A Time for New Thinking in the Haredi World – Part II

(Note: I know this article is long, but I believe it is important.  I am looking for those who will help me achieve the goals stated herein - please contact me if you would like to join with me in moving this forward.  YLO) 

In an essay published a few months ago, I described the growing tension between the Charedi and non-Charedi (secular and national religious) public. I contended that the Charedi community must acknowledge that the events of October 7 have dramatically transformed Israeli society and significantly affected the interactions between the Charedim and other societal groups, as the status quo will no longer stand.

If you have been following the news, you know all my predictions have come true. The Supreme Court has ordered the government to cut funding to all yeshivos and kollels whose students do not serve in the army. The battle lines have been sharply drawn: the overwhelming majority of the Israeli public is no longer willing to put up with the mass exemption of all Charedi young men from the army. With mounting casualties and endless amounts of reserve duty that miluimnikim are forced to serve, the army faces a massive shortage of manpower, severely impacting businesses and families. They also see the massive growth of the now more than a million Charedim. They are worried about future demographics in which a huge percentage of the population refuses to shoulder their national responsibilities.

Sadly, the Charedi leadership sees it as a religious imperative of the highest order to resist any change regarding national service, even for those (estimated at 35%) who are not in yeshiva and not learning. Efforts to create collaborative systems with the army in which Charedi standards of tznius, limud haTorah, tefillah, Mehadrin food, and other needs are properly met are rejected out of hand (although there are a few small successful programs, notably Yeshiva Derech Etz Chaim, the first hareidi Hesder Yeshiva).

Instead, they are spreading the narrative that the government is set on destroying Torah and the Charedi world in a fit of anti-religious hatred. (It must be noted that the lack of trust in the IDF is well founded. The IDF has a lot to answer for regarding the Religious Zionist community towards which it sometimes behaved abominably as far as religious needs are concerned, taking it for granted that Zionist ideology would win. There were too many officers who did not hide their desire to influence soldiers to be non-religious. However, that is almost completely in the past. Today, it is exhibiting a policy change, as evidenced by a far greater success of religious soldiers flourishing in the army).

Leading elderly Rabbonim traveled to America attempting to raise vast amounts of money to replace the government largesse that has kept them afloat till now. Massive demonstrations are the religious call of the day in which the participants scream, "We will die rather than be drafted!" accompanied by calling police Nazis when they attempt to disperse them.
At the same time, we are moving closer and closer to a full-scale war with Hezbollah on the northern border, Rachmana Litzlan. It is a time for national unity, but sadly, this is the reverse of what is happening.

My motivation for writing today stems from a firm belief that the perspectives being disseminated by the Charedi leadership do not reflect the views of everyone—possibly not even the majority—within the Charedi population. It is time for those within the Charedi world who recognize the need for change to use their influence to drive a positive shift in attitudes.

Several recent events additionally strengthened this belief.

• The January pro-Israel rally in Washington, which saw hundreds of thousands of Jews uniting to bolster support for Israel and combat the alarming rise in antisemitism, had a notably poor attendance from the Charedi community. This was due to many leaders advising against participation through statements that shocked many in the yeshiva world.
  
  
• In Israel, there were many shining examples of Charedim championing positive messages of unity and appreciation for IDF soldiers. At the same time, unfortunately, opposing voices emerged as well, disparaging those who "glorify soldiers" and condemning those who volunteered to serve in the army, and much worse. This was in addition to statements by some of the most senior leaders in the Charedi leadership that yeshiva students should not visit wounded soldiers and help their families, as it might disturb their serenity when learning.
  Or that the Bein Hazmanim must offer the regular month-long recess from yeshivos, as the bochurim and Avreichim (unlike the weary soldiers who have not such vacation) need to recover from the rigors of a long winter z'man. The only concession to the harrowing reality gripping Israel —with constant threats faced by civilians, tens of thousands of whom remained displaced and the many families mourning loved ones — was that bachurim should be careful not to be seen taking pleasure trips (Tiyulim), as this would invite negative publicity. (In fact, the reverse happened — many Israelis were appalled to see young Charedi men in restaurants, on buses, and wandering the streets, forgetting their claim that their Torah learning is what saves the day). Many who call themselves Charedi (by default) are appalled by such statements and attitudes.

