израильская политика

[avva]

Десятки муниципальных раввинов в Израиле подписались под религиозным постановлением, которое запрещает сдавать квартиры в аренду неевреям. (англ.)

Нет слов.

(... и ведь все эти мерзавцы, что интересно, все эти "муниципальные раввины" - государственные служащие. Все они живут на в том числе и мои налоги).

Понятно, что нормальной реакцией на это было бы немедленно уволить всех подписавших это письмо. Понятно, что в нашей стране, к моему сожалению и стыду, это не случится. Но какое-то локальное приближение к этому должно существовать. Как-то в этом направлении надо пытаться двигаться. Я не знаю в точности, как. Может, поощрять своими голосами те партии, которые обещают бороться с этой дрянью. "Шинуй" в свое время разбазарила свой политический капитал и почти ничего не сделала; возможно, пришло время для еще одной попытки, не знаю. Но что-то пытаться делать надо. Потому что если закрывать на все это глаза, то через какое-то время мы действительно будем жить в Иране, не преувеличивая.

P.S. Для не-израильтян, немного конктекста: речь идет о прокламации, которая с точки зрения закона никого не обязывает. Религиозные евреи, которые уважают подписавшихся под ней раввинов, могут считать ее для себя обязательной.

Comments

[i_eron]

Well, we haven't had to wait long: Public invited to inform on those renting to Arabs

There already are calls, just as I thought, for everybody to anonymously inform on Jews renting to Arabs. The names of the offenders will then be made public for all to condemn. It is "assimilation" they fear, not idolaters. Does this ring any bells for you, or do you still think that the rabbis did publish their letter in true faith?

Any such renter can surely expect ostracism and harassing. I hope at least that there will be no lynchings, in the manner of Palestinians.

I believe rabbis should be responsible for the consequences of their actions, just like everybody else. Yes, there are respected rabbis that has already correctly called this letter an "irresponsible nationalist provocation". Perhaps in the end their opinion will result in "rectification of errors", so Judaism will correct itself. But the political and criminal damage by then will already be done. This is why we are offended by the letter and demand the resignations. Nobody is blaming Judaism, we just blame the specific trouble-making politicians that have signed the letter.

[shkrobius.livejournal.com]

I do not know how is this organization is connected to these particular rabbis. I expect the clarification to come from these rabbis, because it is their verdict, or higher up. The way I read their letter, it has absolutely nothing about not renting to Muslim Arabs (per our exchange). I see newspapers, zealots, etc. interpreting their letter in this particular way. This does not tell me whether it was intended to be interpreted in this way or people just read it in this way because they want to read it this particulate way. I believe that only people who stamped this letter can tell what did they actually mean by it. If they refuse to tell or tell different things, then you do have a serious rabbi issue. If you have rabbis that go against the Mishneh Torah and 1000+ year old tradition of interpretation of Avodah Zarah that excludes from its scope the Ishmaelites then you have a big problem indeed.

I'll make my own prediction. These rabbis will either tell that it does not apply to the Arabs (de facto admitting that they failed to write a competent rabbinical verdict) or begin contort trying to explain why it applies to all Arabs (in my view, this is simply impossible as a blanket statement) never keeping their story straight even among themselves. In both cases they will discredit themselves - not in your eyes, but in the eyes of people listening to them. As I said, you only need to wait.

[i_eron]

Hm. So, you do not expect them to just sit back and enjoy the mess.

Of course, some attempts to comment and "explain" and confuse are probable. This would just add more air-time to these attention-seeking politicians.

But they will not write a letter with the same well-known signatories, not say clearly that those who have understood them as calling for harassment have understood wrongly, etc.

If the same list of signatures will appear on a letter of the same status as the original that will state clearly that the hate-mongering interpretations are wrong, I shall accept that I was wrong about the intentions of these rabbis. But I shall still demand their resignation because of the political and criminal damage caused by their actions.

Once again, one does not need to be knowledgeable in Jewish law to know that the letter does not express the mainstream Jewish position. We shall know them by their fruits.

[shkrobius.livejournal.com]

You are speculating what will happen. Let's wait and see.

