МАХАНАИМ - еврейский культурно-религиозный центр
К оглавлению
Levi Kitrossky, 2008
Case Study: Religious Anti-Zionism among Newly Observant Jews in the USSR, 1980-1990
Foreword
Consider the notions Judaism and Zionism. A person can adopt one of them and be hostile to any other combination. Examples are: religious and Zionist; religious, but not Zionist etc. Does this mean there are only four basic types: namely ++,+-, -+, --? The answer is: no, there are more. A person can be not just religious and Zionist, but an adept of Religious Zionism as a special teaching, not just a combination of qualities. Conversely, one can be an adept of Religious Anti-Zionism. In this article we choose to talk about this one special type, as a peculiar antithesis to Religious Zionists or Religious non-Zionists.
As a drop of water reflects the entire ocean, one special situation can highlight all arguments, discussions and hesitations in a bigger world. So, we will talk about a kind of case story – penetration of Religious Anti-Zionism into a small community of newly religious Jews in Moscow in a period that later was called Brezhnev stagnation1.
Personal recollections of the author will be interwoven with theoretical discussion. We will be interested not only in sheer pro- and anti-Zionist arguments, but also in psychological profile of main proponents, since we know quite well an important role of our non-rational part.
Historical background
Prehistoric period
There were times when a significant part of world Jewry was in the Russian Empire. The level of religious practice was high, until it was to some extent weakened by the Emancipation movement and emigration. Still, there was no problem to find a religious Jew in most parts of Russia2. The decline in numbers became much stronger after the Communist Revolution with a steady decline through WW2 and later on. Still there were some were dreaming to leave the Soviet Empire, and then about 1970 suddenly the gates were opened3 and during the '70s there was a steady flux of former Soviet Jews to Israel and America. It is very understandable that almost all religious Jews still there used the first opportunity and left. Then the year 1980 saw a Soviet attempt to control Afghanistan by a military invasion. Although not apparent at the time, this was in retrospect the final great mistake of the Soviet regime. The Afghan campaign had a great impact on political life; even the tragedy of 11/09/2001 is one of distant consequences of that war. Since the relations between Western and Communist camp grew very cold, emigration virtually came to a standstill.
The phenomenon of newly religious is born
By 1980 many had applied for an exit visa from the USSR. The official destination was Israel, but a majority used it to go to America. These people mostly were refused the desired visa and thus the refusenik phenomenon was created4.
Refuseniks and people planning eventually to leave were already far detached from Soviet ideology or even never subjects of it. Refuseniks’ national consciousness was developed to some extent. But they were trapped in a cold winter of late days of failing Communism5.
Part of them became Zionists, others joined a struggle for human rights (dissidents), first of all a right for emigration/repatriation/family reunion. Some tried to study Jewish culture, first of all Hebrew6.
For some, their search led them to the Jewish religion. Their specific problem was that there were not many people left to learn from! Many had died, others left. Some elders in synagogues remained, but the gap between them and the newcomers was great. A small isolated group of newly religious was born.
A clandestine Torah lesson in Moscow, around 1988. Courtesy of Machanaim’s archive.
Personal place
I had no religious instruction of any kind, only some vague understanding of a nation. My grandmother of blessed memory was a member of some Zionist organization in Minsk; her brother was even imprisoned for his membership. My grandmother escaped arrest, fled to Moscow and joined the Communist party. The Minsk part was a great secret till she was very old.
Most of the people around me had no illusions about the Soviet regime. Very few brave honest people struggled against it, many dreamt of emigration. Many felt a spiritual vacuum, some turned to Christianity or Buddhism, and some discovered Judaism.
I myself had a special task in the family – to buy stolen pork on every Sabbath Eve (not a joke) as we were waiting to leave to USA. But during the relatively free period of waiting for the first denial of visa, we started for some unclear reasons to be interested in Hebrew and reading Torah. In 1981 we joined a narrow circle of newly religious Jews in Moscow.
Who were the religious Jews in the late USSR?
Traditional folk
Remaining in the USSR for some reason were old people, like the only shochet and mohel in Moscow, R. Motl; old people who felt a revival of interest in their past; people in places where old customs were better preserved, like Soviet Asia or Georgia. Usually these folk could not influence typical young people of the Metropolis; differences in age or culture were too big.
