by Rabbi Eliezer Shenvald, translated & by Hillel Fendel
One of the most exciting and emotional moments in the process of young cadets joining the IDF is the hashbaah, the swearing-in ceremony.
When the Israel Defense Forces was established (Order of the Day, 22 Iyar 5708/May 31, 1948), the General Staff instituted that every new soldier take an oath of loyalty (or simply "declare," if he is religious, which generally precludes taking an oath) as he receives his first IDF rifle and Bible.
Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, understood the special importance of this occasion in a democratic state. It guarantees that the soldiers are totally subordinate to the "recognized authorities" of the State of Israel, without reservations or conditions.
Before the establishment of the State in 1948, the Jewish entity in the Holy Land was engaged in years of struggle with the ruling British – not as part of one army, but rather in separate ideological groups, such as the Palmach (part of the Haganah), Irgun, and Lechi. Such an arrangement is unthinkable in a democratic state, for there must be one single, popularly-elected, authoritative body. As Ben-Gurion himself wrote in his book Uniqueness and Destiny: "An army that is not absolutely subservient to the democratic regime of the people, ultimately takes control over the nation and leads to military anarchy."
This is why he dismantled the Palmach as an independent military organization, and ordered its integration within the IDF. This decision was strongly opposed, especially among members of the left-wing Mapam party, which felt that the Palmach should continue under the auspices of the Histadrut. Most fortunately, Ben Gurion remained firm.
It was also Ben-Gurion who very precisely formulated the oath of allegiance "to the State, to its laws, and to its authorized governing bodies." Specifically, it states: "I hereby swear and commit myself by my word of honor to maintain loyalty to the State of Israel, to its laws, and to its authorized authorities; to accept unconditionally and without reservation the yoke of the discipline of the Israel Defense Forces; to obey all orders and instructions given by the authorized commanders; and to devote all my strengths and even sacrifice my life to the defense of the homeland and the freedom of Israel."
Not for naught did Ben-Gurion specify that every soldier accept this oath upon himself "unconditionally and without reservation" – for he understood that this was not a "conditional contract" of a give-and-take nature. Rather, each soldier was to give of himself during his time in uniform to the "recognized authorities" of the State, without preconditions.
In the thick of the military campaign for Israel's independence, when the country's fate and the lives of its residents faced mortal danger, this understanding was sharpened: The soldier, a citizen of the state, enlists in a "people's army" – a "compulsory army" and not a "mercenary army," and certainly not a "volunteer army," for the protection of the State and the lives of its residents and his own family.
The soldier and the State are one body, not separate entities; an army of the people that protects and defends the lives of your neighbors, families, and even yourself. The trust it places in us, and the commitments we take upon ourselves for it, are therefore absolute. As such, there is no difference between obligatory service and volunteerism [as some opponents of the judicial reform legislation tried to claim these past weeks in maintaining that though they would not avoid obligatory service, their political stance permitted them to stop volunteering for the army]. Nor is our military service stipulated by a mutually-signed contract, with restrictions and conditions. Only mercenary soldiers sign a contract with their employers! In our case, we are obligated as soldiers of the IDF to serve, with no give-and-take and with no ifs, ands, or buts.
When is a contract necessary? When one side refuses to recognize his obligations. This is what appeared to happen with the Tribes of Reuven and Gad when the Israelites were about to enter the Promised Land. These tribes said they wanted to settle the eastern banks of the Jordan River, and Moshe Rabbeinu feared that they wished to separate from the nation and not take part with their brethren in fighting for and settling the western side of the Promised Land.
Moshe therefore formulated a "contract" with them that would unambiguously define their obligations to take part in the war for the Land, and never to part ways with the rest of the nation:
"Moshe said to them: If you do the following, and go out before G-d to war, and cross the Jordan before G-d [and fight] until He drives out His enemies before Him, and [until] the land is conquered before G-d – then you may return [to the eastern bank of the Jordan River]…" (Bamidbar 32,20-30)
Moshe made it quite clear in his lengthy speech to Gad and Reuven, and to part of the Tribe of Menashe who joined them, what would be the consequences if they would not fulfill their side of the bargain. Moshe made what is known as a "double condition," spelling out both what would happen if they fulfilled the condition, and what would happen if they did not. This "contract" became the archetype of Jewish business contracts, which must include the "conditions of Gad and Reuven," to avoid any possibility of a misunderstanding, and to preclude either side from saying, "The contract says only what must happen, but not what will be if it does not happen."
Moshe, in his wisdom, understood the need for a contract with clear obligations. When it comes time to fulfill commitments, there is an inclination among those for whom those commitments are not convenient at that given time to try to reinterpret and explain the contract in an imaginary way that jibes with their desires.
In the end, Gad, Reuven and Menashe fulfilled all their obligations in the contract, and received their inheritance in the lands of Gilad, Bashan, and environs, east of the Jordan. However, the geographic separation caused more than one incident of tensions between the 2.5 tribes and the rest of Israel; see Joshua 25, for instance.
During these days preceding Tisha B'Av – the ninth day of the month of Av, the anniversary of the destruction of both Holy Temples and other calamities in Jewish history – we mourn not only the tragedies, but the sins that led up to them. We must be particularly mindful of causeless hatred and lack of unity, and must certainly not allow the readiness and strength of the IDF to deteriorate. As the Rambam wrote some 850 years ago about the events of our defeat by the Romans:
"And it is for this that we lost our kingdom, and our Holy Temple was destroyed, and our Exile has lengthened until now – because our forefathers sinned and are no longer, for they found many books about astrology, etc., and did not engage in military studies and conquests, but rather thought that those things [astrology, etc.] would help them." (from the Rambam's letter to sages in southern France)
Our generation has the great privilege of being able to enlist in our "national army," to protect our very own State. Let us not forfeit our unconditional allegiance for contractual agreements that allow for all sorts of loopholes and belie our natural bonds with our people.