Had these municipal rabbis written in their letter that they specifically mean, say, Vietnamese migrants practicing animism rites, the reaction would still be an outcry; there would be numerous jeremiads against the rabbinical preaching hate -- and the rest of it. Had it been the mainstream position, little would change as far as the reaction goes. Come on.

[i_eron]

1. You are wrong. Suppose there would be a halakhic ruling about Vietnamese workers. A proper ruling by proper rabbis, not like this one that insults my intelligence. I would respectfully hear it and try to understand it. Then I would very calmly conclude that here I have another small ethical issue in Judaism I find difficult to accept. It is of little practical importance. I believe that a country has every right to decide whom to invite, just as I decide whom to invite to my house. Our country is defined as one "for the Jewish people" even by the hated UN. I think that minorities are beneficial, but I am against a massive immigration by non-Jews. For me it is for cultural reasons, for others it is for religious reasons. If the rabbis would show their reasons are truly religious (for example, prove they are not racist by allowing an odd Vietnamese in, say, on condition of a giyur), I would have no problem with such ruling, even if not identifying with its ideology.

2. It seems once again that you are not arguing with me, not even with a typical secular Israeli, but with a silly stereotype of a left-wing American. Most of us do not see anything wrong with our country being "predominantly Jewish", or with a "racist" Law of return. Most of us are even against re-settling Palestinian refugees within our borders. We currently have some debate about how to repatriate illegal African infiltrators, but only a very small minority would welcome them without limit instead. From a liberal point of view selective immigration is very much different from inequality of citizens.

3. The trouble seems to be "idolaters" living close to Jews. I would classify this as a legitimate religious concern. A ruling by rabbis reminding Jews that it is wrong to live alongside any "idolaters" would not seem aggressive or hate-mongering. It would seem impractical, but that is another matter. Our kosher army includes "idolater" soldiers, our mixed cities have minorities, we have mixed marriages and so on. I do not consider this a problem in itself, but I see that the rabbis might.

[shkrobius.livejournal.com]

I do not see how such a ruling touches on the immigration issue one way or the other. No one forces the idolaters to rent from religous Jews. It would be odd to stipulate that a converted Vietnamese is allowed to live among the Jews, because it is self-evident.

I do not recognize your portrait and I think you are mistaken that a more specific ruling would result in a very different outcome. But I take it back nonetheless, because I do not want to debate counterfactuals. I shouldn't've made this comment, and I apologize.

[i_eron]

The ruling is presumably not just for religious Jews, but for all Jews. In Israel there is no clear divide. Secular Jews that absolutely do not believe in God, never light candles and never fast on Yom Kippur are a small minority. I am personally acquainted with several Jews that mostly do not observe, but do respect rabbinical advice and would surely be influenced by a ruling such as this.

Foreign agricultural workers can probably be usually housed separately from Jews. Probably an Arab or a Druze must then be asked to pose as the nominal owner of such houses. But if the renting is not allowed (and a foreign worker clearly cannot afford to buy an apartment, which is probably similarly forbidden anyway), then most of other foreign workers are left with little option. The problem is mostly economical - after all, they may chose a different country to work in (it would be a pity). It becomes humanitarian if a child is born to such worker.

But if the renting is not allowed to Arab citizens, it is quite a different thing. This is their country too. This would effectively keep them segregated, locked in their villages. It is unacceptable.

Note that the ruling does not prevent Jews from renting (or buying) from Arabs. Strange, no? It would have resulted in the same kind of proximity. According to these rabbis Jews can slowly replace Arabs in all the mixed cities, in a one-way process. It is just ugly politics, nothing else.

[shkrobius.livejournal.com]

OK, so R Aharon Lichtenstein has made more-or-less the same points I've made. He showed why this ruling is either incorrect or irresponsibly ambiguous;
via http://community.livejournal.com/ru_judaizm/1029651.html
That's the right way. If I were one of these rabbis I'd be red in face with shame. Reading such a response is about as bad as it gets in their world.

[i_eron]

>>If I were one of these rabbis I'd be red in face with shame. Reading such a response is about as bad as it gets in their world.

But these rabbis are different from you. They do not much care about being theologically correct. They care about their political power, about maximizing their following among people that would seize any excuse to hate and harass. Your idea about "their world" is far from reality. The world of R Yaakov Yosef is not the same as the world of R Aharon Lichtenstein.