Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:04 PM
|
ALL CONTENTS UNDER RESERVE EXPLICITLY WITHOUT PREJUDICE |
|
|
”…what your organization is trying to accomplish…scope and emphasis
of your work…” (òáøéú) R. Binyomin, Shalom: Thank you for your thoughtful reply;
please accept my apologies for the delay in my response. Let me begin with a clarification
regarding “my organization”. I do not personally lead, represent
or “have” an Organization as the term is generally understood. The term
“organization”, as I believe that it is generally understood, is used to
describe a group of individuals that operate within a formal, top-down hierarchical
framework – and most often, one that is formally “registered” (in some
manner) to “the authorities”. In that sense, the Tzibur is not an
“organization” at all. There are no “officers” in the usual
sense of the term; there is no Board of Directors. There are no fund-raising activities
or programs. By design, there exists no mechanism
at all for tax-deductible donations. The “organization” espoused by the
Tzibur is specifically the methodology that has been universally practiced
according to the Torah for organizing
Civil Society. Thus, the most precise reply to a
question regarding “what your organization is trying to accomplish” would be: “the Restoration of Traditional Jewish Civil Society”. The terminology used in this “mission
statement” requires extensive, precise and detailed definition. But first, it is important to
establish some fundamental principles. It has been said many times that
Torah differs from “religions” in that the Torah addresses all aspects of
life, whereas “religions” are concerned exclusively with spiritual
matters. Unfortunately, the concept of “all aspects of life” is usually
misunderstood to refer to a rather loose collection of attitudes that is
limited to the broad principles of “ethical” behavior as might be delivered
by a university course called “Ethics”, and little else. The actual fact is that the Torah
gives precise instructions for all forms of human interaction, whereas “religion”
(in the common parlance) is restricted to more “spiritual” concerns such as
prayer and ritual. To give two rather simplistic
illustrations: 1) The
Rambam, in the preface to Hilchot Mechira lists “the method of buying and selling”
as one of the 613 Mitzvot. The halachot that detail the proper
performance of this Commandment are quite precise in their application, and were practiced (and
enforced) by most of the peoples of the world throughout history under Common
Law and the Law of the Land as derived almost verbatim from the Talmudic
principles of contracts, agreements and exchanges. Note that this
nearly universal practice came to an end approximately 100 years ago with the
onset of the First World War and the adoption of the now prevalent network of
private central banks that issue most of the currency and foreign exchange
that is used in commerce at the present time. 2) The method by
which Torah society selects and organizes its “leaders” is quite detailed,
and provides the very foundation of Traditional Jewish Civil Society.
One specific detail stands in stark contrast to the current practice: there
are no “elections” in Torah – only “selections”. Representatives
must be selected from among those
individuals physically present, and the representation itself is
substantially identical to the relationship we commonly describe as a Power
of Attorney. We will return to these examples
later, but the fundamental principle at work in the Torah approach to Civil
Society is one of individual
