"Meir Kahane and Contemporary Jewish Theology of Revenge", Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Volume 98, Number 2, 2015, pp. 192-217

soundings

soundings

Soundings,

Vol. 98, No. 2, 2015

Copyright © 2015

The Pennsylvania

State University,

University Park, PA

Meir Kahane and Contemporary Jewish Theology of Revenge

AdAm AfTermAN ANd GedAliAh AfTermAN

AbstractThe article analyzes a relatively unknown, yet influential, contemporary fundamentalist theology of revenge as put for-ward in the religious writings of Meir Kahane (1932–1990), the notorious militant nationalist. We seek to provide a theologi-cal context for this militancy, so as to display the motivational logic behind this troubling trend in Jewish thought and prac-tice. While the doctrine itself has emerged only quite recently, it draws on theological ideas that reach back to the medieval period. In the article we outline the early sources and discus-sions (Biblical, Rabbinic, medieval, etc.) that constitute the background of Kahane’s radical theology of revenge.

Keywords: revenge, Meir Kahane, Yitzhak Ginsburgh, Jewish mysticism and power, Jewish theology

In this article we present and analyze a relatively unknown, yet influential, contemporary fundamental-ist theology of revenge, as put forward in the religious writings of Meir Kahane (1932–1990), the militant nationalist.1 Situated on the extremity of Jewish theo-logical discourse on this topic, his doctrine of revenge has provided justification for, and even inspired, mili-tant violence in Israel.2 We seek to provide a theological context for this militancy so as to display the reason-ing behind this troubling trend in Jewish thought and practice. While the doctrine itself has emerged quite recently, it draws on theological ideas that reach back

Soundings 98.2_04_Afterman.indd 192 07/04/15 8:34 AM

after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology193

to the medieval period, developing and implementing these ideas in ways that would surely have disconcerted their original authors.

This article is divided into two sections. In the first, we outline the early sources and discussions (Biblical, Rabbinic, etc.) that constitute the back-ground of Kahane’s radical theology of revenge. Of particular importance in this connection was a thirteenth-century Kabbalistic teaching that elevated the hidden relationship between God and the Jewish people into a theosophical mystery of the unity of both parties. As an ontological (and not just covenantal) union, whenever the temporal side of the relationship (the Jewish people) was made the target of aggression and thereby threatened with destruction, the eternal side (the godhead) was implicated. The result was a mysterious exiling of God from his true being. Only revenge could restore God to himself, hence the central role assigned to revenge within the process of redemption.

In the second section of this article, we situate Kahane in relation to other schools of thought. Though substantially different from each other, they share some of his theological sources, but not necessarily his conclusions, namely Rabbi Kook and the Chabad movement. While most of the sources explored below tend to view revenge as an abstract category related only to the eschato-logical future and to be performed only by God himself, others focus on the human capacity to stimulate eschatological processes through revenge and other practices. In this context we find the idea that human revenge, per-formed by the Jewish people, is a necessary precondition for the emergence of the eschaton. The shift from a divinely initiated eschatological revenge to a theology of human revenge in the present is part of a wider and more recent development in the history of Jewish theology—the gradual movement of power and responsibility from the godhead/divinity to the people of Israel, and their transition from a passive to an active role in history.

I. Sources

Let us first review briefly the idea of divine revenge in some of the classic Jewish sources before we move on to more radical and esoteric ideas articu-lated in medieval and modern texts regarding the human capacity to stimulate divine revenge.


soundings

soundings

194

The Bible

The vengeance of God is a key theme in the Bible and fundamental to many of its eschatological visions (Peels 1995). God is invoked as the “God of revenge” and the eschatological future is conceived to be bound to the notion that Israel’s redemption will culminate only once God has taken revenge upon Israel’s enemies. Note the following passages: “God of retribution, Lord, God of retribution3, appear!” (Psalm 94:1); “The righteous man will rejoice when he sees revenge” (Psalm 58:11); “let them shout for joy upon their couches, with paeans to God in their throats and two edges swords in their hands; to impose retribution4 upon the nations punishment upon the peoples” (Psalm 149:6–7). Joel 4 and Ezekiel 38–39 also convey this idea, emphasizing both the helplessness of the people of Israel and the future potency of their God, with the understanding that power of revenge belongs to God and only to God. The image of the warrior king coming to the rescue of Israel is one of the more powerful images in Isaiah, Hosea, and Nahum. The pronouncement of Nahum 1:2 illustrates this biblical notion: “The Lord is a passionate, avenging God; The Lord is vengeful and fierce in wrath. The Lord takes vengeance on His enemies, He rages against his foes.” The psalmist in Psalm 79:10 cries out to God, “Let the nations not say ‘Where is their God?’ Before your eyes let it be known among the nations that you avenge the spilled blood of your servants.” He draws, no doubt, on the “Song of Moses” in Deuteronomy 32:43: “O nations, acclaim His people! Foe He’ll avenge the blood of his servants, wreak vengeance on His foes, and cleanse the land of His people.” Later rab-binic commentary recognizes the affinities between Moses and David (who’s conceived to be the poet of Psalms) in that both completed their poems with a cry to God to take revenge against the enemies of Israel:

Moses completed his poem (Deuteronomy 32:43) with “For he will avenge the blood of his servants wreak vengeance on His foes,” and King David did the same in Psalm 149:7 “to impose retribution upon the nations, punishment upon the peoples.”5

Although it is usually God envisioned as the one who will act and take revenge against the Gentiles, there are special cases where the people of Israel are required to take revenge against Amalek6 and other specific nations, rather than await God’s intervention (Afterman and Afterman 2014).