These are just some recent events. There is a long history of spokesmen, including those considered important Charedi Rabbonim, taking increasingly extreme positions and dismissing what used to be mainstream ideas while claiming that their extremist positions were always the norm and are mandated by "Da'as Torah".

I find this all very uncomfortable at best; maddening and disappointing are better words to describe my feelings. After all, many people might classify me as Chareidi. I wear a black hat (although I wear colored shirts on weekdays), identified as a member of Agudas Yisroel, went to "black hat" yeshivos, looked to the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah as the voice of Torah authority, do not say Hallel with a beracha on Yom HaAtzmaut, have a son and several sons-in-law who learn in Kollel, and so forth.
Nevertheless, I feel thoroughly distanced from most of the pronouncements of Rabbinic and political Charedi spokesmen. I cannot listen to any of the statements mentioned above with anything but disdain. I know deep in my kishkes that they are not in line with the Mesorah that I grew up with – with the Torah I heard from Rav Moshe Feinstein and Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, all zt" l, and others of that generation, and that of my personal Rabbeim.

We – the middle-of-the-road men and women who grew up in ordinary yeshiva-oriented homes and yeshivas – have been shunted aside and subsumed within the "Chareidi" label, to our detriment. 

More importantly, I daresay that there are, at the very least, tens of thousands of people who feel hashkafically similar to me, both in Israel and the Diaspora, whether or not they say it out loud. While this has long troubled me and many others, we have somehow made our peace with this.
Now, current events have shown the vital need for people to speak out and reclaim the spiritual mooring taken from us. We – the middle-of-the-road men and women who grew up in ordinary yeshiva-oriented homes and yeshivas – have been shunted aside and subsumed within the "Chareidi" label, to our detriment. We want to be serious Avdei Hashem, who holds on to traditional values with which we were raised without being associated with attitudes and statements by others within the Charedi label that do not represent us at all, to put it mildly. The Charedi label has become too broad – we want out of it as it identifies us with those who we cannot countenance.

Although this is coming to a head, I have been thinking about this for many years. In a lengthy article I wrote a decade ago (https://tinyurl.com/LostHashkafa), I described at length how the Hashkafic group that I, and many, many others, grew up with had somehow been taken from us. I will summarize the main contention briefly, but I sincerely hope that interested readers take the time to read it.

In the 1960s and 70s, my family and I were not considered hareidi — we had never even heard the term. We knew that there were three broad categories within the Ashkenazi Orthodox world, each containing various factions. The three categories were (a) Modern Orthodox, (b) the so-called Ultra-Orthodox and (c) a large group in the middle. These are rough, simplistic characterizations:

•  Modern Orthodox – tended to be Religious Zionist, identified with Mizrachi and Yeshiva University, very open to secular culture, saw great value in secular education, were careful about basic observance but not anything perceived to be a chumra, and also included a good many more seriously observant individuals, some of whom were first-rate talmidei chachamim.
• Ultra-Orthodox – tended to be primarily hassidic (e.g. Satmar), very opposed to Zionism, not identified with Agudah, closed to secular culture, were proud to say that they had little or no secular education, honored Torah learning, and placed a high value on rigorous observance and adopting many chumros.
• In the middle – (MG) were not supportive of Zionism and often expressed critical views regarding the secular leadership and the state of Israel, refraining from celebrating Yom HaAtzmaut. Yet, (whether or not expressed overtly) they were deeply concerned about the welfare of the State of Israel and were quietly proud of some of her accomplishments. They typically aligned themselves with Agudah, were open to some aspects of secular culture, and were interested in sufficient secular education to qualify for a well-paying job without generally pursuing higher education – those who did usually attended university after dedicating several years to full-time yeshiva study. Diligently observant, they placed a high value on Torah learning.