responsibility. Thus, there is no precedent anywhere
in Torah the concept of “limited liability”. While the Torah requires individuals
to form legitimate and lawful partnerships, there is no place in Traditional
Jewish Civil Society for non-human persons (such as corporations) that are
exempt from all of the legal and moral obligations mandated by Torah. Regarding the “scope
and emphasis”
of our work, it must be said at the outset that all guidelines are
recommended on the basis of specific sources and clear precedent in
accepted literature. This task is simplified by the fact
the most of the “disagreements” for which our people have
become famous (infamous?) are matters of local Community custom and, in
nearly all cases of significant divergence, are concerned exclusively with
prayer and ritual – areas that are clearly beyond the scope of our “mission”. The following passage provides a
convenient starting point: ëåôéï áðé äòéø æä àú æä ìáðåú ìäï áéú äëðñú ì÷ðåú ìäï ñôø úåøä åðáéàéí åøùàéï áðé äòéø
ìäúðåú òì äùòøéí åòì äîãåú åòì ùëø äôåòìéí øùàéï ìòùåú ÷éöúï øùàéï áðé äòéø ìåîø ëì îé ùéøàä àöì ôìåðé éäà ðåúï ëê åëê ëì îé
ùéøàä àöì îìëåú éäà ðåúï ëê åëê ëì îé ùøöä àå ùúøòä ôøúå áéï äæøòéí éäà ðåúï
ëê åëê åëì îé ùúøòä áäîä ôìåðéú éäà ðåúï ëê åëê øùàéï ìòùåú ÷éöúï åøùàéï äöîøéï åäöáòéï ìåîø ëì î÷ç ùéáà ìòéø ðäà ëåìðå ùåúôéï áå øùàéï äðçúåîéï ìòùåú øâåòä áéðéäï øùàéï äçîøéï ìåîø ëì îé ùéîåú ìå çîåø ìòîåã ìå çîåø àçø îúä áëåñéà àéï öøéëéï
ìäòîéã ìå çîåø ãìà áëåñéà öøéëéï ìäòîéã ìå çîåø åàí àîø úðå ìé åàðé ìå÷ç
ìòöîé àéï ùåîòéï ìå àìà ìå÷çéï åðåúðéï ìå øùàéï äñôðéï ìåîø ëì îé ùúàáã ñôéðúå ðòîéã ìå ñôéðä àçøú àáãä áëåñéà àéï
öøéëéï ìäòîéã ìå ãìà áëåñéà öøéëéï ìäòîéã ìå åàí ôéøù ìî÷åí ùàéï áðé àãí
ôåøùéï àéï öøéëéï ìäòîéã ìå. úåñôúà á"î éà,éá Here we see that there is practical
purpose as well as a Torah imperative to organize. The format and structure, as well as
the specific and detailed methodology employed in order to implement this
Torah-mandated form of Community organization, is derived by applying the
formula described in Parshat Yitro to
the topology described by the Mishna
in Sanhedrin and in Parshat
Shoftim: ... åëîä éäà áòéø åúäà øàåéä ìñðäãøéï îàä åòùøéí. øáé
ðçîéä àåîø îàúéí åùìùéí ëãé ùøé òùøåú: ñðäããøéï ôø÷ à' äìëä ã' > ùéäà ìëì ãééï ùø
ùì òùøä ãáöéø îùøé òùø ìà àùëçï ùøøä. [ôðé îùä òì àúø] > åîàúéí åùìåùéí. ëãé
ùøé òùøåú ãäééðå ë"â òùøåú ùéäà ëì ãééï ùø ùì òùøä
ãáöéø îùøé òùøä ìà îðéðï ùøøä.[÷øáï äòãä òì àúø] The Abarbanel emphasizes
the clear distinction between task of the “Shofet” (...ìöøëé öéáåø...) and
that of the Dayan (...ìòðéï äîùôè...). The Mishna in Sanhedrin illustrates
this structure by providing the “textbook example” of a Torah Community – a
city of exactly one thousand individuals: The Mishna states that a Community
“that has 120” is obligated to maintain a Community Court (Sanhedrin
Ketana). We have already learned that this
Court consists of 23 Dayanim plus three rows of 23 students,
yielding a total of 92 (öá). (It should be immediately apparent
that the 120 in the Mishna does not refer
to the total population of the city.) The Community Council of “Shoftim”,
topologically similar in structure to the Sanhedrin Ketana, consists of Seven
“Elders” (æ÷ðéí) plus three rows of seven “experts”, yielding a total of 28 ( ëç äöéáåø). Thus the Court and Council together
consist of 120 individuals (in
this “textbook” example of a Community of 1000 individuals). Many sources identify the
“Elders” with the “Captains of 50” mandated in Parshat Yitro. A simple calculation reveals that an
organized Community of 1000 will include 30 Elders: 20 Captains of Fifty plus 10 Captains of 100.
