Part of a series on |
Jews and Judaism |
---|
Normative Judaism's views on warfare are defined by restraint that is neither guided by avidness for belligerence nor is it categorically pacifist. [1] Traditionally, self-defense has been the underpinning principle for the sanctioned use of violence, [2] with the maintenance of peace taking precedence over waging war. [3] [4] While the biblical narrative about the conquest of Canaan and the commands related to it have had a deep influence on Western culture, [5] mainstream Jewish traditions throughout history have treated these texts as purely historical or highly conditioned, and in either case not relevant to contemporary life. [6] However, some minor strains of radical Zionism promote aggressive war and justify them with biblical texts. [7] [8]
Contemporary warfare conducted by the State of Israel is governed by Israeli law and regulation, which includes a purity of arms code that is based in part on Jewish tradition. Tension between the conduct of the Israeli government and Jewish traditions and halakha on the conduct of war have caused controversy within Israel and have provided a basis for criticisms of Israel.
Judaism's doctrines and texts have sometimes been associated with violence. Laws requiring the eradication of evil, sometimes using violent means, exist in the Jewish tradition. Judaism also contains peaceful doctrines. [2] [9] [10] [11] Attitudes and laws towards both peace and violence exist within the Jewish tradition. [2] Throughout history, Judaism's religious texts or precepts have been used to promote [12] [13] [14] as well as oppose violence. [15]
Normative Judaism is not pacifist and violence is permissible in the service of self-defense. [1] J. Patout Burns asserts that Jewish tradition clearly posits the principle of minimization of violence. This principle can be stated as "(wherever) Jewish law allows violence to keep an evil from occurring, it mandates that the minimal amount of violence be used to accomplish one's goal." [3] [4]
The ancient orders like those of wars for Israel to eradicate idol worshiping do not apply today. Jews are not taught to glorify violence. The rabbis of the Talmud saw war as an avoidable evil. A passage in Pirkei Avot reads, "The sword comes to the world for the delay of judgment, and for the perversion of judgment," [16] [17] In Judaism, war is evil — albeit, at times, a necessary one — yet, Judaism teaches that one has to go to great length to avoid it. [18]
The Talmud insists that before going to non-defensive war, the king would need to seek authorization from the Sanhedrin, as well as divine approval through the High Priest. As these institutions have not existed for 2,000 years, this virtually rules out the possibility of non-defensive war. [19]
The permissibility of war is limited and the requirement is that one always seek a just peace before waging war. [2] [20] Some modern Jewish scholars hold that biblical texts authorizing offensive war no longer apply, and that Jewish theology instructs Jews to leave vengeance to God. [21] [22]
Jewish writers in the 2nd-century CE defined their wars as either a mandatory war, a religious war, or a voluntary war. [23]
The Tanakh (Jewish Bible) contains commandments that require the Israelites to exterminate seven Canaanite nations, and describes several wars of extermination that annihilated entire cities or groups of peoples. The targets of the "extermination commandments" were the seven Canaanite nations explicitly identified by God in Deut 7:1–2 and Deut 20:16–18. [24] These seven tribes are Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites. Most of these descended from the biblical figure Canaan, as described in Gen 10:15–18. In addition, two others tribes were subject to wars of extermination: Amalekites (1 Samuel 15:1–20) [25] and Midianites (Numbers 31:1–18). The extermination of the Canaanite nations is described primarily in the Book of Joshua (especially Joshua 10:28–42) which includes the Battle of Jericho described in Joshua 6:15–21. [lower-alpha 1]
Wars of extermination are referred to in several of Judaism's biblical commandments, known as the 613 Mitzvot: [27]
The extent of extermination is described in the commandment Deut 20:16–18 which orders the Israelites to "not leave alive anything that breathes… completely destroy them …." and on 1 Samuel 15 "Now, go and crush Amalek; put him under the curse of destruction with all that he possesses. Do not spare him, but kill man and woman, babe and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and donkey." Rabbinical commentator Rashi elaborates on this commandment: "From man unto woman, from infant unto suckling, from ox unto sheep, so that the name of Amalek not be mentioned even with reference to an animal by [someone] saying: 'This animal belonged to the Amalekites'." [28] [29]
