation about the concept of exile and its variations in the Haredi world.
