Sunday, 7 p.m., Western Wall Square. Thirty thousand people. One of the largest, most powerful, and also most amorphous prayers this place has ever known. In prayers for Gilad Shalit or against the disengagement, for example, those gathered knew exactly what they were asking for. Here they were faced with only a giant question mark, not even knowing how to formulate their request. Who kidnapped the three? Where are they? Are they alive?
The three young faces that stared at us from every corner this week returned to their mother's womb in this prayer. This is how it is customary to pray for a person's fate, with the full name given to him at the circumcision ceremony, along with his mother's full name: Gil-Ad Michael ben Bat-Galim, Yaakov Naftali ben Deborah Rachel, Eyal ben Iris Tishura.
And even without this custom, these three mothers attracted a lot of attention this week. Noble, impressive, optimistic women, receiving hundreds of visitors and giving them hope, instead of the other way around. And all this despite the fact that they also understand the situation very well. One of the family members told me this week that the house is full of "comforters," and immediately corrected himself to "supporters." The mothers of the kidnapped speak Hebrew, but sometimes it seems like they also speak a second language, which is not the news Israeli that we are used to hearing. The language of prayer. Sometimes it sounds almost hallucinatory in light of the difficult assessments of the situation, sometimes it sounds like the only realistic thing that can be done.
Want more news, videos and stories? Join the Haredim 10 WhatsApp channel >>
But not all of us are as restrained as the families. Here are some less noble cases that this tense week has revealed:
The insensitive statuses from the left, and the automatic right-wing desire to be offended. Maybe we should internalize that the left also has its own "hill boys"? Provocateurs who defame the image of the entire camp, and think this is exactly the time to insult? And maybe, at the same time, we should also pay less attention to every insensitive tweet and not turn it into an online commotion? This is clearly not the time for such statements from the left, but it is also not the time to chase them and almost enjoy the right to be offended, from the right.
Where is the "man in charge of the Internet" when you need him? In an era in which it is customary to eulogize traditional media, both written and broadcast, this week it was proven that not every surfer is king. Social networks are faster and cooler, but much less responsible. True, the IDF spokesman needs to provide much more reliable information to prevent rumor mongering. But at the same time, this week it was proven that even in the era of the information revolution, real journalists who are subject to the law and ethics are needed.
On the other hand, where was the media when 11 terrorist attacks were thwarted in recent months? It was only in early June that the Shin Bet revealed this disturbing statistic, but it didn't make huge headlines. Perhaps we were too busy with bored teenagers spraying "price tag" and forgot the difference between "terrorism" and terrorism. The Shin Bet's press release about the significant increase in attempts to carry out kidnapping attacks did not reach the Israeli public at all. Too bad. Perhaps the vigilance of those three young men would have increased as well.
The presidential elections, remember something like that? Last week, I wrote here about Rabbi Yosef Rivlin, one of the leaders of the dynasty of President-elect Reuven Rivlin, who is considered one of the builders of Jerusalem. A reader from the north of the country asked me this week whether Rabbi Rivlin was an ultra-Orthodox or a Zionist. The answer is unequivocal: both. And this answer touches on one of the most fundamental questions regarding Zionism: Is the Zionist movement a rebellion against Jewish tradition, or a natural continuation of it? Did it begin with pioneers who broke the yoke of the commandments, or with a shtreimel on their heads?
It is convenient for the secular Zionist movement to suppress the part played by Rabbi Rivlin and his contemporaries, and to start Zionism with the first Aliyah and not in Mea Shearim. It is also convenient for some of the Haredim today to forget that active Haredi-pioneering spirit. Both of them ignore one small thing: the facts.
Already in Rabbi Rivlin's generation, there were those who noticed the attempt to push the feet of the ultra-Orthodox Zionists, who, as far as they were concerned, simply immigrated to the land and built settlements there. Rabbi Kook, who feared that pioneers like Rivlin would be erased from the historical story, said at the time: "We are commanded to tell about these first pioneers with holy admiration, and to put all of this in memory in a great book." Rabbi Tikochinsky, director of the "Etz Chaim" Yeshiva, said at one of the memorials for Rabbi Rivlin: "The ancient railroad pavers, and the first builders of the old settlement type - the new builders had no idea who or why to come. Only after they paved the way did the new builders find the track to continue and expand the settlement, with the help of God." The new president is well aware of this important historical chapter, and has said in the past: "Zionism began here in Jerusalem, when Herzl was still a baby in Europe.".
But it is doubtful that most of the public knows this. Recently, the family of Rabbi Yoel Moshe Salomon (Rabbi Rivlin's friend and partner in the journey) published the memoirs of the head of the family, one of the founders of Petach Tikva. When they arrived at the printing house with the book, the manager of the place was alarmed: "Who is this rabbi whose picture you want to put on the cover? I always thought that Yoel Moshe Salomon, the one from the song, was a pioneer with sandals and a silly hat.".
And in a week of Israeli unity, this week's Torah portion, the "Korah" portion, is the portion most associated with controversy. Korah and his men dispute the leadership of Moses and Aaron in a painful quarrel that tears the people apart. Chazal look at this story and ask us to forever distinguish between two types of disputes: "dispute for the sake of heaven," which is ideological and involves sincerity and a desire to clarify the truth, and "dispute that is not for the sake of heaven," which is fundamentally a quarrel over honor, money, power, jealousy, and more. Korah's dispute, they state, was a dispute that is not for the sake of heaven.
But even after this diagnosis, we have been left throughout the generations with many disputes in which both sides are convinced that they are fighting "for the sake of heaven." I recently heard the following sentence about this: Many of the disputes that are for the sake of heaven – are indeed for the sake of heaven, but only in the first minute. After a minute, vested interests come into play.
Jewish status:""Our brothers, all of the House of Israel, who are in trouble and captivity, whether at sea or on land, may the place have mercy on them and bring them out of trouble into ease, and from darkness into light, and from slavery into redemption. May it be done in the shortest time and at the most favorable time, and may we say, Amen." (From the prayer)
• Sivan Rahav Meir's column is published in Yedioth Ahronoth
