Second, even without fearing the total collapse of society, there is an obligation to uphold the laws because the leadership and its decisions possess the authority of “Tovei Ha’ir" (the town’s leading citizens), meaning that whatever they decide is binding upon the entire public. Since everyone is a partner in public matters, if each person acts as they see fit, they will harm the public. Therefore, the entire public has taken upon itself to act according to the decisions of its elected leaders.

Third, all the more so when it comes to war, where any individual who acts of their own accord contrary to the position of the government and the military command, harms the collective, and its ability to win the war. Because the ability to win a war is a complex matter depending on many factors, such as national consensus, international support, and knowing the enemy and their capabilities. All the more so when dealing with a multi-front war that spans generations, whose victory depends on expanding and deepening settlement, on the support of the general public, on relations with the powerful nations that support us, and on global public opinion.

Therefore, the entire public grants its leaders the authority to weigh the totality of considerations and manage the war. And when individuals act of their own accord, they endanger the public, whether by undermining national consensus or international support, or by inciting the enemy at a time when the army is not interested in doing so.

These actions are also liable to create significant tension between IDF soldiers and the settlers in Judea and Samaria, which in itself, constitutes a severe blow to the settlement of the Land, and the maintenance of security.

In sum, victory over the enemy depends on the cohesion of military activity, under a single leadership in the name of all Israel. And one who damages this, damages the war effort upon which the lives of Israel depend.

Is it permissible to participate in a tour where part of it breaks the law?

Q: I participated in a trip to one of the locations in Samaria, and during the tour, we passed by Arab homes, and there were a few individuals who wanted to steal various items that were lying in the yards. They claimed they were doing this because the Arabs steal from us doubly, and if they were passing by us, they would steal much more. Besides that, according to their claim, since the vast majority of Arabs generally support the murder of Jews, they are enemies, and they should be harmed so they will flee the land. Is there justice in their words? And is it permissible to participate in a tour where such things might take place?

A: Stealing is strictly forbidden, and this prohibition was stated in the Ten Commandments, and it is one of the Seven Noahide Laws. Regarding the severe nature of the prohibition, our Sages said: “Come and see how great is the power of robbery, for the generation of the Flood transgressed everything, yet their decree of judgment was not sealed until they stretched out their hands in robbery" (Sanhedrin 108a).

In addition to this, as I explained in the previous paragraph, it is forbidden for any person to break the law, and take the law into their own hands. When doing so in the context of war, the severity of the actions is greater, because it damages the cohesion of the military activity upon which the lives of Israel depend.

A participant in a trip containing young people who steal from Arabs must protest against them, and if they do not listen, it is forbidden to participate in such a trip, because the participant becomes an accomplice to a crime.

Is it obligatory to separate “Ma’aser Kesafim" (monetary tithe)?

Initially, more than 90 percent of the national produce was from agriculture and livestock, and consequently, the Terumot and Ma’aserot to the kohanim and Levites could sustain Israel’s Torah and educators. Likewise, gifts to the poor such as Pe’ah (corners of the field), Leket (gleanings), and Shich’cha (forgotten sheaves) from the field’s harvest, along with Ma’aser Ani (tithe for the poor) in certain years, significantly assisted in supporting the poor.

However, over time, the livelihood of many in Israel expanded to industry and commerce, and thus, as a substitute for Terumot, Ma’aserot, and gifts to the poor, our Sages instructed to separate a tithe from the profits of all livelihoods, in order to support Torah teachers, and to assist in providing for the poor (Turei Zahav, Yoreh De’ah 331:32). Akin to what Jacob our Patriarch said: “And of all that You give me, I will surely set aside a tenth to You" (Genesis 28:22). They based their words on what is stated: “You shall surely tithe" (Deuteronomy 14:22) - tithe from the field’s yield, and tithe from all other profits. As they said regarding merchants: “‘You shall surely tithe’… a hint to seafarers to separate one-tenth for those who toil in Torah" (Pesikta D’Rav Kahana 10:10; Tanchuma, Re’eh 18).

And there are those who say that the obligation of Ma’aser Kesafim is from the Torah, as a direct continuation of Terumot and Ma’aserot, as cited in Tosafot: “‘You shall surely tithe all the yield of your seed that comes forth from the field year by year’; I would only know that the yield of your seed is subject to tithing, from where do we derive [that it applies to] interest, commerce, and all other profits? The verse states ‘all’ (et kol) … to include interest, commerce, and anything from which one profits" (Ta’anit 9a, in the name of the Sifrei).

Why do some donate a fifth (Homesh)?

