I thank my good friend Shalom Berger for asking if I was interested in responding to the short article by Yair Sheleg identifying one of the causes of extremism in the fringes of religious-Zionist youth as the revolution in Tanach study and its emphasis on the "unmediated" learning of Tanach with its calls for total war against the enemies of Israel and the cry of vengeance in Shimshon's last stand without the moderating influences of later generations of exegesis and interpretation. Like all short articles with bold theses, this one has an element of truth to it, but exaggerates its claim.
Yes, it is true that any specific approach to learning Tanach (as well as many other parts of the Jewish corpus) taken to an extreme and not balanced by other voices within the tradition and the texts themselves can yield frightening and even devastating results. (Just to take an example from the other pole Sheleg mentions, i.e., the classical Hareidi reading of Tanach. That reading with its total downplaying of the national element and the concept of Jewish sovereignty and the real life connection to the land of Israel together with its quietism had in some readings of Jewish history very negative effects including alienating generations of youth from traditional Judaism, misreading the challenges of Jewish history, and as Rav Avraham Bloch, Rosh Yeshiva of Telz in his celebrated letter from the 1950's abandoning the in depth study of Tanach to the "maskilim". So yes, an excessive emphasis on Tanach without the rest of the tradition is dangerous in the wrong hands of ×לו ×©×œ× ×©× ×• ×•×œ× ×©×ž×©×•. However a few caveats are in order even in this context:
1. The Tanach itself, even in its "unmediated" form is multi-vocal and contains many different voices that internally temper and play off against each other and emphasize complementary values that push the reader to recognize differing historical circumstances and challenges, what can and cannot be achieved, issues of chilul Hashem, things that can only be done through direct Divine command versus human initiative. A rich and deep reading of Tanach even in an "unmediated" form yields much more complexity than the simple slogans one may hear.
2. Moreover, the "unmediated" readings of some of the extremists are often not just ignorant of Hazal, they also "get" the pshuto shel mikra wrong - their "unmediation" itself misreads the intent of the Biblical narrative - see for example Rav Yoel Bin Nun's recent comments on the Shimshon narrative: [
tinyurl.com]
3. The facts on the ground do not seem to support any direct connection between the major advocates and learning institutions that are at the center of the Tanach "revolution" Israel and the language, theology and education of the extremist fringe of the × ×•×¢×¨ הגבעות.
For example- the major educational engine that has driven the Tanach revolution in the Dati-Leumi world has been Michelet Herzog -Yeshivat Har Eztion led by mori verabi Rav Aharon Lichtenstin zt"l and mori verabi Rav Yehudah Amital zt"l. Whatever one says about Tanach begovah einayim or the Tanach revolution, Gush Etzion was and is certainly not a bastion of extremism in the spectrum of Israeli religious-Zionism. If we look at the central figures in the "Tanach" revolution" who taught generations of students three or four figures stand out:
Rav Mordecahi Breuer z"l , Dr. Yehudah Elitzur z"l and yibadel lechayim Rav Yoel Bin Nun, Rav Yaacov Medan, and Rav Yuval Cherlow.
None of these people could in any way be described as an extremists in terms of Jew-Gentile relations nor in somehow viewing the current State of Israel as illegitimate. Just to take two examples, Rav Breuer was an avid supporter of Meimad when it was founded by his life-long friend, Rav Amital z"l, and Rav Yoel famously broke with Gush Emunim because of the events of the Jewish Underground and other extremism that crept into its circles.
4. The reality is that anyone who has actually sat at the feet and really learned with Rav Breuer z"l or Rav Yoel or really worked through an essay of Rav Breuer z"l or Rav Medan knows that it is a bit of caricature to describe these talmidei chachamim as only reading Tanach in an "unmediated" fashion, as a type of modern day Karaites. That is simply not the case. The methodology that they emply asks that one first read Tanach without any preconceived notions and approach the Tanach to see the problems, understand the narrative in its full context and then as a second stage to look at the solutions and the readings of hazal and see how they struggle with those issues and how they sometimes are engaging in עומק פשוטו של ×ž×§×¨× (e.g. Hazal's reading of the Angels visiting Avraham and the Lot story as occurring on Pesah.) while sometimes engaging in pure drash for educational purposes. In addition many of these teachers and thinkers have actually spent much of their work in trying to understand the nexus between peshuto shel kikra and derashot Hazal in halakhic sections of Tanach as anyone who reads Rav Yoel's most recent book זכור ושמור can attest.
In my reading the ideological underpinnings of the extremism (as opposed to the role of the personal history, traumas, feelings of abandonment from the security services of Israel, bigotry, etc.) whatever that has crept into the fringes of the "hilltop youth" are actually rooted in a more complex and toxic brew of selective readings of Tanach, coupled with exposure and emphasis on certain strands in kabbalah and Hasidut that prize one's own authenticity and feelings above halakhic restraints together with anti-Gentile language and apocalyptic and messianic readings of current Jewish history.
With Torah blessings,
Nati Helfgot
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2016 08:46PM by mlb.