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology195

rabbinic Judaism

Following the destruction of the Second Temple and the emergence of rabbinical Judaism, there developed a theory of eschatological revenge against the Gentiles.7 Although this theory is just one of many attitudes articulated at this time, it is nevertheless noteworthy.8 Many rabbis “followed the old pro-phetic line of self-accusation and ascribed the downfall to the people’s own transgressions” (Baron 1952, 2.113). Some were reluctant to blame the Jewish people and focused on trying to understand God’s role in history, reestablish-ing God’s providence and power in this world. Others were interested in the role of God in the future messianic redemption (Shremer 2008, 183–85). In this context the new reality gave birth to a new sort of theology of eschatologi-cal revenge that arose as a result of the painful and humiliating devastation of the Jewish community in Palestine by the Roman Empire. In the absence of any visible demonstration of divine power, some started to imagine a more distant revenge to be carried out by God in the eschaton. The fact that revenge is delayed for an indefinite period is closely related to a new understanding of God’s power and ability to intervene in history (Shremer 2004). As Adiel Shremer has shown, the theory assumes that the exile and destruction are a crime against God, and therefore the execution of punishment for it is left to him. This developing logic associates God’s judgment of the nations who harmed Israel and his vengeance with the prior establishment of His kingdom and Israel’s final redemption. In this way it places Israel’s revenge and redemp-tion alongside God’s pride in the eschatological age, when the kingship of God will be revealed (2004).

This new ideal of power draws upon the idea of restraint. Rather than punishing Israel’s enemies, God chooses to refrain from intervening on behalf of Israel in history. He instead demonstrates his power by permitting wrongdo-ing to persist this side of the eschaton. The “moment of truth” is postponed until an unknown point in the future. Until then, Israel will continue suffer-ing at the hands of its enemies.

The rabbinic notion of revenge was based on the assumption that the political destruction of Israel had damaged God’s pride and dignity. The nation of Israel and God reflect each other’s humility and devasta-tion. The God of Israel’s apparent impotence and powerlessness against the Gentiles’ destruction of God’s city and temple mark a dramatic change in God’s perception of himself, and indeed, in his relation to his devastated people


soundings

soundings

196

(Shremer 2008). The key to Israel’s future redemption is God’s redeeming himself by actualizing his potential power and carrying out vengeance against the political powers that humiliated and persecuted his nation. The redemp-tion of Israel is a function of God’s retribution against the Gentile enemies, and his ultimate return at the end of time to his biblical role as king of history. In other words, redemption is viewed as the rehabilitation of God’s dignity, damaged by the shattering of his people’s pride and political autonomy.

In the rabbinic literature and medieval Kabbalah, the devastation of the land of Israel, the Jewish people, the temple, and Jerusalem, are intercon-nected, and future redemption will be manifested in all of these arenas. The assertion that the enemies of Israel are the enemies of God implies that the political and historical redemption of Israel is ultimately the redemption of God himself. The bitter conflict between the Roman Empire and the Jewish community in Palestine had thus been elevated into a theological attack against the God of Israel. This attack will be answered only in the eschatologi-cal future and only by God himself. Since God’s force will be manifested in history only in the future, any attempt to influence history using human power or force was, on the rabbinic understanding, doomed to failure.

On the political level, “by assigning the vindication to God, and by plac-ing it in the eschaton, the Rabbis have neutralized—and therefore practically nullified—their followers’ hopes for an imminent revenge to be taken upon their enemies” (Shremer 2004, 25).

Thus, the rabbis developed a theology of “passive power” reflecting both Jewish passivity after the brutal failure of the Bar Kochva rebellion and God’s ability to overcome his desire for and right to vengeance in favor of exercising self-restraint. If in the Hebrew Bible God’s power was outwardly manifest in history, for instance by God providing victory to the Israelites in war, for the rabbis (or at least some of the rabbis), God’s power is now internal, reflected in his exercise of patience. This new ideal of power has its roots in later parts of the Hebrew Bible such as the Book of Proverbs (16:32) and is reflected in the dictum of the rabbis (Avot 4:1):

“Ben Zoma said: Who is wise? He who learns from all men, as it is written” (Psalm 119:99) “I have gained understanding from all my teachers.” Who is mighty? He who subdues his passions, as it is written


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology197

(Proverbs 16:32) “One who is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and one whose temper is controlled than one who captures a city.”

