A heated Knesset committee debate over the proposed Basic Law: Torah Study erupted Monday as MK Yaakov Asher of United Torah Judaism launched a scathing attack on Deputy Attorney General Avital Sompolinsky, accusing the government’s legal establishment of hypocrisy and applying a double standard to legislation supported by the chareidi parties.

“This document is not a legal opinion—it is a document of hypocrisy,” Asher declared. “You’re spitting on us and telling us it’s rain.”

Speaking during a discussion on the proposed Basic Law, which seeks to formally recognize the status of Torah study, Asher sharply criticized the legal opinion submitted by Sompolinsky, arguing that it contained internal contradictions and unfairly dismissed the legislation.

He focused on what he described as inconsistencies in the opinion’s criticism of the bill’s wording.

“The introduction discusses the legislative process, Basic Laws, a constitution, and points to numerous flaws of ambiguity,” Asher said. “It claims it is unclear what the law means and to what it applies.”

Asher argued that such criticism ignored how previous Basic Laws were enacted, particularly those advanced during the judicial era associated with former Supreme Court President Aharon Barak.

He cited Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty and Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation, saying those laws also contained intentionally broad language.

“At that time, these laws were passed without detailed definitions,” he said. “On the contrary, many of the provisions were deliberately left vague in order to achieve broad agreement.”

According to Asher, those landmark Basic Laws passed the Knesset by relatively narrow margins toward the end of a legislative session.

“That was the method then,” he said. “Pass them while leaving them intentionally ambiguous because they dealt with values.”

He then challenged what he viewed as an inconsistency within Sompolinsky’s own legal analysis.

“You write that the difficulty with this Basic Law stems from the gap between its language and its stated purpose,” Asher said. “Then you say there is great ambiguity and it is unclear what it means. Isn’t that the opposite?”

The sharpest exchange came when Asher objected to language in the legal opinion describing Torah and Torah study as part of the Jewish people’s “heritage” and “collective memory.”

Reading from the opinion, he quoted its reference to “Torah and Torah study as part of the heritage of the Jewish people,” along with its reliance on Israel’s Declaration of Independence and the vision of the biblical prophets.

“I will say one thing,” Asher responded. “We did not inherit this land because of collective memory or because of the vision of the prophets. We inherited this land because of explicit verses in the Torah, in which the Holy One, Blessed be He, promised this land to Avraham Avinu.”

He continued by rejecting other historical justifications for Israel’s existence.

“We did not inherit this land solely because of the War of Independence or the IDF, nor because of those who remained in Europe and did not come here. Thanks to them we inherited the land? Enough with this nonsense.”

The remarks prompted immediate protests from other members of the committee.

Asher later clarified what he called the central principle behind the legislation.

“Our right to this land is not based on collective memory or on folklore that we need to preserve,” he said. “Our right comes from the Torah and from Torah study every single day. That is what sustains us here. That is what sustained the Jewish people throughout Europe and during all the persecutions.”

The committee session was repeatedly interrupted by shouting and exchanges among lawmakers, forcing Asher to ask several times to finish his remarks.

“I ask that I not be interrupted,” he said at one point before adding moments later, “May I continue speaking? Thank you very much.”

Committee Chairman Yaakov Asher also reminded participants that numerous organizations were still waiting to present their views before the meeting concluded.

The debate over the proposed Basic Law comes amid the ongoing national dispute over the military draft of yeshiva students. Chareidi lawmakers are seeking to anchor the value and status of Torah study in a Basic Law, while tensions between the chareidi parties and Israel’s legal establishment continue to intensify over issues including yeshiva funding and the treatment of bnei Torah.

{Matzav.com}