1 UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770

Iyar 5770 Dear Friends, may serve to enhance your ספר It is my sincere hope that the found in this virtual .(study) לימוד holiday) and your) יום טוב

We have designed this project not only for the individual, studying alone, but perhaps even a pair studying together) that wish to work through the study matter) חברותא more for a together, or a group engaged in facilitated study.

להגדיל תורה ,With this material, we invite you to join our Beit Midrash, wherever you may be to enjoy the splendor of Torah) and to engage in discussing issues that touch on a) ולהאדירה most contemporary matter, and are rooted in the timeless arguments of our great sages from throughout the generations.

Bivracha,

Rabbi Kenneth Brander Dean, Center for the Jewish Future

RICHARD M JOEL, President, Yeshiva University KENNETH BRANDER, David Mitzner Dean, Center for the Jewish Future

RABBI ROBERT SHUR, General Editor RABBI MICHAEL DUBITSKY, Editor

Copyright © 2010 All rights reserved by Yeshiva University

Yeshiva University Center for the Jewish Future 500 West 185th Street, Suite 413, New York, NY 10033 [email protected] • 212.960.5400 x 5313

2 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 Table of Contents Yom Haatzmaut 2010/5770

Our Dependence Upon 's Independence Rabbi ...... Page 4 The Religious Significance of Israel Rabbi ...... Page 9 Maintaining a Connection to the from the Rabbi Joshua Flug ...... Page 12 Establishing Yom Haatzmaut as a Yom Tov Rabbi Eli Ozarowski ...... Page 20 The Roots of the Disputes over Yom HaAtzmaut Rabbi David Pri-Chen ...... Page 31 The National and Personal Calling of Shir Hashirim Mrs. Daphne Secunda...... Page 37 Israel: Motherland and Mother Rabbi Mordechai Torczyner ...... Page 42

3 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 Our Dependence Upon Israel's Independence Rabbi Norman Lamm Chancellor and Rosh HaYeshiva, Yeshiva University

This derasha was originally delivered in the Jewish Center on May 1, 1965. It is taken with permission from the Yad Norman Lamm Heritage collection of Yeshiva University. The seventeenth anniversary of the independence of the State of Israel, which we shall celebrate later this week, affords us the occasion to reexamine our own attitudes and orientations towards the State. I do not, in all honesty, believe that full justice can be done to such a significant theme in the confines of a single sermon. Let us, therefore, merely outline some general principles which ought to guide such considerations. This introspection must be characterized, above all, by a radical frankness and an honesty that may prove painful. In the past, economic exigencies, organizational bias, and the normal desire to avoid confronting unpleasant dilemmas, have usually deterred us from a self-analysis. Indeed, such a searching self-examination will probably leave many of us perplexed, and even deeply disturbed. But it is a blessed perplexity that takes the place of the pedestrian platitudes that have so long substituted for thinking in the past. The fact is that American of all persuasions are in a state of crisis concerning their position and orientation towards the State of Israel. We are beset by certain paradoxes and contradictions. If I be permitted to paraphrase from Avot 1:2, the world stands on three pillars: on Torah, on avodah (which means prayer or the sacrificial service), and on charitable endeavors. So may it be said of the American Jewish world with regard to Israel, that it is comprised of three groups. First is "Torah": the Orthodox Jew, whose love for Israel and devotion to the State is part of the larger context of his commitment to Torah and . The second is avodah - literally the word means work, and here I include those who are devoted organizational workers for the various Zionist groups. The third, gemillat hassadim, comprises those many people whose major expression of interest in Israel is through financial support, such as the U.J.A. and Bonds for Israel. The American Jews whose orientation to Israel is expressed as avodah, that is, the political Zionists, especially the secular Zionists, are in a state of deep crisis. Their dilemma is well known: they have, paradoxically, been defeated by success. Their stated purpose was the creation of an independent state. They succeeded in this goal; because it was fulfilled they therefore are left without a purpose. It is fairly apparent to all objective observers that without

4 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 institutional inertia, these organizations would have disappeared with the emergence of the State of Israel in 1948. Gemillat hassadim as an expression of loyalty to Israel is very important. Israel needs our financial assistance. But all of us hope that the time is not far off when the State will achieve economic independence from us as well as peace with its neighbors. What then? When we shall no longer have to contribute financially or politically to the State, how shall we relate to the State of Israel? Is it conceivable that American Jews will be left with no special relationship towards Israel? We Orthodox Jews, whose position in Israel is expressed by the word "Torah," have been spared, largely, the crises of the other two. Our love for Israel is independent either of political or economical conditions. Our program is not merely one of supporting an economy or creating a government machinery. Our purpose depends neither upon votes nor upon funds, though it may include both. Therefore, neither independence nor peace nor security constitutes a threat to our relationship to Israel, for these do not represent the fulfillment of our goals. Our end is nothing less than the Messianic vision of the complete redemption, a term which includes a spiritual renaissance of the Land of Israel and the People of Israel according to the Torah of Israel; and, ultimately, the spiritual regeneration of all mankind in universal peace and justice. Yet, American Orthodox Jews do face a problem that they cannot continue to avoid indefinitely. Our critics in Israel, both those who are Orthodox and those who are not, have pressed this problem upon us, and we ought to consider it seriously and courageously, not — as we have done — polemically. That is, the act of settling in the Land of Israel is one of the 613 commandments. In a remarkable passage, the late Rav Kook points out that, surprisingly, Maimonides in his Sefer HaMitzvot does not include as detailed commandments those precepts which are fundamental to the whole of Torah; and therefore Eretz Yisrael is not reckoned by him as an individual commandment because it is an underlying principle of the whole of Judaism. It is too important to be regarded as just a mitzvah. In the past, our people did not emigrate to the Land of Israel en masse because of the extremely difficult conditions that prevailed: hostile government, harsh and forbidding environment, and the absence of a community large enough and stable enough to absorb immigrants. But today Israel is a free and independent State, and is even blessed with a measure of prosperity. Hence, the question is asked: why not practice and stress this great precept of ? And we ought to honestly ask the same question of ourselves: indeed, why not aliyah? There has been some trickle of American Jews emigrating to Israel, but how about the rest of us? How can we square our religious conscience and intellectual integrity with our apparent non-concern with aliyah? There are of course a number of objections to aliyah that are offered as an excuse for our neglect of this great principle of Jewish life. Upon reflection, most of them are not worth taking seriously. Let us, for the sake of analysis, consider them briefly. We are told by some people that American Jews are not in exile, in galut, and that therefore aliyah is not obligatory upon us. Some of those who propose this comparatively novel thesis are motivated by an exaggerated Americanism. They fear that the assertion of our exilehood is an act

5 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 of disloyalty to the United States. Historically, this is false. There were amongst our ancestors some who lived in countries of the Diaspora that were blessed with benign governments that allowed full freedom to Jews and Judaism. Yet they never doubted that they were in exile, and never were aware of any conflict between their loyalty to their government and their desire for redemption. Only a totalitarian government insists upon the total loyalties of its citizens. A democratic government asks only that its citizens perform their civic duties and affirm their allegiance to the constitution; it does not forbid them to cherish ancient dreams, present prayers, and visions of a future redemption. It is odd that those who protest loudest against the idea that we are in exile in this country do so largely because they are afraid of the impression that will be made upon other Americans if American Jews consider themselves in exile. What greater exile is there than this?! Indeed, we are in galut! To deny this is to abandon our hopes for geulah, for redemption, to scuttle our belief in the Messiah, to make a shambles of our Torah, to invalidate all of our Jewish past and its sublime dreams for the future, and to reduce our prayers to a kind of sanctified hypocrisy. Ours may be a comfortable galut, a galut in which we have a large measure of freedom; but a convenient galut remains a galut! The once taught this principle in one of his inimitable comments. We read in Isaiah a verse with which we are familiar because we recite it on Rosh Hashanah: והיה ביום ההוא יתקע בשופר גדול On that day (the day of the redemption) a great will be ובאו האבדים בארץ אשור והנדחים (sounded, and those who are lost in the land of Ashur (Assyria בארץ מצרים והשתחוו לה' בהר and those who are dispersed in the Land of Egypt will return to הקדש בירושלם: .the Holy Land ישעיהו כז:יג Isaiah 27:13

But, asks the Baal Shem Tov, will Assyria and Egypt be the only countries from which the exiles will return in the future? He replies that these two countries represent two types of exile. He Mitzrayim), can be) מצרים explains these symbols by rearranging the vowels. Egypt, or ,אשור ,metzarim), narrow straits, difficulty, oppression. Assyria) מצרים rearranged to read osher), happiness, prosperity, plenty. In other words, there are two) אושר Ashur), can be read as) types of exile: one of them, symbolized by Egypt, is the classical form of galut, that of oppression and hatred and bigotry, in which our people are persecuted and dispersed. But there is also another kind of exile which is just the reverse. It is the one symbolized by Assyria. It is the exile of Jews in luxury in which we are lost, because our sublime aims and lofty goals have become deflected as a result of the abundance of convenience and comfort and plenty and prosperity. As a result, we have lost sight of the great Jewish vision of redemption. It is from these two exiles, that of oppression and that of prosperity, that Messiah will redeem us on the day that the great shofar will be sounded. Indeed, the greatest exile - as one great Jew once said - occurs when we do not know that we are in exile. The more we forget our exilehood, the deeper we are caught in it. And what is our condition in America if not exile when we read of the increasing assimilation and growing intermarriage, when non-Jews nationally proclaim that we are the "vanishing Jews of America"?

6 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 One need not be a pessimist as to the future survival of our people in this country to admit that we are suffering a terrible attrition. Galut indeed! The argument against aliyah because we American Jews are not in exile is a spurious one, and does not deserve to be taken seriously. Then there are those who turn the argument around, and would discourage aliyah, or excuse our neglect of it, because of faults they find in the State of Israel. Israel, they tell us, is itself not exactly a complete religious state; not all of its citizens are totally observant. The Israelis too are in galut! Perhaps conditions in Israel are less than ideal, but this argument is only a semantic trick. One need not equate the State of Israel with the complete redemption and the ultimate Messianic state in order to promote the idea of aliyah. The fact is that there is more "Yiddishkeit" and opportunity for the practice of Judaism in Israel than any place else in the world — and Manhattan included. It is true, that to the untrained eye of a tourist, it sometimes seems as if Judaism is in exile in the Holy Land. However, it requires a special insight, an extraordinary gift, in order to be able to see the truth: that Judaism is much more vibrant, much more prevalent, much more real in Israel than it is any place in the world. A great Rabbi once explained, with regard to this special insight, may our ותחזנה עינינו בשובך לציון ברחמים ,one of the prayers in our amidah. We pray thrice daily eyes behold when Thou returnest to Zion in love. Why, he asks, do we pray that our eyes behold that God returns to Zion; why do we not simply pray that God returns to Zion? The answer is that even if God returned to Zion, we might not notice it. Sometimes He is there in His full holiness and glory — only we fail to see it! We are blind to the great and sacred realities of God’s presence in the Holy Land. Therefore we implore Him “Almighty God, allow our eyes to see what already is a fact, that Thou hast indeed returned to Zion!” The only real objection to aliyah is not theoretical but practical. We have made our lives here in this country. We have settled here, raised our families, struck our roots, built our businesses, and advanced our careers and professions. Aliyah proves very difficult for us, no matter how genuine our commitment to it. This is a more honest position than to attempt to argue away our responsibility and justify our failure. It is a frank admission of a practical failure, and not an attempt to rationalize our inadequacy by discarding the ideal as such. Nevertheless, we must never remain satisfied with merely abstract ideals, for that which is unrealizable is essentially unreal. Aliyah must be not only an ideal but a principle. It must govern behavior and conduct. Therefore, if we ourselves, for very practical reasons, cannot emigrate to the Holy Land, we should encourage and assist those who can. But that too is insufficient. Such an approach might well lead us into the classical position of the two Zionists who express their by deciding that a third must go on aliyah to Israel. If we are honest about our reasons for not emigrating — that they are practical, not theoretical — then we must at least see to it that our children will go. We must prepare our children for aliyah before they are settled here. If not all our children, at least each family must decide that the one child most fit for emigration ought to be prepared for it. We must decide to train at least one

7 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 child in that kind of career or profession or business that will enable him to go on aliyah. We must imbue him with the spirit of Israel, and create in him that idealism which will help him fulfill the destiny which all of Israel must ultimately share. No parent regards it as a tragedy if his child becomes a lawyer in California or marries an engineer in South America, or goes into business in Alaska. The world is smaller today than it ever was before. It will be smaller yet ten years from now. We should regard it as a blessing if a child of ours fulfills our dreams, our duties, our highest spiritual and national vocation, by directing him to settle in the Holy Land, on aliyah, and live a full vibrant Jewish life. Our religious integrity requires it. Israel needs olim from the United States. And America needs it! The American Jewish community will be able the better to survive if it sends some of the cream of its youth to the Holy Land. American Jewish youth has begun to look elsewhere for the outlets for its native idealism. We must redirect our children and their idealism to the State of Israel. These precious olim will be the permanent human bond between Israeli and American Jewry. For indeed, if we will not be olim, we will be yordim. If we will not go up, we may, heaven forbid, go down! While the solution is not overly difficult, it is not easy. Facing this issue is no easier for me than for anyone else. But we ignore it at the peril of our own souls and our own integrity. Now that Israel is independent, we must consider aliyah as an opportunity. The future of American Jewry itself will be enhanced by such aliyah. We are, in a large measure, dependent upon Israel's independence. As seen in this perspective, the question of aliyah is not a problem but a prospect, not a perplexity but an opportunity. Let this be uppermost in our minds on this seventeenth birthday of Israel. It can be a most powerful stimulus for the good for us and our children. Indeed, the is seventeen — the number of the birthday (טוב) "numerical value of the Hebrew word for "good טובה הארץ מאוד - "of Israel this year! It was Eretz Yisrael that was described in the Torah as "good "!the Land is very very good" ,מאוד Let us never lose sight of our attachment to that Land. Let us never substitute for our real loyalty to it a mere financial commitment or political interest or sentimental association. For the land is indeed very very good. Through our loyalty to it, may it continue to be very very good for us, for our children, for all Israel, and ultimately for all mankind.

8 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 The Religious

Significance of Israel1 Rabbi Yosef Blau Mashgiach Ruchani, Yeshiva University

If we treat the phrase “reishit tzmichat geulateinu” as granting the state of Israel clear messianic implications, then celebrating “Yom Haatzmaut” as a religious holiday follows automatically. I believe that we should celebrate the birth of Israel without introducing any messianic motif.2 This emerges from an analysis of the transformational impact Israel’s existence has had on Jewish life and religious observance. In the ebb and flow of Jewish history we have experienced times of joy and moments of sorrow. In the Torah, critical events became incorporated into the Jewish calendar as holidays. Chazal added Purim and Chanukah. After the destruction of the , which was mourned through observing the pre-existing fast of Tisha B’Av, there has been a reluctance to add new commemorative days to the calendar. This has led to a lack of clarity in halakhic responses to the creating of the state of Israel and the return of the Jewish people to our homeland after almost nineteen hundred years of exile. The debate about saying full, half, or no hallel, caused us to lose focus on the enormous significance of what has transpired. Sixty-two years later, Israel has become the largest Jewish community in the world and its Jewish population is approaching being a majority of world Jewry. It has become clarified that the emergence of the state is a transforming event. The trajectory of Jewish history has radically shifted. Serious challenges remain, and at times, frustrations with mistakes by a particular government can lead to losing sight of the fundamental change. Grandiose expectations of immediate redemption have led some to become disillusioned. The Zionist vision, when translated to a reality, failed to resolve the Jewish problem. The State of Israel has not proven to be a panacea. We need to remind ourselves that the generation of Jews freed from Egypt did not merit entering the land of Israel because of their inadequacies. Ezra and Nehemiah were unable to convince the overwhelming majority of the Jews in Babylonia to return to the land of Israel. The greatest believers in the State did not even dream that more than a million Jews from the former Soviet Union would become Israeli citizens. Few knew that there were Jews in Ethiopia.

1 This paper is a revision of an article that I wrote in Jewish Action on the sixtieth anniversary of the establishment of the state of Israel. 2The messianic and non-messianic approaches to are associated with the thought of Rav Kook and Rav Soloveitchik respectively.

