Amotz Asael, we are a few days before Tisha B'Av, and it seems that the reports of destruction and civil wars are only increasing. Before we talk about the current situation, in your book, "The March of Jewish Folly" (Yedioth Books), you reconstruct 12 forgotten civil wars and place them at the center of Jewish history. Tell us a little about the similarities concerning the reasons that led to the various civil wars.
"Our ancestors fought 12 civil wars over about 1,200 years, an average of one civil war every four generations. Nine civil wars are reported in the Bible, and three more took place during the Roman period. What the biblical wars have in common – from the story of a concubine on the hill in the Book of Judges to the last war between Judah and Israel, the one that took place between kings Peach and Ahaz – was tribalism."
Photo Archive: Yoni Rikner
And what motivated the later wars?
"The later wars were motivated by political disputes: two revolved around the attitude towards Rome, and one – the war between Alexander Yannai and the Pharisees – revolved, at least according to the Sages, on the relationship between the executive and judicial branches. As for the other two, the best known is the one that took place in Jerusalem between the zealots and the moderates at the outbreak of the Great Revolt.
"The lesser-known war took place 133 years earlier, when the Roman Empire first arrived in the Middle East, and the Hasmonean kingdom had to decide whether to fight the invading empire or make peace with it. Instead of deciding between the two alternatives, Judah turned to civil war between Princes Judas Aristobulus, who wanted war in Rome, and John Hyrcanus, who wanted peace."
, Photo: Gideon Markowitz
And today, in our current situation, do you recognize similar elements that led to past wars?
"In our current situation, there are elements of all these traumas. I think that the cornerstone of reform supporters is the ultra-Orthodox, whose motivation – like the heroes of the biblical civil wars – is the sector. They went to war in court because its insistence on the principle of equality before the law hinders them from providing the sectoral benefit of evading military service.
"On both sides of the ultra-Orthodox are two completely different factions: the royalists and the fanatics. Royalists, like Alexander Yannai at the time, think that the king should be above the law. In the Old Testament, this thinking was represented by Jezebel, who thought that the king was allowed everything, that the law did not apply to him, and that the king was even allowed to use the legal system to attack a citizen; Finally, today's zealots, like the zealots of the destruction of the Temple, want to impose an idyllic picture of the future on the present, while misunderstanding geopolitics and ignoring the gravitational laws of history."
You assume things here, and of course you can disagree with your analysis, but it is impossible to disagree with events that took place in history, so it is interesting to understand - what is it about the nature of the Jewish people that caused us to embark on civil wars throughout history?
"In my opinion, there is no such thing as a 'national character.' As I argue in the book, attributing some innate trait to any nationality, even if it is a superior trait, is racist thinking, because it links genetics, which is involuntary, with moral traits, which are a question of choice. Therefore, for example, most Jews - contrary to various myths, are not wise like Einstein, not rich like Rothschild, not peacemakers like Jeremiah and not justice seekers like Moses."
So maybe we can talk about national heritage.
"Of course it exists, and our legacy is suspicion of flesh-and-blood rule and a desire to restrain it. A people that every year at the turn of spring tells its children about a leader who dared to face a totalitarian ruler and led his people from slavery to freedom; a people whose winter uniforms light candles in honor of guerrillas who defeated an empire in the name of freedom of worship; And a people that every summer celebrates the rebellion of its ancestors against an empire that spanned three continents – such a people knows that a regime, any regime, can quickly become corrupt, arbitrary and aggressive.
"That's exactly why the prophet Samuel warned our forefathers when they asked him to crown them king. This is what Elijah the prophet meant when he told Ahab, 'You have murdered and inherited,' and this is what Nathan the prophet meant when he said to David, 'You are the man,' after the king committed adultery with his neighbor and sent her husband to his death. These are the heroes of our culture, the Jews. This is the legacy Moses established when he refrained from appointing himself, his sons, and his successor Joshua as king; The legacy that recognized in advance the three temptations of power – greed, violence and sex – when it limited the power of future kings through prohibitions such as 'He shall not multiply women' and 'Silver and gold shall not multiply him'. And this at a time when every other regime in the region was absolute, and every ruler did whatever he wanted."
Smugness, foolishness and tragedy
Let's focus on two of the most significant stories of Israeli civil wars – Mistress on the Hill and the war between Amatzia and Despair.
"The story of a mistress on the hill is undoubtedly the strongest of all the stories of the Israeli civil wars. I say 'story' because the narrative value of the report that concludes the Book of Judges is greater than its vague historical factuality. The story is powerful because the pretext for the civil war there is moral – a demand for justice from a tribe on whose border a terrible crime took place; The mobilization for war is spontaneous and sweeping; Its violence is total, genocide; And then she feels regret for the cost of the civil war and a decision to rehabilitate the tribe of Benjamin.
"The second story, as you said, is the correspondence between Amatzia, king of Judah, and Joash, king of Israel. The two went to war near Beit Shemesh, and the warning of the king of Israel came true, when Israel defeated Judah, breached the wall of Jerusalem, robbed the treasures of the Temple, and took Amatzia himself prisoner. In this very realistic story, all the mental smugness, military foolishness and national tragedy of the civil war are folded."
Moshe Shai, Photo: Moshe Shai
Along with Amatzia and Yoash, do you also identify leaders in Jewish history who carried a message to the Jewish people?
"There is one pair, forgotten, that broke the continuum of hostility between Judea and Israel. They were Ahab and Jehoshaphat, who made an alliance with each other, so much so that Jehoshaphat went to visit Ahab in his palace, Ahab married his daughter to the son of the king of Judah, and the two also sent out their armies to fight together in Aram.