These descriptions were similar, though not identical, to three broad divisions in Israel:

1. Dati Le'umi/Chardal – identified with Mizrachi and Yeshivot Bnai Akiva;
2. Charedi – tended to mainly to live in Meah Shearim/Geulah/Bnei Brak, including groups such as Briskers, Satmar, Neturei Karta, and the Eidah Chareidis; and
3. those in the middle group (MG). The MG were non-Zionist but not anti-Zionist, thankful for many of the accomplishments of Medinat Yisrael, interested in its welfare, and appreciative of government-provided services such as the Army, police, and National Insurance. Generally identified with Agudah, many learned full-time a few years after marriage, after which they would briefly serve in the army before going to work. There was little interest in secular education beyond elementary school.

There was a fairly straightforward division as to which Gedolim belonged to which camp, both in America and Israel. One could never imagine, for example, that Rav Moshe Feinstein would be considered authoritative in Satmar or that the Satmar Rav would be the guide for MG; it was clear that these were different streams with different shitos and hashkafos.

Interestingly, the MG did not self-identify as Chareidi. They saw significant differences between themselves and the Eidah Charedis. MG would usually call themselves "yeshivati" (yeshivish), "Litai" (Litvish), "chassidi" (chassidish), "Sefardi" (Sephardic), or just "a frummer Yid” or "black hat".

My lament is that, somehow, that large middle group has unofficially but firmly disappeared. In today's Orthodox world, you are either Modern Orthodox/Dati Le'umi or Charedi. I awoke one morning and found that my family and I were now considered Charedim, as most of those who were once MG somehow came to be called Charedim.

It is not entirely clear why this happened. In the aforementioned article, I discussed some possible causes. However, whether these or other factors caused the demise of the middle group really doesn't matter. The bottom line is that it has occurred and is the reality we now live in — you are either Modern Orthodox/Dati Le'umi or Charedi. (A small number call themselves Chardal (Chareidi Leumi) who are in between Dati Leumi and the middle group, yeshiva oriented but who proudly serve in the IDF, but have yet to garner significant membership).
OK, you might say, so what if I am called hareidi? After all, there are certainly benefits to being considered Charedi. Feeling at home in the warmth and geshmak that abounds in yeshiva and Chassidic communities is good. Moreover, there are beautiful Charedi accomplishments – like all the chessed groups, Hatzalah, Zaka, the Siyum HaShas – in which Charedim can justly take great pride.

Unfortunately, however, there is a very negative side. First of all, besides the aforementioned pronouncements that I abhor and do not want to be associated with, it is no secret that in much of Israeli society (and the American Jewish community), being labeled as Charedi in Israel is to be considered complicit with many negative actions, attitudes, and shirking of national responsibility that enrage the rest of the public. These have caused Charedim to be among the most reviled groups in Israeli society.
By accepting the term Charedi, I am classified with a term that is used by the non-religious, and certainly the non-Jewish, world to identify what they see as a million-strong monolithic group that includes extremist views antithetical to my beliefs, such as Peleg Yerushalmi, anti-modern Eida Chareidis and even the horrible Neturei Karta. All of them – all of us – are referred to with one term: Charedim.

When I have discussed this issue with others, including close friends and family, they usually respond, "Come on, we all know that there are still major differences. You know that I and my chaverim have nothing to do with the terrible Neturei Karta and Peleg Yerushalmi and other extremists…everyone knows that mainstream Charedim do not support that and are opposed to them!" I respond, "First of all, even if you and your chaverim know that, the outside world does not. To them, you are the same; you are Charedim. Secondly, there are more and more leading Rabbonim who fully agree with the extremist views and are now considered mainstream Charedi. And most importantly, in almost every case of severe desecration of G-d's Name, Chilul Hashem, by those groups, the 'mainstream' Charedi leadership does not condemn them and does not disassociate from them. They just accept that the extremists will do their thing (and influence far too many young, impressionable minds), do not stand up to their often violent tactics, and just let them be. And the Chilul Hashem continues, and the Charedim become more and more reviled and feared by the general public.

