The rabbi was confused.
Last week, the Chief Rabbi of Israel, David Lau, was interviewed in the "Shishvat" supplement of "Israel Today," declaring that the Knesset will not determine who is a Jew, just as the Knesset may not decide that cement is not needed to build a building.
But the rabbi confuses completely different concepts.
The Orthodox rabbinate can decide that for it a certain person meets the conditions for his definition as a Jew, and an anonymous person who does not meet these conditions is not a Jew.
The state can aggravate its conditions or ease them, and all this because the state is the one that grants citizenship to every Jew in the world who immigrates to Israel, along with various benefits.
The definition of the Chief Rabbinate is relevant only to those who make its decision.
Through the Law of Return, those who were born as Jews and their families, and those who converted, enter the country and gain citizenship.
It may be that for Lau, most of the immigrants who have recently arrived in Israel are not defined as Jews according to his taste, but in the eyes of many Israelis they are kosher Jews, as in the eyes of the author of these lines. Just as some testimonies among the ultra-Orthodox Jews see the food that received the Chief Rabbinate's kosher as a prey, the chief rabbis consider another kosher as a prey - and that's fine. Each group within the Jewish people is allowed to decide what is kosher in its eyes, who is a bastard in its eyes and to exclude it from the people of Israel for ten generations, just as it is allowed to decide that whoever converts with a Reform rabbi is not a Jew. But the Jewish state has a right and a duty to decide who it considers to be a Jew, and what kind of relationship it recognizes.
Lau seeks to change the most important Israeli law - the Law of Return - in order to reduce the number of those who come to our gates.
But even changing the law is not the role of the Chief Rabbinate, but of the Knesset.
The Jewish state is allowed to absorb those who define themselves as Jews, and it has no reason to suspect them that this was done in a non-matter-of-fact manner.
Woe to the Jewish state if it accepts the opinion of the narrow-minded, who believe that it is their right to determine.
Did his.
The Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, abstained this week from voting on the establishment of a state committee to examine the purchase of the submarines
. Bringing the issue up on the agenda of the weekly meeting, or continuing to delay the decision on this important and problematic issue.
It is true that a prime minister should express an opinion, especially when the issue on the agenda is so important, but whatever his motives may be - at least in this case, the proponents of the establishment of the commission of inquiry should not come to terms with it.
In raising the issue for a vote, he expressed his position.
Control, not cancellation.
It is good that the Israel Police has equipment that allows it to investigate suspicions, and not necessarily in face-to-face investigations.
But the temptation to use this special equipment in non-extreme cases is great, due to its very availability.
It is true that only a district court president and his deputies are allowed to approve wiretaps, but every year there are thousands of wiretapping requests of various kinds, and the court tends to accept police requests, except in rare cases.
The solution is a control body, headed by a retired judge, and which cyber experts will work with, alongside jurists, and all will have a classification.
All police requests for surveillance by advanced cyber means will be brought before this body, which it will be all concerned with, and it will examine every request with seven eyes.
In this way, it will be possible to both take advantage of the amazing technology we have, and also prevent alluvium in its use.
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we'll be happy for you to share it with us
