This week's article was closed before word of the boys' deaths became known.
I must open the column with a rare observation: It struck me this week, on Sunday at nine o'clock in the evening in Rabin Square. These mothers of the kidnapped boys? They are simply amazing. They inspire wonder, encouragement, faith and strength every time you hear them. They said it before me, it doesn't matter.
On Sunday evening, at the height of the rally in Tel Aviv, I received a text message from a friend: "I hope you're seeing this on the news now." I looked around at the thousands and wrote to him: "I don't need to watch the news, I'm here in the square, seeing it in reality. Amazing." But he replied: "No, no, you have to watch the interview that Gideon Sa'ar gave to Yonit Levy now. There's no such thing.".
Want more news, videos and stories? Join the Haredim 10 WhatsApp channel >>
And so it became clear to me that while the religious were asking themselves whether they had succeeded in conquering Tel Aviv and creating inter-sectoral unity there for one evening - at those very hours, a real battle had begun for the future Jewish face of the city.
""Now we move on to an issue that many Tel Avivians see today as a blow to their way of life. Interior Minister Gideon Saar, hello," Yonit Levy began with a smoldering look.
What is a Roshef? It seems to me that an interview with someone from the Qasama clan from Hebron would have been conducted with less force. After all, there is a familiar media format called a confrontation. You bring one for and one against to the studio, and voila, there is a mess. The viewers at home don't understand anything, everyone follows everyone else's words, and the ratings probably go up.
Usually Miri Regev and Zahava Galon staff these kinds of columns, but this time it was completely different: the pros were represented by the senior minister and the cons were represented by the media itself, that is, the senior presenter in the studio. All that was missing was a moderator, a responsible adult who would come and say in an objective tone: "Okay, Gideon and Yonit, we understand both of your positions, let's put a point here, thank you very much.".
In fact, who determines what is for and what is against? As far as I'm concerned, of course, Saar is for. He came to speak in favor of the Sabbath. A day of rest, of family, of holiness. Not a day to buy Compact-Secret laundry softener with the dual action, both stain remover and bleacher. But in practice, Saar was presented entirely against: against liberalism, against openness, against life. In the official response from Mayor Ron Huldai, published that evening, it was stated that the Minister of the Interior "is setting Tel Aviv back decades.".
Do you get it? The Sabbath is something primitive from the past, it contradicts progress. It's like suddenly going back to the days when people used to travel around Tel Aviv by horse and cart.
But in order for us, the viewers, to fully understand who is for us and who is against us, it is not enough for the anchor to shout at the Minister of the Interior. We also need graphic elements to illustrate this to us. In academic-media language, this is called "framing.".
The media can never be objective, some researchers in the field state, because it always packages the information and presents it to us through a certain filter, within a framework, without us noticing.
That's why behind Yonit Levy hung a huge picture of supermarket shelves with lots of products that every family in Israel must have: 5% cheese, milk, Frilli, chocolate - and on them was written in red, in large, in a plumb line: "Closed.".
Do you understand, Tel Avivians? This is what Gideon Saar is going to do to you. Starve you on the weekends. Mom, you promised us a cottage for Shabbat.
Interesting. I, for example, would place a different logo behind it, of two lit Shabbat candles, a challah with an embroidered napkin on it, and a happy family. Each one with its own illustrated photo. The people photographed have a connection to the article.
Well, after all that, you can already guess what the interview itself will sound like. Levy attacked as "the little citizen who just wants to buy food on Shabbat," and Saar explained well that these are criminal shopkeepers who the High Court of Justice has also ruled are blatantly breaking the law.
He detailed how social MKs from the left, such as Dov Hanin and Merv Michaeli, also support him, and spoke about unfair competition against small businesses and neighborhood grocery stores and the weakest workers in society who must work seven days a week. Finally, he explained that cafes, restaurants, and the like will continue to operate, and that he was only talking about supermarkets.
But then two arguments were brought up against him that were later heard over and over again (even before the third argument, by Gila Almagor, who simply compared the decision to cancer).
First, Yonit Levy argued: "Gideon Sa'ar, let's put this on the table: You see your political future as prime minister, and therefore you are taking a step that is good for the religious." Sa'ar replied that regarding the Sabbath, he does not accept the division between religious and secular and returned to explaining the social and economic value of the issue.
I actually enjoyed the premise behind the question: Sa'ar just wants to flatter the religious. Walla. How beautiful. In a political era of exclusion of the religious, in a time when Judaism is perceived as a problem, in a public discourse that is all liberal legislation, suddenly a politician arises who, according to the allegations against him, thinks that the path to the prime minister passes through the Sabbath? Charming. I have no problem with flattery, the question is in which direction.
