| |||
|
IN-DEPTH FEATURES
The tale of the controversy surrounding the reinterment of
the remains of Theodore Herzl in Israel, as it emerges from
private documents in Rav Tzvi Weinman's archive.
A Mixture of Light and Darkness
The accusatory question was featured inside a prominent box
on the front page of the HaKol daily: Who Allowed
Rav . . . To Take Part In Herzl's Funeral? Behind the
headline raged a fierce campaign led by Rav Meir Dovid
Lowenstein z'l, protesting the participation of
prominent members of the chareidi community in the ceremonial
funeral that was held when Theodore Herzl's remains were re-
interred in Yerushalayim.
It was in 5709 (1949). The State of Israel was barely a year
old and the largest institutional body of chareidi Jewry,
Agudas Yisroel, was faced with the dilemma of whether to
approve or to oppose participation in the newly-proclaimed
state's institutions of government. The issue of whether the
Agudah would extend de facto or de jure
recognition to the state still awaited clarification.
In practice, the extent of the Agudah's participation was
initially decidedly liberal. One of its representatives was a
cabinet minister, while one of the party's factions, Poalei
Agudas Yisroel (PAI) was straining at the leash to enter the
Zionist enterprise as a full partner. This too, was the
government that included the United Religious Front which
included all of the religious parties, a short-lived hybrid
that was released onto the political stage to quiver and
hover in the air for a while like a soap bubble before
bursting, in the days before the involvement of the Moetzes
Gedolei Hatorah in the political process had become a matter
of course.
Backed by an enthusiastic media, the new government hoped to
embrace the chareidi circles as full partners — thereby
neutralizing them — very worried as it was over that
community's alarming tendency towards separatism.
From within there was ferment on the sidelines from the
direction of the PAGI movement, a faction of separatist
"ideological troublemakers" (that was in many senses the
opposite of the rebellious PAI movement). PAGI had been
established in, and was run from, Yerushalayim by a group of
powerful activists whose influence was far greater than their
numbers warranted. This presumptuous group even published the
first daily newspaper of its kind, entitled HaKol,
expressing the positions of the movement and its members'
views.
While PAGI was a divisive movement, the ideological
opposition within the mainstream Agudah was embodied by Rabbi
Meir Dovid Lowenstein, the Zeirei Agudas Yisroel
representative. Rav Lowenstein took an independent line and
did not submit to party discipline when it came to voting on
an array of current issues. As the `rebel' of the Agudah and
of the whole United Religious Front he was constantly
clashing with the institutions of the World Agudah and had to
clarify his stand to them.
Rabbi Tzvi Weinman, author of From Katowice to the Fifth
of Iyar (in Hebrew) kept these letters of Rabbi
Lowenstein's to the party's leaders and has let us use
them.
Agudas Yisroel's pragmatic approach was made possible by lack
of semantics and ceremony in the practical parliamentary
arena, though there was no shortage of controversy about
which tactics to employ in dealing with the government. Rabbi
Lowenstein once absented himself from a vote on the budget,
refusing to toe the party line that was being imposed on him.
For this and similar steps he had to defend himself before
the Agudah leadership of Eretz Yisroel and abroad.
A Facade of Unity
This inner tension took on a practical aspect in Av 5709 when
the citizens of the state were informed with fanfare that the
remains of Theodore Herzl, the `Envisioner of the State' (the
Hebrew phrase could also be translated `Prophet of the
State') were to be reinterred in the Holy Land. The country
stood at attention in respectful silence. The heads of
government saw the event both as the realization of a vision
and as the fulfillment of Herzl's expressed wish that his
remains be reburied in the Land.
The event assumed supreme importance as a characteristic
symbol of allegiance or otherwise to the Zionist ideal.
Within the chareidi community it precipitated a degree of
ideological distress. Should the separatist banner be kept
hidden once again and the festive procession be joined? Or
maybe the time had come to take a short breath of
independence? Was it at all certain that halochoh permitted
participation in a parade honoring the man who, more than any
other, symbolized heretical culture and the most extremely
irreligious and estranged face of Zionism?
The arrangements for the ceremony received legal sanction,
provided by the Knesset. Besides the state ceremony, a
special session of the Knesset would convene to mark the
occasion and to honor the memory of the reinterred personage.
What would Agudas Yisroel do? How would it justify its
actions? What is straightforward to us today — that
such a question is put to gedolei Yisroel — was
then not yet the routine way to solve such questions.
The issue of Ha'aretz on the twenty-third of Av 5709
reported with evident concern that, "rumors are circulating
in the corridors of the Knesset that Agudas Yisroel's
executive committee has decided to boycott the funeral of
Herzl's remains" but it emphasizes that the "Agudah leaders
have strongly denied this."
The ones who didn't have a moment's hesitation were the PAI
members who fell over themselves in their fawning. The
Ha'aretz report states that, "PAI made the point
strongly that they will accord honor to the remains of this
great national leader, as befits any Jew whose heart harbors
nationalistic and human sentiments . . ."
The paper then reveals a `secret.' "We have learned from a
reliable source that Mr. Lowenstein indeed proposed a boycott
to his fellow members but the Agudah's executive committee
rejected his proposal and obligated Agudah members to take
part in the ceremonies like all other Knesset parties and
groupings in the yishuv."
Put to the Test
What actually happened?
Ha'aretz reported in shock, "It was a surprise that
the benches of the Communists remained empty at the festive
Knesset session; neither did they take part in the ceremonial
reception of the coffin . . . Their longstanding position is
common knowledge and has seemingly undergone no change."
