1. The caveat to redemption of captives

Part of the Israeli ethos is that Pidyon Shvuyim (release of captives) is a "supreme value" in the sense that it is a value that takes precedence over other values. Indeed, it is a very important value. A moment after Passover, we should reflect on the fact that our people were captives in the Egyptian House of Slavery and that our liberation was too a kind of release from captivity. But Pidyon Shvuyim derives from a higher value: human life. The commandment to achieve the release of captives derives from the value of human life, which overrides almost all prohibitions in the Torah.  At the time of the Return to Zion in the fifth century BCE, Nehemiah chastises the Jewish elite which stood aside as its sons were sold into slavery, while he and his friends had worked to have the slaves released. "We have done our best to buy back our Jewish brothers who were sold to the nations" (Nehemiah 5:8). And that is what Jews have done throughout the generations.

But what does one do when the payment for captives is not just in monies but leads to further kidnappings? Moreover, what does one do when taking hostages becomes a policy and a weapon for our enemies who use the hostages as human shields after they have massacred us? It should be clear to any reasonable person that if their plot succeeds, they will carry out another massacre and take hostages knowing that this is what will protect them from our response. That is what our sages established two thousand years ago when they wrote in blood the rule that, "One does not ransom captives for more than their value because of Tikun Olam (Mishna, Gittin)." If the price paid for hostages leads to the corruption of the world, to the abandonment of other citizens to future kidnappings, then we must not accept such costs imposed on us by the terrorists. Instead, it is a mitzvah for us to fight them and to expunge them from the world so that we do not find ourselves again in such situations in the future.

In other words, the caveat that the Mishna puts on Pidyon Shvuyim is the opposition of our sages to redeeming prisoners at "any cost" and "now." It is cruel, but our leaders must take far broader considerations that take into account the safety and security of all citizens and the existence of the nation.

2. Who is Messianic?

What is the difference between security Cabinet's member Gadi Eisenkot's threat to quit the government if a deal with Hamas is not accepted, and ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir's threat to quit the coalition if a deal is accepted? Why is Eisenkot's threat "legitimate" while Smotrich and Ben-Gvir are "extremists" and "Messianic"? I have said this before and I will say it again: The epithet "Messianic" does not relate to the end of days when our enemies will beat their swords into ploughshares, rather it is an ignorant statement that sees the word messianic as a synonym for "irrational." I wonder, isn't repeating the same mistake over and over again in the hope that in the end things will turn out for the good in itself "messianic" behavior."

What will we receive if we heed the wishes of the deal's supporters: An end to the war before eliminating Hamas with most of the hostages remaining in Hamas's hands. The clear implications are defeat for Israel in which Hamas will be able to rebuild itself. Accepting this wanton deal will set in stone an equation that we will have created: kidnapping Israelis is a guarantee of safety for our enemies even after they have committed a massacre against us. A deal will be a trigger for our enemies to act in the same way in the future. Ending the war without eliminating Hamas will make October 7 a day of victory for our enemies and will serve as a prototype that inspires our enemies to sacrifice themselves in the future. And we already know that their thinking is different to ours. From their perspective, Gaza can be destroyed so long as they achieve their ideal and raison d'être: murder of Jews wherever they may be.

This is stated explicitly in the Hamas charter, while the more "moderate" Palestinian Authority pays stipends to murderers of Jews based on the number of people they have murdered. Once again, I point to the Fatah charter, an official document of the PA, where Article 20, a genocidal clause erases the Jewish People from the family of nations – and it is on the basis of this that they educate their children. It is this ("revitalized") PA that the world wants to see rule Gaza at the expense of our soldiers' sacrifice. Unbelievable! So who is messianic here? Those who want to see a change to our wanton behavior that has been constantly repeated over the years or those who want to repeat it in the hope that in the end "things will turn out well"?

3. Looking at the future picture

The enormous pressure exerted by elements within us to surrender to Hamas because of the hostages is likely to mortgage our future and make all Israeli citizens the potential victims of the next attack. During World War II, the British suffered tens of thousands of casualties on the home front but stood firm against the Nazi enemy. They understood that in war against absolute evil, there can be no compromises, even when a heavy price must be paid. The discourse about the release of dozens of hostages, while the rest remain in captivity, is an emotional one as it sees only one thing: the suffering of the hostages. Their suffering is terrible, and I say so without an ounce of cynicism. Hamas knows Israeli society and uses its knowledge to sow discord between us.

