Episodes of weakness bring forth agression and terror

Continuation of freely translated letter from 1969 of the Rebbe to (then) President of Israel Zalman Shazar

Regarding the concept of a state: If we are speaking about Eilat and the surrounding areas (which are outside of the acquisition of Joshua and Ezra) - were these areas to be made independent of Jerusalem and the rest of the Land of Israel - then these territories should be called "the State of Israel."

Regarding Jerusalem, etc.: The name has already been established by the Creator and Ruler of the world: Up until Yehoshua's conquest it was called the Land of Canaan, and afterwards, the Land of Israel. This precludes any further possibility of a referendum on the subject.

It is obvious that I have no opposition to the term "state" per se, even in reference to most of this area. On the contrary, according to the Torah, the Land of Israel includes a Temple and a state (using the terminology of the Sages in their teach-ings), like the one which includes Yehudah and the Galilee etc. But in my letter I was referring to the dispute over the two names (and the accompanying world view): the Land of Israel vs. the State of Israel - and the fact that the latter has prevailed (I add) for the time being (for my hope and belief is that ultimately the Glory of Yisroel in every single individual Jew shall prevail - and then they will proclaim before all the nations that a fundamental mistake has been made, and that the correct idea and name is The Land of Israel).

I did not write this letter directed at you - because why should I cause you distress for no reason (for you see nothing which you can do about it...)?

I wrote about this - not to some journalist - but to the woman who organized groups for Torah study (in places where, within the framework of nature, there was no chance of success) and who ran the campaign (and I hope she continues) against the scourge of abortions etc. Those who opposed her efforts suspected that I was one of the motivations for her activities. So it dawned upon them that by explaining to her that I oppose the State of Israel (and the proof is that I always say "the Land of Israel"), they could convince her that she shouldn't make efforts in spreading Torah, etc. I was concerned that this might weaken her resolve, so I wrote to her concerning these matters.

You wrote: "I swore loyalty to the State of Israel," - of course, I am aware of this. I am surprised that you did not notice that a long time before you took that oath, I requested that you not refuse this appointment. This was more that just a request - for certainly you know that I was aware even then of the swearing-in ceremony. But I was certain that when you took the oath and swore "loyalty to the State of Israel," you clearly had in mind the Land of Israel, and more than this - you intended the Holy Land. And even more - I was sure that you meant "the Land where G-d's eyes are affixed from the beginning of the year until the end of the year."

The talk of a Chabadnik must be open-hearted; so you are allowed - and obligated - to say what is in your heart. Moreover, I value this as one of the essential ingredients of our friendship. Yet it pains me that in your heart you suspected me of something of which I am not guilty. On the contrary, I emphatically say that the Nation which dwells in Zion, dwells in The Land of Israel, being a special land which has no comparison. It has absolutely nothing to do with the State which lies between Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Egypt. And I demand (not "a bit excitedly" as you write in your letter - but in a greatly agitated way) that the Ambassador to Washington and to the UN make this known - pounding their fists on the tables! The non-Jews in Washington also believe in this, but the Israeli Diplomats maintain that they were instructed not to speak in this fashion, and certainly not to bang their fists on tables, since they represent a country which received permission from the other countries to exist and be considered a state. Therefore they feel that they must behave with proper protocol. And recently, when Israel's Ambassador's patience expired in the UN, and he publicly expressed a fraction of his "adoration" for them, the strongest words of rebuke were directed at him from Jerusalem for the next 24 hours - "Could it be that you actually spoke this way ..." and they forced him to retract his comments in public. Logically, these and similar episodes (of weakness) bring forth agression and terror - until there are deaths, may G-d avenge their blood....


Translated by Mordechai. E. Sones and Yankel Koncepolski for www.TruePeace.org