9 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 The ingathering of the exiles may be incomplete but that primarily reflects the reluctance of American Jewry to make aliya. The Diaspora still exists but it is increasingly dependent on Israel for sustenance. Only in the Unites States is there a comparable number of Jews. However, if we trace the trajectory, the number of American Jews has barely increased in sixty years while the Jewish population in Israel has gone from six hundred and fifty thousand to more than six million. The number of Jews learning Torah full time in Israel dwarfs the numbers in Europe before the Second World War. Without the support of secular governments this community could not survive economically. The period of Torah study for American yeshiva students, girls as well as boys, includes at least a year in Israel. In countries with a small Jewish population the and teachers are often shlichim from Israel. Orthodox opposition to Israel is no longer significant. With the exception of the minuscule , it has been reduced to opposing symbols of the State but supporting it as a reality. Ideological anti-Zionism which was dominant among Reform Jewry, is now a fringe phenomenon. The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, which represents a broad spectrum of organizations, stands firmly in supporting Israel and combating all threats to its security. Even with the wide diversity of American Jewry, the primary Jewish issue for American Jews is where the candidates stand on Israel and its security needs. When all the major candidates express support for Israel the Jewish community searches for any sign that the support is not absolute. If anything, the organized Jewish community is to the right of the Israeli government. The Birthright program, which offers eight days in Israel to college students, is proving to be a most successful approach for connecting unaffiliated Jews to their Jewish identity. Planned follow-up programs will involve spending significantly more time in Israel. Israel is an assumed component of a Jewish identity. Speculation about alternative realities is rarely productive. However, we should remember the precarious state of Jewish life after the Holocaust. Many stories have appeared about prominent Americans, who are actually Jewish, but whose parents decided after the Second World War that that they should abandon their identity. They thought that this would protect their children and give them a better chance of having a good life. Pride in being Jewish began to reappear in 1948 when Israel was established. The wondrous victory of the Six Day War, with the return to Jewish control of the , had enormous impact on Jewish life throughout the world. Those of us who recall the fear of catastrophe felt prior to the war retain the sense of awe at the miraculous reversal. We experienced Hashem’s salvation in the proverbial blinking of an eye. Over forty years later the picture is no longer clear. It has become necessary to regain perspective on what has been achieved. The up and down experiences of Jewish history, with the black cloud of the Holocaust imbedded in our collective memory, has made the Jewish people nervous. Lacking prophets to assure us,

10 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 we worry about the fragility of the Jewish state. Concerns lead to vigilance but fears may lead to losing sight of how much has been accomplished. Israel is a viable state capable of defending itself from its many enemies. Without a true peace it has grown exponentially with a flourishing economy. While the internal conflicts within Jewry have not disappeared, it is far better to debate while having a Jewish country how to best define the nature of being a Jew, rather than whether it would be preferable not to be Jewish at all. For religious Jews, the new reality creates great opportunities as well as challenges. The existence and financial support of the state has helped enable observance to flourish. This has often come with greater hostility from segments of the secular community. This is not a healthy situation for the Jewish people however one assigns blame for the dispute. We did not settle in Israel in sufficient numbers to play a major role in the founding of the state. The religious parties have, at best, been junior partners in coalition governments. It is not clear whether legislation is the effective way to preserve the Jewish character of the state. A minority attempting to limit the behavior of the majority creates resentment. Orthodox Jewry in Israel is split into many factions. Many elements oppose army service. The question whether our focus should be in assuring that society maintains a basic level of public observance or whether we should work to protect the full rights of observant Jews has yet to be answered. What level of are we willing to sacrifice in order that the entire Israeli army keeps kosher? Our rabbinical leaders have yet to demonstrate that a modern state can function while observing . Great progress has been made in dealing with modern technology and medicine. In other areas less has been accomplished. Different proposals have been made for balancing public observance of Judaism with maintaining individual choice. No consensus yet exists for the appropriate parameters but efforts continue. Our present inability to maximize the opportunity for a deeper Jewish identity for all Jews does not negate the religious value of having our own state. Much has been written about governmental mistakes and wrong policies. Let us not forget the lessons of Jewish history that great moments were invariably followed by disappointments. As a people, the creation of the state of Israel has redefined the contours of our history. As religious Jews, observant life has been expanded and Torah learning has exploded. The secular, traditional and observant, whether Sefaradi or Ashkenazi, Chassidim or Misnagdim, religious Zionist or Haredi, all have a joint responsibility to maintain a united people. Without a state perhaps each group could function in isolation assuming that the Arab government would leave the Jewish community alone. It is absurd to prefer that option because difficult choices have to be made. After sixty-two years we should bless Hashem for giving us the state of Israel with all the complications that come with being responsible for our own destiny.

11 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 Maintaining a Connection to the Land of Israel from the Diaspora Rabbi Joshua Flug Director of Torah Research, Yeshiva University’s Center for the Jewish Future

As we celebrate Yom Ha'atzmaut each year, many people in the Diaspora reflect on their connection to the Land of Israel. For those who are planning aliyah, the connection is tangible. For those who don't see aliyah as an option in the near future, there are other means of connecting to the Land of Israel for the Diaspora. In this article, we will discuss some of the activities people from the Diaspora perform in order to maintain a connection to the Land of Israel and frame them in a Torah context. Visiting Israel One of the ways people from the Diaspora maintain their connection is by visiting the Land of Israel. Is there a Torah value to visiting the Land of Israel? The Gemara implies that there is: א"ר ירמיה בר אבא א"ר יוחנן כל Said R. Jeremiah b. Abba in the name of R. Johanan, that whoever המהלך ארבע אמות בארץ ישראל walks four cubits in the Land of Israel is assured of a place in the מובטח לו שהוא בן העולם הבא. .world to come כתובות קיא. (Ketubot 111a (Soncino Translation

The rabbis considered walking in the Land of Israel valuable enough to merit a portion in the world to come. There is a dispute among the commentators as to why it is considered valuable. R. Yitzchak ben Sheshet ( Rivash, 1326-1408) states that walking in Israel is a fulfillment of the mitzvah of settling the Land of Israel: ואחרי שלדבר מצוה מותר אפי' Since it is permissible [to embark on a journey] for mitzvah בע"ש אין ספק שהעליה לארץ purposes, even if one leaves on Friday, there is no doubt that ישראל מצוה היא ... וכן אמרו שם travelling to the Land of Israel is considered a mitzvah … They כל המהלך ד' אמות בארץ ישראל also stated that anyone who walks four cubits in the Land of Israel מובטח לו שהוא בן העה"ב ...וכן is assured a place in the world to come … One should not say that אין לומר שאין העליה מצוה כי אם one does not fulfill a mitzvah by travelling [there], only by settling. הישיבה. Teshuvot HaRivash no. 101 שו"ת הריב"ש ס' קא

12 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770

R. Yosef Trani (Maharit, 1568-1639) does not consider walking in the Land of Israel a mitzvah. Rather, he considers it a merit:3 ומשמע לי שטעמו של הרא"ש ,It seems to me that the reason of Rabbeinu Asher in this responsa בתשובה זו שהשוה נדר זה כשאר where he equates this vow [to travel to the Land of Israel] to all נדרי הרשות היינו משום דנדר זה other types of non-mitzvah vows, is that a vow to travel [to the שנדר לעלות אין בו מצוה שאין עיקר Land of Israel] does not constitute a mitzvah because the primary המצוה בעליה אלא בישיבה והדיר' mitzvah is not travelling there, but settling there, as stated by שמה כמו שהביא הרמב"ן ז"ל אבל מי Ramban. However, regarding one who travels there to visit with שעולה לראותה ע"ד לחזור לא מצינו בזה מצוה מפורסמת. ואפי' תימא intent to return, we do not find a prominent mitzvah. Even if one שזכות הוא לו ממה שאמרו כל המהלך were to say that there is a merit, from what they said that anyone ד' אמות בא"י מובטח לו שהוא בן who walks four cubits in the Land of Israel is assured a place in העולם הבא דכתי' ורוח להולכים בה the world to come as it states 'and spirit to those who walk within מ"מ מצות עשה ליכא. .it', nevertheless, there is no mitzvah שו"ת מהרי"ט חלק ב יו"ד ס' כח Teshuvot Maharit, Vol. II, Yoreh De'ah no. 28

The dispute between Rivash and Maharit is cited by R. (c. 1633-1683), Magen Avraham 248:15, in the context of certain travel arrangements that are only permissible when one is travelling to fulfill a mitzvah. According to Rivash, these travel arrangements are permissible for someone who is travelling to visit the Land of Israel. According to Maharit, visiting the Land of Israel without intent to remain there does not constitute a mitzvah and therefore, these types of arrangements are prohibited. Purchasing Land in Israel Some people maintain their connection to the Land of Israel by owning property in the Land of Israel. The Gemara implies that purchasing property in the Land of Israel is considered a mitzvah: והקונה שדה בסוריא כקונה Our authority further says that] ‘a field bought in Syria is like one] בפרוארי ירושלי' למאי bought on the outskirts of ’. What rule of conduct can be הילכתא אמר רב ששת לומר based on this? — R. Shesheth Says: It means that a contract for selling שכותבין עליו אונו ואפילו ?it [to a Jew] can be drawn up even on Sabbath. What? On Sabbath בשבת בשבת ס"ד כדאמר רבא ,You know the dictum of Raba, ‘He tells a non-Jew to do it.’ So here — אומר לעובד כוכבים ועושה he tells a non-Jew to draw up the contract. And although there is a ה"נ אומר לעובד כוכבים ועושה ואע"ג דאמירה לעובד Rabbinical prohibition against telling a non-Jew to do things on כוכבים שבות משום ישוב א"י Sabbath [which we may not do ourselves], where it was a question of לא גזור רבנן. furthering the [Jewish] settlement of Eretz Israel the Rabbis did not גיטין ח: .apply the prohibition Gittin 8b (Soncino Translation)

3 Maharit also suggests that perhaps there is no independent merit to visiting the Land of Israel. The Gemara's statement regarding someone who walks four cubits in the Land of Israel may only be referring to one who visits during his lifetime and then is buried in the Land of Israel.

13 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 It is permissible to ask a non-Jew to sign the closing documents on in order to purchase property in the Land of Israel.4 The Gemara does not stipulate that one must live on that property in order to fulfill the mitzvah. If one can fulfill a mitzvah by purchasing property in the Land of Israel, this implies that there is a mitzvah to acquire the land, independent of the mitzvah of living there. This, in fact, is the opinion of Ramban (1194-1270):5 שנצטוינו בכיבושה ובישיבתה. We are commanded in its conquest and its settlement. From וממאמרם מלחמת יהושע לכבש תבין the rabbis statement that the war of Joshua to conquer [was כי המצוה הזו היא בכבוש ... הרי considered an obligatory mitzvah], you will understand that נצטוינו בכיבוש בכל הדורות. ואומר the mitzvah is conquest … We are commanded in the mitzvah אני כי המצוה שהחכמים מפליגין בה of conquest in all generations. I say that the mitzvah that the והיא דירת ארץ ישראל עד שאמרו rabbis praise is living in the Land of Israel to the extent that שכל היוצא ממנה ודר בחוצה לארץ יהא בעיניך כעובד עבודה זרה ... הכל they said that anyone who leaves [the land] and lives in the הוא ממצות עשה הזה שנצטוינו לרשת Diaspora should be viewed as one who worships idols … This הארץ ולשבת בה. is all part of the positive commandment that we were השגות הרמב"ן לספר המצוות מ"ע .commanded to acquire the land and settle it ד' Hasagot HaRamban to Sefer HaMitzvot, Aseh no. 4

R. Shlomo ben Shimon (Rashbash, 1400-1467) is of the opinion that acquiring property in the Land of Israel is not a mitzvah. Rather, it is necessary step for the mitzvah of living in the Land of Israel. The leniency to allow a non-Jew to sign the closing documents on Shabbat is a leniency to allow for a preparatory stage necessary to live in the Land of Israel: ובפ"ק דגיטין ובפרק מרובה אמרינן הלוקח In the first chapter of Gittin and in Perek Merubah [the בית בא"י כותבין עליו אונו אפילו בשבת. seventh chapter of Baba Kamma] it is stated that one ופירוש אונו שטרו. ואמרינן התם דאע"ג who acquires a house in the Land of Israel can draft the דאמירה לגוי שבות, משום ישוב א"י לא גזרו contract on Shabbat etc. The primary purpose is settling רבנן ... והעיקר היא הישיבה שהיא הדירה, the land, which means that one lives there. Travelling to ועליה היא סיבת השגת הישיבה והישוב הוא the land is the means by which one can settle and settling צורך קיום הישיבה ... וכן הדבר בעלייה is a means of living there … One who is outside of the ובישוב, כי המצוה עצמה היא הישיבה שהיא הדירה, וסבה הקודמת היא העליה, שמי Land of Israel, if he does not first travel to the Land of שהוא חוץ לא"י אם לא תקדם לו העליה לא Israel, he can't enter the land. Settling it includes יכנס לארץ, והישוב הוא כמו נטיעת גנות activities] such as planting fields and orchards and] ופרדסים וקניית בתים, שכל זמן שימצא מזון acquiring homes, because wherever one finds food and

4 According to Tosafot, Gittin 8b s.v. Af Al Gav, and Rambam, Hilchot Shabbat 6:11, this is the only mitzvah that warrants asking a non-Jew to violate a biblical prohibition in order to fulfill the mitzvah. 5 R. Shlomo Yosef Zevin, L'Ohr HaHalacha pg. 269, notes that the Yerushalmi, Moed Katan 2:4, proves the permissibility of asking a non-Jew to sign the closing documents on Shabbat from the fact that Yericho was conquered by Yehoshua on Shabbat. R. Zevin sees this as a support to Ramban's position that there is an independent mitzvah of conquest of the Land of Israel. See also, R. Avraham Pietrokovski (early 20th century), Piskei Teshuva 1:248, who writes that acquiring land is a fulfillment of the mitzvah of conquest because we follow the opinion that a "private conquest" of the Land of Israel is also considered a conquest. As such, there is no mitzvah to purchase property from another Jew.

14 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 ומדור תמצא הישיבה, ואפשר שיהיה לאדם shelter, one finds proper settlement. It is possible for שם גנות ופרדסים ובתים, והם סיבת הישוב, someone to have fields, orchards and homes that allow והוא אינו דר שם, על כן הישוב אינו ,him to settle there, but he doesn't live there. Therefore הישיבה, וכן יראה מדרך הענין שאין ישיבה settlement is not included in living there … For this וישוב בענין אחד. על כן אני אומר שהישוב reason, I say that settling and travelling to the Land of והעליה שתיהן סבות המצוה אלא שהאחת Israel are two prerequisites to the mitzvah, but the מקדמת והאחרת מגעת ואין המצוה אלא הישיבה. .mitzvah itself is living there שו"ת רשב"ש ס' א Teshuvot Rashbash no. 1

While Rashbash does not consider purchasing property in the Land of Israel a mitzvah, R. Avraham Borenstein (1838-1910), Avnei Nezer, Yoreh De'ah no. 454, seems to accept the opinion of Ramban and still considers purchasing land in Israel while living in the Diaspora a "great mitzvah" that is "partially comparable to living in the Land of Israel."6 Providing Financial Support to Causes in the Land of Israel One can maintain his connection to the Land of Israel by providing financial support to its inhabitants. The Midrash addresses how to prioritize one's charitable distributions and states: באחת שעריך. יושבי עריך קודמים ליושבי Within your gates. The people of your city precede the עיר אחרת: בארצך: יושבי הארץ קודמין people of another city. In your land. The people of the ליושבי ח"ל. .Land [of Israel] precede the people of the Diaspora ספרי פרשת ראה פיסקא סב Sifri, Re'eh no. 62

The Midrash states that the people of one's own city take precedence over the people of another city and that the people of the Land of Israel take precedence over people in the Diaspora. The Midrash does not address whether the people of one's own city take precedence over the people of the Land of Israel. R. Yoel Sirkes (1561-1640), Bach, Yoreh De'ah no. 151, rules that the people of one's own city take precedence. R. Yisrael of Shklov (d. 1839) disagrees. In disputing Bach, he states the following: דבנתינתו ליושבי א"י מקיים ב' By giving to the people of the Land of Israel, one fulfills two מצות להחיות עניים ולקיים ישיבת mitzvot: supporting the poor and maintaining the settlement in א"י. .the Land of Israel פאת השלחן, הל' ארץ ישראל, Pe'at HaShulchan, Hilchot Eretz Yisrael, Beit Yisrael 2:29 בית ישראל ב:כט

R. Yisrael of Shklov is of the opinion that one can fulfill the mitzvah of settling the Land of Israel by supporting its poor inhabitants. R. Chaim Y.D. Azulai (Chida, 1724-1807) provides a compromise between the opinion of Bach and the opinion of R. Yisrael of Shklov:

6 See Tzitz Eliezer 6:32.

15 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 ואפשר דגם הרב ב"ח לא אמרה אלא It is possible that Bach did not say [that one should give to the במתנדב לעניי א"י דוקא אמנם כשבא [people of one's own city before the people of the Land of Israel שליח מא"י דעיקר שליחותו הוא except when one gives to the poor people living in the Land of משום ישוב א"י דאי לאו סיוע בני Israel. However, if a representative comes from the Land of הגולה נמוגים ארץ וכל יושביה מפני Israel whose purpose is to promote the settlement of the Land of גוים מפני לסטים בעלילותם Israel, and if not for the support of those in the Diaspora, the ובתועבותם ולא יזכר שם ישראל עוד land and its people would be downtrodden by the other nations בא"י נראה דבזה גם הרב ב"ח ודעמיה מודים דקדמי לעניי העיר דכמה and by thieves with their persecutions and despicable acts, and החמירו רבותינו זכרונם לברכה משום the Jews would have no presence in the Land of Israel, it would ישוב א"י עד שהתירו לכתוב בשבת seem that even Bach would agree that they precede the poor of בערכאות שלהם ולקנות בית בא"י מן one's own city. The rabbis were so concerned about settling the העכו"ם בשבת וחותם ומעלה Land of Israel that they allowed purchasing a home in the Land בערכאות. .of Israel from a non-Jew on Shabbat etc פני דוד פרשת ראה ס' טו P'nei David, Parshat Re'eh no. 15