We, the citizens of Israel, remember the hostages every day, we pray for them and work for their benefit. However, a worthy leadership must make rational considerations when debating how to respond to this situation. Their discussion must take into account the full picture and the future suffering of the next generation of families of hostages and victims of terrorist attacks, whose pain will be no less than the pain of the current families. That is the supreme test of leadership.

4. The prophet's lesson for the king

We learned it from our Prophet Samuel, the father of the institution of monarchy in Israel. King Saul didn't fulfill the supreme mission of eliminating Amalek and expunging him from this world. Samuel understood the reasons for Saul's conduct; as Saul himself admitted: "I have sinned, for I have transgressed the word of God and your word, for I feared the people and yielded to their demands" (1Samuel 15:24). Instead of leading, Saul sought to score points with the people and the media, and perhaps among neighboring peoples as well – in other words in world opinion, which cannot stand a situation where the Jews fight their enemies and dispel evil from the world.

Samuel teaches Saul – and through him, the generations to come - what true leadership is: leadership that does not seek to cut corners and does not prefer short-term goals over the long-term historical view that takes into account the eternal existence of the people in a hostile environment. God, the prophet tells the king, is not impressed by ceremonies and vacant statements that score points with the public but are untruthful: "Does the Lord delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obedience to the Lord's command?" (Ibid 15:22).

The most important thing, Samuel tells Saul, is that he must understand his role as leader of the people: "You may look small to yourself, but you are the head of the tribes of Israel. The Lord anointed you king over Israel" (Ibid 15:17). Saul's tragedy was that throughout his life he saw himself as having been made king by chance as he had gone to look for his father's asses and returned home with a promise from the prophet that he had been chosen to be our people's first king. Thus, Samuel explains to Saul that even if he sees himself as small, he cannot be modest and leave political and military decisions to the people; He has to lead as he is the head of the tribe of Israel, with an emphasis on the head that thinks rationally and not the heart that takes emotional decisions. And so, the last act in this event, derived from the concept: Samuel asks that Agag, King of the Amalekites, be brought before him and he executes Agag himself - to teach the children of Israel the laws of eradication of chametz.

The post The supreme test of leadership appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

1.

So, what were we fighting about? As per the tradition of our people, it was less about the judicial reform and more about our identity. The judicial system seeks to shape our identity. It does so through controversial judicial rulings that are not based on written law, but on the oral law that each justice brings with him. Half of the Israeli public (and a majority of the Jewish public) wants the Supreme Court to leave issues of identity to the Knesset. We came here from the four corners of the earth with strongly formulated perspectives on pretty much every possible question, and if no laws have been broken, decisions should be left to us, through our elected officials. That's democracy.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

It would appear that some of those shouting out "d-e-m-o-c-r-a-c-y" did not mean majority rule, but the rule of a privileged minority. They control most of Israel's wealth, they hold most of its senior positions, they are most of the military's senior officers, and they run academia and the judicial system. These are mechanisms where there are no elections, and climbing the ranks is enabled by individuals who for the most part promote those who think and look like them. It is this anomaly that citizens among us sought to change through the rules of majority and minority, but then they discovered that they are not allowed to do so as they are not considered worthy.

2.

Most of the interlocutors I have come across have refused to conduct a discourse based on rational dialogue. The strength of emotions, the insult, the rage, and the loathing dictate almost every sentence. This stands out when talking to people who are normally governed by rational discourse. Most of the time their arguments are ad hominem and not ad factum. Their writings are not complex, but Manichean – in other words suffering from a simplistic division into the forces of good and evil, and employing insults that end the debate before it begins. Those for whom skepticism should be part of their toolbox negate any possibility of there being any truth on the opposing side. They see themselves as dealing with the forces of evil with whom war is the only option and believe that there can be no truth whatsoever to any of their claims.

Video: Anti-reform protests in Jerusalem. Credit: Yoni Rikner

Journalists and pundits have been competing among themselves as to the apocalyptic future they forecast for us once the law narrowing the reasonableness standard passed. Their imagination went wild and there was no longer any need to distinguish between truth and lies and between reality on the ground (a marginal law was passed) and their dark predictions (the end of the country). Giving an interview to the BBC, I was asked whether, in the wake of the vote, Israel would become a theocracy; they heard this from Israeli interviewees who spoke before me.

This psychosis has also afflicted elected officials who call for blood, fire, and sulfur to be rained down from the heavens against supporters of the judicial reform. I wrote to a few of them that they are wishing this not against comic book figures, but against their friends. Do they wish upon them Dante's Inferno as punishment for their opinions?

3.