Newcomers
After the Six Day War there was a considerable revival of interest in Israel, the Jewish people and their heritage, among Soviet Jews. In some cases it led as far as total acceptance of the yoke of Torah. Since 1980 many people got stuck in the USSR and these newly religious started to influence others. After some time regular lessons and groups were established.
Who where they? Most of them had a background in math, being either mathematicians or at least some kind of technical intelligentsia. In my opinion, the reason for the high percentage of math related people can be found in Pascal’s “Thoughts”: only a mathematician can start with a few axioms and arrive at distant and seemingly improbable conclusions.
Many of them belong to the Habad movement. Like most Hassidic groups, they are confident that the sanctity, scholarship and wisdom of their Rebbe are the highest. They are convinced that the text of their prayer book was the most accurate, that the most important book to study is the classic work, Tanya, written by an earlier Rabbi of Habad. Many of them talked of the imminence of the Messiah, who was certain to be—of course— guess who?
Where many Hassidim were attracted to the more spiritual texts, less emotional people turned to the Talmud. Some were attracted to Modern Orthodoxy and/or Religious Zionism, some just stayed neutral and above differences. Still others started from interest in the State of Israel, then passed through nationalism to religion and then cut off original attachment to Israel.
Personal place
Naturally, I started to learn from and with people I knew personally, some even from school7. It was a small group that first struggled with Rashi, and later with the Talmud.
The process of acquiring faith is described by Kierkegaard as a jump into darkness: one leaves a well illuminated place and comes into the unknown. The person feels threatened, stripped of his convictions. Maybe due to this, we felt necessity to keep and use the cultural baggage we acquired in one’s “previous” life. I knew people who threw poetry they wrote into the toilet bowl or covered Tolstoy and Shakespeare books with a screen. But I decided from the start that it this was not for me.
Connections to abroad: let my people go
In the wider world a movement to help refuseniks and “let my people go” was initiated by two youngsters and gradually acquired force. US Senator Henry Jackson, who was present at liberation of Buchenwald, sponsored the Jackson-Vanik amendment, which connected trading relations with the USSR to freedom of emigration there.
Many people did what they could to help Jews in USSR. It was impossible to transfer money to the USSR, but goods were sent for sale or usage. Religious circles also participated, with a characteristic distinction – they sent many volunteers to teach Torah, usually persons in possession of American or European passports. They regularly gave lessons and brought books. Contents and spirit of these clandestine meetings were dependant on the personality of the guest, who came from Israel, America, England and sometimes even France or Holland.
KGB kept watch on what was happening and used intimidation from time to time against religious activists, although it was much busier with Hebrew teachers and emigration activists.
A group of religious refuseniks, Moscow, around 1988. Courtesy of Machanaim’s archive.
And on one fine day some of the visitors brought “Vayoel Moshe” by the Satmar Rebbe, Yoel Teitelbaum. This book was to have some impact on the people of our community.
Personal place
My place was visited often by foreigners. It was not without some risk. For example, once a plain clothed KGB men with one real policeman came “to check passport regime” when we had a foreign guest. We all pretended that no religious activity took place. All those present were put on a list and received visits from a representative of Committee for Religions Affairs to their jobs or called to other talks.
Judaism and Zionism
History
The relationship between Judaism and Zionism has been a central issue for about 200 years, both in philosophy and in politics and it cannot be covered here. Among the main questions are
a) Must we wait till Messiah comes or we can improve our status by ourselves?
b) In general must we wait for God’s help or do we try and then He helps?
c) Can we struggle for a Jewish state?
d) Which methods are permissible?
e) What is Jewishness – nationality, religion or some mixture of both?
f) What relations can religious Jews have with non-religious ones?
Clearly, only a fraction of these issues will be touched upon.
Local
The USSR fought all religions, including Judaism. Also, it was afraid of any appearances of nationalism that could be fatal to the Empire, so it tried to weaken all national movements, including Zionism. The word Zionism itself was used as a word with an obvious derogatory meaning. But many Jews had clandestine sympathies with the movement without any connection to religion. So, the newly religious people were to set the puzzle by themselves: what are relations between Judaism and Zionism?
Personal
I felt like many others that events of Jewish history must have a religious meaning, although the correct interpretation can be difficult if not impossible.
Encounter with Satmar ideology: what is Satmar?