Chida suggests that Bach agrees that a person (or organization) representing the settlement of the Land of Israel as a whole takes precedence over the poor of one's own city. Chida seems to be focused on maintaining a Jewish presence in the Land of Israel. In this regard, his approach differs slightly from R. Yisrael's. According to R. Yisrael, supporting the poor in the Land of Israel is a fulfillment of the mitzvah of settling the Land of Israel because it allows those poor individuals to live in the Land of Israel. According to Chida, there is an additional fulfillment to support the settlement of the Land of Israel as a whole. This fulfillment appears to be based on Ramban's understanding of the mitzvah of conquering the Land of Israel. In order for the Jewish People to control the Land of Israel, there must be a Jewish presence. By allowing those who maintain the Jewish presence to remain in the Land of Israel, one is contributing to the conquest of the Land of Israel. Based on Chida's comments, one can add that there are other means of financially supporting the settlement of the Land of Israel including the purchase of Israeli products and investment in Israeli companies. Performance of Mitzvot in the Diaspora There is a Midrash that provides a means of connecting to the Land of Israel on a daily basis: דבר אחר ואבדתם מהרה, ושמתם את Another interpretation 'you will be quickly lost' 'you shall place דברי אלה וגו', אף על פי שאני מגלה these words etc.,' even though I exile you from the Land [of אתכם מן הארץ לחוצה לארץ היו Israel] to the Diaspora, you should be decorated with mitzvot מצויינים במצות שכשתחזרו לא יהו so that when you return, they should not be new to you. This is עליכם חדשים, משל למלך בשר ודם comparable to a human king that was angry at his wife and שכעס על אשתו וטרפה בבית אביה sent her to her father's house. He said to her 'Continue to אמר לה הוי מקושטת בתכשיטיך שכשתחזרי לא יהו עליך חדשים כך adorn jewelry so that when you return, they should not seem אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל בני היו new to you.' Similarly, G-d said to the Jewish People, 'My מצויינים במצות שכשתחזרו לא יהו ,children, be decorated with mitzvot so that when you return עליכם חדשים. '.they should not be new to you ספרי פרשת עקב פיסקא ז Silfri, Ekev no. 7

16 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770

According to the Midrash, there are certain mitzvot that are observed in the Diaspora so that the people of the Diaspora will be familiar with these mitzvot upon returning to the Land of Israel. Rashi (1040-1105) seems to understand that the Midrash refers to all mitzvot:7 אף לאחר שתגלו היו מצויינים Even after you are exiled, you should be decorated in mitzvot, place במצות, הניחו תפילין, עשו tefillin, make mezuzot in order that they should not be new to you מזוזות כדי שלא יהיו לכם .when you return חדשים כשתחזרו. Rashi, Devarim 11:18 רש"י דברים יא:יח

Ramban also follows Rashi's approach and provides an additional explanation: והנה הכתוב שאמר ואבדתם מהרה The verse that states ''you will be quickly lost' 'you shall place these ושמתם את דברי אלה וגו', אינו words etc.,' only requires one in the Diaspora to perform mitzvot מחייב בגלות אלא בחובת הגוף that relate to the body [and not the land] such as tefillin and כתפילין ומזוזות, ופירשו בהן כדי mezuzot. The rabbis explained that the obligation is so that they שלא יהו חדשים עלינו כשנחזור don't seem new to us when we return to the land because the לארץ, כי עיקר כל המצות ליושבים mitzvot are primarily for those who are living in the land of G-d. בארץ ה'. ולפיכך אמרו בספרי וירשתם אותה וישבתם בה Therefore, they stated in the Sifri 'You shall inherit it and settle in ושמרתם לעשות ישיבת ארץ it, And you shall observe [the mitzvot] settling the Land of Israel ישראל שקולה כנגד כל המצות '.has the same weight as all of the other mitzvot combined שבתורה. Ramban, Vayikra 18:25 רמב"ן ויקרא יח:כה

If one takes Ramban's comments at face value, one would come to the conclusion that the mitzvot are meant to be observed in the Land of Israel and the only reason why mitzvot are observed outside of the Land of Israel is so that we are able to properly perform the mitzvot upon returning to the Land of Israel. However, this cannot be true for a number of reasons. First, the agricultural laws that apply in the Land of Israel are observed to some extent outside of the Land of Israel in order to properly perform these mitzvot upon returning to the Land of Israel. When these laws are applied in the Diaspora there are many leniencies. Yet we find no halachic distinctions between observance of non-agricultural mitzvot in the Land of Israel and observance of these mitzvot in the Diaspora. Second, if observance of mitzvot in the Diaspora was merely a training exercise, one who performed mitzvot in the Diaspora would be required to repeat those mitzvot upon entering the Land of Israel (if the timeframe of the original mitzvah has not passed). Yet, we don't find such a requirement. Third, the Gemara, Avodah Zarah 13a,

7 Divrei Eliyahu, Parshat Ekev quotes the Vilna Gaon (1720-1797) that there is a mistake in our version of Rashi. that one ",הפרישו תרומה עשרו מעשרו" This was meant to say ".ה"ת ע"מ" Originally, Rashi wrote an abbreviation should observe the mitzvot of terumot and ma'asrot while in the Diaspora in order to be accustomed to observing these mitzvot upon returning to the Land of Israel. However, the copiers thought that since Rashi's comments The ".הניחו תפילין עשו מזוזות" appear in a section dealing with tefillin and mezuzah, the abbreviation must stand for Vilna Gaon contends that it is logical to assume that Rashi meant to refer to terumot and ma'asrot because there is no inherent requirement to observe agricultural laws in the Diaspora and there is an inherent requirement to observe tefillin and mezuzah in the Diaspora.

17 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 states that it is permissible to leave the Land of Israel in order to perform certain mitzvot. If it were true that observance of mitzvot outside of the Land of Israel is only for preparation purposes, what value is there to any mitzvah in the Diaspora that would justify leaving the Land of Israel?8 One must conclude that even Ramban agrees that the mitzvot performed in the Diaspora are not merely training exercises9. Ramban's opinion is understood by R. Naftali Z.Y. Berlin (Netziv, 1816-1893) as follows: אלא בא המקרא בזה ללמדנו עיקר גדול The verse teaches us an important principle that Ramban דכבר כתב הרמב"ן בפרשת תולדות wrote about in Parshat Toldot and other places that the ובכמה מקומות שהתורה ומצוותיה אע"ג Torah and its mitzvot, even though the non-agricultural דמצוות שאין תלויות בארץ נוהגות אפילו ,mitzvot are observed in the Disapora, they are nevertheless בחוץ לארץ מ"מ מיוחדות המה יותר more specific to the Land of Israel. For this reason, mitzvot בארץ ישראל ועל כן נקראות משפט אלקי are called 'the laws of the G-d of the Land.' It is understood הארץ והדבר מובן שלפי זה גם יעודיה that for this reason, even though its purposes also apply in אע"ג שישנם בחו"ל מ"מ יותר משמשים ומגיעים בארץ ישראל. the Diaspora, they are nevertheless, more relevant to the העמק דבר שמות כ:יב Land of Israel Ha'Amek Davar 20:12

The mitzvot have inherent significance whether they are observed in the Diaspora or in the Land of Israel. The difference between mitzvot observed in the Land of Israel and mitzvot observed in the Diaspora is that mitzvot observed in the Land of Israel have greater significance. Based on Netziv's explanation, one must then question the reference by the Midrash, Rashi and Ramban to mitzvot in the Diaspora as preparation. If the mitzvot have inherent value in the Diaspora, why is their observance considered preparation for the observance of mitzvot in the Land of Israel? Perhaps the answer lies in the parable provided by the Midrash. The Midrash compares observance of mitzvot in the Disapora to adorning jewelry. Jewelry is not considered a necessity. The purpose of jewelry is to enhance one's appearance. Similarly, mitzvot can be observed in an

8 Rambam, Hilchot Melachim 5:9, writes that there are four situations that allow one to leave the Land of Israel: to learn Torah, to find a spouse, to escape persecution, or to earn a livelihood. Of the four, learning Torah and finding a spouse are the only two that constitute mitzvot. It is possible that according to Rambam, the permissibility of leaving the Land of Israel is not based on the ability to perform the mitzvah in a more enhanced manner in the Diaspora, but rather to enable one to perform the mitzvah in a more enhanced manner upon returning to the Land of Israel. Finding a spouse allows one to perform the mitzvah of p'ru ur'vu, procreating. Torah learning provides one with the knowledge to perform all other mitzvot. Tosafot, Avodah Zarah 13a, s.v. Lilmod, write that the permissibility to leave the Land of Israel for these mitzvot is a function of the fact that finding a spouse and learning Torah are considered very important mitzvot. The comment of Tosfaot implies that the value of fulfilling the mitzvah in the Diaspora is greater than the value of remaining in the Land of Israel. R. Achai Gaon, She'iltot no. 103, rules that one may leave the Land of Israel to perform any mitzvah. 9 See Chamesh Derashot pp. 91-92, where R. Yosef D. Soloveitchikstates that there are two separate covenants relating to the observance of mitzvot. The first is the covenant of Avraham that only requires mitzvot to be observed in the Land of Israel. The second is the covenant of Sinai that applies in all places and is not limited to the Land of Israel.

18 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 ordinary manner or in an enhanced manner. When one is in the Land of Israel, the sanctity of the Land allows and demands that one observe the mitzvot in an enhanced manner. Through the sanctity of the land, there is an ability to achieve greater spiritual heights through the observance of mitzvot. The sanctity of the land also demands a more meticulous observance of mitzvot.10 The message of the Midrash is that when one is in the Diaspora, one should try to observe mitzvot in that same enhanced manner so that when one returns to the Land of Israel, one is accustomed to the observance of mitzvot in an enhanced manner. Our efforts to fulfill mitzvot in an enhanced manner can be categorized as a longing to fulfill mitzvot in the Land of Israel. Summary We presented various means of maintaining a connection to the Land of Israel while living in the Diaspora. Most of these means are a form of the mitzvah of settling the Land of Israel or living in it. We also noted that one can maintain the connection by striving to perform mitzvot in an enhanced manner reflective of the observance of mitzvot in the Land of Israel.

10 Ramban's comments begin by addressing the question of why the Torah (Vayikra 18:25) refers to the violation of incest as a defilement of the Land of Israel. Ramban explains that the sanctity of the Land of the Israel allows for even less tolerance of violations of incest and idol worship than the Diaspora does.

19 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 Establishing Yom Haatzamut as a Yom Tov Rabbi Eli Ozarowski Faculty, Michlelet Mevaseret Yerushalayim and Midreshet Yeud, Jerusalem

Introduction In the religious Zionist public, Yom Haatzmaut has emerged in the last fifty years as one of the most important days on the Jewish calendar. On this day, individuals can express their gratitude to Hashem for the modern miracle known as the State of Israel in a religious framework. In this essay, we will attempt to understand the halachic and hashkafic basis for instituting this new “Yom Tov,” some of the problems raised against it, and responses to those problems.11 Unlike some other halachic controversies, there is a strong correlation between the hashkafic perspective on the State of Israel and the halachic position of whether to celebrate this day in any form. Someone who argues that the establishment of the State was a negative occurrence will most likely contend that Yom Haatzamut should not be celebrated; while someone who believes that this was a positive development will be more inclined to argue in support for the significance of such a day. It is therefore important to investigate the different hashkafic positions concerning the State of Israel before discussing the halachic opinions concerning establishing a Yom Tov on the fifth of Iyar. Hashkafic Responses to the State of Israel Since its inception, there have been a number of varied responses concerning the proper reaction to the founding of the State of Israel. Atchalta D’Geulah (beginning of the redemption process) According to R.Tzvi Yehuda Kook12 and many others in the Religious Zionist camp, the founding of the State is to be considered the beginning of the final redemption process.13 They

11 This question is related, but distinct, from the question of whether to recite Hallel on Yom Haatzmaut. For summaries in English concerning Hallel, see R.Josh Flug, “Should you make a berachah on Hallel on Yom Haatzmaut?,” Yom Haatzamut to go 5768; R. Ralph Pelcovitz and R. Rybak, “Reciting Hallel on Yom Haatzmaut,” Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, Spring 1984, 5-24; and R.Chaim Jachter, “Hallel on Yom Haatzmaut,” found at www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/735867. 12 R.Tzvi Yehuda Kook, “B’Netivot Yisrael,” p.182. 13 See Aharon Ahrend, "Pirkei Mechkar L'Yom Haatzmaut," p.14; see also R.Menachem Kasher, "HaTekufah HaGedolah," p.374 (cited in footnote #3 of Ahrend's book and in Teshuvot Yabia Omer 6:41:5) where he documents a famous proclamation of many rabanim from all segments of orthodoxy who declared that "we should

20 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 argue forcefully that the large segments of the Jewish people returning to our homeland, the establishment a Jewish government, and the miraculous resurgence of the economy after two thousand years of desolation all point towards this conclusion. This conclusion may be supported by R’Aba's statement in the Gemara (Sanhedrin 98a) “Ein lecha meg’uleh mizu,” there is no greater indication of the end of days than that which the prophet Yechezkel (Yechezkel 36:8) prophesizes, “now mountains of Israel, your branches shall come forth and your fruit will be offered to my people Israel.”14 Ramban (Shir HaShirim 8:12) also comments that the beginning of the future redemption will take place based on the permission of the governments (of the world) and this will be a partial kibutz galuyot.15 This phenomenon is exactly what has been occurring over the past fifty years. This ideology certainly would yield the conclusion that we must recognize the founding of the State as a nes nigleh, an open miracle, requiring some sort of positive response on our part, and this is in fact what most of the authorities that subscribe to this approach believe. Kol Dodi Dofek (my beloved is knocking) R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik, in his seminal work Kol Dodi Dofek, also viewed the establishment of the State of Israel in a positive light, but did not attach as much inherent significance to this event. In the mind of R.Soloveitchik, Hashem is knocking on our door in different ways, including through the military arena, political arena, and the historical arena, all of which clearly indicate the Divine imprint on events leading to the founding of the State. But the significance of a knock, explains R.Soloveitchik, is that He is waiting for us to answer. If we respond properly through embracing the gift we have been given and building on our connection to Eretz Yisrael, then this certainly can be the first step to redemption. However, if we do not respond properly, we might miss the opportunity. Maaseh Satan (the work of the Satan) According to the former , R. Yoel Teitelbaum,16 the establishment of the State is all a test from Hashem to see if we remain faithful to him. Since He put us in exile, only He can return us to Israel as a nation, and we cannot do so on our own prior to this. Therefore, since Hashem has not yet brought the Mashiach Himself, we must reject what we are being offered here, since its basis is essentially human intervention in the Divine plan.17 Therefore, this event must be viewed in an extremely negative light, and is certainly not one to celebrate. This approach has been adopted by many in the radical charedi world who totally reject the existence of the State of Israel today.

thank Hashem… to be able to see the first sparks of the Atchalta D'Geulah with the establishment of the State of Israel”; see also R.'s comments discussed below concerning this issue. 14 This source has been noted by many, including R.Tzvi Yehuda Kook (ad loc.). 15 For additional sources which treat Kibutz Galuyot and the blooming of the land as the beginning of the redemption, see Tzitz Eliezer (7:48), Yeshuot Malko (YD 2:66), & others cited by R.Yaakov Moshe Bergman, HaMedinah HaYehudit, pp.104-111. 16 R.Yoel Teitelbaum, Hakdamah L’Sefer Al HaGeulah V’al HaTemurah and VaYoel Moshe p.178 17 See below for more concerning the Satmar Rebbe’s Talmudic basis for his position. See also R.Kenneth Brander, “The Mitzvah of Yishuv Eretz Yisrael.” Yom Haatzmaut to go 5768 for more on this issue.

21 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 Shev V’al Taaseh (no response) There are many others, mainly in the more mainstream charedi world today, that simply ignore the day of Yom Haatzmaut as having any significance whatsoever: it is a regular day, just like any other. In contrast to the religious Zionist world as well as the Satmar position, both of whom do view this event as a critical one, this position does not respond at all to the establishment of the State, neither positively or negatively. This may stem from tensions concerning whether halachah allows us to celebrate such a day or initiate new religious days on the Jewish calendar, the lack of religious direction in the government of Israel, or a variety of other reasons. Although there certainly may be legitimacy to these concerns, the danger in this approach is that our uncertainty as to how to respond or our intentional lack of response may begin to obscure our view of Hashem’s guiding hand through history, and we may begin to lose sight of the amazing significance and consequences of having our own State. What Is So Special About Yom Haatzmaut? Most individuals in the religious Zionist world accept either position one or position two which requires acknowledgment on our part. However, to contemplate instituting a Yom Tov on Independence Day, the fifth of Iyar, we must analyze what exactly occurred on this day that warrants potentially giving it a special status. What is so great about David Ben Gurion declaring independence, when the very next day the Arab countries declared war? How were the Jews saved from their enemies on this day? There are a number of answers given to this question: Freedom for Jews to live in Israel R. Meshulam Roth argues (Teshuvot Kol Mevaser 1:21) that Yom Haatzmaut constitutes a shift from avdut l’cherut, servitude to freedom, similar to Pesach.18 Until this point, for almost two thousand years, the Jews had nowhere they could truly call home, and relied on the good will of the local rulers to be allowed to live and conduct business. They did prosper in many countries, only to be thrown out and forced to wander. This reached a climax during the Holocaust when Jews that escaped often had nowhere to go. Some arrived at the shores of other countries, including Palestine, begging to be saved, and many were turned away or sent back to Europe to their deaths at the hands of the Nazis. Suddenly, now, after Israel declared independence, all Jews had a country they could call home, and no Jew would be turned away. This, says R. Roth, is an extremely significant development, and should be recognized as no less than a miracle from Hashem. R.Yitzchak Nissim19 adds that although there was much pain and distress immediately after declaring statehood, over the years the pain will pass and be forgotten, while the very fact that statehood was declared and all the positive consequences that resulted from it will be foremost in people’s minds. This indeed appears to be what has happened. Being saved from enemies R. Roth continues that Yom Haatzmaut also constitutes a yeshuah, salvation, from “mitah l’chaim,” from death to life, similar to Purim, since many were saved from death. However, he

18 See below for elaboration on the themes of Avdut L’cherut and Mitah L’chaim and for their Talmudic basis. 19 R.Yitzchak Nissim, “Arichat Nisuin V’Tisporet b’Yom Haatzmaut,” Hilchot Yom Haatzmaut V’Yom Yerushalayim, p.338.

