Part IX: Reckless Misreckoning of Religious Anti-Zionism
When people hear my objection to Zionism, they automatically associate me with Satmar or Neturei Karta. Alas, nothing could be further from the truth.
The only significant voice of opposition to Zionism in the Jewish world comes from fringe elements dubbed as “fundamentalist” and "ultra-orthodox” [1]. Of these, there are two general categories. The less extreme of the two are the followers of Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum of Satmar [2].
This group doesn't recognize the state, nor do they vote, pay taxes, or serve in the IDF. However, they don't publicly protest it or call for its downfall.
The more hard-liner of the two is the so-called Neturei Karta [3], who actively and publicly denounces the state and calls for its dismantling. Moreover, some of them support Hamas and advocate for a "Palestinian State." They've posed for photo-ops with Arafat, Ahmadinajad, and others of their ilk
This latter fanatic element needs no commentary. Their unhinged recklessness speaks for itself. Whoever befriends genocidal jihadi murderers are Jew-haters by definition, or in this case, self-hating Jews.
Arafat murdered Jewish babies. Ahmadinajad funded the murder of Jewish children. Any Jew who aligns with such villains is a sworn enemy of his people.
Some argue that my rejection of the state amounts to the same position by default, since absent the "Jewish State," Jews would supposedly suffer under a hostile Palestinian Arab state that would invariably take its place. That's not at all what I'm advocating.
Rather, I am opposed to all states, especially a "Palestinian" one. Furthermore, I utterly oppose Hamas, PA, and all other Jew-hating genocidal entities, NGOs, and governments.
Moreover, I strongly advocate for the right of every Jew to live In the Land of Israel free from any Zionist or Islamic rule, or from any other sort of foreign tyranny.
In fact, I would support the notion of Jewish self-rule and self-determination, in principle at least, except for the fact that the nominally Jewish state represents the very antithesis thereof.
Statehood is a sham, a trojan horse whose true objective was to subjugate our people and indefinitely prolong our exile, Heaven forfend. As I've expressed previously, neither “solution” is acceptable, “Two-State” or “One-State.” The only viable option for human survival is a No State solution in which human beings of moral conscience reject modern states everywhere, especially in the Levant.
Accordingly, I propose that all decent peace-loving individuals of the Holy Land (and abroad) should bear arms and defend themselves from predatory Islamists and predatory Zionists.
In contrast, Neturei Karta demands that a “Palestinian State” replace the Zionist one. In effect, they are endorsing expedited mass-slaughter and expulsion of Jews. This position is egregious and unthinkable.
Let's leave Neturei Karta aside and examine the Satmar position, one that's more prevalent in the "ultra-orthodox" world.
Satmar objection to the state is based on the "Three Oaths," a Talmudic exegesis of three repetitive verses in Song of Songs
"I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem... that ye awaken not, nor stir up love, until it please" [4]. Our sages asked: Why these three oaths? One, that Israel should not scale the wall {i.e. ascend the Land en masse and forcefully [5]}. Two, the Holy One, Blessed be He, adjured Israel not to rebel against the nations of the world. Three, the Holy One, Blessed be He, adjured the nations that they would not oppress Israel too much [6].
According to Satmar, the very existence of a Jewish state in the Holy Land violates the first two of these oaths. (Curiously, they aren't opposed to the sizeable Satmar community living in the Land, so long as one didn't "scale the wall," i.e. joining the state by assuming citizenship, but rather went to live there as an individual.)
While many raised this same objection to Zionism over a century ago, most rabbinic leaders stopped opposing the state publicly after WWII and more so after the state became a reality in 1948.
Religious Zionist apologists argue that the Oaths are null and void ever since the Balfour declaration.
Furthermore, some counter that these oaths don't appear in any halachic code, which suggests that they're aggadic in nature and not legally binding [7].
In my opinion, the issue of the Three Oaths is a diversion that distracts us from the real evils of Zionism. While obsessing over an aggadic homily of questionable relevance, religious Anti-Zionists are missing the main point, the dystopian dangers of a false-messianic movement that imposes statism.
In fact, Satmar's objection based on religious zeal actually benefits the Zionist cause. Their bane of contention is not with the ills of statism, but with obscure religious dogma that sounds antiquated and ridiculous to the average Jew.
Perhaps this explains a historical enigma. Why did the nascent Zionist movement rescue the Satmar Rebbe from war-torn Europe during WWII? Why would arch-Zionist Rudolph Kastner [8] have seen any value in saving the life of Rabbi Teitelbaum, the outspoken sworn enemy of Zionism?
Theories abound concerning this mystery. Some speculate that wealthy Jews paid large sums to secure seats on the train for the Satmar Rebbe and his family.
Honestly, I've always been skeptical of this explanation. The Zionists collaborated with the Germans during the Shoah, and particularly in sealing the fate of one million Hungarian Jews at the end of WWII. As we pointed out in Part VII [9], Zionists cared little for Jewish lives, let alone the lives of orthodox Jewry or its Rebbes whom they so abhorred. In their own odious words, "One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Poland" [10].