Satmar is a city in Hungary better known as the place of origin of Satmar Hassidim, especially R. Yoel Teitelbaum. The Rebbe had strong objections to any form of Zionism and opposed emigration from Hungary to Palestine, even when it was still possible. Many Hassidim perished during the Holocaust. There is some irony in fact that the Rebbe himself was saved by Rudolf Kastner, a representative of the Zionist movement in Israel. The Rebbe arrived among some 1700 saved people via the so called Kastner train to Mandate Palestine. He became a religious leader of anti-Zionists there and continued to be even after his departure to USA, where he successfully built communal life of his adherents. The Rebbe was the first to compile a systematic book of religious anti-Zionism - “Vayoel Moshe” (And Moshe agreed). Later he published another work: “Al HaGeulah VeAl HaTemurah” (On Redemption and Substitution), which was more like a pamphlet against war victories of the Zionist State.
As for Kastner, he was accused of collaboration with the Nazis, but before the end of all judiciary proceedings he was shot and killed. The story is very complicated.
Memorial for victims of Holocaust from Satmer in Holon, Israel. Courtesy of David Shay in Wikipedia.
Personal
There was a man in Moscow, whom we will call A. He belonged to our company of newly religious. Once A. expressed his wish to become a Habad Hassid, mostly because the Rebbe is great and it is good to follow him. All the others started to argue that it is much better to do more thinking on your own.
One can say that we succeeded. But some time later a strange rumor arrived – A. had become a Satmar follower! And there is a small but strongly minded group of them.
It sounded so strange that I tried to talk to him. A.’s main argument was as follows. The argumentation of book was very strong. And everybody agrees that the author is really a learned and saintly Rabbi. But the author says that all people that oppose him are dependant on Zionists directly or indirectly, so they cannot say what they think, and only he can. Except, of course, those who speak honestly, but did not learn enough.
This combination of accepted authority of R. Teitelbaum and his more than clear hints, why his opponents do not agree, was almost fool-proof. X says that Y is good and honest, so everyone agree that Y is an authority. But Y says that X is not good or sincere. So, the authority of X is dubious, but Y is OK in every opinion. So, it is wiser to be with Y! As easy as high school math. That very moment I felt sorry that we spoke against being Habad; the new teaching seemed much less friendly.
The proof and counterproof
The of tale of the three oaths
The most accessible and interesting point of the learned discussion in “Vayoel Moshe” is an Aggadah about three oaths that the Jewish Nation were obliged to take before going into exile8:
R. Zera was evading R. Judah because he desired to go up to the Land of Israel while R. Judah had expressed [the following view:] Whoever goes up from Babylon to the Land of Israel transgresses a positive commandment, for it is said in Scripture, They shall be carried to Babylon, and there shall they be, until the day that I remember them, saith the Lord. And R. Zera? — That text refers to the vessels of ministry. And R. Judah? — Another text also is available: I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, by the gazelles, and by the hinds of the field, [that ye awaken not, nor stir up love, until it please]'. And R. Zera? — That implies that Israel shall not go up [all together as if surrounded] by a wall. And R. Judah? — Another 'I adjure you' is written in Scripture. And R. Zera? — That text is required for [an exposition] like that of R. Jose son of R. Hanina who said: 'What was the purpose of those three adjurations? — One, that Israel shall not go up [all together as if surrounded] by a wall; the second, that whereby the Holy One, blessed be He, adjured Israel that they shall not rebel against the nations of the world; and the third is that whereby the Holy One, blessed be He, adjured the idolaters that they shall not oppress Israel too much'…. R. Judah stated in the name of Samuel: As it is forbidden to leave the Land of Israel for Babylon so it is forbidden to leave Babylon for other countries. Both Rabbah and R. Joseph said: Even from Pumbeditha to Be Kubi.
Thus, according to R. Judah, it was forbidden for individuals like R. Zeira to go to Israel. According to R Zeira himself, however, the prohibition is only when it is by force and in organized groups.
R. Teitelbaum posits that the Law is according to R. Zeira and we need only to define what is considered in groups and by force and through rebellion. He invests a lot of effort to explain why the law does not appear in any core books of Jewish Law, like Rambam, Rif or Shulhkan Aruch.