22 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 doesn’t explain exactly how. Perhaps we can explain that many who came to Israel as a result of its independence might otherwise have been killed in other hostile countries around the world.20 Additionally, even those in Israel now were given the right to defend themselves, whereas before the struggle for independence they often would be subject to the whims of the Arabs, and even those that did defend themselves risked being deported by the British. Alternatively, we can explain that Yom Haatzmaut also celebrates being saved from our enemies during the War of Independence. Although the war and the danger did extend for a few months after the fifth of Iyar, we celebrate our deliverance on the day independence was declared as an arbitrary day. This explanation would contend that it is not so important which day is celebrated, but rather the critical fact is that some day is designated to acknowledge these events.21 Explosion of Torah R. (Teshuvot Yabia Omer 6:41) argues that the tremendous increase in Torah learning is also sufficient reason to establish a Yom Tov. He describes how this dramatic development has altered Torah learning not just in Israel but across the globe. Most critical questions pertaining to Klal Yisrael, as a whole, are sent to the Gedolim in Israel and many individuals have studied in Israel before pursuing professions, which has helped to raise the level of Torah and mitzvah observance in many communities worldwide.22 Establishing a New Yom Tov Today So far, we have established that Yom Haatzamut and Israeli independence have had an enormous impact on Jews in Israel as well as around the world. But does this alone give us the right to establish a new “holiday” on the Jewish calendar? Do rabbis today halachically have the power to declare such a day as a Yom Tov? What in fact would be the halachic parameters of such a Yom Tov? To answer these questions, we must look at some of the halachic literature

20 It should be noted that the Satmar Rebbe (in context of ascribing the blame for the Holocaust to the Zionists’ ascent to Israel) argues exactly the opposite: these Jews, primarily in Arab countries, were not in danger until after Israel declared independence, and therefore it is actually the Zionists at fault for placing these Jews in danger and forcing them to flee to Israel. See Vayoel Moshe, p.123. 21 This issue also arises in the context of a “nidche,” a year when the day of Yom Haatzmaut is moved due to concerns for desecration of Shabbat. Some poskim argue that although the fifth of Iyar is the regular day of celebration, other legitimate concerns such as preventing Shabbat desecration permit us to change the date. They explain that our celebration really encompasses the entire victory of the War of Independence, and the fifth of Iyar was chosen simply because independence was declared on that day. See for example R. , “Yom Haatzmaut SheChal B’Shabbat,” Hilchot Yom Haatzmaut V’yom Yerushalayim, p.322 who suggests this at the very end of a discussion of a “nidche.” R. Yona Metzger also authored a pamphlet published by the Rabanut HaRashit for Yom Haatzamut 5764 (which was a nidche) where he also subscribes to a similar explanation. 22 For an interesting source somewhat related to this, see R.Samson Rafael Hirsch’s commentary on the Torah (Vayikra 2:10) who suggests that chametz symbolizes national independence (“Atzmaut Medinit”). He continues that we eat matzah on Pesach, our holiday of freedom, because Hashem is truly the one Who took us out of Egypt, since we never would have been capable of doing it ourselves. However, our observance of Torah and mitzvoth does allow us the ability to demonstrate our own role in “Atzmaut Medinit,” which can only take place in this way, which is why on the national korban of the Shtei HaLechem was actually chametz. In our case, it is somewhat reversed since the independence of the State paved the way for the growth of Torah in Israel.

23 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 concerning previous attempts to establish additional Yomim Tovim, whether this was accepted in practice, and whether the criteria in other cases can be applied to Yom Haatzmaut as well. Ibn Ezra Interestingly enough, one of the earliest sources related to this question is a comment by Ibn Ezra (Bamidbar 10:10) on the section of chatzotzrot, the trumpets. The Torah details the situations when there is a mitzvah to blow these trumpets: “on the days of your rejoicing and appointed holidays and on your days of Rosh Chodesh, and you shall blow the trumpets…” What does the Torah mean by “yom simchatchem,” the days of your rejoicing? Which holidays during the year does this refer to? Although the Sifrei (Piska 77) explains that this refers to Shabbat,23 Ibn Ezra interprets this to mean a time when we have been victorious over our enemies and established a day of simcha to commemorate it, similar to Purim. This day, says Ibn Ezra, is a day when we blow the chatzotzrot to express our thanks to Hashem for saving us. Thus, according to Ibn Ezra, there may be grounds for establishing a day of rejoicing when we triumph over our enemies, which could serve as an interesting precedent for Yom Haatzmaut. Although this Ibn Ezra is not quoted in most of the classic halachic sources concerning establishing a Yom Tov below,24 it is quoted by some of the contemporary authorities discussing Yom Haatzmaut, including R. Yehoshua Ehrenberg (ad loc.), R. Meshulam Roth (Teshuvat Kol Mevaser 1:21), and others. Maharam Alashker The first source to directly raise the question of establishing a Yom Tov is Teshuvot Maharam Alashkar (Siman 49) who was asked whether a community can institute a day of celebration binding on all inhabitants, including future generations and individuals that move away. Basing himself on the Gemara (Bava Basra 8b) that permits the leaders of a city to institute binding decrees on its residents, Maharam Alashkar permits them to institute the observance of such a day. Maharam Alashkar also cites another relevant passage from the Gemara (Eruvin 41a) that R.Elazar bar Tzadok did not fast on the tenth of Av, even in years when Tisha B’av was observed on that date (such as when the ninth of Av falls out on Shabbos), since according to the Mishnah (Taanit 26a), his ancestors brought the wood offering on that day in the Beit HaMikdash during the time of Ezra, so for him it was a family Yom Tov. This ruling is subsequently cited by many acharonim, including Magen Avraham (686:4), Chida (Chaim Shaal 1:6), Beer Heitev (686:5), and (686:8). Pri Chadash Pri Chadash (496:14) disputes this ruling of Maharam Alashkar. He notes that there is a dispute in the Gemara (Rosh HaShanah 18b) whether “batlah Megillat Taanit,” whether all of the days

23 This explanation is somewhat difficult, since we do not usually find Shabbat referred to as a day of Simcha in the Torah, and it is usually assumed that Shabbat does not have a mitzvah of simcha, rejoicing, like the other Yamim Tovim. Perhaps this is why Ibn Ezra interprets the pshat of the verse differently. See R.Yehoshua Ehrenberg, “Berurei Halachah B’kesher Im Chag Haatzmaut,” Hilchot Yom Haatzmaut V’Yom Yerushalayim, p.25, who elaborates on this Sifrei, and R.Shlomo Wahrman, Sefer Orot Hashabbat, Siman 18, who cites other sources that do seem to recognize a mitzvah of simcha on Shabbat, some of which even quote the Sifrei directly. 24 Perhaps the reason they do not cite this is because in most situations during exile we did not actually defeat our enemies, we simply were saved from death or destruction in specific situations.

24 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 of celebration in the times of the second Temple recorded in the Megillat Taanit have been abolished or not. R. Elazar bar Tzadok, claims Pri Chadash, must have been following the opinion that “lo batlah Megillat Taanit,” and we can continue to observe these special days as Yomim Tovim even after the Temple’s destruction. However, argues Pri Chadash, the Gemara there seems to pasken that “batlah Megilat Taanit,” and these days have indeed been abolished and cannot be celebrated anymore. If so, the passage in Eruvin cannot serve as a proof that we can institute a new Yom Tov in our times for any type of salvation.25 Chatam Sofer Teshuvot Chatam Sofer (OC 191) was also asked this question and cites both of the above opinions, ultimately preferring that of the Maharam Alashker. However, his proof for this approach differs from Maharam Alashker. He accepts the argument of Pri Chadash that the Gemara Eruvin is not a valid proof, but instead offers two additional proofs for his opinion. First, the Gemara (Arachin 10a) says that after the Jews were exiled from Israel, “huchsheru kol haAratzos lomar shirah,” literally meaning that all lands were prepared to say shirah. According to Chatam Sofer, this means that we can celebrate a miracle or salvation even from a country other than Israel.26 Second, he argues that the conclusion of “batlah Megillat Taanit” only applies to cases of Yomim Tovim relating to events in the Beit HaMikdash, but there is no problem celebrating events that do not relate to the Beit HaMikdash by establishing a Yom Tov.27 Application of the shitot to practical halachah According to Maharam Alashker and Chatam Sofer, it would seem that it is permitted to establish a new Yom Tov today, and there are records of many individuals and communities that indeed accepted days such as these upon themselves to celebrate various events in which they were saved.28 On this basis, many recent poskim, especially within the religious Zionist

25 From the actual text of Maharam Alashkar, it seems that his main proof is actually the first Gemara quoted from Bava Basra, and the second quote about R.Elazar bar Tzadok only adds that even if the heads of the community did not actually decree a Yom Tov but it was simply a minhag the community practiced, it is still binding. It is interesting that Pri Chadash only attacks the second source and completely ignores the first. Perhaps Pri Chadash felt that the first source from Bava Basra alone does not prove at all that the ability of the elders to institute community takanot extends to establishing a Yom Tov as well, and only the second source could serve as a potential proof. 26 This interpretation is not accepted by all commentaries. Turei Even (Megillah 14a), for example, explains that this refers only to the destruction of the first Temple, after which the Kedushah of the land did not remain (“kedushah rishonah lo kidshah l’atid lavo”). The Gemara’s point is then that despite the rule discussed in that sugya that we don’t recite Hallel for a miracle in chutz laaretz, that does not apply when Eretz Yisrael’s kedushah is lacking. However, after the destruction of the second Temple, when we hold that the kedushah of the land does remain (“kedushah shniyah kidshah l’shaatah v’kidshah l’atid lavo”), reciting shirah for miracles is still limited to Eretz Yisrael. Apparently Chatam Sofer interpreted this passage differently than Turei Even. See R.Yehudah Gershuni, “Al Keviat Yom Tov,” Hilchot Yom Haatzmaut V’yom Yerushalayim, p.57. 27 See also Chatam Sofer (Yoreh Deah 233, Orach Chaim 163, Orach Chaim 208) for other teshuvot related to our topic. 28 See R.Shariah Devlitzky, “Keviat Yom Hadayah L’achar Milchemet Sheshet Hayamim,” and R.Ovadya Hadaya, “Keviat Yom chag Klali,” Hilchot Yom Haatzmaut V’yom Yerushalayim pp.61-68 who mention a number of examples of this, including “Purim Frankfurt,” a Yom Tov celebrated in Frankfurt on 20 Adar 1 for miracles they experienced as reported in Sefer Yosef Ometz (1109), a community Yom Tov in Tripoli on 23 Tevet (also discussed in his Teshuvot Yaskil Avdi OC 6:44), and a Yom Tov celebrated by the Chayei Adam after his family was saved from a terrible fire (Chayei Adam 155:41).

25 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 community, sanctioned the establishing of Yom Haatzmaut as well, including R. Shlomo Goren, R. Ovadya Hadaya, R. Yehoshua Ehrenberg, R. Meshulam Roth, and many others.29,30 We should note that Chatam Sofer does limit his allowance of making a Yom Tov to a case where the Jews were literally saved “mimitah l’chaim,” based on the Gemara (Megillah 14a) which explains that this is why Purim was permitted to be established based on a kal v’chomer from Pesach: on Pesach when they were taken from avdut to cherut, Hallel is recited, so certainly when Jews are taken from potential death to life, Hallel should be recited (and a Yom Tov can be established). Chatam Sofer says that as long as we are still in galut, there can be no true avdut l’cherut, and therefore one shouldn’t make a Yom Tov on being saved from troubles other than threat of death. According to this, it should follow that on Yom Haatzmaut, where no individuals were actually saved from death on that day, a Yom Tov cannot be established. Nevertheless, argues R.Shlomo Goren (ad loc.), Chatam Sofer would certainly permit establishing it, since now we are not in galut: we have returned to our land and we have a sovereign government, so this might actually count as a true avdut l’cherut, especially since many Jews began returning from other countries where they were indeed in literal slavery. According to Pri Chadash, however, it would be forbidden to institute any such Yom Tov. R.Chaim Regensberg, after suggesting a number of proofs to his position, adopts the Pri Chadash’s approach as normative and explains his opposition to such a holiday on this basis.31 Although he did not quote the Pri Chadash directly, the Chazon Ish32 also opposed instituting new religious days to the Jewish calendar, and thus was strongly against Yom HaShoah as the national day of remembrance for the Holocaust. Presumably, he would have opposed Yom Haatzmaut for similar reasons. This approach may also be one of the reasons why many groups do not accept the establishment of this day of religious celebration.

29 See their articles in Hilchot Yom Haatzmaut V’yom Yerushalayim where they all accept this conclusion. 30 The character of such a Yom Tov and what exactly should be done to celebrate it is the subject of some debate. Based on the Talmudic sources regarding Megilat Taanit (Rosh Hashanah 18b, Taanit 18b) it seems clear that such a Yom Tov would forbid eulogies and fasting. Another widely accepted practice for this type of Yom Tov is to arrange a seudat mitzvah, which is also mentioned in some of the sources concerning Yomim Tovim. This is also evident from the words of Rama (Orach Chaim 670:2) who notes that although there is no mitzvah to have a seudah on Chanukah, a seudah with words of Torah and praise (divrei shirot v’tishbachot) would still qualify as a seudat mitzvah. However, as mentioned above, sources concerning reciting Hallel are much less clear. Many communities instituted their own special customs to commemorate their miracles, such as lighting special candles and reciting special Tehillim. See the sources cited in note 17. There is also a debate whether a Yom Tov such as Yom Haatzmaut permits shaving, haircuts, and weddings despite the restrictions of Sefirah. From R’Chaim Palagi, Moed Lchol Chai Siman 6, it seems that a Yom Tov celebrated by a family for a miracle that occurred during Sefirah permits shaving as well, and many authorities in Eretz Yisrael use this source to permit shaving on Yom Haatzmaut. See R.Yitzchak Nissim, “Arichat Nisuin V’Tisporet B’Yom Haatzmaut” and R.Moshe Maimon, “Im Nohagin Divrei Aveilut B’Chag Haatzmaut,” Hilchot Yom Haatzmaut V’Yom Yerushalayim, pp.341-348, and Teshuvot B’Mareh HaBazak (4:53). However, R.Schachter, Sefer Nefesh HaRav, p.94, cites R.Soloveitchik as disapproving of this approach. 31 Sefer Mishmeret Chaim (Siman 38). R.Regensberg was a well known at Hebrew Theological College in Skokie, IL, in the first part of the twentieth century. Interestingly enough, my father, R.Joseph Ozarowski, who attended and received semichah from HTC, has told me that R.Regensberg was known to be a very big supporter of religious Zionism and the State of Israel. Contrary to other opinions discussed above, this positive outlook of Medinat Yisrael did not impact on his decision that halachically instituting Yom Haatzmaut as a Yom Tov was incorrect. 32 R.Avraham Yeshayah Karelitz, Igrot Chazon Ish, # 97.