Why must I choose to either be either Dati Leumi or haredi? Why have the many people like me been left bereft of a hashkafic home, when we are just trying to live Torah lives and support being part of the IDF?

In the existential struggle that is going on right now and consuming Israel, it is simply not true that all who are called "Charedim" agree with the stance of the Charedi leadership that no change whatsoever be allowed and that all young men, regardless of whether they are actually learning, must not be drafted into the army.

(Speaking for them), we recognize that:

• The deal worked out between the Chazon Ish zt" l and Ben Gurion almost eighty years ago — whereby the few hundred full-time learners (at most) were exempted from army service in an attempt to rebuild the Torah world destroyed in the Holocaust — was a temporary measure, not envisioning a time when tens of thousands would be exempted
• The system by which the "shvers" (fathers-in-law) would support young married couples is unsustainable today, given that three generations of shvers are full time learning. In Israel, with the war's economic impact, it is untenable to support tens of thousands of young men who do not enlist.
• It is simply not true that going to the army means that a young man necessarily will be lost to Yiddishket. Tens of thousands of wonderful yirei shamayim and Talmidei chachamim in the Dati Leumi and particularly in its Hesder and yeshiva gevoha world prove otherwise. A similar system can and should be set up with the active collaboration of Charedi Roshei Yeshiva to provide for proper Torah, Tefilla, Kashrus, and Tzniyus standards if only there was the will to work together on it, recognizing that the status quo must change. (As I wrote, one such Hesder yeshiva already exists, but is considered marginal by the overwhelming majority)
• Clearly, there are large groups of Chareidim who will never agree to any change and will fight changes ever more fiercely — the true “ultra-Orthodox”. They should be left to fight their own battles with the Israeli authorities and not bind the many who quietly do not agree with them and see the need for change. If there was a more pragmatic and rational group they could be part of, they could publicly disassociate from those who say "We would rather die than be drafted" and continue to enrage the Israel public.
• The tolerance of Israeli society for such a large segment of the population who (as they see it) do not work, do not serve in the army, do not contribute (with notable exceptions like Hatazalah, Zaka, etc.) - and contain many who are not suited to learn full time - while demanding huge government benefits and stipends has ended. There is no political, judicial, or social will to continue this. None whatsoever — to the extent that there is any talk of support for it, it is seen as pure political blackmail.

Why must I choose to either be either Dati Leumi or Charedi? Why have people like me been left bereft of a hashkafic home, when we are just trying to live Torah lives based on the Chinuch we received in the MG of old? If only there were a different group that I could be publicly associated with! One that looked for its Torah guidance to the many great Rabbonim today who teach and speak in the true Mesorah of the great Gedolim of my youth and do not share these extreme hashkafos but (perhaps because of this) are not widely seen as the Gedolei HaDor.

This is a group that stood firmly for Shmiras HaTorah and dikduk b'mitzvos, but also for inclusiveness, moderation, and the cardinal need for us to focus – in word and deed – on "making the name of Hashem beloved through the model you present" (Yoma 86b). Indeed, it is time to publicly and clearly redefine and contrast the two broad groups as separate hashkafic entities with different mindsets and worldviews.

If that group existed, I would not be subject to criticism by the secular media and public, who conflate all Charedim and tar them with the same brush. Let those who espouse extremist views and condone associated actions live with the results of their choices while allowing the rest of us to follow a different path, unencumbered by that association. It is patently ridiculous and unfair that the great majority of the "middle group", who are repulsed by many things that happen in the Charedi world, have to feel defensive because of their "fellow Charedim".