The report then continues, "Stranger by far however was the
behavior of the `opposition within the coalition.'" [What a
pretentious description! — D.T.] "While Mr. M.D.
Lowenstein, one of the Agudah representatives in the
religious party, took part in the Knesset session, he was
absent from the ceremonial reception of the coffin in the
afternoon."
What lay behind Lowenstein's absence? And what did the
question on HaKol's front page — Who Allowed
Rav . . . To Take Part In Herzl's Funeral? —
mean?
In a well-reasoned letter to R' Yaakov Rosenheim zt'l,
President of the World Agudah, Rabbi Lowenstein relates what
really happened and poses a probing question to his political
rivals in his party. He writes, "Agudas Yisroel's
parliamentary committee decided to participate in the Knesset
session devoted to Herzl but not to participate in the
funeral. This decision appeared in the press the very next
day, despite the decision that it should remain secret. I
regret having submitted to party discipline and taking part
in the session, [including] standing in silence. We had to
listen to the speeches made by the Knesset chairman, Yosef
Shprinzak, who announced that with the approval of all that
is holy to our nation and of all past generations, he was
including Herzl among our nation's holy figures . . . and the
Prime Minister's speech [in which he] equated Herzl with
Moshe Rabbenu and with Yosef, lehavdil . . ."
Then comes the about turn. "As soon as knowledge of our
[planned] absence from the funeral became known, fear and
dread seized our leaders. The parliamentary committee was
immediately convened and it was decided to change the earlier
resolution and to allow everyone freedom of choice over
whether or not to attend the funeral. But, wonder of wonders,
there was a report again in the next day's papers —
again, despite the secrecy — that Agudas Yisroel had
decided at the last minute to participate in the funeral.
Naturally, this brought renewed attacks against me for
organizing a `one-man boycott.' "
What about PAI? Rabbi Lowenstein relates, "The PAI
kibbutzim sent their representatives to the funeral
with bags of earth from their land and emptied them into the
grave. The PAI settlements Masmiya and Kibbutz Chofetz Chaim
went out onto the road to meet the procession. The entire
ceremony was purely worship of a false messiah. They used the
pesukim, `And when the aron moved on (Vayehi
binso'a ho'Oron)' and `Awaken Yerushalayim for your king
has come.' They also wrote that with his burial there,
Yerushalayim has attained a higher level of holiness [Afro
lepumei — D.T.] and they intend to erect a museum
around his grave, as has been done [at Lenin's tomb] in
Moscow, a place that will be the destination of `thousands of
pilgrims.' "
Here Rabbi Lowenstein then had his own piercing question to
ask: "It is hard to describe what a laughing stock we have
now become in the eyes of the yishuv, who certainly
cannot understand why we have suddenly grown so enthusiastic
over Herzl and what connection it might have with our
membership in the government?"
The Aftermath
What were the views of the gedolei haTorah? Were they
even approached? Such obvious questions were hardly ever
asked back then. Rabbi Lowenstein himself doesn't even offer
this as a reason for his absence from the funeral. He tried
independently to impose the involvement of the Moetzes
Gedolei Hatorah — to which some had assigned merely
`presidential' [i.e. honorary] status — upon the
party.
In a letter that he sent to all the members of the Moetzes
Gedolei Hatorah, Rabbi Lowenstein wrote, "There is no doubt
that so long as it is not known who is responsible for what
happened within the Agudah camp with regard to the funeral of
Herzl's remains, mutual confidence — between the Agudah
Knesset members and the members of the parliamentary
committee [the ones who confirmed the alteration of the first
resolution — D.T.] — cannot return to our ranks.
It seems to me that one of the highest functions of the
Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah is to see to it that confidence
exists. Every day that passes [in the present atmosphere]
does further damage."
Rabbi Lowenstein suspected that the news of the first
resolution had been intentionally leaked to the press in
order to damage him and to isolate him in his campaign. He
asked the leaders of the Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah to conduct
an internal investigation to find out who had leaked the
report to the press, but the Moetzes merely asked each of the
representatives who sat on the parliamentary committee to
write a declaration stating that they "hadn't leaked [news
of] the decision to anyone else." From Rabbi Lowenstein's
letter it is apparent that it was doubtful whether this
request had been fulfilled.
In his speech at the celebrations that Zeirei Agudas Yisroel
organized marking the reception of sifrei Torah by
Kibbutz Kommemiyus, Rabbi Lowenstein mentioned the issue of
the participation in the funeral. A well-known irreligious
newspaper described the speech as having been "in the spirit
of what was the norm in Agudas Yisroel circles decades ago in
the Diaspora." This one-sided slant seems to reflect the
views his rivals. The report concludes, "Echoes of the speech
reached the Religious Front, which is about to reach drastic
conclusions with regard to Mr. Lowenstein."
In Retrospect
Looking back almost sixty years, it seems clear that Rabbi
Lowenstein's approach has emerged victorious. Today, Agudas
Yisroel's separatism is starker and, most important, all its
conduct is subject to the control of the Moetzes Gedolei
Hatorah.
Herzl is buried in grey anonymity near the forgotten grave of
his father. If there is any way that his grave can be
portrayed as a museum it is only with regard to the worn-
out, mortally wounded Zionist ideology, which is in its final
twitches.
And one final thought: Where is PAI which jumped onto the
Zionist bandwagon with a loud cheer? Very little, if
anything, remains.
Falsehood has no endurance! The truth endures.
|
All material
on this site is copyrighted and its use is restricted.
Click here for conditions of use.