In Talmudic commentary, the Canaanite nations were given the opportunity to leave, and their refusal to leave "lay the onus of blame for the conquest and Joshua's extirpation of the Canaanites at the feet of the victims." [30] Another explanation of the exterminations is that God gave the land to the Canaanites only temporarily, until the Israelites would arrive, and the Canaanites extermination was punishment for their refusal to obey God's desire that they leave. [31] Another Talmudic explanation - for the wars in the Book of Joshua - was that God initiated the wars as a diversionary tactic so Israelites would not kill Joshua after discovering that Joshua had forgotten certain laws. [32]
A formal declaration that the “seven nations” are no longer identifiable was made by Joshua ben Hananiah, around the year 100 CE, making laws of exterminating war a dead letter. [19] [33]
Maimonides explained that the commandment of destroying the nation of Amalek requires the Jewish people to peacefully request of them to accept upon themselves the Noachide laws. [34]
Some commentators, such as Rabbi Hayim Palaggi (1788–1869) argued that Jews had lost the tradition of distinguishing Amalekites from other people, and therefore the commandment of killing them could never practically be applied. [35]
Scholar Moshe Greenberg asserts that the laws of extermination applied only to the extinct tribes, and only to their contemporary generations of Israelites. [6] [36] Scholar Carl Ehrlich states the biblical rules of extermination provide guidance to modern Israelis not for genocidal purposes, but rather simply as models for reclaiming the land of Israel. [37]
Contemporary Jewish biblical scholar Sidney Hoenig discussed the "brutality" in the book of Joshua, and emphasized that it is a story, and that the purpose of the story was to increase the glory of God. [38]
Scholar Carl Ehrlich states that Jewish commentators have tended to be silent regarding the morality of the violence in the Book of Joshua. [39] Prominent atheist Richard Dawkins asserts that the commandments to exterminate are immoral. [40]
Several Jewish scholars have characterized the exterminations as stories of genocide. [41] Scholar Shaul Magid characterizes the commandment to exterminate the Midianites as a "genocidal edict", and asserts that rabbinical tradition continues to defend the edict into the twentieth century. [42] [43] Scholar Ra'anan S. Boustan asserts that – in the modern era – the violence directed towards the Canaanites would be characterized as genocide. [44] Scholar Carl Ehrlich characterizes the Battle of Jericho and the conquest of the Canaanite nations as genocide. [12] [45] Scholar Zev Garber characterizes the commandment to wage war on the Amalekites as genocide. [46]
According to Ian Lustick, leaders of the now defunct [47] Jewish fundamentalist movement Gush Emunim, such as Hanan Porat, considered the Palestinians to be like Canaanites or Amalekites, and suggested that the biblical texts imply a duty to make merciless war against Arabs who reject Jewish sovereignty. [48]
Niels Peter Lemche asserts that European colonialism in the 19th century was ideologically based on the Old Testament narratives of conquest and extermination and that some radical Zionist groups have brought the same idea to bear in Israel. [5]
Nur Masalha, Elliot Horowitz, Josef Stern and others suggest that Amalekites have come to represent an "eternally irreconcilable enemy" that wants to murder Jews, and that some Jews believe that pre-emptive violence is acceptable against such enemies; for example modern Palestinians have been identified as "Amalekites" by rabbi Israel Hess. [49] [50] [51] [52]
Jewish tradition permits waging war and killing in certain cases. However, the permissibility to wage war is limited and the requirement is that one always seek a just peace before waging war. [2]
In 1992, the Israel Defense Forces drafted a Code of Conduct that combines international law, Israeli law, Jewish heritage and the IDF's own traditional ethical code—the IDF Spirit (Hebrew : רוח צה"ל, Ru'ah Tzahal). [53]
According to Rabbi Judah Loew (Maharal) of Prague, Jewish law forbids the killing of innocent people, even in the course of a legitimate military engagement. [54] Nonetheless, some religious leaders[ who? ] have interpreted Jewish religious laws to support killing of innocent civilians during wartime in some circumstances, and that this interpretation was asserted several times: in 1974 following the Yom Kippur war, [55] in 2004, during conflicts in West Bank and Gaza, [56] and in the 2006 Lebanon War. [57] However, major and mainstream religious leaders have condemned this interpretation, and the Israeli military subscribes to the purity of arms doctrine, which seeks to minimize injuries to non-combatants; furthermore, the advice was only applicable to combat operations in wartime. [55]