The day after the vote on narrowing the reasonableness standard, opponents of the bill purchased front-page ads in the daily newspapers in the form of black pages announcing a "black day for Israeli democracy." We received a lesson in how to speak in a unified voice against the choice of the masses. Let us not forget that the day before the vote, some military reservists, in particular air force pilots and special forces members, threatened not to turn up for reserve duty. This was no less than an attempt to force the government to give in to the dictates of military personnel who decided that their opinion was more important than ours. This was a silent coup that overturned the correct civil-military relationship in a democratic country. From this moment on, those who had wholeheartedly supported compromise believed that there was no way to turn back and they had no choice but to vote for the bill. Had they voted against, a dangerous precedent would have been set in which pressure groups extort the government to act according to their will. The Knesset vote took the air out of this silent coup and at least somewhat restored democracy's honor.

This was not reflected in any way on the front pages of the daily newspapers. The ads sought to blacken the day of those citizens who supported the amendment to the reasonableness standard and present them as a dark and ignorant group of people who endanger democracy. These mourning notice-style front pages were intended to cause demoralization and to instill the thought that the reform's supporters had committed a terrible crime rather than passing legitimate legislation.  In small print, the papers noted that this was an ad. It doesn't make any difference; these mourning notices placed half the Israeli people outside the boundaries of legitimacy. After 75 years of independence, this is an unfortunate precedent.

4.

In my mind's eye, I saw Aldous Huxley resurrected. Many people are familiar with George Orwell's book "1984" which was written in 1948 and described the communist dystopia he was familiar with from the Soviet Union at the time. Sixteen years later, Huxley published his book "Brave New World" describing the dystopia of a (pseudo) liberal democracy where everyone thinks the same and anyone who thinks differently is considered a pervert and enemy of the regime. In such a society there is no need for dictates from the regime; the unified (black) front controls the media and academy and other institutions. Those who think differently have to do so living underground like the crypto Jews of Portugal and Spain. I know some of them.

5.

All the public offers of comprise (I repeat, public!) have come only from the supporters of judicial reform. In my columns, I have called for far-reaching compromise to calm the situation. But the opposition's political leadership has not offered any concrete compromise (not merely clouded calls to "participate in talks at the President's Residence". We have already done that) – one that will satisfy the other side as that, after all, is the essence of compromise, not forcing the other side on its knees.

Behind the scenes, the leaders of the opposition agreed to compromise, so why did they not take a brave stand and do so publicly? Here is a possible explanation. One of the leaders of the opposition tweeted a warning (while others posted similar texts): "This is a call to all the potential Chamberlains (Herzog, Gantz, Lapid) – compromise is not a value of itself. Don't compromise the values of these wonderful people. The time for victory has come…" If one side is being compared to the British prime minister who signed the "peace agreement" with Adolf Hitler that led to the outbreak of the Second World War, then we all know who is on the other side. How would anyone dare to compromise with a leader who is compared with the person whose name cannot be stated? If anyone were to agree to do so, they would come under ferocious attack from the heads of the protest movement and their standing and image among their voters would be destroyed.

This threat against those who would compromise reminds me of a story from the Talmud (Gitin) from the period of the Great Revolt (66-70 AC) that led to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in the year 70: "Abba Sikkara was the leader of the zealots of Jerusalem and the son of the sister of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai sent a message to him: Come to me in secret. He came, and Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said to him: Until when will you do this and kill everyone through starvation? Abba Sikkara said to him: What can I do, for if I say something to them they will kill me…"

Now, after the legislation, and once Tisha B'Av is over we should sit and reach a compromise. Despite the attempts to paint the dispute as a battle between the sons of darkness and light, it is a legitimate dispute. The situation is similar to that on the eve of the destruction of Jerusalem. We have learned our lesson. After the destruction, Rabbi Judah the Prince decided to add dissenting opinions to the Mishnah, the enormous legal codex that he edited, even though they were not decided as part of Jewish law (Halachah). This was a statement of principle in favor of having many opinions and of disputes, so long as they were for the state of heaven, and they are most certainly not a reason for division. Comfort, oh comfort, my people.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Our constant struggle for identity appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

1.