These selected individuals are eligible to fill the seats of 23 Dayanim plus
7 Council members. The end of the Mishna quotes R.
Nechemia with reference to a minimum Community of two-hundred thirty
individuals, wherein 23 will be qualified to fill the seats of the Court, and
seven of those 23 will also serve on the Council of Seven. Although
this is not the “ideal” situation, the basic requirements of Representation
are met by the appointment of Captains of Ten (i.e. a “Power of Attorney”
granted by a formally constituted “Community” of ten specific individuals
(see Gur
Aryeh Parshat Yitro, Korban HaAida and Pnei Moshe on the Mishna). äîëðä äîùåúó : äîçðä äîùåúó We have
come to believe that there are individuals in Israel that are here primarily
as a result of their desire to “live a Jewish life
in the Land of Israel”. While recognizing the fact that every
individual may have a unique definition for each word in the phrase, this common
ideal nevertheless creates the potential for the creation of a Torah
Community defined by a common goal. There
appear to be a small number of individuals that perceive some dissonance
between the “ideal” society described by the Torah and the current state of
affairs. Unfortunately, many “activists”
consistently fail to abandon failed strategic approaches and remain unmoved
by the lessons of history, both positive and negative. Even more unfortunate are the
negative consequences of employing blatantly confrontational tactics such as
protests, pressure and political “partying”, all of which have been proven
ineffective (and often quite counter-productive). Furthermore, there is no precedent in
Torah for any of these failed confrontational approaches to Remedy. As
a result, we are extremely meticulous in our all of our activities as part of
an effort to avoid all forms of confrontation in all relevant and
applicable jurisdictions. Rather, we rely entirely upon Remedy
in the form of positive action as mandated by Torah, the Law of the Land and
properly ratified Treaties as well as by personal and Community obligations
undertaken in the form of legitimate contracts and agreements. The Club As I read your article, I was
particularly gratified to read of the legal decision describing of “Orthodox
Judaism” as a “club”. Many of the behavioral requirements
mandated by Torah have become rather difficult to fulfill properly due to the
statutory framework that has been superimposed over the Law of the
Land. This includes a wide variety of restrictions and regulations in
jurisdictions ranging from the UCC and various Treaties to the statutes
imposed by the State of Israel. As an illustration of this conflict,
we can examine (briefly) the Commandment of “Buying and Selling” mentioned
above. The Torah requires that purchases be
made in one of three specific ways: money, written contract or physical
acquisition. In each case, there must be an exchange of
real value. In point of law, physical acquisition automatically creates
a Torah obligation to pay “money”, which is defined in Torah specifically as
metallic silver. It should be further noted that the
Torah explicitly negates the possibility of purchasing goods
via the transfer of debt. (See, for example, the lengthy
discussion and various examples brought by the Yerushalmi in Bava Metzia
Perek 4 Halacha 1). In addition to the metallic
silver, only copper and gold may be used as lawful
alternatives for the storage of monetary value (when dealing in amounts that
are too small or too great for silver coinage to be convenient Yerushalmi Maaser Sheni, Perek 2, Halacha 3). We have been unable to identify the
lawful mechanism that gives effect to the various procedures commonly used to
purchase goods and services in the Global Economy. Specifically, one might ask: “What is
the lawful nature of the currency issued by privately owned central banks
such as the Bank of Israel and the Federal Reserve?” One might be tempted to identify
these documents as “promissory notes”, which are lawful and valid documents
recognized by the Torah (despite the fact that one cannot actually perform
the Mitzvah with such a note). Nevertheless, the “notes” issued by
the Bank of Israel and the Federal Reserve (as well as all of the other
privately-owned “national banks” that participate in the Global Banking
System) lack the fundamental characteristics that are required by
the definition of a “promissory note”; there is no “promise” nor any
“obligation” on the part of any individual or any group of individuals to pay
anything to anyone at any time, and there is no reference anywhere on the
“document” to redemption in the form of metallic silver (or any other
material embodiment of intrinsic value) in any specified amount. While there have been several
attempts to create “alternative
currencies”; none have been particularly successful, and all have been
confrontational in practice. Nevertheless, we have developed a
means by which individuals and Communities may fulfill the requirements of
the Mitzvah without contravening the statutes of the State of Israel through
the formation of a private club. Members use “coupons” in trade exclusively among members
of the club. In commerce, these “coupons” are treated the same as
common “gift certificates”. The “coupons”, called “Maneh” (i.e.