During the 2006 Lebanon War leaders of the Rabbinical Council of America issued a statement prodding the Israeli military to "review its policy of taking pains to spare the lives of innocent civilians", because Hezbollah “puts Israeli men and women at extraordinary risk of life and limb through unconscionably using their own civilians, hospitals, ambulances, mosques… as human shields, cannon fodder, and weapons of asymmetric warfare,” the rabbinical council said in a statement, “we believe that Judaism would neither require nor permit a Jewish soldier to sacrifice himself in order to save deliberately endangered enemy civilians.” [57]
In another case, a booklet published by an IDF military chaplain stated "... insofar as the killing of civilians is performed against the background of war, one should not, according to religious law, trust a Gentile 'The best of the Gentiles you should kill'...". [58] The booklet was withdrawn by the military after criticism, but the military never repudiated the guidance. [59]
Activist Noam Chomsky claims that leaders of Judaism in Israel play a role in sanctioning military operations: "[Israel's Supreme Rabbinical Council] gave their endorsement to the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, declaring that it conformed to the Halachi (religious) law and that participation in the war 'in all its aspects' is a religious duty. The military Rabbinate meanwhile distributed a document to soldiers containing a map of Lebanon with the names of cities replaced by alleged Hebrew names taken from the Bible.... A military Rabbi in Lebanon explained the biblical sources that justify 'our being here and our opening the war; we do our Jewish religious duty by being here.'" [60]
In 2007, Mordechai Eliyahu, the former Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel wrote that "there was absolutely no moral prohibition against the indiscriminate killing of civilians during a potential massive military offensive on Gaza aimed at stopping the rocket launchings". [61] His son, Shmuel Eliyahu chief rabbi of Safed, called for the "carpet bombing" of the general area from which the Kassams were launched, to stop rocket attacks on Israel, saying "This is a message to all leaders of the Jewish people not to be compassionate with those who shoot [rockets] at civilians in their houses." he continued, "If they don't stop after we kill 100, then we must kill 1,000. And if they don't stop after 1,000, then we must kill 10,000. If they still don't stop we must kill 100,000. Even a million. Whatever it takes to make them stop." [61]
An influential[ citation needed ] Chabad Lubavitch Hassid rabbi Manis Friedman in 2009 was quoted as saying: "I don’t believe in western morality, i.e. don’t kill civilians or children, don’t destroy holy sites, don’t fight during holiday seasons, don’t bomb cemeteries, don’t shoot until they shoot first because it is immoral. The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children". [62] Later, Friedman explained: "the sub-question I chose to address instead is: how should we act in time of war, when our neighbors attack us, using their women, children and religious holy places as shields." [63]
The Book of Joshua is the sixth book in the Hebrew Bible and the Old Testament, and is the first book of the Deuteronomistic history, the story of Israel from the conquest of Canaan to the Babylonian exile. It tells of the campaigns of the Israelites in central, southern and northern Canaan, the destruction of their enemies, and the division of the land among the Twelve Tribes, framed by two set-piece speeches, the first by God commanding the conquest of the land, and, at the end, the second by Joshua warning of the need for faithful observance of the Law (torah) revealed to Moses.
The Israelites were a group of Semitic-speaking tribes in the ancient Near East who, during the Iron Age, inhabited a part of Canaan. They were also an ethnoreligious group.
Balaam, son of Beor, was a biblical character, a non-Israelite prophet and diviner who lived in Pethor, a region or settlement which has never been located, but is thought to have been between the region of Iraq and northern Syria in what is now southeastern Turkey. According to chapters Numbers 22–24 of the Book of Numbers, he was hired by King Balak of Moab to curse Israel, but instead he blessed the Israelites, as dictated by God. Subsequently, the plan to entice the Israelites into idol worship and sexual immorality is attributed to him . Balaam is also mentioned in the Book of Micah.
Agag is a Northwest Semitic name or title applied to a biblical king. It has been suggested that "Agag" was a dynastic name of the kings of Amalek, just as Pharaoh was used as a dynastic name for the ancient Egyptians. The etymology is uncertain, according to John L. McKenzie (1995), while Cox (1884) suggested "High."