Let's talk about Torah study. The holiday of Shavuot has an agricultural dimension, being the festival of the wheat harvest, during which the first fruits were brought to Jerusalem. However, it also has a spiritual dimension: the holiday of the Giving of the Torah. No one intends to leave these great eternal treasures to others. The Quran refers to us as the "People of the Book" ("Ahl al-Kitab"), but I used to tell Italians that we are the "People of the Books," because, throughout our thousands of years of existence, we have managed to build an immense textual and intellectual skyscraper that no other nation in history has bequeathed its descendants. And all Hebrew speakers have the right and privilege to visit any floor we so desire in this building, and to draw from their treasures of knowledge, wisdom, and morality.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

To draw from the well of knowledge is utilitarian. "You're not productive," is an epithet that has often been directed at Torah scholars more than once. Indeed, Torah study among our people has evolved over the years from an engagement with our ancient legal codex, Halacha, to a focus on learning itself. A Jew sits in front of a book, as generations before him have done, he delves into it, connects with the ideas within it, and with the philosophical and legal discussions contained in that book, the formative stories that have shaped us. He toils in his studies. The act of studying itself is a value in its own right, even before considering the benefits that the scholar will draw from study, even before he has understood what he is studying. It is that we build an ethos that elevates learning to the chiefest joy of our nation. And wherever we were exiled, we took care, first and foremost, of the teachers of young children, those who would pass on the ancient wisdom to the next generation.

2.

In a period when in Europe, about ninety percent of the population couldn't read or write, and they relied on religious clerics to mediate knowledge, about ninety percent of the Jewish people were literate. Thus, we created an ethos of excellence. Yet, the secret does not lie solely there, but in our spiritual connection to the books, in the intellectual and emotional bond with the worn-out pages and with the small black letters that generation after generation built the first floors of that intellectual building, adding their own floors for future generations.

And behold what a wonder, every time someone attempted to summarize the Torah in a single book, to ease the burden on learners and the masses who couldn't navigate the vast maze of halachic literature, a tremendous philosophical and textual eruption followed in the generations after.

Toward the end of the second century CE, in the Galilee, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi (Judah the Prince) gathered the various traditions and schools of thought and compiled them into the six orders of the Mishnah, so that the Torah would not be forgotten. The result, in the centuries that followed, was the two Talmuds, the Babylonian and Jerusalem (which actually was written in the Galilee) Talmuds, immense treasures of Halacha and philosophy, theology and ethics, history and customs, legend and folklore.

In the 12th century, Maimonides composed his work "Mishneh Torah," in which he summarized in 14 volumes all Jewish law and thought up to his time while settling various disputes. In the centuries that followed, the result was a vast literature surrounding his composition, including scholars and decisors who debated his positions and presented equally sophisticated intellectual structures.

In the 16th century in Safed, Rabbi Joseph Karo, who was only four years old when expelled from Spain, completed a similar work. He gathered the entire body of Jewish law until his time into four divisions in his monumental work the "Shulchan Aruch" ("Set Table"). He hoped that the book would organize the laws and concepts in an accessible and clear manner, in a way that could be compared to a person who sits down at a table that is already set and all they have to do is to begin the meal. The result, in the centuries that followed, was a tremendous literary, intellectual, and halachic eruption, including works by decisors who either disagreed with his rulings or had different interpretations of his words. And thus, the chain continues to our time and will extend from our generation to future generations.

3.

In this incredible textual skyscraper, there are different and diverse floors, and each one of us can find a floor where we feel at home, the place where one's heart desires to study: be it the Torah, the books of the prophets, the wisdom literature, poetry, or the return to Zion. After the Bible, there is the Apocrypha (extraneous books) that did not enter the biblical canon but are part of the creative spirit of the nation, especially the books of the Maccabees, which tell the story of the Hasmonean revolt in the second century BCE and what followed. The Midrash literature in its various shades, the Mishnah and the Talmud, biblical interpretation in the medieval and modern periods, Jewish philosophy, the mystical literature (such as the Zohar), Medieval Hebrew poetry, Hasidic and ethical literature (sifrut musar), and so on. And thus, we come to the floors added by more recent generations, including reflections on the social and spiritual revolutions in the world and among our people, including the secular revolution, Zionism, the Holocaust, and the establishment of the State of Israel, and all the way up to contemporary literature.

When a person enters a house of study (a classic Beit Midrash), even if they don't understand the subject being debated, they will hear that the verbs employed by learners, no matter the era, are not in the past tense but in the present tense: King David "says," Rabbi Akiva "argues," Rashi "interprets," Maimonides "adjudicates," the Zohar "reads" the verse in an original way, the Shulchan Aruch "determines," Ramchal (Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzato) "speaks" to us today in his book "Mesillat Yesharim" (Path of the Upright), and so on. This is because our texts have not remained on the shelf of a museum of the past but continue to surround us today and engage us in an ongoing dialogue. This is one of the meanings of the expression "Torah of life."