26 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 A Yom Tov for all of Klal Yisrael? Even if we accept the more lenient approach permitting the establishment of a Yom Tov, R. Hershel Schachter (B’ikvei HaTzon siman 32) notes that Yom Haatzmaut may pose more of a problem than the others discussed in earlier poskim. Chatam Sofer himself in the above teshuvah gives an additional answer to how R. Elazar bar Tzadok kept his own personal Yom Tov despite the fact that “batlah Megilat Taanit.” He says that personal or communal holidays are permitted to be instituted, but national holidays, such as those in Megilat Taanit, would be forbidden to establish anymore. Chayei Adam (Hilchot Purim 155:41) also expresses similar sentiments to that of Chatam Sofer forbidding a Yom Tov for the whole nation. According to this, argues R. Schachter, the fact that Yom Haatzmaut was meant to be established for the entire Jewish people means that it should actually be forbidden to do so according to these authorities.33 Interestingly, most of the contemporary poskim mentioned above discussing Yom Haatzmaut do not mention this point; they simply quote the first part of the Chatam Sofer in support of establishing a Yom Tov. Perhaps they interpreted Chatam Sofer to be giving an additional explanation why R. Elazar bar Tzadok was permitted to keep his own personal Yom Tov on the tenth of Av, but this does not reject his first explanation that a Yom Tov is permitted if it has no relation to events in the Beit HaMikdash, and this would hold true even if it was for “Kol Yisrael.” Alternatively, some poskim, such as R. Ovadya Hadaya (ad loc.), rely mainly on the Maharam Alashkar (perhaps because they are both Sefardim), who never mentions this limitation of “Kol Yisrael.”34 R. Schachter himself suggests another defense for Yom Haatzmaut that an event which qualifies as “atchalta d’geulah” would still warrant a Yom Tov, despite being targeted to the whole Jewish nation. He bases this on a comment of R.Yaakov of Lisa (author of the Netivot HaMishpat) in his commentary to Megillat Esther35 who says that the reason Purim was established as a Yom Tov was because it was considered atchalta d’geulah. Based on the Ramban’s introduction to Sefer Shmot where he says that the Jewish people were considered “redeemed” after arriving at Har Sinai and subsequently building the Mishkan, R. Schachter argues that the definition of geulah is building the Beit HaMikdash, and the Purim miracle was a step on the way to the Jews returning to Israel to build the Bayit Sheni. So too, he says, Yom Haatzmaut can be viewed as the first step of restoring Jewish sovereignty over its homeland which will hopefully lead to the building of the Temple, similar to the mitzvah of appointing a king, which the Gemara (Sanhedrin 20b) says is the first step to building the Beit HaMikdash.36

33 This may be one important difference between the parameters for reciting Hallel on Yom Haatzmaut and the question of establishing Yom Haatzmaut as a formal Yom Tov of sorts. Regarding Hallel, a miracle affecting the entire nation is more likely to obligate its recitation (see Yabia Omer ad loc.), whereas for establishing the day as a Yom Tov, the Kol Yisrael aspect makes it harder to allow according to Chatam Sofer and Chayei Adam. 34 In fact, even Magen Avraham, Beer Heitev, and Mishnah Berurah, who accepted the possibility of establishing a communal Yom Tov, only quote the Maharam Alashker but make no mention of Chatam Sofer. 35 R.Yaakov MiLisa, Megillat Setarim, 9:19. 36 See the remainder of R.Schachter’s piece for other sources and details concerning his position, including his conclusion that although one is not obligated to celebrate a holiday related to atchalta d’geulah, including Yom Haatzmaut, nevertheless one is permitted to do so.

27 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 R. Ovadia Yosef (ad loc.) argues that even an atchalta d’geulah is not sufficient to warrant reciting Hallel with a berachah on Yom Haatzmaut, since there are still numerous challenges and troubles in Israel. Although it is possible R.Ovadia would distinguish between Hallel and the other characteristics of establishing a Yom Tov, it is clear that he feels this type of atchalta d’geulah is not strong enough at least regarding certain aspects of such a chag. He bases this on the Yerushalmi (Pesachim 10:6) that says although one should indeed recite praises (“shirah”) to Hashem when He does miracles for you, this does not apply to “techilat geulatan,” such as the night they left Egypt (as opposed to after crossing the sea).37 Also, it is worthwhile to note (as does R. Goren in passing) that we don’t have records of a specific day of Yom Tov for the return of Jews to Israel in the time of Ezra, so too here one could argue that atchalta d’geulah alone would not warrant a designation of Yom Tov. Bal Tosif Another challenge dealt with by contemporary poskim in attempting to establish Yom Haatzamut as a religious holiday is the prohibition of bal tosif. The Torah tells us (Devarim 4:2) that we are not allowed to add or detract in any way from the Torah as it was given to Moshe. According to Ramban there, this prohibition includes establishing new holidays on the Jewish calendar. How can we justify our establishing of Yom Haatzmaut as a Yom Tov when Ramban seems to explicitly prohibit such an action? In fact, this source, or at least the general hashkafah behind it, may be another reason why many in the charedi world have been opposed to Yom Haatzamut and why Chazon Ish was opposed to Yom HaShoah. To answer this problem, rabbinic authorities have suggested the following two explanations.38 First, it is noteworthy that Rashi (Megillah 14a s.v. chutz) appears to disagree with Ramban and implies that bal tosif is only violated when a Navi, a prophet, institutes a new mitzvah or holiday. However, a Beit Din does have the authority to establish such a day as a rabbinic enactment. Therefore, says Rashi, the Gemara was only bothered by the introduction of mikra megillah into halachic practice since nevuah still existed at this time, but Chanukah, which took place after the conclusion of prophecy, is not questioned. So too, Yom Haatzmaut should not violate bal tosif according to this since it was not instituted through a Navi. Second, Ramban himself must confront the question of how the Jews during the second Temple were allowed to institute all of the holidays detailed in Megilat Taanit, mentioned in the Gemara (Taanit 18b and elsewhere). Shouldn’t these days of celebration violate bal tosif according to Ramban? The answer is that apparently Ramban must also agree that these days do not violate bal tosif because they are done

37 R. Schachter could respond that the Yerushalmi only refers to leaving Egypt which has nothing to do with building the Beit HaMikdash, or that the Yerushalmi means that one is not obligated to do so, but if one wanted to it would still be allowed. Nevertheless, the Yerushalmi does not appear to differentiate between Yetziat Mitzrayim and other types of miracles other than based on “techilat geulatan.” 38 See R.Shlomo Goren (ad loc.). See also R.Yehudah Gershuni, R.Betzalel Cohen, and other authors in Hilchot Yom Haatzmaut V’Yom Yerushalayim who discuss this question. R.Schachter’s approach discussed above could answer that normally bal tosif would apply when establishing a new holiday for Klal Yisrael, which would be the reason for Chatam Sofer and Chayei Adam’s limitation of instituting new days of Yom Tov to personal or community events alone. However, here when done for an event which is atchalta d’geulah this may not apply. R.Schachter discusses this issue in a shiur recorded on www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/725325 concerning Yom Haatzmaut.

28 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 with the sanction of the Chachamim, and their purpose is to praise Hashem for His salvation. Consequently, Ramban will agree that any day designated to celebrate by thanking Hashem would not qualify. Hashkafic Challenges to Yom Haatzmaut and the State Many of those that oppose celebrating Yom Haatzmaut, and even some that support it, wonder how we can celebrate the inception of a state with numerous failings and deficiencies in the spiritual realm. Is celebration the response when we haven’t truly achieved our goals yet? Let us briefly detail a few of these concerns and possible responses to them. The government is not run according to the Torah One of the most troubling questions asked is how we can rejoice when Jews are not running the country in accordance with the laws of the Torah. Furthermore, the entire state was founded by secular Zionists, many of whom were even anti-religious. How can the beginning of the redemption be brought about in this manner? R. Yaakov Moshe Bergman39 and others explain that the development of Israel can be a positive thing even when achieved by the secular. The Gemara (Sanhedrin 102b) already tells us that the reason the wicked Omri merited to rule the Jewish people as king was because despite all his wickedness, he built up a number of cities in Eretz Yisrael. So Yishuv Eretz Yisrael, even when brought about by non-religious, carries great merit with it. In addition, Rav Soloveitchik (in Kol Dodi Dofek) and others point out that the religious Jews could in fact have had more of a role in running the country had more of them come on aliyah. However, the vast majority of those that came were secular, and they were the ones who helped the shape the fledgling state in its formative years. Shalosh Shevuot (the ) The Gemara (Ketubot 111a) tells us that the Jewish people “swore” to the nations of the world that they would not conquer the land of Israel (“shelo yaalu b’chomah,” literally they “wont go over the wall”) before the proper time. How then can we celebrate the founding of a State if we are not allowed to be there in the first place? This question is in essence the main attack of the Satmar Rebbe on Yom Haatzmaut and the State of Israel as discussed above. One of the main responses to this question is that the Jews in fact did not conquer the land of Israel, but were given permission by the nations of the world, first after the Balfour Declaration, and later after the U.N. vote in 1947, to return to Israel and establish a Jewish state there.40 The security situation in Israel Another question raised by many, including R.Ovadya Hadaya (Teshuvot Yaskil Avdi 6:10 in explaining why we cannot make a berachah on Hallel on Yom Haatzmaut), is that although we are in control of our own land, there are constant threats directed at Israel by its hostile neighbors, and one does not feel a sense of national security. How can we celebrate when we

39 R.Yaakov Moshe Bergman, “HaMedinah HaYehudit,” pp.27-31. 40 For more sources and detailed analysis of this question, see R.Kenneth Brander, “The Mitzvah of Living in the Land of Israel: Is it a Biblical Commandment?, Yom Haatzmaut to go 5768; R.Hershel Schachter, ad loc;, R.Menachem Kasher, ad loc.; and R.Shlomo Aviner, Maamar Shelo Yaalu b’Chomah (also found in Noam Volume 20 and online at: http://bit.ly/cdRxT8).

29 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 never know when the next war might erupt or the next missile might hit? Although this contention was even truer during the first thirty years of Israel’s existence, it certainly is still relevant in our day as well, with Hamas, Hizbullah, and Iran amassing weapons, and frequent shooting attacks by Arabs in various parts of the country. We still don’t have the Beit HaMikdash One of the final challenges raised is that the true complete Geulah is certainly the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash, which has not happened yet. How can we celebrate Yom Haatzmaut when we have not yet achieved our primary goal? What is our country worth without the Beit HaMikdash? The answer to the last two challenges is that our celebration of Yom Haatzmaut does not indicate that all of our problems are solved and that we live in the ideal society as will be experienced in the days of Mashiach. However, if we ever want to reach that stage, we must thank Hashem for everything he gives us along the way. Each step is significant, similar to a child growing up whose parents take pride each time the child learns how to do something new, such as crawl, walk, speak in full sentences, and graduate school. If we thank Him for every stage, we hope that He will continue to help us pass through subsequent stages successfully. Conclusion Although rabbinic authorities debate whether one can and should establish a Yom Tov on the occasion of the establishment of the State of Israel, this disagreement should not obscure the more critical issue that those of us in the religious Zionist camp are in agreement about: we have been witness to the monumental event of the founding of a Jewish state in Israel in our times, and the far reaching effect that this has had, and it is our responsibility to demonstrate to Hashem how much we appreciate it, in whatever method we feel is halachically and hashkafically acceptable. The Gemara (Sanhedrin 94b) tells us that Chizkiah was set to be the Mashiach, but Heaven was upset at him because he had not properly thanked Hashem for the salvation of the Jews from Sancheriv and Ashur. Metzudat David has a similar thought concerning the pasuk in Shirat Devorah (Shoftim 5:12) of “uri uri dabri shir kum Barak v’shaveh shevyecha ben Avinoam,” “awaken, awaken, speak the words of song, arise Barak and capture your captives (of war) son of Avinoam.” According to Metzudat David, the connection between the singing in the first half of the pasuk and the taking of captives in the second half is that the more we praise Hashem for how He has helped us, the stronger the salvation will be. If we don’t thank Hashem now, how can we expect for Him to give us more of the vision that we want for our nation? Perhaps we can merit the fulfillment of the berachah of the Metzudat David through internalizing the lesson of Chizkiah: the more we thank Hashem for the gifts He has given us, the more He will increase our salvation in today’s challenging times, leading to the final step of the ultimate redemption through the building of the Beit HaMikdash once again in Jerusalem.

30 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 The Roots of the Disputes over Yom HaAtzmaut Rabbi David Pri-Chen Kollel Fellow, YU-Torah Mitzion Chicago Community Kollel לע"נ סבי ר' דוד ב"ר זאב פרי-חן נלב"ע יום-העצמאות ה'תשל"ז

Kibutz Galuyot - Ingathering of Exiles Yom HaAtzmaut is intended to be a day of thanks and jubilation, one that transcends boundaries, for all of world Jewry. After all is said and done and beyond all the intricate analysis regarding the relationship between Zionism and Judaism, the religious significance of the State, the nature of the redemption and other issues, this day marks the occurrence of one of the most meaningful days in the history of our nation. It is an event that, without any dispute, constitutes sufficient reason to be established as a national holiday. The significance of the day goes beyond the mere announcement of a State, the establishment of Tzahal, and other events connected to this day, which may not be sufficient reasons for many parts of our people to establish a holiday. The opening of the gates of the Land of Israel to Jewish aliyah on a mass scale and the ingathering of the exiles that began on this day are singular events in history, which undoubtedly have much religious significance. We have never seen a comparable moment in history where Jews scattered in all corners of the earth left their lands and immigrated to G-d's chosen land; and all with the endorsement of the U.N., the institution created to represent the consensus of the nations of the world. It would seem that this alone would warrant the establishment of a day of thanks and praise, whether or not it is the beginning of the final redemption. Interestingly, the source from which we derive the halachic obligation for an individual person to give thanks in response to the occurrence of miracles lies in the context of national ingathering of exiles41. Tehillim 107 begins as follows: הֹדוּ לַה' כִּי טוֹב כִּי לְעוֹלָם חַסְדּוֹ: Give thanks to God, for He is good, for His mercy endures for יֹאמְרוּ גְּאוּלֵי ה' א ֲֶשׁר גְּאָלָם מִיַּד ever. So let the redeemed of Hashem say, whom He has redeemed צָר: וּמֵאֲרָצוֹת קִבְּצָם מִמִּזְרָח from adversity and gathered them out of the lands, from the east וּמִמַּעֲרָב מִצָּפוֹן וּמִיָּם: תָּעוּ

ברכות נ"ד:41

31 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 בַמִּדְבָּר בּ ִ ִישׁימוֹן דָּרְֶך עִיר מוֹשָׁב and from the west, from the north and from the sea. They לֹא מָצָאוּ: רְעֵבִים גַּם צְמֵאִים wandered in the wilderness in a desert way; they found no city of נַפְשָׁם בָּהֶם תִּתְעַטָּף: וַיִּצְעֲקוּ אֶל habitation. Hungry and thirsty, their soul fainted in them. Then ה' בַּצַּר לָהֶם מִמּ ְֵצוּקוֹתיהֶם יַצִּילֵם: they cried unto God in their trouble, and He delivered them out of וַיַּדְרִיכֵם בְּדֶרְֶך יְשָׁרָה לָלֶכֶת אֶל their distresses. And He led them by a straight way, to go to a city עִיר מוֹשָׁב: יוֹדוּ לַה' חַסְדּוֹ of habitation. Let them give thanks to God for His mercy, and for וְנִפְלְאוֹתָיו לִבְנֵי אָדָם: His wonders to mankind. תהילים פרק קז Tehillim Perek 107

The fundamental event from which we learn the obligation to give thanks is derived from precisely the event with which we are concerned. The pesukim speak about the ingathering of the exiles from the farthest reaches of the earth. From a halachic perspective, this event serves as the archetype for miraculous events in general. How then is it possible that despite the great miracles that undoubtedly occurred on this day, impacting wide parts of the Jewish world, Yom HaAtzmaut became a day that is so associated with conflict, and so saturated with the tensions that exist between the different factions amongst the Jewish religious public? Yom HaAtzmaut !? The major reason to this controversy, just like many historical phenomena is that one may offer various, wide ranging interpretations for this event. Perhaps a modest insight to shed light on the tension that surrounds this day will actually illustrate that is part of its unique essence. In other words, the heated debate and spirited discussion about this day may be an inextricable part of Yom HaAtzmaut and the time in which we live. At first glance, it seems that the notion of independence is clearly a foreign notion to Judaism. Inpendence as it is commonly understood is impossible in our religious worldview, one which is based on our continuous dependence on Hashem, Who “recreates in his kindness daily, constantly.42” Yet, people are given free will and have the option of acting contrary to the will of Hashem. Man has the capacity to build and create or destroy and tear down, yet man can never shake loose from his constant dependence on his Creator. Seemingly, a declaration of independence flies in the face of our consistent reliance on Hashem. Is there a concept of Jewish independence, and if so, what is its nature? עצמיות and עצמאות Firstly, in order to understand Jewish independence, let us find the source of the word Atzmaut - independence, in the Tanach. In its current form the word does not appear in any of the twenty four books of the Tanach, but an interestingly similar word is found in several places- Atzmiut or Atzmi: לֹא נִכְחַד עָצְמִי מִמֶָּךּ אֲשֶׁר ע ֵ ֻשּׂיתִי בַסֵּתֶר My frame was not hidden from You, when I was made רֻקַּמְתִּי בְּתַחְתִּיּוֹת אָרֶץ : .in secret, and figured in the lowest parts of the earth תהילים קלט:טו Tehillim 139:15