Amalek is described in the Hebrew Bible as the enemy nation of the Israelites. The name "Amalek" can refer to the descendants of Amalek, the grandson of Esau, or anyone who lived in their territories in Canaan, or North African descendants of Ham, the son of Noah.
Holocaust theology is a body of theological and philosophical debate concerning the role of God in the universe in light of the Holocaust of the late 1930s and early 1940s. It is primarily found in Judaism. Jews were killed in higher proportions than other groups; some scholars limit the definition of the Holocaust to the Jewish victims of the Nazis as Jews alone were targeted for the Final Solution. One third of the total worldwide Jewish population were killed during the Holocaust. The Eastern European Jewish population was particularly hard hit, being reduced by ninety percent. While a disproportionate number of Jewish religious scholars were killed, more than eighty percent of the world's total, the perpetrators of the Holocaust did not merely target religious Jews. A large percentage of the Jews killed both in Eastern and Western Europe were either nonobservant or had not received even an elementary level of Jewish education.
Gentile is a word that today usually means someone who is not Jewish. Other groups that claim Israelite heritage, notably Mormons, have historically used the term gentile to describe outsiders. More rarely, the term is used as a synonym for heathen, pagan or any non-circumcised person, regardless of ancestry. As a term used to describe non-members of a religious/ethnic group, gentile is sometimes compared to other words used to describe the "outgroup" in other cultures.
Islamic–Jewish relations comprise the human and diplomatic relations between Jewish people and Muslims in the Arabian Peninsula, Northern Africa, the Middle East, and their surrounding regions. Jewish–Islamic relations may also refer to the shared and disputed ideals between Judaism and Islam, which began roughly in the 7th century CE with the origin and spread of Islam in the Arabian peninsula. The two religions share similar values, guidelines, and principles. Islam also incorporates Jewish history as a part of its own. Muslims regard the Children of Israel as an important religious concept in Islam. Moses, the most important prophet of Judaism, is also considered a prophet and messenger in Islam. Moses is mentioned in the Quran more than any other individual, and his life is narrated and recounted more than that of any other prophet. There are approximately 43 references to the Israelites in the Quran, and many in the Hadith. Later rabbinic authorities and Jewish scholars such as Maimonides discussed the relationship between Islam and Jewish law. Maimonides himself, it has been argued, was influenced by Islamic legal thought.
According to the Hebrew Bible, the Kenites/Qenites were a tribe in the ancient Levant. They settled in the towns and cities in the northeastern Negev in an area known as the "Negev of the Kenites" near Arad, and played an important role in the history of ancient Israel. One of the most recognized Kenites is Jethro, Moses's father-in-law, who was a shepherd and a priest in the land of Midian. Certain groups of Kenites settled among the Israelite population, including the descendants of Moses's brother-in-law, although the Kenites descended from Rechab maintained a distinct, nomadic lifestyle for some time.
Religious violence covers phenomena in which religion is either the subject or the object of violent behavior. All the religions of the world contain narratives, symbols, and metaphors of violence and war. Religious violence is violence that is motivated by, or in reaction to, religious precepts, texts, or the doctrines of a target or an attacker. It includes violence against religious institutions, people, objects, or events. Religious violence includes both acts which are committed by religious groups and acts which are committed against religious groups.
Black Hebrew Israelites are a new religious movement claiming that African Americans are descendants of the ancient Israelites. Some sub-groups believe that Native and Latin Americans are descendants of the Israelites as well. Black Hebrew Israelites combine elements to their teaching from a wide range of sources to varying degrees. Black Hebrew Israelites incorporate certain aspects of the religious beliefs and practices of both Christianity and Judaism, though they have created their own interpretation of the Bible, and other influences include Freemasonry and New Thought, for example. Many choose to identify as Hebrew Israelites or Black Hebrews rather than Jews in order to indicate their claimed historic connections.
Martyrdom in Judaism is one of the main examples of Jews doing a kiddush Hashem, a Hebrew term which means "sanctification of the Name". An example of this is public self-sacrifice in accordance with Jewish practice and identity, with the possibility of being killed for no other reason than being Jewish. There are specific conditions in Jewish law that deal with the details of self-sacrifice, be it willing or unwilling.
