|
|
|
The heresy of Jewish Zionism
by
Baha Abushaqra
If we seek solace in the prisons of the distant past
Security in human systems we're told will always always
last
Emotions are the sail and blind faith is the mast
Without a breath of real freedom we're getting nowhere
fast
If God is dead and an actor plays his part
His words of fear will find their way to a place in your
heart
Without the voice of reason every faith is its own curse
Without freedom from the past things can only get worse
(Sting, History will teach us nothing)
"In an article published in the Washington Post of 3
October 1978, Rabbi Hirsch (of Jerusalem) is reported to
have declared: 'The 12th principle of our faith, I
believe, is that the Messiah will gather the Jewish exiled
who are dispersed throughout the nations of the world.
Zionism is diametrically opposed to Judaism. Zionism
wishes to define the Jewish people as a nationalistic
entity. The Zionists say, in effect, 'Look here, God. We
do not like exile. Take us back, and if you don't, we'll
just roll up our sleeves and take ourselves back.' 'The
Rabbi continues: 'This, of course, is heresy. The Jewish
people are charged by Divine oath not to force themselves
back to the Holy Land against the wishes of those residing
there.'" (Sami Hadawi, Bitter Harvest, quoted in
Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict by Jews for
Justice in the Middle East.)
This view -that Zionism contradicts the teachings of
Judaism- is held by a sizeable number of non-Zionist
Jewish groups, such as Neturei-Karta, Satmar, Jews not
Zionists, etc. As Neturei-Karta put it, "the founders of
Zionism were all atheists who denied the Torah. All the
Torah Sages of that time opposed them and opposed Zionism,
saying that Zionism would lead only to destruction." The
message such groups try to deliver is that Zionism is a
political movement championed by atheists or secular Jews
for the political purpose of colonizing Palestine and is
not, never was, an enterprise mandated by God Himself. In
fact, the so-called "father of Zionism," Theodore Herzl,
confessed in his diaries that he is an agnostic
.
The political-colonialist nature of Zionism is best
illustrated by its definition in Webster's Revised
Unabridged Dictionary
: "Among the Jews, a theory, plan, or movement for
colonizing their own race in Palestine, the land of Zion,
or, if that is impracticable, elsewhere, either for
religious or nationalizing purposes; -- called also Zion
movement."
There are secular reasons why the elders of Zion and their
imperial supporters encouraged Jewish settlement in
Palestine. I believe, the then superpowers supported the
Zionist enterprise because, simply, it was the imperialist
thing to do at the time. European anti-Semitism played a
significant role in all this, especially in motivating
European Jews to flee persecution to Palestine, but it was
quite fashionable back then to colonize others, and
Zionists, as a distinct political entity, were active
players in this dark episode. Zionists invoked the
spiritual significance of the biblical "Promised Land" to
advance their agenda.
You would expect an institution founded on the literal
interpretation of the biblical scriptures to be a devout
entity that adheres to the word of God verbatim. Imagine
then a Jewish state governed by halacha --that would be
the Jewish version of Taliban's Afghanistan.
Notwithstanding it's ethno-centrism, Israel is a secular
modern state, and even its notorious Zionist leader, Ariel
Sharon himself, is not affiliated with a Jewish orthodox
party or is known to be particularly religious. Yet, this
irreligious, modern and supposedly democratic political
state claims it is the incarnation of a supernatural
narrative.
They say, repeat something long enough, and it becomes a
reality. World Jewry corroborate this saw when it comes to
Palestine. Consider the founding myths of modern Israel
--a land without a people, etc. The myth of the "Promised
Land" is no different. Hardly a day goes by without a
religious Zionist preaching, perhaps with genuine
conviction, that Palestine is God's Promised Land to Jews.
In this demagogy, political-Zionism becomes a righteous
creed; and, the argument that Jews have no right to impose
their religious beliefs on Palestinians, while valid,
fails to impress the most enlightened religious Zionist.
Let us then assume that the Bible is the true word of God,
and see if the Zionist interpretation -that God gave
Palestine to Jews unreservedly- holds any water.
Firstly, according to the Torah, God promised the land of
Canaan to Abraham and his "seeds" after him, i.e., to
Abraham and his sons Isaac and Ishmael and their
descendents. For example, Genesis 17: 7-10 (KJV) God
speaks to Abraham:
"And I will establish my covenant between me and thee
and thy seed after thee in their generations for an
everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy
seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy
seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all
the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I
will be their God. And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt
keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee
in their generations. This is my covenant, which ye shall
keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee..."
Under this biblical clause, therefore, to be covered by
the covenant, a Jew must be a direct descendent of
Isaac/Jacob (the promise is for "seeds," i.e. actual
descendents, not mere followers). In practice, it requires
methodological DNA analysis to establish this genealogy.
Converts are inadmissible candidates under this category.
Arabs, being descendents of Ishmael, are automatically
covered by this promise. Though God later reiterates the
covenant with Isaac and Jacob, nowhere does He exclude
Ishmael or his progeny. The claim by some Zionists that
Ishmael should be excluded from the covenant because he
was, unlike Isaac (son of Sarah), a son of a concubine
(Hagar) is baseless (and inappropriately supremacist).
Genesis 16: 3 (KJV) explicitly says that Sarah gave Hagar
to her husband Abraham "to be his wife."
Secondly, the divine promise was fulfilled, and the
descendents of Jacob dwelt the land of Canaan and they
remained there and assimilated with the inhabitants. Mind
you, Abraham himself died without actually realizing that
divine promise -but his seeds supposedly did. In Hebrews
11:13, for example, God says referring to Abraham "these
all died in faith not having received the promises, but
having seen them afar off..." Acts 7: 3-5: "..and He (God)
gave him (Abraham) no inheritance in it (Canaan), no, not
so much as to set his foot upon; yet He promised that He
would give it to him for a possession, and to his seeds
after him...."
In other words, not just because it says somewhere in the
Bible that God will do something, He will actually do it
as He said he would. Commonsense suggests that words of
the bible should not, at least sometimes, be taken
literal.
That Zionism contradicts the teachings of Judaism because
"The Jewish people are charged by Divine oath not to force
themselves back to the Holy Land against the wishes of
those residing there," as Rabbi Hirsch suggested is one
interpretation of the scriptures, though literal, is more
benevolent than the Zionist one. For the instinctual, it
is hard to imagine that a loving God would mandate a
colonialist agenda. The idea itself defies the definition
of a peaceful religion, if not logic. As a friend recently
pointed out to me, if Jews are so eager to follow the Old
Testament meticulously, why do they ignore the backbone of
Jewish teachings, the Ten Commandments that dictate "thou
shalt not kill" and "thou shalt not steal" when it comes
to Palestine? Isn't this unequivocal heresy?
Notes:
For complete text, see
http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html
"I do not obey a religious
impulse...I am an agnostic." (p. 54) Th. Herzl: "Diaries. Ed.
Victor Gollancz, 1958.
Webster's Revised Unabridged
Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
Mr. Baha Abushaqra is a Media Activist with Palestine Media Watch.
Source:
by the same author:
More
in 'Perspective' or 'Archive'
|
|
|