4.

This magnificent treasure has sustained us as a people, even when we had no territory, and the national body was dismembered and scattered throughout the four corners of the earth. The Torah was the land in which we lived, and through it, we also preserved the dormant national core that awaited the right moment. The Zionist revolution of the return of our people to Zion and the establishment of the state could not have happened without the existential ethos of constant learning and study of Torah, even during the most difficult periods.

But the value of Torah study did not end with the establishment of the state. We continue to need it today in order to exist. We are a people connected by the bonds of a glorious shared historical fate. True, we argue and quarrel with one another over our destiny, but there is nothing new about that. We have done the same in every generation that preceded us, since the first argument between our nation's founder and God over the fate of Sodom. "Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel, for you have fought with God and with men, and have prevailed," the angel of God said to our third patriarch when he gave him his new name. Our name embodies within it the eternal struggle with God; in other words, with our identity.

5.

Constant debate is deeply connected to the ethos of study and love of wisdom, and it is the secret of our existence throughout history. From it stems, among other things, the unparalleled phenomenon of how we became the "Start-Up Nation" which in such a small land generates more discoveries and innovations than any other place on the planet. We are in constant debate with God and men, with our identity, with every logical and philosophical argument ever made, with every legal, moral, and theological determination – raising against them mountains of contradictory reasoning. This Talmudic dialectic has not remained confined to fading ancient texts but has been copied to the planes of modern study and research that have challenged every assumption or reality and sought solutions and innovations to contemporary problems.

On the holiday of Shavuot, we will go to the House of Study, choose a book that we connect with, and will join the chain of generations, reading from the beginning (Genesis). For they are our life and the length of our days.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post A night that is all about Torah: Thoughts on Shavuot appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

In honor of Jerusalem Day, which marks the liberation and reunification of our capital city, here are a few cultural waystations in over 3,000 years in which we have remembered Jerusalem even during the depths of our exile and because of which we have always known to where we aspire to return:

1.

Jerusalem is both at the beginning and end of our national and spiritual concern. Jerusalem is both an idea with a place behind it and a place with an idea behind it.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

In recent months, I have been studying the Book of Samuel with my daughter. Samuel the Prophet served as the connecting link between the period of the Judges and the period of the Kings. This is our people's book of politics: the struggles between the tribes for recognition and between the royal houses for power. After the changes of power and David's ascent to the throne, there was a need to find a unifying capital not located within the territory of a specific tribe. Thus, the City of David was founded with the conquest of Jerusalem, which became the capital of the United Kingdom of Israel.

The following historical formula has accompanied us ever since: First, we settle throughout the land, and only after we establish ourselves does Jerusalem arrive. "Blessed is the Lord from Zion, He who dwells in Jerusalem. Hallelujah." First Zion, and then Jerusalem. Just as in our time: the return to Jerusalem in 1967 comes after the establishment of the state in 1948. First the establishment of the national body, and after that, our spirit is revived. The historical process works in hidden ways on the national spirit, and it is important to be aware of this, to equip oneself with patience, and not to hasten the end, i.e. the redemption.

2.

Our sages taught us: In remembrance lies the secret of redemption. If we remember from whence we came, we shall know where to return. People of all religions and nations bless their gods for food, but it is the Jews whose sages created a special blessing in which in the grace after meals we call on God to rebuild Jerusalem. What is the connection between food, a universal need, and our capital? Our sages apparently wanted to instill in us the understanding that just as an individual cannot live without bread, without food, so too the nation cannot survive without Jerusalem. Every day, when we say grace after meals, we remember how keenly we miss Jerusalem. This is an act that after thousands of years has become part of our identity, a component of our collective unconsciousness.

And when a couple marries, they remember Jerusalem beneath their wedding canopy. They break a glass to declare that their joy is not complete as long as our city lies in ruins. Before breaking the glass, they recite the oath of the Babylonian exiles. When the city was first destroyed in the sixth century BCE, the Babylonians exiled the social elite, the priests, the Levites, and the political and spiritual leadership. The Babylonian captors discovered among the refugees Levites who used to play in the Temple orchestra. "Sing for us one of the songs of Zion" (Psalms 137) they demanded. But the exiles had already hung their harps on the willows and lamented to their captors, "How can we sing a song of the Lord on alien soil?!" We cannot sing, and "how" did we reach such a terrible state that our captors seek to force us to play for them, and we do not have the inspiration when we are not in our homeland. To strengthen their commitment, they swore: "If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. Let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, if I remember thee not; if I set not Jerusalem above my chiefest joy." Ever since then, we have repeated that oath.

