העורך Editor

A Defense of ‘Zehut’

I received several appeals to address claims against Moshe Feiglin’s “Zehut” party. Here’s one (shortened):

I just found out that Zehut’s #3 or 4 guy is against Bris Milah!

While I happen to love libertarianism, I do have my limits – and since Bris Milah is an integral part of Jewish identity, I want it to be made mandatory! (So does Hashem.) It is far different than most separation of church and state issues. Bris Milah is something without the Jewish nation and the state of Israel couldn’t exist.

So yes, Zehut just lost my vote (and that of a number of my friends when I informed them of this.)

Before I begin, I wish to clarify I don’t have a straightforward opinion on these elections, but I do like Feiglin for most of his rhetoric (and enjoy pretending to myself the rest of his entourage agree with him on essentials).

First of all, Korban Pesach is kareis, too…

As was clarified by the party immediately upon this negative campaign, the party has a plank, a platform, a list of things they claim to support and believe in, but opposition to Bris Milah isn’t in there. As always, party members are entitled to their opinions, but these are generally superseded by the official party positions. And every political party has an assortment of people with an assortment of views.

And the statements were made prior to the individual’s joining of the party, and therefore without speaking in its name, so this wasn’t “stupid” either.

Bris Milah is optional and will continue being so. As for the various claims heard against the Mitzvah, see this. And, yes, it should be made mandatory, along with pork and Chillul Shabbos, etc. being made illegal, but by Beis Din, not the state. The means of enforcement must themselves be kosher (as opposed to prison, for instance). And this won’t happen by means of the state, either, but through increased levels of Fear and Love of Heaven.

Now, as far as the “Zehut” party, itself. There are two ways of living life, a long view or a short view. The choice depends on one’s perception of the present. Sometimes one can reconcile the short-term and the long, but choices will often arise where one can only select one.
As Feiglin has clarified many times, he is in politics to ensure a different kind of Prime Minister than the serial illiberal, fake-rightwing ones, such as Bibi. If one sees the political direction of the state in generally positive terms, then it suffices to get various small changes here and there. If one sees the political direction of the state in generally negative terms, then nothing but a change at the top will suffice.
Seen in these terms, there is not a choice between better and worse political parties, but status-quo premiership, and a “Jewish” version. Zehut is the only attempt at this. I am more radical than Feiglin, but something is better than nothing.
Zehut has problems. Not the fake one of Brish Milah, but real ones, like Rabbi Chaim Amsalem. But Zehut is the only vehicle for actually “changing course”.

Rafi Eitan, Mossad Spy Finally Dead

From the Jerusalem Post: 

Eitan was one of the founders of the Israeli intelligence community, serving both in the homeland security agency, the Shin Bet, and with the Mossad, carrying out foreign spying, for decades starting in the 1950s.

So, he was involved in the shanda Lavon Affair? Why not say so, eh?

Are you embarrassed the state of Israel tried to murder innocent civilians (the very definition of terrorism)?!

Background from Wikipedia:

The Lavon affair refers to a failed Israeli covert operation, codenamed Operation Susannah, conducted in Egypt in the summer of 1954. As part of the false flag operation, a group of Egyptian Jews were recruited by Israeli military intelligence to plant bombs inside Egyptian-, American-, and British-owned civilian targets: cinemas, libraries and American educational centers. The bombs were timed to detonate several hours after closing time. The attacks were to be blamed on the Muslim Brotherhood, Egyptian Communists, “unspecified malcontents” or “local nationalists” with the aim of creating a climate of sufficient violence and instability to induce the British government to retain its occupying troops in Egypt’s Suez Canal zone. The operation caused no casualties among the population, but cost the lives of four operatives: two cell members who committed suicide after being captured; and two operatives who were tried, convicted, and executed by the Egyptian authorities.

Eitan was the intelligence officer who operated Israeli agent Jonathan Pollard in the mid-1980s. Pollard gave Israel large amounts of intelligence from 1984-1985 in his capacity as a US naval intelligence officer, and was sent to prison from 1985-2015. Eitan personally ordered preventing Pollard from entering the Israeli Embassy in Washington, which might have allowed him to avoid three decades in US prison.

Eitan actively tried to harm Pollard his entire life, while pretending to apologize. (P.S., Ask Esther Pollard what Eitan said to her!)

“…the vast majority of his operations still cannot even be shared with the public.”

Never a good sign…

He also helped capture Eichmann so he could be “judged”, instead of directly killed once identified, thereby destroying Jewish legitimacy to exist. Should Hitler have been allowed to defend himself at trial, too?! That’s Eitan’s claim to fame!

Eitan was credited with possibly stealing uranium from Belgium to bring to Israel.

Stealing?! Since when are you allowed to “possibly” steal?! Not to mention Israel’s nuclear program endangers the lives of neighboring Jews in Dimona, etc. etc.

According to Yossi Melman, writing in the Post’s sister publication Maariv, he also helped catch the Israeli-Soviet spy Yisrael Bar and stole designs of the French Mirage aircraft.

Now, stealing designs is not called stealing.

His Pensioners party won seven seats in the Knesset in 2006, and he served as Pensioners Minister in the government of Ehud Olmert.

Yes, yes. And we all know exactly how much care and concern he showed for the Jewish people and for his constituents then…

Read more here: ‘Spy’ Is A Dishonorable Profession

ערך מול צורך: ישעיהו ליבוביץ בענין מצות תפילה

…

תגובתי על טענתך “שהתפילה לשם שמים נופלת במילכוד הצורך של האדם”:

א. שני יהודים מתפללים תפילת מנחה:

(1) החתן לפני היכנסו לחופה עם הנערה שאותה הוא אוהב – והוא חש שזהו היום הגדול בחייו – ומצטרף ל-9 יהודים אחרים לאשרי ושמונה-עשרה.

(2) האבל החוזר מבית-עלמין מקבורת אשת-נעוריו – והוא חש שעולמו חרב עליו – מצטרף ל-9 יהודים אחרים לאותה אשרי ואותה שמונה-עשרה.

מבחינת צרכיו הנפשיים של האדם אין סיטואציות בחיים שהן רחוקות זו מזו ואף מנוגדות זו לזו – כשתי הסיטואציות הנ”ל. אבל מבחינת קבלת עול תורה ומצוות – ובכלל זה קיום מצוות תפילה – אין הבדל ביניהן. יהודי ירא-שמים מקיים מצוה זו מתוך הכרת חובתו, שהיא אחת בכל המקרים ואינה תלויה ברחשי-לבו באותה שעה, ואפילו בניגוד לצרכיו הנפשיים (המלה שבה פותחים דיני תפילה בשולחן-ערוך היא “יתגבר”!).

ב. בעקבות אירועים מסויימים או חוויות מסויימיות שהיו לאדם הוא מקיץ בבוקר משנתו עם תחושה עמוקה לדברי קהלת “ושנאתי את החיים כי רע עלי המעשה הנעשה תחת השמש”. אבל אם הוא מן המקבלים עליהם עול תורה ומצוות הוא עוטף טלית ומניח תפילין ופותח במלים “ברוך שאמר והיה העולם” – לשם קיום מצות תפילת שחרית, ובודאי לא לשם סיפוק צרכיו.

מתוך “רציתי לשאול אותך פרופ’ ליבוביץ” עמ’ 229-230.