42 Birkot Kriat Shema

32 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770

The author of this psalm sings to Hashem, acknowledging that even his most hidden parts are not hidden from Him. From the moment of creation of an embryo, although it occurs in a hidden place, it is all revealed before the Master of the world. Some commentators explain that the word atzmi in this verse refers to the fetus and it relates to the bone (from the word etzem). In contrast, the author of the Metzudos commentary suggests that the word connotes the essence of the matter in its qualities, an interpretation closer to today's usage of that word. However, even when we accept the first interpretation, referring the word atzmi to etzem, the bones of the fetus, his intent is to the basic elements and perhaps the most inner component of the person's personality. Just as the skeleton of the person is the basis of the human being, as it holds up and gives shape to the entire being, so too, atzmi is the hidden aspect of the person that gives form and shape to one’s personality. “As a person is a tree of the field.”43 Often, the Torah draws a comparison between the physical structure of a person and trees of the field, or to the world of flora at large. A person has seeds, much like a tree; one’s children are one’s saplings: אֶשְׁתְָּך כְּגֶפֶן פֹּרִיָּה בְּיַרְכְּתֵי בֵיתֶָך Your wife shall be as a fruitful vine, in the innermost parts of בָּנ ֶָיך כִּשְׁתִלֵי זֵיתִים ָסבִיב לְשֻׁלְחָנֶָך .your house; your children like olive plants, around your table תהלים קכח:ג Tehillim 128:3

In light of this comparison, etymologists offer that the word etzem is related to the word etz, tree. People have branches, fruit and leaves but the etzem, the essence, is the tree itself. If so, we can continue this analogy and suggest that just as trees, although they are hard and strong, continuously grow and develop, so too do human bones: וּרְאִיתֶם וְשָׂשׂ לִבְּכֶם וְעַצְמוֹתֵיכֶם כַּדֶּשֶׁא And you shall see and your hearts shall gladden, and תִפְרַחְנָה וכו' .your bones shall blossom like fields ישעיהו סו:יד Yeshayahu 66:14

Perhaps this is the basis for the Ibn Ezra’s explanation of the word atzmi in the psalm, which states that this refers to the innate capabilities of the embryo when it is still unborn, the potential that is found within the child that develops and grows over the years. Hence, the notion of atzmiut ha'adam reflects the basic potential within a person. On one hand it is hidden but on the other hand it is the backbone and foundation that exists and develops on the outside. The atzmiut is the source of energy and potential which is found in the person, which grows and develops with him. Likewise, we suggest that the atzmaut of the Jewish people is also its atzmiut. Between freedom and Atzmiut After more than 200 years of slavery, Am Yisrael finally leaves Egypt as a free and united nation. On the one hand, the Exodus from Egypt marks the end of a long process, the process of

43 Dvarim 20:19

33 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 transforming a family to a nation. However, at the same time it also serves as a starting point for a long and arduous journey. Our sages in the Midrash 44 compare the Exodus to an antedated birth of an animal. Like a veterinary surgeon, Hashem pulls the fetus, Am Yisrael, out of the animal uterus. According to this description, it seems that our sages viewed the Egyptian exile as a prolonged pregnancy, the process of forming the nation. Just like an embryo, the growth process of the nation occures in an exponential fashion: Starting from twelve sons, going through seventy people who went down to Egypt. We find out in the beginning of Sefer Shmot that Bnei Yisrael became a huge nation, threatening the world's strongest empire at the time. During this stage, Bnei Yisrael do not have their own identity yet, and are still a part of the Egyptian culture – similar to the opinion quoted in the Gemara that considers the fetus an integral part of his mother (Yevamot 78:1). In fact, the first to realize that a separate entity is being created in Egypt, are not Bnei Yisrael themselves, but rather the 'animal', or the surrogate mother - the Egyptians. Pharaoh is the first one to define the family of Yaakov as a 'nation ': וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל עַמּוֹ הִנֵּה עַם בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל רַב And he said “behold, the Jewish nation is greater and וְעָצוּם מִמֶּנּוּ ”more powerful than us שמות א:ט Shemot 1:9

The bloods of the Korban Pesach and the Brit Milah represent the blood of the labor: וָאֶעֱבֹר עָלַיְִך וָאֶרְאְֵך מִתְבּוֹסֶסֶת בְּדָמָיְִך וָאֹמַר And when I passed over you, and saw you wallowing לְָך בְּדָמַיְִך חֲיִי וָאֹמַר לְָך בְּדָמַיְִך חֲיִי in your blood, I said to you: By your blood, live; and יחזקאל טז:ו I said to you: By your blood, live Yechezkel 16:6

The Exodus, then, constitutes the final stage of the birth process of Am Yisrael. The Exodus, however, is not the end of the story, rather the beginning of a different journey, the point where the newborn starts its life. This journey begins in Parashat : וַיְהִי בְּשַׁלַּח פַּרְעֹה אֶת הָעָם וְלֹא נָחָם And when Pharaoh had let the people go, and God led אֱלֹהִים דֶּרְֶך אֶרֶץ פְּלִשְׁתִּים כִּי קָרוֹב הוּא ,them not by the way of the land of the Philistines כִּי אָמַר אֱלֹהִים פֶּן יִנָּחֵם הָעָם בִּרְאֹתָם although that was near; for God said: 'Lest the people מִלְחָמָה ו ָ ְשׁבוּ מִצְרָיְמָה: '.repent when they see war, and they shall return to Egypt שמות יג:יז Shemot 13:17

In the early days of the journey to the land of Israel, God guides the nation through the barren desert and not through the main road. Seemingly, in order to prevent any feelings of regret from the newly freed slaves, God seeks to hide any risk of war from Am Yisrael. According to this explanation, the divine plan was to grant some rest to the slaves who were enslaved for so many years, at least for a few days. Ramban on those verses has already pointed out the difficulty in this explanation: If so, why did Hashem confront Am Yisrael with the Egyptians so close to their

מדרש תהלים, מזמור קי"ד44

34 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 departure? Furthermore: this plan was soon disrupted by the war against Amalek! If the purpose of marching through the desert was to avoid war immediately after leaving Egypt, this goal was not achieved, when Am Yisrael still had to fight for its life! Moreover: later in the book, we read that Am Yisrael wished to return to Egypt because of the wars and perhaps even more because of the hard life in the desert. Was it not better then to guide the people through the shorter route and thus avoid the physical hardships?! Rabbi Yoel Bin-Nun45 explains, in line with Rashbam's approach46, that the divine purpose of the guidance through the desert was different than what was previously suggested. R' Bin-Nun claims that in order to understand God's intent in this act, one needs to understand the concerns about the risk of return to Egypt. רַק לֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ סוּסִים וְלֹא י ִ ָשׁיב אֶת הָעָם Only he shall not have too many horses to himself, nor מִצְרַיְמָה לְמַעַן הַרְבּוֹת סוּס וַה' אָמַר לָכֶם לֹא cause the people to return to Egypt for more horses; as תֹסִפוּן לָשׁוּב בַּדֶּרְֶך הַזֶּה עוֹד .God said to you: You shall no longer return that way דברים יז:טז Devarim 17:16

Throughout the Tanach various examples seem to reveal a deeper meaning of the prohibition on the king of Israel to allow the return of Am Yisrael to Egypt. Hashem does not forbid only the physical return to the land of Egypt, but in addition prohibits a development of a political and security dependence on the southern kingdom. Many prophets criticize the kings of Israel and Judah for relying on the military strength of Egypt. Isaiah contrasts the reliance on Egypt to having faith in Hashem: הוֹי הַיֹּרְדִים מִצְרַיִם לְעֶזְרָה עַל סוּסִים Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help, and rely on יִשָּׁעֵנוּ וַיִּבְטְחוּ עַל רֶכֶב כִּי רָב וְעַל horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many, and פָּר ִ ָשׁים כִּי עָצְמוּ מְאֹד וְלֹא ָ שׁעוּ עַל in horsemen, because they are exceeding mighty; but they קְדוֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶת ה' לֹא דָרָשׁוּ: .look not unto the Holy One of Israel, and don’t seek God ישעיהו לא:א Yeshayahu 31:1

God commands the king not to concede the independence of the Jewish people, to avoid bringing about the patronage of Egypt over the Jewish People. The goal of the long haul in the desert is the development of this independence and the non-dependence on Egypt. God does not lead Am Yisrael to Israel via the shortest route, but in an indirect, winding route to stress the complete separation from the Egyptian authority. By leading his people straight to the inevitable encounter with their former oppressors, God emphasize that they are redeemed thanks to his own mighty hand, and not by virtue of the consent of Pharaoh. At the end of the grueling journey through the desert, a journey which was designated to create independence and even more so atzmiut for the people of Israel, they arrive at the Promised Land. With all the foreseeable difficulties involved in conquering the land they do not turn to Egypt for help. The atzmiut is being created during the long process in which Am Yisrael receives the Torah, the unique substance of the nation, and starts to fight all alone without any visible miracles by God.

'על חירות ועצמאות', גוילין ד' (תמוז תשנ"א) עמ' 4543-39 שמות יג יז , (R. Shmuel Ben Meir (1080-1160 46

35 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 On Pesach, Am Yisrael gains its freedom, which means lack of dependence on Egypt, but this is only a negative content. In their wanderings in the desert, the nation achieves its atzmiut, the positive self content. The repentance process of Am Yisrael In the long years of exile, Am Yisrael lost its independence as well as their atzmiut. For centuries we were not dependent on our own actions, but on the whims of emperors and czars, kings, prime ministers and Führers. The liberation from this dependence is the first level of Yom HaAtzmaut - freedom and lack of dependence on others, but it is only the 'negative' meaning of the day. The more profound and significant event which happened on this day, was the opportunity given to us by G-d to take our fate in our hands. Am Yisrael has the ability to create a reality in which not only they do not depend on others, but they also determine their very own destiny. By the return of Am Yisrael to its land, a long process of rediscovery begins, a process of revealing their atzmiut and their own substance. Atzmiut can be expressed in various aspects of the nation's life - its culture, political choices and many more aspects. The 5th of Iyar is not only a celebration of Independence and lack of dependence, but mostly Yom HaAtzmiut. On that day Am Yisrael returns to its self-essence, and its personalized and unique substance. At this point let us return to our starting point. It seems that all the discussions and debates within Am Yisrael about the essence of Yom HaAtzmaut are an integral part of the celebration. The nature of these disputes is perhaps the nation's attempts to find out what is this atzmiut, what is the unique essence of the people of Israel. The arguments over the meaning of Yom HaAtzmaut are themselves a very powerful expression of Israel's independence. As mentioned above this atzmiut is not static and those discussions demonstrate that we even have the mandate to figure out our own self-definition. Thus explains Rav Kook the essence of teshuva, repentance: התשובה היא שיבה אל המקוריות, אל הראשית, Teshuva is a return to the basics, to the לחבר את כל ענפי החיים אל השורש אשר משם beginning, to connect all the leaves of life to the הם יוצאים .root that they come from אורות התשובה עמ' קל"ד Orot Hateshuva p. 134

Yom HaAtzmaut for the klal, the public, is analogous to what is for the individual. During Yom Kipur the individual tries to remove his external layers and to return to his deeper self, so on Yom HaAtzmaut -HaAtzmiut the klal returns to its uniqueness and originality. The tension and debates which surround this day are mere an implication to this repentance.

36 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 The National and Personal Calling of Shir Hashirim Mrs. Daphne Secunda

Since its inclusion in the canon, Shir HaShirim has presented its readers with formidable interpretive challenges. Aside from the question of how a book that is apparently a collection of love poetry fits within the sacred contours of Tanakh, the twists and turns of the relationship between the lovers – at times forlorn yet at other times fulfilled – represent a whole different set of cruxes. Jewish interpreters in ancient and medieval times were well aware of these difficulties and attempted to address both issues in their writings. Famously, Rashi opens his introduction to his commentary on the sefer by referring to the multi- valiancy of Scripture: אחת דבר אלהים שתים זו שמעתי, מקרא אחד One statement of God, these two I heard. One verse יוצא לכמה טעמים וסוף דבר אין לך מקרא extends to a number of explanations, and the final thing יוצא מידי פשוטו .is that a verse does not stray from its literal meaning

The commentary’s ambitious goal is to somehow link classical midrashic interpretations with the Sefer’s passionate plot despite the apparent gap between the two. Rashi explains that on the whole, the overarching approach of the midrashim is to recount Jewish national history, and particularly, the relationship between God and the Jewish people. By using this approach, Rashi also attempts to account for the complex trajectory of the lovers’ relationship: ואומר אני שראה שלמה ברוח הקדש And I say that Solomon saw with a holy spirit that the Jewish שעתידין ישראל לגלות גולה אחר גולה people were eventually to be exiled, exile after exile, destruction חורבן אחר חורבן ולהתאונן בגלות זה after destruction, and in order to mourn in the exile for their על כבודם הראשון ולזכור חבה ראשונה glory of old, and to remember the love [God had] to make of אשר היו סגולה לו מכל העמים לאמר them a chosen one of all the nations, so they should say “let me אלכה ואשובה אל אישי הראשון כי טוב go and return to my original husband, for it was better for me לי אז מעתה ויזכרו את חסדיו ואת מעלם אשר מעלו ואת הטובות אשר then than now” and that [God] should remember His אמר לתת להם באחרית הימים kindness and the level He raised them to, and all the goodness He said He would give them at the end of days.

37 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 The numerous points of exile and destruction in the national story are represented by the moments of distance between the lovers. Interestingly enough, the high points in the relationship are seen as a kind of nostalgia for the initial love that God showered on Israel during the formative years of her existence. A good example of Rashi’s method can be found in his comments to Shir Hashirim 1:5: ְ שׁחוֹרָה אֲנִי וְנָאוָה בְּנוֹת יְרוּשָׁלִָם I am black, but attractive, daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of כְּאָהֳלֵי קֵדָר כִּירִיעוֹת ְ שׁלֹמֹה: .Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon רש"י: שחורה אני במעשי ונאה Rashi: I am black in my actions, and attractive in the actions of my אני במעשה אבותי ואף במעשי ancestors, and even in my actions there are attractive ones, if I have יש מהם נאים אם יש בי עון העגל the iniquity of the golden calf, to contrast that I have the merit of the יש בי כנגדו זכות קבלת התורה acceptance of the Torah.

In other words, according to Rashi, all of the signifiers in this verse refer to national issues that can be located in the distant, formative past. Although the Rambam did not author a commentary on Shir Hashirim, it is clear that the sefer held great importance in his religious phenomenology. The Rambam describes the nature of proper love of God47: וכיצד היא האהבה הראויה הוא שיאהב את ,What is the proper love? One should love God with a great ה' אהבה גדולה יתירה עזה מאוד עד שתהא abundant, strong love to the point where one’s soul should נפשו קשורה באהבת ה' ונמצא שוגה בה ,be bound with the love of God, until one is obsessive over it תמיד כאלו חולה חולי האהבה שאין דעתו ,lovesick, as one who cannot stop thinking about a woman פנויה מאהבת אותה אשה והוא שוגה בה and contemplates it constantly, while awake, while eating תמיד בין בשבתו בין בקומו בין בשעה and sleeping, greater than that should be the love of God in שהוא אוכל ושותה, יתר מזה תהיה אהבת ה' בלב אוהביו שוגים בה תמיד כמו שצונו the heart of His lovers, as we are commanded “with all of בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך, והוא ששלמה אמר your heart and all of your soul” and that is what Solomon דרך משל כי חולת אהבה אני, וכל שיר said in the form of parable “for I am sick with love” and all השירים משל הוא לענין זה. .of Shir HaShirim is a parable for this concept הלכות תשובה י:ג Hilkhot Teshuva 10:3

True, all-encompassing love of God can be compared to the lovesick emotions that one lover feels for another. For our purposes, the final line of the halakha is of particular importance: “And all of Shir Hashirim is a parable for this matter.” That is, the Rambam reads the story of Shir Hashirim as reflecting the overpowering love that a person experiences if they fulfill the mandate of loving God with all their heart. Unlike Rashi, it would seem that the Rambam locates Shir Hashirim both in the present and on an individual plane – not in the distant, national past. The Voice of My Beloved Knocks אֲנִי יְשֵׁנָה וְלִבִּי עֵר קוֹל דּוֹדִי דוֹפֵק :I sleep, but my heart is awake; Hark! My beloved knocks פִּתְחִי לִי אֲחֹתִי רַעְיָתִי יוֹנָתִי תַמָּתִי Open to me, my sister, my love, my dove, my undefiled; for my'

47 See also Hilkhot Teshuva 10:6.

38 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 ֶ שׁרֹּאשִׁי נִמְלָא טָל קְוֻצּוֹתַי רְסִיסֵי לָיְלָה: head is filled with dew, my locks with the drops of the night.' I פָּשַׁטְתִּי אֶת כֻּתָּנְתִּי אֵיכָכָה אֶלְבָּשֶׁנָּה have put off my coat; how shall I put it on? I have washed my רָחַצְתִּי אֶת רַגְלַי אֵיכָכָה אֲטַנְּפֵם: דּוֹדִי feet; how shall I defile them? My beloved put in his hand by the שָׁלַח יָדוֹ מִן הַחֹר וּמֵעַי הָמוּ עָלָיו: קַמְתִּי hole of the door, and my heart was moved for him. I rose up to אֲנִי לִפ ְַתֹּח לְדוֹדִי וְיָדַי נָטְפוּ מוֹר open to my beloved; and my hands dropped with myrrh, and וְאֶצְבְּעֹתַי מוֹר עֹבֵר עַל כַּפּוֹת הַמַּנְעוּל: my fingers with flowing myrrh, upon the handles of the bar. I פָּתַחְתִּי אֲנִי לְדוֹדִי וְדוֹדִי חָמַק עָבָר נַפְשִׁי יָצְאָה בְדַבְּרוֹ בִּקַּשְׁתִּיהוּ וְלֹא opened to my beloved; but my beloved had turned away, and מְָצאתִיהוּ קְרָאתִיו וְלֹא עָנָנִי: מְצָאֻנִי was gone. My soul failed me when he spoke. I sought him, but I הַשֹּׁמְרִים הַסֹּבְבִים בָּעִיר הִכּוּנִי פְצָעוּנִי .could not find him; I called him, but he gave me no answer נ ְ ָשׂאוּ אֶת רְדִידִי מֵעָלַי שֹׁמְרֵי הַחֹמוֹת: ,The watchmen that go about the city found me, they smote me הִשְׁבַּעְתִּי אֶתְכֶם בְּנוֹת יְרוּשָׁלִָם אִם they wounded me; the keepers of the walls took away my תִּמְצְאוּ אֶת דּוֹדִי מַה תַּגִּידוּ לוֹ ֶ שׁחוֹלַת mantle from me. 'I adjure you, daughters of Jerusalem, if you אַהֲבָה אָנִי: '.find my beloved, what will you tell him? That I am love-sick שיר השירים ה:ב-ח Shir Hashirim 5:2-8