Finally, I must admit that I debated whether this was the time for this article, as it was such an unusual time of Jewish unity. But first of all, as I described in Part One of this article, that unity is very fragile and, in fact, already coming apart. Moreover, I am talking about an issue already being hotly debated in the public square, with many people upset about the issues I pointed to at the beginning of this essay.
In the late Jewish Observer, Rav Nachman Bulman זצ"ל penned a vital article, "What Price Unity", regarding relations between the Orthodox and the non-Orthodox. In it, he spoke of the tension between the need for peace and unity among Jews and the need for clear distinctions when significant matters of principle were concerned. He argued that while standing together against external threats is crucial, we must not be cowed into accepting what we perceive as a distortion of our banner of Torah. Jewish unity is generally vital, but our tradition teaches us that it is not always so. We need Achdus, but we also need havdalah, when unity comes at a cost that is too great.

Published July 26, 2024 in the Jewish Press, Israel National News, and the Queens Jewish Link

Why a Haredi Spokesman is Dividing Religious Jews

When I first saw that Rabbi Avi Shafran's recent essay " Why a Gaza hostage deal is Dividing Religious Jews About a Sacred Tenet of Judaism" (reproduced below) was being run in the virulently anti-religious, far-left Israeli newspaper Haaretz (I could not find it any other media publication) I was surprised. . . until I read the essay.

HaAretz was indeed the ideal place for this flawed and biased article, which distorted the positions of Haredim while attacking the National religious parties headed by Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir.

Briefly, the article claimed that the recent support of the Haredi parties for President Biden's hostage deal was purely a reflection of the deep concern that Haredim feel about the hostages and the primacy of the mitzvah of Pidyon Shvuyim (releasing captives) apparently far more than their counterparts in the National Religious world. From constant prayers for the captives to signs about them in Meah Shearim and other fantasies that he conjures up, one is given to believe that the position the Haredi political parties took was based solely on altruistic love for their captive brothers and sisters and zeal for Torah values, which apparently to his mind is far greater than in the National Religious camp.

To his American audience, he went on to explain that "While Smotrich's Religious Zionism and Ben-Gvir's Otzma Yehudit parties see things through what is essentially a patriotic lens, albeit one informed by religious beliefs; UTJ and Shas' view is exclusively Judaism-centric in nature." Furthermore, he claims, that for Smotrich and Ben Gvir, the release of the hostages is a lower priority. In contrast, they see "military gain and the crushing of Hamas, realistic or not, as the prime goal, above all else."

To say that only Haredi views are based on Torah values, while those of the National Religious and Otzma parties are based on a "patriotic lens albeit informed by religious beliefs" is a lie, distortion, and an insult. 

There is so much here that is offensive that it is hard to know where to begin. To say that only Haredi views are based on Torah values, while those of the National Religious and Otzma parties are based on a "patriotic lens albeit informed by religious beliefs" is a lie, distortion, and an insult. The views may be different, but they are both based on solid Torah values, albeit positions that disagree with each other. The NR and O parties believe that (1) it is a mitzvah of the highest order to take part in the National defense and that this can be done and is done such that there are many religious soldiers who fight who are Yirei Shamayim and Talmidei Chachomim who follow the Halacha that everyone is required to participate in a Milchememt Mitzvah. They follow Poskim, who, like Moshe Rabbeinu, says that it is wrong to sit back while others fight. They hold that while it may be justified for a relatively small cadre of super-dedicated men to study Torah full-time, the way of the Torah is that most people must participate in the National Defense. This short essay is not the place to discuss the enormous issue of the mitzvah and the privilege of fighting for the protection of our people. Still, it is ugly, offensive, and false to claim that it is not based on "exclusively Judaism-centric sources".

Moreover, the opposition that the National Religious and Otzma parties have to Biden's deal is not because of any lack of deep desire to see the hostages freed. There is no difference of opinion about the importance of the "Sacred Tenet of Judaism", Pidyon Shvuyim. Their opposition — shared by a majority of Israelis — is because (a) it is a bad deal in which Israel has to give up many bloodthirsty captives who, like the accursed Sinwar, will likely hurt us again, and (b) it leaves Hamas in place to regroup and not be defeated, and (c) they don't trust the US government, or anyone else, with guaranteeing our security, and many other reasons. They feel that the only way to get a deal that we can live with is to fight till the total submission of Hamas to the point that they will not threaten us again. This deal is flawed and falls far short of that.