Every politician flatters someone or something, the question is what milieu he wants to impress and what public opinion he cares about. After all, in the very week that former Education Minister Sa'ar chose to flatter the Sabbath and its lovers, the current Education Minister chose to flatter in a completely different direction. In the same hours when Sa'ar went from studio to studio and confidently explained how important the day of rest is, even though his position is unpopular, the most unpopular, in the eyes of the media, Firon went from studio to studio and did not stop apologizing and explaining, so that the media would forgive him for half an unpopular sentence.
It was literally a mirror image: While the secular minister explained how the Sabbath was a national matter and not just a religious matter, the religious, rabbinical minister apologized and explained that a distinction must be made between a "halachic family" and a "civil family" and that halachic law was only his private matter ("I am an Orthodox rabbi, what should I do?").
But the climax is yet to come. Yonit Levy's last question came from the realms of gossip and entertainment, where it has recently been reported that Gideon Sa'ar is getting stronger. "Getting stronger" in journalistic terminology means that he sometimes ties a red thread on his wrist or goes to some high-profile party, but in the case of the Minister of the Interior, it is probably a more internal process. He observes Shabbat. Yes, that's right. He doesn't answer the phones, he doesn't drive.
If the decision to enforce the Sabbath laws can be dismissed as a "wink to the religious," what can be said about a Jew who simply stops desecrating the Sabbath? This too is a well-calculated step that is entirely preparation for a future confrontation with Netanyahu, Lapid, Bennett, and Ya'alon? Did a political strategist tell him that he now needs to win the heart of Yankel Litzman and not Assi Ezer? Is there no limit to political cynicism?
The truth is, I was suspicious at first too. I first heard about it about a year ago, when someone told me that Saar had been studying Torah regularly for three years with one of the most serious rabbis in Jerusalem. I was surprised. I didn't believe it.
As far as I'm concerned, Sa'ar was an ambitious Likud politician, and I didn't understand why he would waste an hour a week on deep camaraderie. What would that give him in the center of the Likud? After all, some politicians sometimes seem so full of themselves that it seems almost impossible for them to undergo any change. So, a significant move closer to Gideon Sa'ar's Sabbath observance, like this in the middle of his life? Are you crazy?
My interlocutor assured me that it was serious, but even when I already believed him – I didn’t say a word about it to anyone. There is something illegitimate about bringing out those who are getting stronger (or as a good friend of mine, a convert himself, calls it: "upgrading"). It’s not even moral. From the many conversations I’ve had with people who are discovering their Judaism for the first time, it turns out that the easy part is falling in love with the Torah and God. The hard part is telling people about it.
Just imagine what a blow it would be for Gideon Sa'ar, a 48-year-old senior minister, to suddenly tell his party members, or his wife Geula Even: "Don't call me on Shabbat, I don't answer the phones anymore. Yes, not even on WhatsApp." It's a slow, measured, and personal process, one that you really don't want the general public poking its nose into if you're not ready yet.
So Sa'ar has already been exposed, but I will never tell you here about the famous singer, the top lawyer, and the senior IDF general who are gaining strength these days.
If so, this is how it sounded on the broadcast: "The opponents of your decision," the sullen Yonit scolded him, "point to the fact that you yourself started keeping Shabbat and ask why the whole city should follow your lead following this decision?""
Saar didn't blink. I squirmed in my chair for him with tension, but he continued to stare straight ahead and said: "These are not serious things. With all due respect, no one asked Supreme Court President Grunis, who wrote the ruling, whether he observes Shabbat or not. You too, when you ask me questions, I don't ask you whether you observe Shabbat or not, and if not – maybe you're not asking objectively? With all due respect, this is my private matter, I know how to exercise my discretion in a state-like manner, and my decision will stand the test before the court.".
""Minister Gideon Saar," said Yonit, "there is Qassam rocket fire in the south, we must end it, thank you at this stage.".
And everything, I don't know how, suddenly connected with me: the shooting in the south, the fruit of the disengagement that was sold to us from those very studios in a sympathetic and enthusiastic framing. A shooting that interrupts a poignant confrontation in the studio over the question of what Shabbat is in the State of Israel and what its importance is, which is happening right while thousands are listening to mothers full of faith and a different spirit in Rabin Square. These weren't three different news headlines on the agenda. Everything, it seems to me, is connected to those fundamental questions that we haven't yet answered for ourselves.