3.

At the beginning of the 12th century, from the depths of exile in Spain, Rabbi Yehuda Halevi wrote a song of longing for our capital. Here is a part of its famous opening: "Zion, behold, will you not ask after the welfare of your prisoners, who seek your welfare, and are the remnant of your flock?" Indeed, we have been prisoners of Zion throughout the exiles, and Rabbi Yehuda Halevi asks Zion as a child asks its mother if she still remembers us, and if she still cares about our well-being. For our part, we have not ceased to remember her and pray for her rebuilding. And then, like the exiles of Babylon, he associated his song with the memory of the city: "To wail for your afflictions I am like the jackals, but when I dream of the return of your captivity, I am a harp for your songs." He tells us where his poem-prophecy stems from: from the dream of the return to Zion.

Some 850 years later, ahead of Independence Day 5727 (1967), terrifying rumors emerged about Arab armies gathering for war against us. That evening, a young female soldier named Shuli Nathan took the stage at Binyanei Hauma in Jerusalem holding a guitar and sang for the captives of Zion. She sang a modern lament for the city where a wall separated the Israeli half from the part under Jordanian control, which included the Temple Mount and the Western Wall. She recalled Rabbi Akiva's promise to his wife at the beginning of the second century CE: "If I had the means I would place on your head a Jerusalem of Gold." Wealthy women of the time would adorn a gold tiara with a depiction of the city of Jerusalem. But after the destruction of the temple in 70 CE, this promise also held national significance: We will not rest until we restore the ruined city to its former glory.

Naomi Shemer, who wrote the song, remembered Rabbi Yehuda Halevi and described the sources of her song as the poets of Jerusalem throughout the generations: "Behold I am a harp for all your songs." She quotes the oath of the exiles of Babylon: "If I forget thee, Jerusalem/ Which is all gold."  Thus, in one evening, the citizens of Israel united through one song with the exiles of Babylon in the sixth century BCE and the Jews in Judea in the second century in front of the ruins of Jerusalem, and with exiles of Spain in the 12th century CE. They remembered that they too were exiles from their city, even though they were so close to it, albeit beyond a wall. Three weeks later, they reunited with liberated Jerusalem.

4.

In December 1966, about eighteen months before we were reunited with our city, Shmuel Yosef Agnon was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature. Little Israel's first Nobel prize. He, too, recalled the oath of the exiles of Babylon, and at the award ceremony, he made Jerusalem his chiefest joy. And thus, he declared to the world: "As a result of the historic catastrophe in which Titus of Rome destroyed Jerusalem and Israel was exiled from its land, I was born in one of the cities of the Exile. But always I regarded myself as one who was born in Jerusalem." It is by chance that we were born in the exile of Europe or Yemen or North Africa or Persia. Only by chance, due to the disaster of the destruction that led to our dispersion into the Diaspora. There is no special significance to Jewish existence in Berlin, Rome, or New York. Jews live there by chance because, in the depth of our existence as a people, "we always regarded ourselves as having been born in Jerusalem."

Like all the other poets of Zion, Agnon too revealed the wellspring of his work-prophecy: "In a dream, in a vision of the night, I saw myself standing with my brother-Levites in the Holy Temple, singing with them the songs of David, King of Israel." Do you remember the Levites who refused to sing on alien soil? From the depth of this refusal, which obligated us to the rebuilding of Jerusalem, Agnon grew to become a Hebrew writer in the Land of Israel and witnessed the resurrection of our people and the liberation of the eternal city.

5.

At the time that Italy was united and emerged as a modern state in 1861, there lived a Jewish intellectual by the name of Moses Hess, who had strayed from his people. The renaissance of Italy ignited a spark and a desire for a similar process among the Jewish people, who were then deep in national slumber. Like us, the Italians also established a state without their capital, Rome, which was still under the rule of the Church. Turin and Florence served as capitals until the liberation of Rome in 1870. Meanwhile, in 1862, Hess published his book "Rome and Jerusalem." At the beginning of the book, he expressed a prophetic vision: "With the liberation of the Eternal City on the banks of the Tiber, begins the liberation of the Eternal City on the slopes of Moriah; the renaissance of Italy heralds the rise of Judah."