The powerful rabbinic image of a patient God waiting to take his revenge was later depicted in medieval Ashkenazi texts in terms of God listing “on his garment” the names of all Israelites murdered by Gentiles over the course of time, so that in the future he would have a record of those to be avenged (Liebes 2008, 269–97). The brutal persecutions experienced by the medieval Ashkenazi Jews led to the development of an even more advanced theology of redemption, which Israel Yuval refers to as a theory of “vengeful redemp-tion” (2006, 94). The poems and tales of martyrdom written by those who survived the persecution are loaded with highly charged eschatological ideas of revenge (Shepkaru 2006; Goldin 2008; Cohen 1999, 2000, 2004). Several of these sources have even argued that the Jews are required to commit suicide as a form of martyrdom and sacrifice themselves and their children when faced with a brutal persecution. This desperate act of self-inflicted martyrdom,9 they believed, would finally force God to intervene and bring vengeance upon the Christian persecutors (Yuval 2006, 92–144). Thus, in Ashkenaz, a unique type of suicidal martyrdom was developed in an attempt to bring about escha-tological reality “here and now,” including elements of revenge against the Gentiles (Wolfson 2001; Cohen 2012). In addition, we find in many poems that envisioned the bloody clothes of God following his acts of revenge, poems designed to stimulate God and force him back into history. Several of these poems had an important impact on Jewish liturgy, and to this day some con-tinue to be part of the liturgy (Yuval 2006, 97–104).

Kabbalah

Thirteenth-century Andalusian kabbalists, living under rather different cir-cumstances than contemporary German-French Jewish communities, came to view the covenantal relationship between the people of Israel and the God of Israel as involving more than a condition of mutual commitment. Rather, they conceived it in metaphysical terms in which God and his people were ontologically joined so that they formed one entity (Scholem 1991, 140–96). The community of Israel, meaning its metaphysical spiritual being embodied in the rabbinical persona of the “Assembly of Israel,” had been elevated to


soundings

soundings

198

become mystically identical to the godhead itself (182–86). The fundamental identification between the “Assembly of Israel” and God’s feminine presence, the “Shekinah,” has far-reaching theological ramifications (Schafer 2002; Green 2002; Idel 2005, 104–52). The fact that the people of Israel as a mythi-cal entity were now considered a persona of the godhead meant that they shared a single fate and that their supremacy was rooted in the godhead itself (Wolfson 2006, 17–124). The future messianic redemption of the exiled people is redemption of the godhead itself and, conversely, the current exile and suf-fering of the people is the exile and suffering of God, a form of sacrifice on his part.

Although thirteenth-century Kabbalistic teaching is diverse and contains several different understandings of redemption (Idel 2011), there is a central idea that correlates the national redemption of the people with the redemp-tion of the godhead (or the “divine power;” Idel 2011, 33).10 The exile of the Jewish people since the destruction of the Second Temple was understood to be the result of an inner catastrophe that occurred within the godhead, leav-ing God unable to effect his will upon history. This is represented by a cata-strophic rip within the godhead itself and an ensuing chasm between God and his feminine persona, the Jewish people. In close correlation to its differ-ent doctrines of evil (Scholem 1970, 122–28), there emerged a rich mythical understanding of the historical exile of the Jewish people and its theological significance. The historical exile reflects a “higher,” or metaphysical, exile in the godhead. The metaphysical enemies of Israel have not only destroyed the house of God and scattered his people, but have also damaged the “throne” of God—the symbol of his sovereignty as king of history (Pedaya 2001, 103–47, 154–61, 198–222).

Using a complex set of images, the Kabbalists explored the catastrophe that unfolded inside the godhead, now considered to be a God in exile from his peo-ple and from his true being (Scholem 1970, 165–80). They linked the symbols of the house of God (the temple, Jerusalem; Idel 2009) to the “bride” of God (the “people of Israel,” the “name of god,” the throne of God)—all feminine hypostases correlated to the “Shekinah,” that is, the feminine persona of the godhead that was damaged and almost totally devastated by the archenemies of Israel (A. Afterman 2004, 120–23). The devastated king is forced, in the pres-ent, to watch helplessly as his “bride” (Israel) is abused and devastated by God’s


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology199

enemies, both metaphysical and concrete (Tishby 1987, 450–54, 461–70). The metaphysical forces of evil, embodied throughout history as different Gentile institutions, were able to harm the godhead by attacking its most sensitive and vulnerable element: its feminine concrete extension in history.

The Kabbalists thus asserted that the destruction of Israel and Jerusalem reflects a parallel destruction that occurred within the godhead, separating the feminine persona from masculine and resulting in historical and meta-physical exile, reflected in the real and spiritual distance between the Jewish people, their holy land and city, the Torah, and most importantly, God. The redemption of Israel is therefore conditioned on the prior redemption and unification of the godhead. It is essential that God returns to (or remembers) his ancient disposition and purpose in the covenantal relationship with his people. Without God’s return to his true “higher” being, it is impossible to rectify the catastrophe that occurred in history, the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem. This process depends solely on the Jewish people. Since God, as Shekinah, is essentially powerless, it is up to Israel to generate the redemption by the exercise of sacred theurgy.11 This exercise is first and fore-most a form of piety: by prayer and correct ritual practice the relationship between God and the people of Israel can be repaired. The redemption in question must first take place within the hidden theosophical dimensions of the godhead, by virtue of the mysterious relationship between the Torah, the commandments, and the dynamic godhead (Scholem 1987, 414–30).12 Later, as a consequence, it will be reflected in history.