Alternative interpretations of the oaths Midrash9
a) Legally binding? Whatever the Midrash means, we need to determine to what extent it is legally binding. As noted above, the standard codes do not mention the prohibition of moving to Israel, suggesting that, like much aggadic material, the rule against leaving Babylon and that against moving to Israel is not binding.
b) Scope of the law? The law is actually as formulated by R. Judah, but its scope includes only Babylon. That is, it is forbidden to leave Babylon even for Israel. Not only R. Judah says it to his pupil, but also other Sages on the same page of the Talmud clearly said the law prohibits to leave Babylon as well as Israel. This view is seemingly supported by the Rambam himself10. This explanation is very smooth and natural.
c) It seems that Rabbis in Israel especially in the words of Resh Lakish disagreed with their Babylonian colleagues. So, the opinion of R. Judah and R. Zeira is in disagreement with more authoritative Palestinian Sages. In this case the binding law emerges nor from words of R. Judah neither from words of R. Zeira, but from Resh Lakish and his colleagues in Palestine11.
d) The main point is not to fight the world political order, and to proceed only with the agreement of all or most nations. But since the United Nations decided to partition Palestine12, this issue has become moot.
Personal
Someone from abroad brought a thing rare in the USSR in those days: a “Casio” programmable calculator, which “knew” a version of the Basic language. I programmed some games, but the ultimate program was how to sort guests from abroad. The algorithm started with the question:
DID YOU LEARN KETUVOT 110?
If not: GO LEARN IT.
Else: IS THE LAW ACCORDING TO R. YEHUDA?
… (More questions and answers)
The final output was one of the sentences like: IT IS RAMBAM, IT IS RASHI, YOU ARE HEALTHY - HABAD etc. The latter was originally against Zionism (Rebbe RASHAB), but still supports Israel post-factum. In the worst case the calculator started beeps, printed: SATMAR and closed itself! The program was tried on A. and other people and worked perfectly!
A group of refuseniks in Moscow airport, around 1987. Courtesy of Machanaim’s archive.
Other struggles
Conspiracy and heresy
The book of the Satmar Rebbe sought to undermine other authorities, because they are dependant on Zionists. Another typical accusation was of heresy or dealing with people who left tenets of the Torah. Such a position can impress a lot of people, especially considering its scope and sophistication. So the reader became overwhelmed and never saw holes in reasoning or missing sources, and rejected all attempts to cite another contemporary book.
Personal
I read first a later “Al HaGeulah VeAl HaTemurah” and not the original magnum opus of Satmar Rebbe “Vayoel Moshe”. It worked on me so hard that resulted in total insomnia, which I normally never had. In order to get some release, I wrote during half of the night about 12 pages of counter-arguments13. The next day I delivered pages to A. He did not answer, and also did not return the pages. Why? Because he suspected heresy, so he could not pass it to anybody, even to the author. Not being certain, he did not burn them, but apparently buried them instead.
In our talks he said about me that I was in his eyes a person suspected of heresy. So, if I’d be drowning, God forbid, he would not save me, in accordance with the Rambam’s position on heretics. But he still will not push me under water, because the fault was not proved. Many thanks! I was so impressed that the next night I had a nightmare. I dreamed that somebody knocked on the door, I opened to see A. standing there with an axe.
Once, for the discussion I brought “Kuzari”, but A. did not want to look into it, because it was an Israeli edition. Fortunately A. had an old pre-Zionist edition. There the King asks the Rabbi, why the Jewish people do not go to the Land of Israel, if it is so important and good? The Rabbi answered: I am embarrassed, Oh king of Khazars; it is our sin, because of it the Almighty still did not fulfill what He promised us... All our prayers are like a bird song: we say “gather us”, but do not pay real attention to their sense14. This exact place is not mentioned in “Vayoel Moshe” for some reason, and A. was at a loss. But nevertheless he remained adamant.
Epilogue and conclusions
Dangerous bumps and curves
There is some literature on the process of becoming religious. A compelling description of Levin’s progress is given by Tolstoy in the end of Anna Karenina. In Jewish philosophy notably Franz Rosenzweig dealt with it.
My five pence is that the jump into the darkness has a lot of risks:
a) Since a person leaves everything behind, he has no ground under his feet. Supposedly the ground will be found in Torah. But we already know that the reliance on conveyed Law only, without usage of the natural conscience, will not work. One can probably be a very bad person, formally performing all the commandments. How to diminish the risk? By continuity, do not severe ties completely, do keep the previous culture baggage.
b) A religious person supposes that the Torah is the absolute truth. Fine, but inside Torah community there are different opinions also. And it is very easy to take one of them as absolute truth and to start despising other positions. The struggle for the absolute truth hardens hearts and makes people intolerant. How to cope with it? Do not be overconfident. Doubts are a necessary element of cognition15.
