Professor Paul Eidelberg
Given the increasing number of Israel’s Arab citizens, Israel’s
present form of government is not viable and will not see much of the 21st century.
Hence the present writer has drafted a Jewish Constitution which, if implemented,
would enable Israel to pursue its national purpose with vigor and dignity.
Judging from various sociological studies, such a Constitution would win the
support of a substantial majority of Israel’s Jewish population. Spokesmen
across the political and religious spectrum recognize that Israel’s present
system of government is a monstrosity.
To increase support for a Jewish Constitution, it will be helpful to dispel
the prejudice that government under such a Constitution would be theocratic.
This is more a semantic than a substantive issue. If “theocracy”
signifies a regime ruled by a church or by priests, Judaism is not theocratic.
There is no church in Judaism, neither THEOLOGICALLY, since there is no mediation
between G-d and the individual Jew, nor INSTITUTIONALLY, since there is no ecclesiastical
hierarchy.
If, however, the word “theocracy” is construed literally as the
“rule of G-d,” then Judaism is theocratic, for G-d is the ultimate
source of law and authority. But what does this mean OPERATIONALLY? In Judaism
no priesthood BUT ONLY PUBLICLY TESTED SCHOLARSHIP CAN LAY CLAIM TO ANY VALIDITY
REGARDING THE LAWS OF THE TORAH. This means that the Torah belongs to every
Jew, whether he is a Kohane, Levite, or Israelite. Let us examine these three
“classes.”
The first thing to be noted is that they are hereditary but not closed. The
daughter of an Israelite or Levite may marry a Kohane and her children will
be Kohanes, since “class” status is patrilineal. Hence, even though
Kohanes have distinct duties and privileges, there is no separation of “classes.”
Nor is there a ruling class. In a truly Jewish state, who rules is based, first
and foremost, on intellectual and moral character. Indeed, the most authentic
form of Jewish leadership is that of the teacher, whose power is not political
but intellectual and moral.
Moreover, unlike the practice of any so-called aristocracy, education in Israel
is open to, and even required of, all members of the community. Far from stratifying
the three “classes,” TORAH EDUCATION IS THE GREAT UNIFYING FORCE
OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE, A PEOPLE THAT HONORS SCHOLARS MORE THAN KINGS.
In a mature Jewish community the center of gravity lies not in any ruling class
but in the body of the people. In fact, it is hardly an exaggeration to say
that the leaders of a Jewish community act consistently with the Torah when
they make themselves superfluous!
In such a community, writes Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, “let a Rabbi
try to give one decision in opposition to the Torah, and the humblest Jewish
apprentice will refuse obedience … and rebuke the Rabbi for his error
or forgetfulness of his duty, and remind him that among Jews it is not the clerical
robe nor government decrees that confers authority, that the word of the most
celebrated Rabbi carries weight only so long as it accords with the law, and
is null and void if it conflicts with the law sanctioned in Israel.”
Because the Torah belongs to the people as a whole, no hierarchical power can
impose any regulations or any officials on a Jewish community without first
obtaining its consent. As the Sages themselves teach: “We must not appoint
a leader over the community without first consulting it” (Berachot 55a).
They also teach that every regulation made by a Beit Din which has not been
accepted by the majority has no binding force.
This should not be construed in terms of contemporary democratic thought. There
is no unqualified majoritarianism in the Torah. Under Judaic law the minority
can compel the majority to carry out everything which is a legal obligation
of the community. (Contrast the American Constitution whereby an individual
can bring a suit to the Supreme Court which in turn can declare a law enacted
by Congress unconstitutional, hence null and void.)
The above analysis should dispel the prejudice that a Torah government would
be a “theocracy,” a state ruled by a priestly caste. Incidentally,
back in the 18th century, Harvard president Samuel Langdon considered the government
embodied in the Torah to be a “perfect republic.”