Overcoming the political rivals of the people of Israel will be the outcome of a theurgical process of healing the godhead through Jewish ritual. In other words, the emphasis shifts from historical exile to a theurgical one. Healing of the godhead will be accomplished through proper performance of Jewish ritual, rabbinical values of fertility, and, most importantly, prayer and Torah study. The Kabbalists chose to emphasize deep commitment to the Jewish way of life and its communal and family values as powerful tools of resurrec-tion and empowerment of the godhead. Since Israel’s condition in history is a reflection of hidden dynamics in the godhead, once the godhead is recti-fied, Israel’s historical exile will be rectified accordingly. The Messianic acts of revenge, to be carried out by God, will occur only after redemption through the performance of Jewish ritual and law, enabling the godhead to action.


soundings

soundings

200

In contrast to classical rabbinic thought, for medieval Kabbalists redemption must first be realized in the theosophical realms through the theurgic energy of the Jews living “below” in history (especially the elite practitioners of the Kabbalah). They alone have the secret keys (the effective theurgist power) to initiate the redemptive process inside the godhead. In other words, they alone comprehend the requisite elements of the Jewish Hallachic path that may restore harmony in God, and thereby facilitate his process of healing. The healing of the divine will then be reflected in God’s harmonious relationship with his feminine persona, the people of Israel.

The idea of a historical-political redemption generated by a recovered and empowered God was thus transformed by the Kabbalists into a metaphysi-cal redemption of God by spiritually powerful individuals. The healing of the godhead will effectively situate God back on his throne and introduce him once again as the king of history. Then he will not only rescue the people of Israel from the hands of their enemies in exile, but will exact revenge on the two major archetypical enemies of Judaism, the Christians and Muslims.13 There will then be Jewish political sovereignty in the holy land.

II. Contemporary Manifestations

It is from medieval Kabbalah that cohesion comes: The Jewish people, the Torah, and commandments, the Jewish history of exile, and metaphysical hatred (“Anti-Semitism”) are all rooted in the godhead and its inner dynam-ics. Together, all of these elements serve as ontological boundaries between Israel and the Gentiles (Wolfson 2006, 124–28). In light of God’s passivity, it is up to the Jewish elite to generate the theurgical energy that will bring about eschatological redemption.

Engaging these ideas, the modern return to history brought about an understanding that action through theurgy alone is not sufficient; action must also be realized in concrete historical terms.14 The nation of Israel must initi-ate the redemptive process from below rather than wait for God to initiate the messianic process. These theories, developed by some messianic religious Jews—often inspired by the mystical trends of Judaism—maintain that the people of Israel are currently the only possible source of power. However, in contrast to medieval Kabbalists, this power is not to be activated in


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology201

metaphysical or theosophical realms, but directly onto the historical-political stage. The focus, therefore, shifted back to history’s reflection of the hidden divine process rather than divinity’s self-sacrifice reflected in history. The form of action shifted from Jewish ritual to concrete political action rooted in the Torah. Unlike the secular Zionist movement, which advocated a secular return to history, these religious thinkers write as part of the messianic reli-gious tradition that views history as the realm in which both Jewish ritual and concrete action are the medium by which God’s kingdom is to be restored. There are several thinkers, to be analyzed below, that went even further, argu-ing that part of the concrete action must include acts of violence against the Gentiles as a crucial element in this process of mutual rehabilitation of God and the people of Israel. As we will see, medieval theories of revenge reflected in Ashkenazi and Kabbalistic sources influenced the contemporary religious understanding of vengeance espoused by extremist thinkers.

meir Kahane (1932–1990)

Meir Kahane was born in Brooklyn, New York, on August 1, 1932.15 His father, Rabbi Charles Kahane, was involved in the Revisionist movement, and was a close friend of Ze’ev Jabotinsky. Kahane founded the Jewish Defense League (JDL). He saw many of the poor and elderly Jews of New York being targeted by criminals. As a result, he set out to change the image of the Jew from “weak and vulnerable” to one of a “mighty fighter, who strikes back fiercely against tyrants” (Kahane 1971, 220–21). The JDL’s controversial methods, which fre-quently included the threat of or actual violence exacerbated Black-Jewish tensions already present in New York City. An important aspect of the JDL was the rebuilding of “Jewish power,” evidenced in the slogan “never again.” However, after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, which came in the midst of the post-war euphoria following 1967, Kahane changed his focus to Israeli Arabs and Palestinians. His new argument centred on the claim that the State of Israel was established by God as an act of revenge against the Gentiles for their persecution of Jews, especially the systematic killing of Jews during the Holocaust. Following his move to Israel in 1971, Kahane founded the vehe-mently anti-Arab Kach16 party. The party’s platform called for the annexa-tion of all territories acquired in the 1967 war and the forcible removal of all Palestinians. Under the auspices of Kach, Kahane continued to lobby for his


soundings

soundings

202

beliefs in violent ways and was jailed on several occasions. He was the first Jew in Israel ever to be accused of sedition (Sprinzak 1999, 187–93). Kahane was elected to the Israeli parliament (Knesset) in 1984. His movement continued to grow until, prior to the 1988 Knesset elections, the Kach party was banned from running. The ban was based on an amendment of the election law, added because of Kahane’s emergence that disqualified any candidate whose platform included “incitement to racism.” Two years later, in 1990, Kahane was assassinated in New York by an Egyptian terrorist.