It's much more plausible that the Zionist establishment saw value to their cause in saving and perpetuating Satmar. Could it be that the Zionists perceived the Satmar Rebbe's religious opposition as an asset to Zionism in a backhanded sort of way?
Now anyone who opposes the state could be labeled a religious fanatic like those “ultra-orthodox” Satmar and Neturei Karta extremists who obsess over irrelevant religious tomes oblivious to reality.
Indeed, when people hear my objection to Zionism, they often associate me automatically with Satmar or NK. Alas, nothing could be further from the truth.
Not only do these groups fail to recognize the true dangers of Zionism, i.e. statism. They themselves have fallen prey to statism, hook, line, and sinker. Satmar and NK genuflect to state, so long as it's not the "Jewish" one. They concede authority to modern states and surrendered their communities' freedoms to abject state dependency.
Satmar, perhaps the most populous of all chassidic orders worldwide, relies heavily on state subsidies. Satmar institutions in Brooklyn and Kiryath Joel cooperate fully with state mandates. It's rather shocking how a community founded by a principled zealot like Rabbi Teitelbaum capitulated to secularist political agenda and walk in lockstep with government.
Statism found willing Williamsburg collaborators.
Tragically, it's not just Satmar. Most other chassidic sects likewise walk in lockstep with government, including Chabad Lubavitch.
On a deeper level, it's fair to speculate that the predator class saw value in preserving large chassidic courts like Satmar, since institutionalism (and corporatism) are the mechanism through which they wield control over the population. This tragic phenomenon will be addressed in Part X.
In summary, religious Anti-Zionism mightly be aptly described as "controlled opposition," since it actually furthers the Zionist agenda, enslavement of Jews to the dystopian shackles of statism.
Addendum:
After objective analysis of the Satmar Rebbe's writings, it becomes clear that his true objection to the Zionist state wasn't because it violated the Oaths per se, since he himself concedes that oaths aren't binding on future generations, etc., but rather because secular statehood constitutes a heresy and subversion of authentic Judaic eschatology. This position, that forms the basis of Chabad's rejection of Zionism, will be discussed in Part XII.
Rabbi Teitelbaum himself acknowledges that he cited the Oaths as a means of underscoring the grave severity of embracing the heresies of Zionism, since violating an oath carries a more serious punishment in Torah Law than mere heretical belief [11].
As argued above, this view still misses the point and fails to identify the true evils of Zionism. It would have been more accurate to denounce all forms of statism as a lethal heresy and sinister subversion of humanity. However, a limud zechuth of his intentions will be proposed in Part XII.
Notes:
[1] The term “ultra-orthodox” is pejorative and divisive. For example, see https://forward.com/opinion/193209/dont-call-us-ultra-orthodox/#:~:text=Our%20beliefs%20and%20practices%2C%20after,Just%20fair%20will%20do.
[2] 1887-1979, also known as the Satmar Rav or Satmar Rebbe. Settled in the Williamsburg neighborhood of Brooklyn, NY, 1946. His position on Zionism is espoused by many others in the haredi Jewish population. In our Holy Land, the most significant proponents of Rabbi Teitelbaum's view form a venerable rabbinic court called the Eidah Hachareidis based in Meah Shearim, a Jerusalem neighborhood of the old yishuv that predates Zionist immigration. The Eidah Hachareidis opposed Zionism for decades prior to the state's existence. Rabbi Teitelbaum presided over this court as chief rabbi and president, and also served as its default spokesman, so his writings formulate the basis of their objection to Zionism. For brevity's sake, I refer to his viewpoint as “the Satmar position.”
[3] Neturei Karta, literally "Guardians of the City,"
[4] Song of Songs 2:7, 3:5, 8:4
[5] Rashi
[6] Kethuboth 111a
[7] See Part VII “The Sacrilege of Religious Zionism.” It's laughable when Religious Zionists make this argument since their entire theology is based on a midrash aggada in Talmud Yerushalmi Berachoth 1a, which contradicts explicit halacha psuka in Rambam's Laws of Kings 11:4.
[8] See Perfidy by Ben Hecht and In Jewish Blood: The Zionist Alliance with Germany, 1933-1963, by Steve Rodan Elly Sinclair. https://www.amazon.com/Jewish-Blood-Zionist-Alliance-1933-1963/dp/B095LFHMHF . The author was interviewed at https://rumble.com/v1k2kb1-r-and-b-amalek-and-erev-rav-51-steve-rodan-in-jewish-blood-the-zionist-alli.html See also Min Hameitzar by Rabbi Michel Ber Weissmandl.
[9] See Part VIII: “Who are the Real Zionists?”
[10] Quote attributed to prominent Zionist Yitzchak Gruenbaum.
[11] See Maaneh Chacham, a collection of letters by Rabbi Yoel Kahan, particularly his correspondence with R’ Mendel Vechter (formerly) of Satmar.
Photo: Anti-Zionist rabbis who rally behind the flag of other states, so long as it's not the “Jewish” one, have sadly missed the point and fail to identify the true evils of Zionism, statism..