It is obvious to any observer of the current Israeli political scene that the Haredi parties' strong support of the hostage deal is primarily due to one major issue and one minor issue, both of which stem from a strategic political calculus.

But the cynicism runs much deeper. 

Any observer of the current Israeli political scene will see that the Haredi parties' strong support of the hostage deal is primarily due to one major issue and one minor issue, both of which stem from a strategic political calculus.

The major issue is the position they have taken on the hostage deal is based on the Haredi parties' attempts to garner political support from other parties, particularly those who might be sympathetic to their draft law, which aims to exempt all Haredim from military service. This law is wildly unpopular and highly controversial and faces significant opposition; thus, securing political allies could be crucial for the Haredi parties to advance their agenda. They are, therefore, willing to sit with strange bedfellows, even the very anti-religious Yair Lapid, who Rabbi Shafran quotes as congratulating the Haredim for "displaying national responsibility." It is no secret to anyone that Lapid's concern for the hostages is a cover for his boundless enmity for PM Netanyahu, whom he continually falsely attacks as not caring about the hostages and seeking only his own political survival.

The minor issue is that there has been a noticeable trend of growing support for Otzma Yehudit among young Haredim, a shift that has caused concern among traditional Haredi parties. This trend is attributed to various factors, including a desire for more robust representation on national security issues and a more assertive stance on Jewish identity in the public sphere. Young Haredim are increasingly drawn to Otzma's bold approach to these topics, which resonates with their concerns about the future of their community and the state of Israel. As a result, Haredi parties are wary of the potential loss of votes to Otzma, as they traditionally rely on the unified support of their community to maintain political influence.

It is too bad that Rabbi Shafran engages in falsification and distortion to promote the Haredi agenda and the canard that Haredim care about the hostages more than those who are actually going out to fight for them. What is true is that much as we wish there were a good deal on the table, no deal is better than a bad deal that does more harm than good.

Published on Israel National News (Arutz Sheva) 6/13/24

----

Original Safran Essay - I don't want anyone to give HaAretz a dime in order to read it.

----

I'm an ultra-orthodox Jew, and I pray regularly over the course of each week at three different New York-area synagogues. I've also attended services in recent months in several other American cities. Since October 7, all of them have concluded with the recitation of a chapter or two of Psalms followed by the prayer on behalf of Jews "in distress or captivity," with the plea for divine mercy on them and that they will swiftly be delivered them from distress to comfort, from darkness to light, from enslavement to redemption."

A flash of that light and redemption was seen Saturday when four Israeli hostages were rescued in a special Israeli army operation in central Gaza, among them Noa Argamani, 25, who became a symbol of those kidnapped into Gaza by Hamas after a video of her being carried off into captivity by motorcycle, surrounded on either side by Hamas terrorists, as she screamed out in despair went viral.

The rescue was welcome news, but the most realistic best hope to get the others home is a negotiated deal.

It shouldn't be a surprise that ultra-Orthodox political parties Shas and United Torah Judaism have endorsed a plan that U.S. President Joe Biden announced last week was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's for a truce   a phased plan to secure Hamas' release of hostages and end the war in Gaza.

The ultra-Orthodox, or Haredi, community both in the Diaspora and in Israel has held the hostages center of mind for one simple reason: our belief in the sanctity of life.

This past Hanukkah, candles representing each of the Hamas hostages at the time were lit in a Jerusalem yeshiva's display of anguish over and hope for, one for each of the hostages abducted by Hamas. Another Haredi yeshiva set seats for the hostages at a large empty table. Hundreds of its students read Psalms for their release.

The names of the hostages have been projected on the main street in Bnei Brak, a largely ultra-Orthodox city near Tel Aviv, along with a plea for prayers that they be released. Each week, the Haredi publication Hamodia dedicates a page with the names of the hostages.