In the following, we focus on the influence of medieval sources on Kahane’s theological ideas rather than the influence of contemporary political ideology.17 Some might argue that Kahane is a political thinker using religious arguments to justify his ideological outlook rather than an essentially religious thinker who deals in politics. It is our view, however, that Kahane viewed himself first and foremost to be a “rabbi,” as shown through his establishment of a religious seminary in Jerusalem, where his philosophy is taught. He also considered his theological book Or HaRaayon (The Jewish Idea, 1993) his most important work. It is his theological work that had the most influence on political reality.

According to Kahane’s extremist theology, the redemptive process will and should include a major component of vengeance performed first by the people of Israel, especially by the “uniquely outstanding” ones. Instead of God launching the messianic era with acts of revenge, it is now the responsibility of Israel and its special elite to generate such acts “below” in order to facilitate the messianic era’s advent. This action would initiate the process of redemp-tion and empower the shattered God to regain his might and return to his-tory.18 It seems that for God to return to history, his people need to return to him first. They may do so by acting violently in the interest of just revenge. If God cannot act according to his true nature and past commitments, it is up to his “partner” to take the initiative and perform certain functions on his behalf. This theology of revenge assumes that God, devastated after the Holocaust, is practically dead (Kahane 1993, 119).19 Because God and Israel are intimately correlated, the devastated state of the people reflects a devastated God. It is no longer possible to rectify the godhead first (as in medieval Kabbalah); it is too late. The only solution is to restore Israel’s existence and pride “below” by acts of revenge. Only then will God’s bruised pride be restored, empowering him


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology203

again to take back his original position in history and complete the process his people have started. Although this kind of theology is marginal, it is our belief that it had and still has an impact today.20 Widely known for his political antics and populist racism, Kahane also wrote an influential Jewish theology. Much of his theology is concerned with revenge as a religious act. This is articu-lated most clearly in Or Ha-Ra’ayon, which draws on various earlier sources, including the mystical teachings discussed above.

Kahane’s theology is based on three fundamental pillars:

A. The people of Israel are a collective mythical being ontologically rooted in divinity, that together with God faced a mythical enemy from its early days. This mythical enemy, “Amalek,” is embodied in different actual enemies throughout Jewish history, and the various persecutions and ordeals that Jews have suffered throughout history are manifestations of the same mythical struggle. Furthermore, there is an ontological differ-ence between the mythical nation of Israel and the Gentiles, especially Israel’s enemies. The ontological difference between the Jewish and Gentile soul overrides the Jewish principle that all of humanity was created in the image of God. The belief that Gentiles are inferior21 and embody the demonic powers of history justifies acts of deadly violence and revenge.

B. The God of Israel and his people ontologically reflect one other; the extermination of one third of the Jewish people in the Holocaust led to the near devastation of the God of Israel, together with his people. Thus, the argument proceeds, the people of Israel are religiously obliged to use all means possible to take revenge against their mutual enemies and to rehabilitate their mutual pride and status. Whether or not they realize it, the Palestinians and other forces fighting Israel are part of a mythical, religious battle that seeks the destruction of the people of Israel and its God. These factors permit the use of any and all measures to overcome the enemies.

C. The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, shortly after the Holocaust, must serve one purpose: to facilitate redemptive revenge against the Gentiles. The establishment of the modern Jewish state in the historical land of Israel is an instrument for activating the redemptive process, rather than a result or a sign of such a process.


soundings

soundings

204

Based on these three pillars, Kahane argues that carrying out vengeance against the metaphysical enemy “Amalek” (hostile Gentiles) is fundamental to saving God and his people, both of whom almost ceased to exist as a result of the Holocaust. The establishment of the Jewish state, with its institutional-ized power and military might should, on Kahane’s view, be placed at the service of redemption-bound revenge. Kahane goes so far as to justify acts of vengeance even against innocent people by arguing that they belong to the mythical enemy that must be eradicated as a condition for the redemption of Israel and its God. In his view, the loss of innocent lives, if necessary, is a justifiable sacrifice.