portions used for counting), are made of pure metallic silver. This is
(also) an effective method employed in order to reduce the risk of nefarious
individuals counterfeiting the “coupons”. Of course, there
are many other very significant details that are not particularly relevant to
current discussion, and those details may be explored in another forum. One example of such a “detail” is the
Club Rule prohibiting the sale of the “coupons” themselves, as that would
constitute a taxable transaction and, in addition, such a sale would promote
the (false) impression that the “coupons” themselves are a commodity. Another example of this non-confrontational
approach may be seen in the nature of the proposed draft Law
of the Public. Unity One of the most loudly and frequently
touted “values” in Torah is the concept of Unity (“Achdus”, in
colloquial Yeshivish parlance). This might be measured
by counting the number of Melava Malkas held under the general rubric of
“achdus” or, alternatively, by gauging the relative the popularity of the
song, “Yachad Shivtei Yisrael”. One might be tempted to ask, “If
Unity is such a supreme value, why does the verse include the concept of
“tribes”? Would it not be more appropriate to sing “Yachad Yisrael”? Do we really need “shvatim”? Of course, the answer is a resounding
“YES” – there is a clear imperative to preserve diversity in Unity. This becomes self-evident when one
recalls that the Torah, the Land and the People are all designed organically
according to the same topology, patterned after the human anatomy. (Thus,
Jerusalem is the “heart” of the Land and the King is the “heart” of the
people. Interestingly enough, the King is held responsible for the
economic well-being of the people in the same way as the heart is responsible
for the distribution of value to the human body via the blood. The word
used for “value” traded in economic activity is “ãîéí”, a plural form
of the word “ãí” “blood”). Each individual and every
Community is likened to a limb of the body of Israel, and no single limb – no
matter how numerous (two hands), useful (sense organs) or necessary (heart,
brain) – may lay claim to any significant existence independent of the body
as a whole. It is the goal of Communal Unity - more
properly expressed as the formation of a Community by a group of individuals
formally contracted in a Partnership for the express purpose of engaging in
unified action that is purposefully directed towards the achievement of a
Common Goal - that provides the foundation for Traditional Jewish
Civil Society. It is for this reason that political
parties cannot, by definition, play any legitimate role in the organization
of any Torah society. The etymology of the term “party” is identical in
Hebrew translation, and essentially describes a method of dividing the
population – breaking up the Community into “parts” that identify themselves
as opponents in a variety of contexts. The proliferation of political
parties is historically associated with a technique known as “divide and
conquer”. The Torah mandates a process that
effectively precludes the very existence of political parties by requiring
all Representatives to obtain a personal “minui” (power of
attorney), by requiring that all decisions be ultimately authorized
by the entire Community, and by requiring that this formal authorization be
ratified in a public session with all Partners in physical attendance (îòîã àðùé äòéø). As mentioned above, the detailed
procedures have been
in practice universally until relatively recent times. Nevertheless, it is necessary to
emphasize that the Torah Community, as the basic building block of Traditional
Jewish Civil Society, is a true legal and lawful entity that takes the
specific form of a Partnership, and is formally created by appointment of
functionaries and the creation of a Community Treasury. These features are
mandatory prerequisites as well as prominent features of any concerted and
informed effort to achieve true
Unity. Organization The “Club Rules” require all forms of
“organization” to be grassroots in practice. It should be noted in this context
that the phrase “Power to the People” is not the invention
of student protesters. The original phrase, used throughout
the past 2000 years of our history has been: ëç äöéáåø ëç äöéáåø ðåáò îëì éçéã áòí äéäåãé ììà äáãì îåöà, äù÷ôä, àå
äùúééëåú ôåìéèéú Caveats This brief reply introduces only a
small selection of the major points relevant to this discussion. The original sources stand on their
own merits. All errors and misunderstandings
are my own. Nevertheless, I hope that these few
remarks, despite being poorly organized and despite failing to provide a
comprehensive picture in understandable terms, are nevertheless informative
enough in order to provide adequate background for further discussion and,
more importantly, are sufficient as presented in order to initiate a process
that leads the reader to independent action. Thank you for your patience and understanding. Yonatan
ben Eliezer Old
City, Jerusalem äöìçä
áëì äòðéðéí, ä÷'
éåðúï The Power of the Jewish Community in Israel emanates from each individual in the Community; regardless of country of origin, philosophical approach or political
allegiance. - http://www.tzibur.org tziburby@gmail.com |
|
|
Seal COPY-CLAIM by:jdh™ ñéîï ä÷' éåðúï:àîøëì |
|
ä