The great emotional force of these passukim lies in their ability to completely draw the reader into the story, encourage her to identify with the protagonist, and ultimately, to frustrate this sympathy by marking the “beloved”’s laziness as, paradoxically, both understandable and inexplicable. The question burns: What is the meaning of the female lover’s inertia? Why does she not simply get herself out of bed and open the door for her lover, instead of enjoying a few moments of rest that will inevitably lead to frantic searching? Although we can only speculate, it is nevertheless worth asking how the Rambam understands the tumultuousness of the lovers’ relationship if their story is supposed to exemplify the highest level of human love of God. Rav Soloveitchick’s insight about the ideal religious experience is instructive in this regard. In a celebrated footnote at the beginning of Halakhic Man, the Rav argues against the view that the most sublime height to which a religious person can aspire is a sense of spiritual tranquility: …This popular ideology contends that the religious experience is tranquil and neatly ordered, tender, and delicate; it is an enchanted stream for embittered souls and still waters for troubled spirits… …And second, this ideology is intrinsically false and deceptive. That religious consciousness in man’s experience which is most profound and most elevated, which penetrates to the very depths and ascends to the very heights, is not that simple and comfortable. On the contrary, it is exceptionally complex, rigorous, and tortuous. Where you find its complexity, there you find its greatness. The religious experience, from beginning to end, is antinomic and antithetic…Religion is not, at the outset, a refuge of grace and mercy for the despondent and desperate, an enchanted stream for crushed spirits, but a raging, clamorous torrent of man’s consciousness with all its crises, pangs and torments… Perhaps the Rambam reads the lovers’ ups and downs as related to the tumultuous experience of a complex religious life.

39 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 When we look at the writings of another towering figure of the twelfth century, R. Yehuda Halevi, we find an approach to Shir Hashirim that appears in some senses closer to Rashi’s view. R. Yehuda Halevi also understands the narrative as expressing the national past. HaLevi focuses, however, not only on the formative period of Jewish existence, but rather on the specific moments of exile and return to the Holy Land. …It is this very sin that has prevented us from achieving that which God promised us for the second temple…this means that the Divinity was prepared to settle in the Second temple as it had previously provided that the Jewish people would all agree to return to Israel eagerly. Instead, only some returned, while the majority-including the important leaders-remained in Babylon. They preferred subservience in the Diaspora, so that they would not have to part from their home and affairs. Perhaps this is what Solomon meant when he said “I am asleep but my heart is awake” in that he compared Diaspora Jewry to one who is asleep… “A voice my beloved knocks” refers to God’s beckoning call to return to Israel…When it later says “I have removed my coat” this refers to the sluggishness of the Jewish people to return, just as one who is too lazy to don his coat and join his friend outside… “My beloved sent his hand through the door latch” refers to Ezra and Nehemiah, and other prophets who enticed the people to return, until some finally agreed to return… God in turn repaid them with what was hidden in their hearts, in all that all the holiness that returned was in a diminished state, commensurate to their diminished state. On further reflection, it is possible that R. Yehuda Halevi did not only associate Shir Hashirim with the national history of displacement and return, but rather he too may have seen the role of the individual in this history. In a wel-known passage in the Kuzari, the Jewish sage – who should perhaps be read as an expression of R. Yehuda Halevi himself – is forced to admit to the King of Khazar that his daily supplications to return to the Land of Israel are no more than the “chattering of birds”: Kuzari said: If so, then you must have a limited affection for your Torah. You have not made Israel your goal, nor your place of living and dying. Yet you say in your prayers ‘Have mercy on Zion’ for it is our life’s home…I see that all your knee-bending and bowing toward Israel is mere flattery or some insincere custom. Rabbi said: ….you have shamed me, King of Khazar….And so our recitations of such prayers as ‘bow down to the mount of His holiness”, “blessed are you who returns His Divine Presence to Zion and the like are merely like the warble of the parrot and other birds who imitate human voices; we do not think about what are we saying when we say these and other prayers. It is as you say, Khazar King. We might speculate that in HaLevi’s own personal reading of Shir HaShirim, he merged the individual and national aspects of exile and redemption to and from the Holy Land. His devastatingly beautiful poetry on Zion, as well as the traditions about his personal sacrifice to make aliyah, line up quite well with the personalization of this motif.

40 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 Partially relying on R. Yehuda Halevi’s approach to the book as a whole but updated to reflect the miraculous events of recent Jewish history, Rav Soloveichik sees in this passage both the incredible promise of the founding of the State of Israel, and also the aching sense, felt less than a decade later, of missed opportunities: What was our reaction to the beckoning of the voice of the Beloved, to the munificence of His loving kindness and miracles? Did we get out of our beds and immediately open the door, or did we continue to rest like the Lover , and were we too lazy to get out of our beds? “I have washed my feet, how shall I soil them?” …Orthodox Jews should have hastened to perform so great a mitzvah, to plunge with joy and enthusiasm into the very midst of this holy work: the building and settling of the Land. However to our regret, we have not reacted that way. When a miracle does not find its proper answering echo in the form of concrete deeds, an exalted vision degenerates and dissipates… Let us be honest and speak openly and candidly. We are critical of certain well-known Israeli leaders because of their attitudes to traditional values and religious observances. Our complaints are valid…however…we could have extended our influence in shaping the spiritual image of the Yishuv if we had hastened to arouse ourselves from our sleep and descend to open the door for our Beloved Who was knocking…Had we established more religious kibbutzim, had we built more houses for religious immigrants, had we created an elaborate and extended system of schools… The Rav does not merely associate the climax of the book with the Jewish national history of exile and return. By emphasizing the issue of personal responsibility, he locates the story in the present and on a personal key. In other words, there are elements here of the three approaches that we have outlined. The triumph of the founding of the State of Israel is something that everyone in our generation, regardless of age, has experienced personally. And so is the brunt of the Rav’s critique that we have squandered the full realization of this opportunity at the very moment of its actualization. At the end, it is the Rav’s compelling interpretation of contemporary events in light of the promise and tragedy of Shir Hashirim’s description of the dod’s knocking, that still remains seared on the consciousness of our community, over fifty years on. Yeshiva University can take pride in the hundreds of alumni who have personalized the epic story of national redemption and uprooted their families to be part of what will hopefully constitute the final return to the Land of Israel. At the same time, we must remember that this is only the first response to the Divine “knocking.” One hopes that even at this late date it is still possible to answer the Rav’s call and bring about real change in Israeli society, to engage all elements of Israeli society and bring the State’s people and leadership into the encompassing and loving embrace of God.

41 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 Israel: Motherland and Mother Rabbi Mordechai Torczyner Rosh Beit Midrash, Zichron Dov Yeshiva University Torah Mitzion Beit Midrash of Toronto

ותאמר ציון עזבני ה' וה' שכחני .And Zion said: God has abandoned me, and God has forgotten me ישעיהו מט:יד Yeshayah 49:14

לא יאמר לך עוד עזובה ולארצך You shall no longer be called ‘Abandoned,’ and your land will no לא יאמר עוד שממה כי לך יקרא ’.longer be called ‘Desolate,’ for you will be called ‘My desire is in her חפצי בה Yeshayah 62:4 ישעיהו סב:ד

Israel as our beloved intimate The Jew has known many reasons for his millennia-old longing for the Land of Israel; our thrice- Let our eyes see when You return mercifully ,ותחזינה עינינו בשובך לציון ברחמים“ daily recitations of to Zion,” have been fueled by motivations both religious and secular, personal and national. Focus of the biblical universe, cradle of our nation, throne of King David’s theocentric empire, haven from our foes, place at which our mitzvot are most practical and practicable, host of our most palpable connection to the world of the spirit, terraced hills across which the plangent Divine Here I will dwell, for I have desired her,48” still echoes – Eretz ,פה אשב כי אויתיה“ ,declaration Yisrael has been all of these for the genetic and spiritual heirs of Avraham and Sarah. In the vision of Rav Avraham Yitzchak haKohen Kook and Rav Yissachar Techtel, though, the Land of Israel plays a more active role. Earth and stone and river and sea are anthropomorphized as limbs controlled by a humanesque consciousness, and the space formerly known as Canaan is identified as a living being, an independent spiritual entity to whom we are bonded. ארץ ישראל איננה דבר חיצוני, קנין The Land of Israel is not an external thing, an external prize חיצוני לאומה, רק בתור אמצעי למטרה acquired by the nation, a means toward the end of national של ההתאגדות הכללית והחזקת קיומה unification and reinforcement of the nation’s physical or even החמרי או אפילו הרוחני. ארץ ישראל ,spiritual survival. The Land of Israel is an independent entity היא חטיבה עצמותית קשורה בקשר …bound to the nation in the bond of life חיים עם האומה... Rav Kook, Orot, Eretz Yisrael I אורות (ראי"ה) – ארץ ישראל א

48 Tehillim 132:14

42 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 Seen in this light, Yeshayah’s identification of Zion as a bride is part of a broader depiction of the Land of Israel as a thinking, feeling, loving and beloved intimate being who longs for us to return home. Anthropomorphic land Description of land as a thinking, feeling entity did not originate with the Land of Israel; the midrash places this concept at the start of the Torah, in the Divine creation of the third day,49 -fruit trees and fruit ,עץ עושה פרי and עץ פרי when God charged the land to create both producing trees, but it only produced the latter: ולמה נתקללה... ר' יהודה בר' שלום Why was [the land] cursed? Rabbi Yehudah ben Rabbi אמר שעברה על הצווי שכך אמר Shalom said: She trespassed God’s command. G-d said, ‘Let הקב"ה תדשא הארץ וגו' מה הפרי נאכל the land produce vegetation, etc ’ meaning that just as the fruit אף העץ נאכל, והיא לא עשתה כן .is edible, so the tree should be edible, and she did not do this בראשית רבה ה:ט Midrash, Bereishit Rabbah (Vilna) 5:9

The concept of territorial consciousness does not end with Creation, either, and it is not limited to wicked rebellion; the sages also envisioned stones desiring to serve the righteous Yaakov. The Torah50 records an overnight condensing of Yaakov’s protective stones from the plural to the singular, and regarding this change the sages explained: כתיב ויקח מאבני המקום, וכתיב ויקח It is written, ‘And he took from the stones of the site,’ and it is את האבן! אמר רבי יצחק: מלמד :written, ‘And he took the stone!’ Rabbi Yitzchak explained שנתקבצו כל אותן אבנים למקום אחד, ,This teaches that all of the stones were gathered to one place וכל אחת ואחת אומרת עלי יניח צדיק and each one said, ‘This tzaddik will rest his head on me.’ We זה ראשו; תנא: וכולן נבלעו באחד. learned: All of them became absorbed into one.51 חולין צא: Talmud, Chullin 91b

Many more classic sources ascribe consciousness to a range of inanimate objects, from the sun and moon to the plant kingdom. Certainly, at least some of these texts are meant to provide moral instruction rather than to describe ex-cerebrum thought processes. Nonetheless, the identity of Israel as a person, as a thinking and feeling entity, and particularly as a mother to the Jewish people, adds depth of meaning to our exile, and intensifies the imperative for our return. The meaning of Motherland In itself, envisioning our birthplace as Motherland is not unique to the Jewish people; numerous nations describe their homelands in maternal terms, depicting these spaces as environments which passively provide nourishment, security and familiar comfort. As Professor Rosemary Marangoly George wrote, “Home is a place to escape to and a place to escape from. Its importance lies in the fact that it is not equally available to all. Home is the desired place that is fought for and established as the exclusive domain of a few.52” Our concept of Israel as Mother

49 Bereishit 1:11-12 50 Bereishit 28:11, 18 51 See also Midrash, Bereishit Rabbah 68:11 and Rashi to Bereishit 28:11 for some variation 52 Rosemary M. George, The Politics of Home: Postcolonial Relocations and Twentieth-Century Fiction, pg. 9

43 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 transcends this role, though; we envision the Land of Israel as an active matriarch, actively protecting us and summoning us home. The Torah portrays mothers as dynamic protectors, intervening and risking their own well- being on behalf of their young. From Sarah declaring that Yishmael would not inherit “with my son, with Yitzchak,53” to Rivkah arranging Yaakov’s blessing and accepting his curse upon herself,54 to Rachel pleading with God on behalf of her descendants,55 to Batsheva orchestrating her son Shlomo’s ascendancy to the throne and then arranging the downfall of his challenger Adoniyahu,56 the Jewish “mother” is more than nurturer. The mother is a lioness, acting to ensure the safety and success of her offspring. Along the same lines, the Land of Israel is seen as an active Mother for the Jewish people, evicting unworthy tenants and invoking her own merit on behalf of her longed-for children. Rav Yissachar Techtel saw this message in the Divine promise57 to remember Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaakov and “The Land”: ומתורת משה רבינו בעצמו למדתי זאת I have learned this from the Torah of our master Moshe בפ׳ בחקתי כתיב וזכרתי את בריתי יעקב himself. It is written, ‘And I will remember My covenant with ואף את בריתי יצחק ואף את בריתי Yaakov, and also My covenant with Yitzchak, and also My אברהם אזכור והארץ אזכור... כי עיין covenant with Avraham I will remember, and the land I will ברש״י שם שכתב למה נמנו אחורנית remember.’… Rashi there wrote, ‘Why are they listed in כלומר כדאי הוא יעקב הקטן לכך ואם reverse? As if to say: Yaakov the youngest is worthy of this, and אינו כדאי הרי יצחק עמו ואם אינו כדאי if he is not worthy then Yitzchak is with him, and if he is not הרי אברהם עמו עיי״ש ועפי״ז יש להוסיף דאף אם כולם אינם כדאים היינו worthy then Avraham is with him.’ Based on this, one may add באופן דתמה זכות אבות ח״ו אבל that even if all of them are unworthy, meaning that the merit of ו״הארץ אזכור״ דזכות ארץ ישראל our ancestors has ended, still, ‘The land I will remember,’ for תחלצם ממיצר... היא תגן עלינו the merit of the Land of Israel itself will save them from לחלצנו ממיצר בכל עת שאנו נתונים trouble… She will protect us, to free us whenever we are placed בצרה, ר"ל. .in trouble, Heaven forbid אם הבנים שמחה – פתיחה א Em Habanim Sameicha, First Prologue

Like Queen Esther approaching Achashverosh and offering herself on behalf of her people, the Land of Israel approaches HaShem and offers her own merit on our behalf. Returning to our mother This personification of Israel as mother and protector should add a dimension to our longing for aliyah, inflaming our souls and inspiring our national return to Israel with the greatest urgency. Our impulse to return is not only a selfish desire to live in the land of our ancestors, or to use the land and its products for our rituals. We are not only walking in the Biblical land and laying claim

53 Bereishit 21:10 54 Bereishit 27 55 Yirmiyah 31:14 56 Melachim I 1-2 57 Vayyikra 26:42

44 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 to the once and future home of the Beit haMikdash, rather, we are returning to our mother, to a being who longs to have her children restored. A midrash highlights the intensity of this longing: אמר ירמיהו כשהייתי עולה לירושלים Yirmiyah said: When I ascended to Yerushalayim, I raised my נטלתי עיני וראיתי אשה אחת יושבת eyes and saw a woman sitting atop a mountain, wearing black בראש ההר, לבושיה שחורים ושערה clothing and with her hair undone, crying out, seeking one who סתור צועקת מבקשת מי ינחמנה, ואני would console her. I cried out as well, and sought one who צועק ומבקש מי ינחמני, קרבתי אצלה would comfort me. I drew close to her and spoke with her, and ודברתי עמה, ואמרתי לה אם אשה את told her, “If you are a woman, speak with me. If you are a דברי עמי ואם רוח את הסתלקי מלפני, ענתה ואמרה לי, אינך מכירני, אני היא spirit, leave me.” She replied, “Do you not recognize me? I am שהיו לי שבעה בנים, יצא אביהם .the one who had seven sons whose father left to go overseas למדינת הים, עד שאני עולה ובוכה עליו While I was yet crying for him, it was prophesied to me, ‘The הרי שניבא ואמר לי נפל הבית על house has collapsed upon your seven sons and killed them.’ I שבעה בנייך והרגם, איני יודע על מי ”!don’t know for whom to cry, and for whom to release my hair אבכה ועל מי אסתור שעריי, עניתי ,I replied and told her, “You are no greater than my mother ואמרתי אין אתה טובה מן אמי ציון Zion, who has been turned into grazing for the wild animals of והיא עשויה מרעית לחיות השדה, ענתה the field.” To which she replied and said to me, “I am your ואמרה לי, אני אמך ציון ”.mother, Zion פסיקתא רבתי כו Midrash, Psikta Rabti 26