This theology of revenge is based in part on the relatively widespread notion of the ontological difference between the souls of Gentiles and Jews. These ideas are prevalent in the Chabad movement22 (of the Lubavitch dynasty), where we find the most developed theory of the “qualitative differ-ence” between Jew and Gentile: “The latter possess an animal soul (nefesh ha-behemit), which derives from the aspect of the shell of the “other side”23 and is located in the left chamber of the heart, whereas the former alone is endowed with the divine soul (nefesh ha-elohit), which is the spark that ema-nates from the light of the Infinite and is located in the brain as well as in the right chamber of the heart.”24 Similar ideas are expressed in the thought of religious Zionist Rabbi Abraham Itzhak HaCohen Kook (1865–1935). Chabad Hasidism and Kookian Religious Zionism differ on many points, yet share many of the sources that have in turn had an impact on Kahane’s theology of revenge. In his quest to differentiate the Jews from the Gentiles, Rabbi Kook adopted Judah Halevy’s medieval doctrine of ontological hierarchy of souls between Jews and Gentiles25:

The difference between the soul of Israel, its essence and aspirations, and that of the soul of the gentiles, of all ranks, is greater and deeper than the difference between the Human soul and the soul of a beast, inasmuch as between the latter the difference is a matter of quantity while between the former it is a difference of quality.26

As with Rabbi Kook, the fundamental idea at the base of Kahane’s theol-ogy of revenge is the assumption, articulated above, that the people of Israel


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology205

are ontologically superior to Gentiles. Kahane directly attacks those who attempt to promote the values of universal equality of all humanity in the name of the Torah and Judaism:

Nonsense and vanity are those foreign values, which infiltrated into large sectors of God’s People, advocating the “equality” of all men and nations. This equality, which is so important for the Gentiles, has no place in the Temple of truth of the qualities and values of God’s Torah. . . . God created himself a special, unique, holy, supe-rior people—the People of Israel—which will live in isolation—and sorry are the eyes and ears that hear and see the large portions of God’s People, that have assimilated and distorted (the truth) so deeply that many of them kick their crown, abandon their Land, and dispute the concept of their election as a holy and superior people, as sons of God. (Kahane 1993, 303)

Kahane does not perceive the concept of the “chosen people” as “racist.” Instead, he argues that the interpretation of this concept as racist stems from the infiltration of foreign culture into Judaism, leading the Jews to be ashamed of their superiority over the Gentiles. Developing further his theory, Kahane considers the unique existence of the Jewish people and their covenant with God to be constituted upon four elements. These four elements—the people, the Torah, the land, and the Hebrew language27—are all rooted in the divine and together constitute that which is the particular superiority of the Jews. In other words, Judaism is not a universal religion but a particular one, based on a particular exclusive covenant. Putting his theology into practical terms, Kahane argues against the Western character of the State of Israel:

This is a Jewish state. It bows in front of Judaism and does not contra-dict it. It acts in accordance with Jewish values and Jewish command-ments even if these contradict international law and diplomacy; even if they contrast the normal and accepted Western and democratic lifestyle; this is so even if this puts its interests under risk and threat-ens to isolate it from the civilized gentiles. . . . The duty of Judaism is to be separate, unique, different and chosen. This is the role of the


soundings

soundings

206

Jewish people and their instrument, the State. . . . We have no part in the standard values of the nations. Assimilation does not begin with mixed marriages, but in copying and adopting foreign values, alien and non-Jewish concepts and ideas. 28

Kahane is explicit in his insistence that the State of Israel and its insti-tutions should and must be instrumental in the theological purpose of ven-geance against the Gentiles. Jews must take advantage of these instruments of power in order to implement a theology of revenge. Kahane sees the exer-cise of vengeance (Nekama) as an important religious duty. He considers the oppression of the Jews by the Gentiles throughout the centuries (and the Jews’ humiliating inability to respond) as Hillul Hashem, the desecration of the name of God. It is through revenge that the Jews will restore God’s honor:

Whoever concedes their revenge against Israel’s enemies, in prac-ticality concedes the revenge of The Holy One, Blessed Be He, as whoever acts against Israel is in fact acting against the God of Israel, in the fact that he shows no fear of God’s punishment . . . therefore, it is forbidden for any man to concede on revenge. (Kahane 1993, 120)

Israel’s revenge, which is a vehicle for God’s empowerment and eventual revenge, is seen by Kahane as Kidush Hashem (sanctification of God’s name) and as strengthening God’s rule over the world:

The victory of injustice and wickedness is ostensible proof of God’s absence from the world, and there is no greater profanation of God’s name. By contrast, God’s victory and revenge over His enemies, the evildoers, prove to the world that “verily there is a God Who judges on earth!” (Psalms 58:12). . . . It is only through revenge that God is revived and awakened. (1993, 119)

Only through revenge can God revive himself and emerge from the state of concealment (Hester Panim). He writes that only through revenge “God rejoices and awakes and in fact revitalises himself literally, returns to life” (119). In his booklet Listen World, Listen Jew Kahane gives us another, more


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology207

contemporary, insight into his understanding of the concepts of Hillul Hashem and Kiddush Hashem:

When the Jew is beaten God is profaned! When the Jew is humili-ated God is shamed! When the Jew is attacked it is an assault upon the Name of God! . . . Every Pogrom is a desecration of the Name. Every Auschwitz and expulsion and murder and rape of a Jew is the humiliation of God. Every time a Jew is beaten by a Gentile because he is a Jew, this is the essence of Hillul Hashem! . . . A Jewish fist in the face of an astonished Gentile world that had not seen it for two millennia, this is Kiddush Hashem. Jewish dominion over the Christian holy places while the Church that sucked our blood vomits its rage and frustration, this is Kidush Hashem. A Jewish Air Force that is better than any other and that forces a Lebanese airliner down so we can imprison murderers of Jews rather than having to repeat the centuries old pattern of begging the Gentile to do it for us. This is Kidush Hashem. (Kahane 1975, 121–22)

