  |
|
| |||||
Rabin's assassination was not the first in Israel. But the high profile of a prime minister, the public brash hullabaloo and the personal exterior of the supposedly religious murderer create a distinct political and ethical statement. It highlights the fact that perhaps something was lost along the way to warrant newer, more specific messages and ethics. The very reality of the hand of man striking his fellow, even more, that of Jew against Jew, in murder, starkly demonstrates that "simply because there is no fear of G-d in this place and they shall kill me."
"This expression of the times," says Rav Gafni, "expresses this pointedly. The fact that one who externally appears as religious, but who leans more dominantly on his secular side, and performs acts that any religious man would absolutely affirm that murder is forbidden, accentuates the firm knowledge that 'Though shalt not kill' means exactly that. There is absolutely no condoning a Jew who shoots another Jew. Such a deed can easily happen again when matters become more acute and each side is convinced of its truth.
"Such a situation can backfire on a large segment and can lead to other murders from those convinced of the truth of such incitement. A tragic situation. For a lack of G-d-fear in a place can surely lead to the loss of lives. By people for whom the boundaries of Halacha are their guiding light and determines their path in life, such a thing cannot and could not happen and I hope will never happen, but the danger nevertheless exists.
Regarding the issue which served as the background for the assassination: Man, blood and earth point to the ladder of preference of the Torah outlook, as Maran HaRav Shach determined for us. Man and the prohibition of bloodshed are more important than land, with the objective of shedding the least amount of blood. Where do we stand in a position approaches that of the Left, rather than our traditional place leans closer to that of the Right?
There is no doubt that Ariel Sharon was one of the most outstanding leaders of the State of Israel for decades, for better and for worse, except for one small problem: he was not assassinated by a lowly assassin but died on his sickbed in a hospital, after existing in a coma for eight years. Thus, each year when his death's anniversary roles around, few people commemorate or even remember it except for the few from his home in Chavat Hashikmim down south. The media does not mention the day in special editions nor are any public events held on that anniversary. His rich military and political career do not enjoy any review or critique, and thus he is relegated to a forgotten doom, together with his colleagues and predecessors who went the way of all men.
It is conceivable to assume that were it not for the assassination of Rabin, his end would mirror that of his predecessor. It is likely that he would have lost the next election to Netanyahu, at least according to the surveys made at the time, and would have then returned home as a past prime minister, occupied with writing his memoirs and remembered negatively as signing the Oslo Agreement which brought in its wake the gang of murderers and its leader, Yassir Arafat.
Part 2
This article is a translation of an article that appeared in the Israeli Yated 19 years ago.
The tzaddik, Rav Aharon Rabinowitz, zt'l, showed incredible self-sacrifice for Torah under the Communist Regime. When he moved to Eretz Yisroel his dedication to his fellow Jews behind the Iron Curtain remained equally strong. He was a talmid chochom who was also versed in Kabboloh. His prayers emanated from the depths of his pure heart. He was the rabbi of Egged, the Israeli bus network, and he developed unique methods to bring many people back to Judaism. The fourth of Kislev (November 24th) will be the thirty-ninth th yahrtzeit of the mesirus nefesh Yid. He arrived in Israel 69 years ago on the 27th of Cheshvan (November 18).
The War Against Missionaries
Jewish immigrants from Morocco resided in the Givat Mordechai neighborhood of Jerusalem at that time. Their financial state was very difficult.
This Google Custom Search looks only in this website.
Outstanding Articles From Our Archives
Opinion & Comment
"Then on the third day Avrohom lifted up his eyes and saw the place far off. And Avrohom said to his young men, `Stay here with the donkey while I and the lad go yonder and prostrate ourselves, and then return to you'" (Bereishis 22:4- 5). Rashi (v. 4) explains that Avrohom's "seeing the place" means his seeing a cloud hovering over the mountain. Chazal (Tanchuma, Vayeiro 23) tell us that the two lads who had gone together with him, Yishmoel and Eliezer, could not see this sight. Avrohom therefore told them, "Stay here with the donkey" -- that they are a people similar to donkeys. R' Sheila in Brochos (58a) called an Akum a "donkey," as is written, "Whose members are like those of donkeys and whose issue is like that of horses" (Yechezkel 23:20).
But why, just because they did not reach the lofty level of seeing Shechina on Mt. Moriah, was their status said to be equivalent to donkeys? Are there not many Jews, even many prominent ones, who cannot see the Shechina? Should we consider all of them to be like donkeys?
At any rate, we can infer that a person's failure to reach the level he can reach is considered a definite shortcoming.
There is a simpler way to explain this. Actually it is impossible to expect each person to envision the Shechina. If according to his lowly level he cannot do so, why should he be criticized?
Only Eliezer the servant of Avrohom, who disseminated his Rebbe's teachings through the world, could be criticized, since he himself was a godol hador. Not only did Eliezer digest all of Avrohom's teachings, he was actively engaged in enlightening others with those teachings. Why could Eliezer, whose stature was undeniably elevated, not see the Shechina? If he nonetheless did not see the Shechina, this definitely shows that another factor was involved in his failure.
Opinion & Comment
The sedros of Lech Lechoh and Vayeiro deal primarily with the ten nisyonos of Avrohom Ovinu. In Michtav MeEliyohu )vol. 2, pg. 162 (Rabbi Dessler z"l points out a surprising anomaly in the nature of these tests. Avrohom Ovinu is most famous for his middah of chessed, loving-kindness. Correspondingly, one would have expected that the nisyonos he was given would have been ones wherein he was challenged to perform chessed under difficult circumstances. However, this was not the nature of most of the tests. In fact, in most of the tests he was challenged not to perform chessed.
Most of his nisyonos challenged him to use his middah of gevurah in order to continue along the path of his life. For example, Avrohom had to be hard- hearted in sending away Yishmoel in order to protect Yitzchok. He had to separate himself from his elderly father Terach and all of his friends and acquaintances in the nisoyon of Lech Lechoh, and he had to separate himself from the rest of humanity in the nisoyon of bris miloh.
Rabbi Dessler z"l explains that this is because Avrohom Ovinu reached perfection in the trait of chessed by himself. The purpose of the nisyonos that Hakodosh Boruch Hu gave him was to develop his trait of gevurah, inner strength. Avrohom's trait of chesed would only be complete in conjunction with his developing to the utmost his middah of gevurah.
This requires some explanation, why does chesed require gevurah in order to reach its complete fruition?
|
|||||
.jpg)