Israel Hess was an Israeli rabbi.
Herem or cherem, as used in the Tanakh, means something given over to the Lord, or under a ban, and sometimes refers to things or persons to be utterly destroyed. The term has been explained in different and sometimes conflicting ways by different scholars. It has been defined as "a mode of secluding, and rendering harmless, anything imperilling the religious life of the nation", or "the total destruction of the enemy and his goods at the conclusion of a campaign", or "uncompromising consecration of property and dedication of the property to God without possibility of recall or redemption". It is translated into Latin as devotio, a word used for human sacrifice, and into Greek as anathema, which was a sacrifice to the gods.
Judaism's doctrines and texts have sometimes been associated with violence or anti-violence. Laws requiring the eradication of evil, sometimes using violent means, exist in the Jewish tradition. However, Judaism also contains peaceful texts and doctrines. There is often a juxtaposition of Judaic law and theology to violence and nonviolence by groups and individuals. Attitudes and laws towards both peace and violence exist within the Jewish tradition. Throughout history, Judaism's religious texts or precepts have been used to promote as well as oppose violence.
Judaism has teachings and guidance for its adherents through the Hebrew Bible and rabbinic literature relating to the notion and concept of peace. The precepts of peacefulness and compassion are paramount in Judaism, Judaism also contains a number of doctrines which eschew violence. However, while Judaism condemns normative violence, it is not categorically pacifist.
The Hebrew Bible and the New Testament both contain narratives, poems, and instructions which describe, encourage, command, condemn, reward, punish and regulate violent actions by God, individuals, groups, governments, and nation-states. Among the violent acts referred to are war, human sacrifice, animal sacrifice, murder, rape, genocide, and criminal punishment. Violence is defined around four main areas: that which damages the environment, dishonest or oppressive speech, and issues of justice and purity. War is a special category of violence that is addressed in four different ways including pacifism, non-resistance, just war and crusade.
Numbers 31 is the 31st chapter of the Book of Numbers, the fourth book of the Pentateuch (Torah), the central part of the Hebrew Bible, a sacred text in Judaism and Christianity. Scholars such as Israel Knohl and Dennis T. Olson name this chapter the War against the Midianites.
War in the Hebrew Bible concerns any military engagement narrated or discussed in the Hebrew Bible, also known as the Tanakh or Old Testament of the Bible. Texts about war in the Hebrew Bible are part of the broader topic of The Bible and violence. They cover a wide range of topics from detailed battle reports including weapons and tactics used, numbers of combatants involved, and casualties experienced, to discussions of motives and justifications for war, the sacred and secular aspects of war, descriptions and considerations of what in modern times would be considered war crimes such as genocide or wartime sexual violence, and reflections on wars that have happened, or predictions, visions or imaginations of wars that are yet to come.
Mandatory war, or compulsory war, is a technical term found in Hebrew classical literature and denoting a war that requires the entire nation of the Jewish people to rise-up and to become actively engaged-in because of an existential threat to the Jewish nation. The aim is to thwart the enemy advances against the nation of Israel, without the necessity of enslaving and exterminating the enemy, or of annexing the enemy's territory. It is to be distinguished from a "voluntary war", that is to say, a battle waged of free choice, which requires the approbation of the Sanhedrin, presumably in order to impose a religious and moral check on reckless warfare. It is also to be distinguished from a "religious war", which is restricted to those nations mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, such as Amalek and the nations of Canaan. The biblical command, in the case of the Canaanite inhabitants, was to exterminate them and to annex their territory, whereas others who made peace with Israel could be enslaved and forced to pay tribute.
"Despite the long regnant model that the Canaanites and Israelites were people of fundamentally different culture, archaeological data now casts doubt on this view. The material culture of the region exhibits numerous common points between Israelites and Canaanites in the Iron I period (c. 1200–1000 BCE). The record would suggest that the Israelite culture largely overlapped with and derived from Canaanite culture... In short, Israelite culture was largely Canaanite in nature. Given the information available, one cannot maintain a radical cultural separation between Canaanites and Israelites for the Iron I period." (pp. 6–7).Smith, Mark (2002) The Early History of God: Yahweh and Other Deities of Ancient Israel, (Eerdman's)
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)