Following a disastrous terrorist attack on a school in the northern Israeli town of Kiryat Shmone, in which many school children were killed in 1976, Kahane distributed a pamphlet entitled Hillul Hashem among his followers.29 In the pamphlet he detailed his philosophy in relation to revenge and specifi-cally in relation to the practical role that the State of Israel should play in its enforcement:

God created the state not for the Jew and not as a reward for his justice and good deeds. It is because He, blessed be He, decided that He can no longer take the desecration of his name and the laugh-ter, the disgrace, and the persecution of the people that was named after him, so He ordered the State of Israel into existence, which is a total contradiction to the Diaspora. If the Diaspora, with its humili-ations, defeats, persecutions, second class status of a minority . . . means Hillul Hashem, then a sovereign Jewish State which provides the Jew home, majority status, land of his own, a military of his own and a victory over the defeated Gentile in the battlefield—is exactly


soundings

soundings

208

the opposite, Kidush Hashem. It is the reassertion, the proof, the testimony for the existence of God and his government.30

This pamphlet can be seen as constituting a direct attack on Kookist the-ology, the heart of Religious Zionism, according to which the State of Israel was established as part of a heavenly process leading to redemption. Kahane argues that it is not the Jews who are responsible for the establishment of the State of Israel but the Gentiles (Ravitzky 1986a, 95). The State of Israel was not created because the Zionists or the Jews deserved it but as a result of Gentile action. According to Kahane’s theory of Hillul Hashem, the humilia-tion of the Jews by the Gentile world was in fact a humiliation of God, as his chosen people were persecuted repeatedly. The establishment of Israel does not symbolize a reward for Jews, as Rabbi Kook thought, but a punishment for their prosecutors (97). It can therefore be argued that Kahane sees the very definition of Jewish freedom as closely correlating with the Jews’ ability to use organized force in order to humiliate the Gentiles (97).

Kahane’s insistence that the State of Israel will be instrumental in the theological scheme of revenge represents a significant departure from main-stream Religious Zionism. In fact, this idea can be seen as constituting yet another attack on Kookian theology, according to which the State of Israel was established as part of a messianic process initiated by God, leading his people to redemption.31 Rabbi Kook did not regard the founding fathers of secular Zionism as heretics acting against the will of God but rather as active agents in a messianic process of which they had only a dim awareness. On this doctrine, God himself has acted to revive the nation and has chosen to implement his will through the leaders of secular Zionism. Religious Zionism accordingly viewed the secular State of Israel not as a sin (as do some ultra-orthodox Jewish sects) but rather as a sign that God has decided to forgive all his people, not only the observant ones. In total contrast, Kahane argued that it is not the Jews who are responsible for the establishment of the State of Israel, but the Gentiles. Its establishment resulted from the wrongs committed by the Gentiles and the aftershock of the Shoah. Only institutionalized revenge will truly restore Jewish existence and mark the beginning of the messianic era. In fact, Kahane argues, the messianic process will begin only when Jews undertake revenge against the Gentiles who deserve it, for then God will be


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology209

empowered to follow those steps and ultimately fulfil the messianic aspirations of generations of Jews who suffered while in exile (Ravitzky 1986b, 14–15). Kahane’s theory of Hillul Hashem, in which the humiliation of the Jews by the Gentile world was in fact a humiliation of God, leads to radical theologi-cal conclusions. By using organized tools of power and inflicting humiliation on the Gentiles, the people of Israel are not only freeing themselves from the decadence and weakness of the Diaspora but are, more importantly, reinstat-ing God’s status as the true God of Israel as he functioned in the Biblical past.

Kahane also establishes a direct link between the Biblical decrees regard-ing the conquest of the land of Israel and the political situation in the modern State of Israel. Kahane is particularly invested in the concept of the “seven nations,” which refers to several instances in the Hebrew Bible when God commanded that the “seven nations” residing in the land of Israel be utterly destroyed once the land was conquered. Consider, for example, Deut 7:1–2: “you shall smite them and utterly destroy them; you shall make no covenant with them, nor show them mercy.” The idea of the destruction of the “seven nations” has not traditionally held much historical or referential value. Even the Hebrew Bible testifies that such procedures were never actually under-taken by the ancient Israelites, as illustrated by King Saul’s sparing the life of the Amalekite king (1 Samuel 15).32 Later rabbinical authorities determined that the category of seven nations had no actual reference, thus already emp-tying this category from any actual relevance (Afterman and Afterman 2012). Despite the categorical claim of ancient rabbinical authorities that the seven nations could no longer be identified, Kahane argued that this command-ment must be reissued and applied to the current enemies of the State of Israel. According to Kahane, the essential reason behind the unforgiving and unequivocal commandments regarding the inhabitants of the land in biblical times is the fear that their inherent hatred and desire for revenge will lead to a relentless effort to overthrow Israel’s rule. This leads Kahane to the conclusion that the same reasoning applies today, and that these rules have continued to apply to all Gentiles dwelling in the land of Israel throughout the centuries. Today they apply specifically to the Palestinians.