Rav Kook understood the Land of Israel as a partner of the Jewish people, and this partner suffers our exile as a bereaved mother mourns for her children. Yeshayah envisioned the day when the Land of Israel would be like a bride returned to her spouse. Rav Yissachar Techtel portrayed the emotions of that reunion by describing the reunion of a mother reunited with her husband and children in the Ghetto, concluding,58 “So I imagine will be the joy of our mother, the Land of Israel, at the moment when all of us will return to her.” May HaShem enable us to bring that day to reality, and to see the fulfillment of Dovid haMelech’s words: מושיבי עקרת הבית אם הבנים שמחה הללוקה He establishes the barren woman in the house as תהילים קיג:ט !a joyous mother of children; Praise God Tehillim 113:9

Second Prologue ,אם הבנים שמחה ,Rabbi Yissachar Techtel 58

45 YESHIVA UNIVERSITY • YOM HA’ATZMAUT TO-GO • IYAR 5770 Yeshiva University’s Center for the Jewish Future, in conjunction with the Graduate School of Jewish Studies presents: A Morning of Jewish Scholarship with the Faculty of the Bernard Revel Graduate School Bridging Academic Sunday, April 25, 2010 Jewish Scholarship Yeshiva University, Furst Hall • 500 West 185th St. New York, NY and Torah Learning Dr. David Berger Ruth & I. Lewis Gordon Professor of Jewish History and Dean Halakhah, Hashkafah, and the Academic Study of Judaism

Dr. Debra Kaplan Dr. Pinkhos Churgin Memorial Chair Assistant Professor of Jewish History Women, Marriage and Property: From the Rishonim to Early Modern Frankfurt Dr. Ronnie Perelis Dr. Isaac and Jelena (Rachel) Alcalay Assistant Professor of Sephardic Studies “These Indians are Jews”: Lost Tribes, Secret Jews and Brave New Worlds

Dr. Mordechai Cohen Professor of Bible and Associate Dean New Perspective on the Rambam: His Contribution to Parshanut ha- Miqra Dr. Jonathan Dauber Assistant Professor of Jewish Mysticism 11:30 am 10:30 am 9:30 am 10:30 11:30 Controversies in Early Kabbalah: On the Writing of the First Kabbalistic Texts

For more information, please e-mail [email protected].

The Arbesfeld Yom Rishon program presents Women in Tanach and Talmud Yom Iyun • Sunday, May 2, 2010 Yeshiva University, Furst Hall • 500 West 185th St. New York, NY

9:15am 10:30am 11:30am 12:30pm Registration Rabbi Hayyim Angel Rabbi Mark Dratch Rabbi Yosef Blau 9:30am Avigayil and David: The Role Love, Honor and Obey? Halakhic Responses to the of That Narrative in Sefer Marital Relations and Changing Role of Women in Professor Shemuel Relationships in the Talmud Society Smadar Rabbi Shalom Carmy Rabbi Shmuel Hain Rabbi Benjamin Blech Rosensweig Halakha and Rape: Three 20th Family Redeemed and If Brit Milah is the Sign of Century Perspectives on One Marriage Sanctified: An our Covenant with G-d, What The Interface of Overview of Seder Nashim Pshat, Chazal, & Rambam About Women? Parshanut: The Model Rabbi Daniel Feldman Dr. Aaron Koller Mrs. Yael Leibowitz Rabbinic Readings of a of Benot Zelaphchad Bound by Time? Women and Polarity In Tanach: How David Sefirat Ha’Omer Radical Book: Esther in Hazal And Goliath Shed Light On Our Understanding Of Megillat Ruth Mrs. Nechama Price Mrs. Shoshana Strong or Weak? Women in Schechter Rabbi Menachem Tanach Reflections on the Mirrors of Leibtag Mitzrayim: Looking Forward to The Women in Tanach Who Make Change Have No Name

$10 Admission • Free Admission for YU Students • Mincha & conclusion at 1:30pm A project of Yeshiva University’s Center for the Jewish Future and the Office of Student Affairs. Co-sponsored by YSU, SOY and TAC. For dedication and sponsorship opportunities, or for more information, please visit www.kollelyomrishon.org or e-mail [email protected].

Aliyah The Israel Experience... for a Lifetime Nefesh B’Nefesh provides support and guidance to help ensure a successful transition to your new life in Israel.

Aliyah Flights • Financial Assistance • Employment Resources Expedited Government Processing • Aliyah Guidance

Applications and information is available at: www.nbn.org.il or 1-866-4-ALIYAH

In cooperation with: In cooperation with: Ministry of Immigrant Absorption Rabbi David Aaron, Jed H. Abraham, Professor Abraham S. Abraham, Rabbi Dov Ber Abramowitz, Ms. Malka Adatto, Rabbi Elchanan Adler, Rabbi Aharon Adler, Rabbi Yosef Adler, Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein, Judy Alkoby, Rabbi Mordechai Alon, Rabbi Avraham Eliezer Alperstein, Rabbi Nisson Lippa Alpert, Rabbi William Altshul, Zohar Amar, HaRav , Joshua Amaru, Claudia Esther Amzallag, Rabbi Elisha Ancselovits, Rabbi Hayyim Angel, Rabbi Howard Apfel, Shira Apfel, Dr. Maryln Applebaum, Rabbi Yosef Leib Arnest, Rabbi Binyomin Aronowitz, Dr. Shawn Zelig Aster, Abigail Atlas, Dr. Harvey Babich, Dean Karen Bacon, Mrs. Miriam Bak, Rabbi Hanan Balk, Dalia Barenboim, Rabbi Natan Bar-Haim, Rabbi Shalom Baum, Rabbi Mordechai Becher, Rabbi Assaf Bednarsh, Rabbi Shmuel Belkin, Rabbi Eliyahu Ben-Chaim, Diana Benmergui, Rabbi David Berger, Rabbi Etan Moshe Berman, Rabbi Michael Bernstein, Dr. Moshe Bernstein, Rabbi Azarya Berzon, Rabbi Abraham Besdin, Mrs. Rachel Besser, Rabbi Ezra Bick, Rabbi Jack Bieler, Amanda Bier, Rabbi Yoel Bin Nun, Rabbi Elchanan Bin Nun, Rabbi Aaron TheBina, RabbiMarcos Josh Blass, Rabbiand Yitzchak Adina Blau, Rabbi KatzYosef Blau, Dr. Rivkah Blau, Rabbi Benjamin Blech, Rabbi Dr. J. David Bleich, Rabbi Moshe Bleich, Gerald J. Blidstein, Rabbi Akiva Block, Rabbi Dr. Jon Bloomberg, Dr. Norman Blumenthal, Rabbi Bodner, Rabbi Yehuda Dovid Borenstein, Rabbi Yitzchok Borenstein, Dr. Abba Borowich, Rabbi Reuven Brand, Ms. Miryam Brand, Rabbi Kenneth Brander, Rabbi Asher Brander, Dean Zelda Braun, Rabbi Yitzchak Breitowitz, Edward Breuer, Rabbi Alan Brill, Rabbi Abba Bronspeigel, Dr. Erica Brown, Rabbi Michael Broyde, Rabbi Ephraim A. Buckwold, Rabbi Ahron Dovid Burack, Esther Burns, Rabbi Menachem Burshtien, Rabbi Dr. Nathan Lopes Cardozo, Rabbi Yosef Carmel, Rabbi Shalom Carmy, Rabbi Strauchler Chaim, Rabbi , Rabbi Leon Charney, Isaac Chavel, Dr. Scott Chudnoff, Nechama Citrin, Eli Clark, Aaron Cohen, Rabbi Alfred Cohen, Rabbi Tanchum Cohen, Rabbi Mordechai Cohen, Rabbi Yitzchok Cohen, Stuart A. Cohen, Mrs. Suzanne Cohen, Rabbi Dovid Cohen, Ariella Cohen, Michal Cohen, Mrs. Shulamith Cohn, Ronald Cranford, Rabbi Avigdor Cyperstein, Rabbi Yaacov Darmoni, Rabbi Avishai David, Rabbi Edward Davis, Jennifer Deluty, Chief Rabbi Riccardo Di Segni, Prof. Jacob Dienstag, Chanie Dinerman, Rabbi Herbert Dobrinsky, Rabbi Solomon Drillman,A Project Rabbi Steve of Dworken, Yeshiva Rabbi AllyUniversity Ehrman, Rabbi CenterShlomo Einhorn, for Rabbi the Chaim Jewish Eisen, RabbiFuture Chaim Eisenstein, Rabbi Benny Eisner, Rabbi YUTorah.orgEliach, Dr. G.E. Elinson, Rav haRoshi , Rabbi Ya’akov Elman, Sarah Epstein, Tamar Epstein, Dr. Immanuel Etkes, Rabbi Yitzchak Etshalom, Jennifer Fathy, Jessica Feig, Rabbi Aaron Feigenbaum, Rabbi Aaron Feigenbaum, Rav Reuven Feinstein, Dr. Carl Feit, Rabbi Yaakov Feit, Rabbi Daniel Z. Feldman, Dr. Louis Feldman, Rabbi Jonathan Feldman, Dr. Adam Ferziger, Rabbi Chaim Feuerman, Professor Steven Fine, Rabbi Dr. Yoel Finkelman, Eitan Fiorino, Meira Fireman, Bernard J. Firestone, Esther Fischer, Rabbi Chonoch Henoch Fishman, Rabbi Tzvi Flaum, Ms. Elana Flaumenhaft, Rabbi Josh Flug, Rabbi David Fohrman, Rabbi Netanel Frankenthal, Rabbi Ezra Frazer, Esther Frederick, Rabbi Avidan Freedman, Rabbi Barry Freundel,Daily Frida Fridman, Shiur Rabbi Yosef Friedenson, • Michelle Daf Friedman, Yomi Rabbi Binny Friedman, • Rabbi Parshat Meir Fulda, Tova Gavrilova, Dr. Sheldon Gelman, Rabbi , Rabbi Yitzchak Genack, Rabbi Shmuel Gerstenfeld, Rabbi Gershon Gewirtz, Rabbi Jonathan Ginsberg, Rabbi Beinish Ginsburg, Ms. Leslie Ginsparg, Rabbi Ozer Glickman, Mrs. Shayna Goldberg, Michelle Goldberg, Rabbi Shraga Goldenhersh, Mrs. Yael Goldfischer, Joshua L. Golding, Dr. Dan Goldschlag, Rabbi Noah Goldstein, Rabbi Shmuel Goldstein, Adeena Goldstein, Ariella Goldstein, Rabbi Dovid Goldwasser,HaShavua Pearl Chana Goldwasser, Rabbi Meir• Goldwicht,Halacha Ms. Anne Gordon, Rabbi Moshe• History Gordon, Rabbi Moshe Gorelick, • Rabbi Yeruchim Gorelik, Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb, Atara Graubard Segal, Dr. Richard V. Grazi, Rabbi Nota Greenblatt, Dr. Wallace Greene, Yonit Gross, Rabbi Zvi Grumet, Dr. Naomi Grunhaus, Yael Grunseid, Rabbi Yehoshua Grunstein, Dr. Jeffrey S. Gurock, Rabbi Yaakov Haber, Rabbi Shmuel Hain, Rabbi Kenneth Hain, Rabbi Y’rachmael Hamberger, Rabbi Daniel Hartstein, Rabbi Daniel Hartstein, M.A. Hastings, David Hazony, Rabbi Nathaniel Helfgot, MachshavaRabbi Chaim Heller, Marvin Heller, David Hellman, • Rabbiand Yehuda Henkin, much Rabbi William Herskovitz, more! Rabbi , Rabbi Robert Hirt, Rabbi Shlomo Hochberg, Malcom Hoenlein, Rabbi Josh Hoffman, Sarah Ariella Hollander, Dr. Shalom Holtz, Rabbi Jesse Horn, Carmy Horowitz, Rabbi David Horwitz, Dr. Arthur Hyman, Rabbi Chaim Ilson, Rabbi Shimon Isaacson, Rabbi David Israel, Rabbi Chaim Jachter, Rabbi Ari Jacobson, Rabbi Yaacov Jaffe, Julian (Yoel) Jakobovitz, President , Esther Jungreis, Menachem Kagan, Mrs. Rivka Kahan, Rabbi Aharon Kahn, Rabbi Moshe Kahn, Rabbi Yair Kahn, Rabbi Yosef Kalinsky, Rabbi Nathan Kamenetsky, Rabbi Shmuel Kamentsky, Rabbi Yisroel Kaminetsky,Over Rabbi 34,000 Ephraim Kanarfogal, shiurim Dena Kapetansky, and Feige articles Kaplan, Lawrence and Kaplan, Prof.growing Lawrence Kaplan, every ,Rabbi Michael day. Katz, Dr. Jacob Katz, Rabbi Yaacov Moshe Katz, Shaina Katz, Adina Katzman, Rachel Katz-Sidlow, Sharon Kaufman, Menachem Kellner, Rabbi Benjamin Kelsen, Dr. AaronAll Kirschenbaum materials , Rabbi Shmuel available Klammer, Dr. Zanvel for Klein, downloadMrs. Dena Knoll, Rabbi Jeffreycompletely B. Kobrin, Rabbi Eliakim free. Koenigsberg, Rabbi Yishai Koenigsberg, Rebbetzin Leah Kohn, Rabbi Yonatan Kolatch, William Kolbrener, Professor Aaron Koller, Milton Konvitz, Chana Kosofsky, Rabbi Ira Kosowsky, Rabbi Shlomo Nosson Kotler, Rabbi Dr. Doniel Kramer, Rabbi Daniel Kraus, Mrs. Rachel Kraus, Haim Kreisel, Rabbi Elly Krimsky,Subscribe Rabbi , toRabbi a Dr. podcast John Krug, Rabbi Moshe or Krupka,e-mail Malkie subscriptionKrupka, Rabbi Yaacov Lach, Chanie of Ladaew,your Rachaely Laker, Rosh HaYeshiva Norman Lamm, Professor Dov Landau, Rabbi Doneal Lander, Dr. Sidney Langer, Chief Rabbi , Rabbi Israel Meir favoriteLau, Mrs. Yael Leibowitz, speaker Rabbi Menachem or Leibtag, series. Dr. Shnayer There’s Leiman, Dr. Harry Leiman,something Rebbetzin Abby Lerner, for Rabbi everyone Moshe Hakohen Lessin, Rabbi Lev, Rabbi Yonah Levant, Ms. Elisheva Levi, Rabbi Aaron Levine, Rabbi Yosef Dov Halevi Levine, Dr. Michelle J. Levine, Rabbi Dr. Zalman Levine, Rabbion Yosie the Levine, largest Rabbi Aaron Levitt, web Jacob site Lewin, forJed Lewinsohn, Jewish Rabbi Dr. learning , online. Rabbi Moshe Lichtenstein, Rabbi Meir Lichtenstein, Rabbi Moshe Lichtman, Rabbi Zevulun Lieberman, Emily J. Liebling, Diane Liebman, Rabbi , Nikki Lipman, John F. Loike, Rabbi Chaim Loike, Dr. John D. Loike, Dana Lotan, Ms. Adina Luber, Adina Maik, Cantor Joseph Malovany, Rabbi Mordechai Marcus, Rabbi Chaim Marcus, Rabbi Shmuel Marcus, Rabbi Ari Marcus, Rabbi Moshe Zevulun Margolies, Rebecca Marmor, Rabbi Shmuel Maybruch, Mrs. Sally Mayer, Michael P. McQuillan, Golda Meir, Rabbi Moshe Meiselman, Rabbi Baruch Pesach Mendelson, Rabbi Ami Merzel, Miriam Merzel, Rabbi Dovid Miller, Rabbi Michael Miller, Talia Miller, Rabbi Adam Mintz, Rabbi Jonathan Mishkin, Eliza Moskowitz, Rabbi Dovid Nachbar, Mois Navon, HaRav Avigdor Nebenzahl, Rabbi Yaakov B. Neuburger, Rebbetzin Peshi Neuburger, Mrs. C.B. Neugroschl, Mrs. Pnina Neuwirth, Rabbi Menachem Nissel, Helen Nissim, Dr. Rona Novick, Rabbi Shmuel Areyeh Olishevsky, Rabbi Uri Orlian, Dr. Mitchell Orlian, Rabbi Eli Ozarowski, Zemirah Ozarowski, Rabbi Chaim Packer, Rabbi Shraga Feivel Paretzky, Rabbi Yehuda Parnes, Dr. Moses Pava, Marina Pekar, Dr. David Pelcovitz, Rabbi Marc Penner, Gil S. Perl, Rabbi Shlomo Polachek, Rabbi Tuli Polak, Rabbi Moshe Ahron Poleyeff, Jennifer Polin, Rabbi Elazar Meir Preil, Mrs. Zlata Press, Dr. Rebecca Press Schwartz, Leyna Pressman, Mrs. Nechama Price,