One who separates a tenth fulfills the mitzvah in an average manner, and one who wishes to fulfill the mitzvah in an optimal manner should separate a fifth of his profits (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De’ah 249:1). This is because the ordinance of Ma’aser Kesafim was intended to replace the obligation of Terumot, Ma’aserot, the gifts given to the Priests from animals, and the other gifts given to the poor. And when calculating them all together, they amount to a sum between a tenth and a fifth.

A question on the Vilna Gaon’s (Gr"a) opinion regarding science studies

Q: In the previous column, extraordinary statements were cited in the name of the Vilna Gaon (the Gr"a) praising science studies even for rabbis, up to the sharp expression, “To the extent that a person lacks knowledge of the other sciences, correspondingly he will lack a hundredfold in the wisdom of the Torah; for Torah and wisdom are bound together." These words seemed puzzling to me, as we see important rabbis who oppose studying science. Is there certainty that this was indeed the Gra’s position?

A: There is no room to doubt that this is the Gr"a’s opinion, for his student, Rabbi Baruch of Shklov, wrote in the name of the Gr"a in his introduction to the Hebrew translation of Euclid’s Elements, printed in the year 5540 (1780): “In the month of Tevet 5538 (1778), I heard from the holy mouth, that to the extent that a person lacks knowledge of the other sciences, correspondingly he will lack a hundredfold in the wisdom of the Torah; for Torah and wisdom are bound together. And he commanded me to translate whatever is possible of the sciences into our Holy Tongue, so that many will roam, and knowledge will increase among our people Israel." In doing so, he explains his motivation for translating Euclid from Greek and printing it.

His book was published when the Gr"a was about 60 years old, eighteen years before his passing (5558 / 1797), and it is impossible that they would publish something in the name of the Gr"a that he did not say, without the Gr"a or one of his students denying it.

In addition, the Gr"a’s words were quoted by many, including Rabbi Eliyahu Landau, a descendant of the Gr"a, in the introduction to his book ‘Minchat Eliyahu’; Maran Harav Kook in ‘Ikvei HaTzon’, the article ‘Derishat Hashem’, and in the approbations of the Ra’ayah (Rav Kook) 219; Kol Hator 5:2:12; and Rabbi Menachem Mendel Kasher in his book ‘HaTekufah HaGedolah’ Part 2, p. 635.

Elaboration on the words of Maran Harav Kook

Rabbi Kook, who, to a large extent, followed the path of the Gr"a, naturally agreed with his words. As an explanation for the value of studying science, one can bring what he wrote: “When Divine knowledge is small, then the conception one has of Divinity is also small… By means of knowledge of the world and life, by means of a richness of feeling in all of existence, for which one truly needs to engage in all the sciences in the world, in all the doctrines of life, in all the ways of different cultures, and the moral and religious contents of every nation and tongue… and then, according to his spiritual greatness, the Divine light will shine upon him" (Shmoneh Kvatzim 2:126).

Is there “Bitul Torah" (neglect of Torah) in studying science and literature?

Q: How can one encourage Torah students to study sciences? Don’t they neglect their Torah studies while learning sciences, and the sin of neglecting Torah is extremely severe?

A: Engaging in worldly wisdom is not considered Bitul Torah, because the wisdom of the Creator is revealed in creation and all its components, including humanity in all its diversity, for human talent is also a Divine creation. As the Maharal explained (Netiv HaTorah 14), there is no Bitul Torah in studying the sciences, for we learned from Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, who never neglected Torah in his life, and yet studied all the sciences. As our Sages said about him: “He never spoke idle chatter in his life, nor walked four cubits without Torah and tefillin, no man preceded him to the study hall, nor did he sleep in the study hall neither a regular sleep nor a brief nap… he never left a person in the study hall and departed, and no one ever found him sitting in silence, but only sitting and studying" (Sukkah 28a).

And regarding him they said he learned everything: “He did not leave unstudied Scripture, Mishnah, Talmud, Halachot and Aggadot, meticulous details of the Torah and of the Scribes, Kal Vachomer (a fortiori arguments) and Gezeirah Shavah (analogies), astronomy and gematria, conversations of ministering angels, conversations of demons, and conversations of palm trees, parables of launderers, parables of foxes, great matters and small matters. A ‘great matter’ refers to Ma’aseh Merkavah (esoteric mysticism); a ‘small matter’ refers to the discussions of Abaye and Rava" (ibid). Thus, even the conversations of palm trees, parables of launderers, and parables of foxes, which encompass literature, are not considered Bitul Torah.

This article appears in the ‘Besheva’ newspaper and was translated from Hebrew