By the time Theodor Herzl came and uttered the code words "Zion" and "Jerusalem", the ground had already been prepared like a spring that is coiled for thousands of years. Now it was finally given the signal to break free and push our people home.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Eternity is Jerusalem appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

There is no way back. The metaphorical gun has been placed on the table, senior Opposition members have made insane and irresponsible threats; we cannot fold. There is however room for dialogue and compromise and we must bring on board members of the opposition who support restoring the balance between the branches of power and reining in the Supreme Court. But we cannot pull back. If the coalition gives up this historic opportunity, there will be no way back for the masses who voted it into power.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

We know that the judicial reform is not about "regime change" as the Opposition charges, and that it will strengthen democracy, not harm it. The Opposition is trying to cause chaos in order to bring down the government. We cannot let this distract us from our goal. Take a deep breath comrades: We have a homogenous coalition that can last out its full four-year term and more. We need to turn down the heat in other government offices so we can concentrate on the present campaign, which is the most important front in the past 100 years in the battle of opinions.

The extremist rhetoric coming from some parts of the coalition is a sign that it is not sure of itself – it is letting off a hundred years of steam. This perhaps nourishes the desire for revenge after many long years of oppression, but it does not show leadership. There are many on the other side who fear that our democratic regime is about to change. We have to ease their fears, to calmly tell the truth, and magnanimously offer a compromise. A regime that is sure of itself does not threaten its citizens – even when they demonstrate against it – and it certainly doesn't harm symbols of power. Respect for institutions does not contradict criticism of them, but it does show the public that the situation is under control.

2.

What is at stake is an issue for which we returned to the chronicles of history and from which we derived the strength to return to the Land of Israel: The question of identity. Who are we? The relationship between Israeli and Jewish, the tension between our right to live in our land and the rights of minorities, how to deal with our enemies, the conflict between our allegiance to this land and comprise over it – and many other issues.

Concepts such as "First Israel" and "Second Israel" are being thrown about. But I believe that these terms, as used by Dr. Avishay Ben Haim, are insufficient and harm our historic battle. I used such concepts in my articles many years before Ben-Haim; they were one of the socio-historical conclusions I drew from my doctoral thesis. But they were not directed at an intra-ethnic Marxist class war. In my view, we are talking about a chronological issue: Who came here first when the state was established, and who arrived later after all the good spots were tak?n.

The socialist avant-garde that came to the Land of Israel at the start of the 20th century after the failed revolution in Russia were revolutionary pioneers who saw themselves as representing the future and from their perspective, the Old Yishuv and the First Aliyah mostly made up of observant and traditional Jews, represented the past.

3.

In 1931, the 17th Zionist Congress took place in Basel, Switzerland. The Revisionist movement led by Ze'ev Jabotinsky had become the second most important Zionist movement and competed with the Labor movement (Mapai) led by David Ben-Gurion. Jabotinsky demanded that the Congress declare that the goal of Zionism was to establish a Jewish state on both banks of the Jordan River. The other parties refused and Jabotinsky responded by declaring "This is not a Zionist Congress" and tearing up his membership card. The Revisionists walked out of the World Zionist Organization and left the stage to Ben-Gurion and Mapai, who within just a few years took over the leadership positions and the institutions of the state-to-be.

When the state was established, Mapai and its sister movements were the first to the post in every field: In politics, government companies, the army, academia, the media, and the judicial system. Likud and other movements that had played second fiddle only came to power in 1977, after leadership positions not subject to vote had long been filled. That was Second Israel, the one that came after First Israel. Few people understood why Menachem Begin, in his victory speech after the 1977 elections, spoke about 46 years (and not 29 years, the time that had elapsed since the founding of the state): He remembered the 17th Congress.

Thus, the ethnic-class struggle is part of the issue, but it is absolutely not the main issue. Benjamin Netanyahu's excellent English is paradoxically proof that he belongs to Second Israel, as, in the state ruled by Mapai, his late father Benzion – a brilliant historian with revolutionary theses who was considered Jabotinsky's intellectual successor – was cast into the political wilderness.  The chair was taken and he was forced into exile at an American university.

Describing the 100-year battle from an ethnic-class perspective falls wide of the mark and perpetuates the wretchedness of Second Israel at a time when things have moved forward. In order to rule we need to construct a leadership consciousness; namely, to build a leading elite in all fields. In other words, less of a "sweet message" (as Ben Haim defines the message of "Second Israel") and more of a "certain message" that provides security and confidence to the public and is convinced in its ability to lead the history of the Jewish People in its country at the present time.

4.

The social group in Israel that came second and assumed the leadership in 1977, did very little to change the situation in unelected centers of power. It sufficed with the illusion that it had won the elections and was growing demographically. Nothing was done to change the situation in academia, the media, and think tanks. It is only in recent years that the trend has begun to change. In any event, the primary tool employed by First Israel to determine the rules of the game was no longer the Knesset. The arena switched from the legislative and executive branches to the judicial branch.