"Ahab in the Bible is dwarfed by the king that archaeology teaches, who was a great statesman who led a regional alliance that went to war against the rising power of Assyria, and thus succeeded in delaying by more than 100 years the great storm of Assyria on Israel. Jehoshaphat, for his part, was a moral giant, and it is said that he established courts 'in all the cities of Judah' and instructed the many judges he appointed: 'Keep and do because there is no people with the Lord our God who rises and negotiates bribes.'"
Do you see such leaders among us today?
"I have no doubt that they are, but without entering into a personal discussion, I will only say that the current situation in Israel, and throughout the Western world, is that the leadership, intellectual and moral level of most politicians is often relatively lower than the level of leaders in other fields, such as the economy, entrepreneurship, industry, business, academia and security."
The limitations of the beit midrash
As for leadership, you believe that our ancestors were fatalists, that they believed that their political fate was predestined, and that the future would be born out of catastrophe. According to you, this assumption also accompanies Israel's leadership in modern times.
"Every ultra-Orthodox Israeli and every ultra-Orthodox – which together is half of the current coalition – believes that Jewish history is managed by Providence. In my opinion, this simplistic view was a cause, and even more a result, of the civil wars that ended with the destruction of Jerusalem. This fatalism had two faces: in retrospect, he interpreted Jewish defeat not as the result of political foolishness, but as a divine punishment for religious sins; Looking to the future, Jewish fatalism miraculously promised salvation from Heaven. Thus Jewish statesmanship degenerated until the rise of Zionism."
Spontaneous mobilization for war. Mistress on the Hill, Photo: Giustiniano-Degli-Avancini
The leadership aspect is also related to the tension portrayed among the people, as we see in the various demonstrations. But beyond that, what repeats the thread, even today, in the internal tension that pervades the Jewish people?
"Lack of listening to the members of the company. The Hebrew noun 'argument' is related to the verb 'to see'. This means that we are supposed to come to a real argument not in order to win or lose – for this there is the verb 'arguing' in Hebrew – but to listen, learn, educate and open up. The debate in current Israeli culture not only does not open, it closes. It closes the eyes, the mind and the heart."
This seems to contradict the culture of controversy in the history of the Jewish people.
"Much has been said, and rightly so, about the fact that in the beit midrash students fearlessly argued with their gentlemen, and students with students, as a way of study and as a matter of routine. It is indeed impressive and special, but the trouble is that this whole culture developed while atrophying the governmental muscle, because the sages of the Mishnah and the Talmud and the rabbis of the Middle Ages did not run states, governments or even cities."
Explain.
"The act of government is new to the Jewish people. For example, many Israelis do not understand the profound difference between ordinary legislation and constitutional legislation, which the founding fathers of the United States understood 235 years ago.
"Ordinary legislation, such as passing the budget, is done by an ordinary majority, even if it is tight, because otherwise there will be anarchy. Constitutional legislation, on the other hand, i.e. the infrastructure laws of the legislation, such as the manner in which judges are selected and their powers defined, must reflect the broad consensus. That's what constitutional law does. It is intended, by its very nature, to reflect and nurture broad consensus. An attempt to force the same mountain as a tub without broad agreement will end in an explosion. These fundamental questions of democratic life were not dealt with in the beit midrash, so we must look at what other peoples have done in similar situations and learn from them. They have gained experience that we don't have."
Great statesman. Ahab at Ramot Gilad, Photo: Julius-Schnur-von Karolsfeld
Lincoln's insight
The explosion you are talking about corresponds, of course, with sayings that arise around the destruction of the Temple and the unfounded hatred between the different camps of the people. What do you think of these sayings, which are sometimes thrown into the air too easily around the destruction of the Third Temple?
"This danger is real, and it obliges all of us to fear every morning anew a civil war, with all its severe consequences. This means that an Israeli leader, before any other consideration or goal, must be guided by one goal: the unity of the people. There were two leaders in the State of Israel who excelled in this: Levi Eshkol, who established the unity government that won the Six-Day War; Yitzhak Shamir, who in 1984 formed with Shimon Peres the unity government that rescued Israel from the worst economic crisis in its history, and then, in 1988, formed another unity government, even though he could have formed a narrow right-wing government.
"Yitzhak Shamir and Levi Eshkol understood what Abraham Lincoln understood, that 'a divided house will not stand.' Even more importantly, there was humility in their personalities. This trait, which is currently sorely lacking in Israel's leadership, is what helped them foster broad national agreements."
You mentioned the civil war and its harsh consequences. However, many Israelis are aware that they are in conflict with the other half of the nation, only when they find out about it in the media. Perhaps the incessant talk of civil war only brings another perception of polarization and conflict into Israeli consciousness?
"Israelis who are unaware of the opinions and feelings of other Israelis live in ghettos, where they rub shoulders only with those who are similar to them. But the others are right next to them, on the other side of the ghetto wall, and they are doomed to live together and shape together the public domain between the ghettos. Therefore, we must talk about the danger of civil war, because it is real, and we must understand its ramifications. It will cause all of us to be modest in general, and in our internal debates in particular."
But when you go outside your home—to the grocery store, to the doctor, to the neighborhood walk—do you feel tense?
"Fortunately, no. We are not there. But I do feel that in various circles they are wary of entering into a political conversation, because they fear a dialogue of the deaf, which will deteriorate into a loud argument within minutes. Anyone who reads the history of the many civil wars in the modern era, for example in the United States and Spain, knows that this is how it begins."
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us