Notices are hung in the ultra-orthodox Jerusalem neighborhood of Mea Shearim in Yiddish requesting people recite psalms and prayers for the return of the hostages.

Pamphlets with the pictures and names of the hostages have been circulated in the Haredi community, where everyone is given the opportunity to "adopt" a hostage and recite psalms for them until they return. The effort was duplicated in the predominantly ultra-Orthodox neighborhood of Borough Park in neighborhood of Brooklyn.

The fact that few, if any, of the hostages have been identified as belonging to religious communities is a non-factor when it comes to feeling anguish and imploring the Creator to effect their release. Pidyon shvuyim, redemption of captives, is a major Jewish religious obligation. The legendary 12th century Jewish thinker Rambam wrote that "The redeeming of captives takes precedence over supporting the poor or clothing them. There is no greater mitzvah than redeeming captives."

Haredi support of the hostage release plan stands in stark contrast to National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich's insistence that they will not back the current proposal, and have threatened to resign from the government if Netanyahu accepts the deal. A previous hostage deal was supported by the ultra-Orthodox parties and all other parties in the government with the exception of Ben-Gvir's party.

If there was a realistic way to rescue all the remaining hostages without loss of life   an Israeli commando perished in the recent mission as did Palestinian civilians   that would be ideal. Unfortunately, the pending deal is likely the best way forward at present.

But Ben-Gvir called the plan "a flawed deal, which is a victory for terror and a security threat to the State of Israel. Agreement to such a deal is not total victory   but total defeat." He and Smotrich see military gain and the crushing of Hamas, realistic or not, as the prime goal, above all else.

Most Americans don't fully understand how different the Israeli ultra-Orthodox world is from the national religious one. Israelis are considerably more familiar with that distinction.

Because, just as the Haredi parties' attitude toward military service for those engaged in full-time Torah studies   the source of so much consternation in Israeli society   radically diverges from that of the nationalist religious parties, so do the two camps' respective attitudes toward military or political objectives. While Smotrich's Religious Zionism and Ben-Gvir's s Otzma Yehudit parties see things through what is essentially a patriotic lens, albeit one informed by religious beliefs; UTJ and Shas' view is exclusively Judaism-centric in nature.

And, while both camps regard Eretz Yisrael ("The Land of Israel") as holy and as the birthright of Klal Yisrael, a term which means for the good of the Jewish world community, Haredi leaders see the preservation of Jewish lives as a higher priority than Jewish presence on every part of the Holy Land. That is why Rabbi Elazar Menachem Shach, who founded Degel Hatorah, one of the two parties that comprise the United Torah Judaism joint ticket, famously endorsed territorial concessions if they could save Jewish lives.

Whether such concessions in reality today can preserve the safety of Jews is an arguable proposition. If there are any true partners for peace among the Palestinian leadership, they have yet to reveal themselves . But concern for Jewish lives nevertheless remains a Haredi fundamental.

To be sure, utterly destroying Hamas, the stated goal of the government which Haredi parties are members of may prove to be elusive. And, in any event, evil is a shape-shifter; hatred of Jews living in Israel among some in Palestinian society seems, unfortunately, to be a perennial weed. This leaves, at least in Haredi eyes, rescuing the hostages not yet killed, as priority number one.

It's worth noting that the proposal outlined by Biden is not perfect but has the potential for achieving that mission.

Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid, offering exquisitely rare praise for Israel's ultra-orthodox population, which currently makes up some 13 percent of Jewish Israelis, welcomed the ultra-Orthodox parties' support for the hostage deal/truce proposal as "displaying national responsibility."

But that is not what it is. What it is, is the embrace of the Jewish religious mandate to prioritize the saving of Jewish lives. And even though we welcome Saturday's rescue, the other 120 hostages who still need to come home, some of them who, tragically, will return in body bags, cannot wait for another daring and dangerous military operation.