c) Since Judaism has a relatively few followers but a large amount of influence, and since it includes a notion of “the chosen”, it results in a feeling of belonging to very few chosen who know truth better than all others. It can easily pass inside Judaism – I know better than all other groups. It will happen, if we do not fight against the feeling.
d) Some persons are happy only if they have some singular authoritative person that answers all their questions and leads to heroic deeds. It can be difficult, but still it is more comfortable to put responsibilities on another person. This easily leads to cults and sects. So, beware of overemphasizing one personality and think critically and independently.
e) Many ideological struggles of the past are still hot, and the neophyte can be enlisted easily by some side for its case.
f) It is not very easy to define who is a fanatic, and how to recognize one, and even how not to become one. But if a person makes of part of teaching above all and suppresses all doubts and voice of conscience, he is a fanatic. Since everybody understands that fanatic is bad, do not become one.
g) I had once a very skeptical relative who told me that the religious were immoral. Why? Because they assign their responsibility for moral judgment to another man instead of using their own moral judgment. I think that nowadays it is basically true – it is immoral to assign all my moral decisions. Only one correction is needed – to decide only on my own is immoral too.
Personal epilogues
The person I called A. moved to Kiryas Yoel, a Satmar town in the USA. , along with most of the members of their narrow circle. One of them used to call people still inside USSR and try to convince them to go to US instead. In addition to ideology he cited also higher standard of living as a reason for more spirituality. Another man organized similar activity in Vienna, which was a temporary station on the way that time. He even brought Satmar Agency “Rav Tuv” as an alternative to the Jewish Agency. The same activity was felt also in Israel, where some new arrivals entered Yeshivas that preached anti-State propaganda and acquired anti-Israeli views. I met one person like this during his and my first days in Israel; he was already severely indoctrinated and challenged me with the passage of three oaths even before studied it himself! He felt very confident, because the probability that a randomly taken new repatriate knows the Talmudic passage was very low, although that particular time it did not work. The failure did not influence him.
I got only one letter from A. Instead of “Israel” there was “Eretz Isroel” on the envelope. And we talked once by phone. He did not go to Iran to sit with its president on the famous Holocaust denial session, but justified those who went. I think he is still happy, and we can stop here.
1 See Wikipedia “Brezhnev stagnation”
2 The author holds the book “Memoirs of a Jewish Grandmother” by Polina Vengerov in high esteem. Written in German, translated into English and Russian.
3 Operation “Wedding” – a failed attempt to hijack a plane resulted in a new emigration policy.
4 See Wikipedia “refusenik”. The entry in Russian Wiki has been written by the author of this article. The term is used in modern Russia also for newborn left in hospitals by mothers and in some other senses.
5 A recent American documentary film “Refusenik” (2007) is warmly recommended. There is an entry about the film in Russian Wiki by the author.
6 See, for example, Wikipedia “Ephraim Kholmyansky”, the entry about the hero of Hebrew also written by the author of this article.
7 Michael kitr-Ivanov – my first teacher of Judaism also supplied an article to the issue of Chiddushei Torah NDS.
8 Babylonian Talmud Ketuvot 110B, English translation by I.W.Slottki, edited by R.I Epstein on http://www.come-and-hear.com/kethuboth/index.html. Similar stories told also in Shabbat 41A and Berachot 24B
9 R. Shlomo Aviner nicely lists 13 explanations in his compact brochure “Shelo Yaalu Kehoma” (That they shall not go as a wall). We select four.
10 Laws of Kings, 5:12
11 Yoma 9B, Resh Lakish hated “Babylonians” that they did not come like a wall in early days of the Second Temple. This is the opinion of Pnei Yehoshua to Ketuvot 113.
12 Avnei Nezer after San Remo Conference, which was further confirmed by League of Nations at 1922 and UN Resolution 181 in 1947. The source is Rashi: “by wall” means altogether by force.
13 Recently I found the similar story on Satmar Rebbe himself in English Wiki. His criticism was against “Em Habanim Smeha” by R. Y.Sh.Teichtal. The latter perished in Holocaust but managed to write a book in which he repudiated his previous anti-Zionism
14 “Kuzari” by Yehuda Halevi 2:24. At the end the Rabbi – hero of the book left to Israel. The author of the book himself also went and died there.
15 I’d be more than happy to own this aphorism, but I heard it from R. Zeev Dashevsky.