In the 1980s the number of petitions filed against the government to the Supreme Court – sitting as the High Court of Justice – skyrocketed. When Aharon Barak became president of the Supreme Court and the Knesset legislated the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty and Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation the bell was rung for "the constitutional revolution" as Barak himself described it. Its main message was: You can play pretend in the Knesset, but it is the Supreme Court that will decide whether laws are legitimate if government decisions are valid, and whether IDF combat and security doctrine are proportional.

The judicial appointments committee made sure to only appoint judges who agreed with the constitutional revolution and by doing so perpetuated the system. Even a legal prodigy such as Prof. Ruth Gavison couldn't get a seat on the Supreme Court because she had criticized Aharon Barak's judicial activism. The "reasonableness standard" was the final straw because after all the opinion of the Supreme Court justices weighs over the experience and considerations of those whom the public appointed to carry out the policies they support. Those were the rules of the game – until today.

That is why this is a decisive campaign. That is why there are protests on the streets and that is why in the media there is almost wall-to-wall opposition to change. We are witnessing in front of our very eyes the historic possibility to change the rules and that strikes fear into both sides. After a hundred years, our side has awoken and is demanding its share in the leadership pie; not crumbs and not having to ask permission from the honorable justices, but a restoration of the proper balance between the branches of power. For the first time, the judicial system will also be subject to audit and restraint. For example, the court will not be able to debate basic laws, which to its understanding are the foundation of a constitution. Dialogue and compromise, yes, but we must not miss our opportunity. In this historic struggle, one thing must be clear, we will not return to the status quo ante.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post In this battle, we must not retreat appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

An online Holocaust Remembrance Day event hosted by Israeli Ambassador to Italy Dror Eydar was interrupted by anti-Semites who managed to briefly disrupt the event and even scrawl virtual swastikas.  

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

The hackers, who are apparently neo-Nazis, took advantage of the joint Zoom screen and essentially took over by calling out profanities and drawing the graffiti. This happened just as Eydar was introducing the participants, which included the local professor in charge of the adoption of the antisemitism definition as proposed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance

Eydar says the professor countered the provocateurs, saying: "How dare you use this symbol of death?" According to Eydar, he then moved to cancel the shared screen option so that the Nazis could be stopped in their tracks. 

"This proves that there is still antisemitism on the fringes in Europe," Eydar said. "He said that "there is a great deal of solidarity with us, and as ambassador, I have felt that many have been listening to us," noted Eydar, who said that the majority of Italians do not share anti-Israeli views. 

 Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Nazis in Italy disrupt Israeli ambassador's Holocaust memorial event appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Peace and security in the Middle East are now possible, Israeli Ambassador to Italy Dr. Dror Eydar said this week at a virtual conference of ambassadors devoted to the Abraham Accords.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

The conference was sponsored by Italy's Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance and led by former Italian Foreign Minister Giulio Terzi.

"The paradigm has changed. Peace and security in the Middle East are now possible, and the way to achieve them is through deepening and expanding cooperation. Establishing diplomatic ties is just the first step," Eydar said.

"The axis of moderate, peaceful states will expand and shape a new reality in the Middle East and lead to prosperity, welfare, and security for the peoples of the region," Eydar said.

 Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post 'Axis of moderate, peaceful states will expand'   appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The decision to appoint Eydar to the post of Israeli ambassador to Italy was raised in conversations Eydar held with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, during which Eydar expressed a desire to represent Israel internationally. Netanyahu, who at the time retained the foreign ministry portfolio, had the discretion to make a number of ambassadorial appointments.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Eydar said in response to the Italian confirmation of his new position that he "thanks President [Sergio] Mattarella and the government of Italy for confirming the appointment, and I hope to justify the faith that has been placed in me. My thanks, too, to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for his belief in me."

"Currently, Ofer Sachs, who is an excellent ambassador for Israel, is in Rome, and I hope to follow in his footsteps and those who came before him in bringing relations between Israel and Italy forward," Eydar said.

Eydar is expected to begin his new job in September.

Eydar researches historical, cultural, and literary topics and has published two books, as well as over 1,000 columns. He lectures in Israel and abroad. Eydar wrote a regular column in Israel Hayom from the paper's inception, and until leaving to enter the diplomatic world served as editor of the op-ed section.

The post Italy confirms former Israel Hayom columnist Dror Eydar as ambassador appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.