Kahane further argues that because the Arabs will never accept the halachic conditions of hashlama,33 Jews have a religious duty to initiate war on them. He emphasizes that the association of the Palestinians with the


soundings

soundings

210

seven nations fated for destruction in the Bible is not merely a theoretical parallel. On the contrary, he holds that the biblical commandment enjoining the total destruction of the seven nations must be enforced against modern Palestinians. This institutionalized revenge against the Gentiles will serve a future redemptive process. As we have sought to show, this revenge is ardently desired by Kahane and his disciples, precisely in view of the deep historical and metaphysical changes that it promises to effect. As a summary let us quote from Kahane’s commentary on the Hagadah of Passover, where he character-izes this feast as:

[A] holiday that was created to commemorate the sanctity of ven-geance; the punishment and the destruction of Pharaoh and Egypt that mocked and humiliated God by crying: “Who is the L-rd? I know not the L-rd.” Vengeance so that the world shall know the L-rd and cry, “Verily, there is a God that judgeth in the earth.” . . . For it is only vengeance that proves that there is indeed a God in the world, that there is good and evil and punishment for that evil. When the wicked kill and injustice reigns, surely the wicked cry out: “There is no God, for if there was He would punish me.” And the victim in his agony agrees. When there is no vengeance and punish-ment and the wicked reign, God is pushed from his throne; it is the greatest Hillul Hashem—desecration to God’s Name; it is “proof” that there is no God.34

In light of this, one cannot ignore the action of one of Kahane’s devoted students, Dr. Baruch Goldstein (1956–1994), an American-born Israeli physi-cian. Goldstein carried out on the holiday of Purim (February 25, 1994) a massacre in the city of Hebron. Twenty-nine Arabs at prayer in the Ibrahimi Mosque (within the Cave of the Patriarchs) were killed, and another 150 were wounded in Goldstein’s subsequent shooting. Goldstein was a close student of Kahane’s, who spoke publicly at Kahane's funeral in 1990. The choice of Purim by Goldstein as the day for carrying out his act of vengeance was not accidental but rather directly linked to Purim’s historical significance as a day of retribution against Israel’s enemies. It drew directly upon Kahane’s theology of revenge.35


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology211

In the aftermath of Goldstein’s massacre, a well-known Israeli Chabad Kabbalist Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh (1944–) published a defense of Goldstein entitled Baruch Ha-Gever (1995),36 within which a hid-den mystical meaning was attributed to his Purim atrocities. Ginsburgh claimed that the heart of Goldstein’s act of Kiddush Shem was justified vengeance against the Palestinians. This religious act, he explained, was rightly aimed at changing political circumstances and eventually instigat-ing an eschatological transformation (ben Horin 1995).37 Here we find a clear manifestation of Kahane’s theology of revenge and a genealogy from Kahane’s radical theology, through his student’s brutal act of revenge, to a theological justification of that revenge. They all articulated a theory in which revenge lies at the core of an act of Kidush ha-Shem, making revenge the ultimate religious act. For Ginsburgh, taking revenge is the clearest act of Jewish authenticity, realizing below what emanates from the deepest point of the divine.38 Being fully aware of the traditional Jewish (and more broadly Western) sensitivity to the value of innocent human life that stands categorically against such acts, Ginsburgh explains how the authentic Jews must be willing to overcome this instinctive reaction and through a higher state of consciousness realize the “higher” act of revenge that will eventu-ally stimulate a hidden mystical process with messianic consequences. In other words, for a Jew to reach the highest level of Kidush ha-Shem (consid-ered to be a mystical state above conventional logic), he must implement a “pure” act of violence that will ignite the process and eventually lead to a new religious reality.

The various modern approaches to revenge discussed here have all shared assumptions about the superiority of Jews over Gentiles, as well as the ontological categories within which Jewish people undergo apotheosis and become a part of the godhead (compare to criticism by Hartman 2000). Acting below in the name of the God, those acts of messianic revenge that were strictly reserved for God alone in the messianic future are now the responsibility of the Jewish people “below”—here and now. While for many Jews the act of religious revenge against innocent people is the ulti-mate act of idolatry, for Kahane it is the most precious act of sanctifying the name of God.


soundings

soundings

212

Notes

1. This article was originally presented at an international workshop, “Comparative Ethics of War,” organized by the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO). We thank PRIO professors Gregory M. Reichberg and Henrik Syse for their encouragement and helpful comments in preparing this article for publication. Thanks are due also to the anonymous reviewers and editors at Soundings who helped us clarify our arguments.

2. The revenge killing in Jerusalem (July 1, 2014) of Muhammad Hussein Abu Khdeir is among the most recent manifestations of such extremist ideologies.

3. The Hebrew reads אל נקמות.4. The Hebrew reads נקמה.5. Yalkut Tehilim 1.6. On the history of the demand to take revenge against Amalek and its various

interpretations see Sagi (1994) and Horowitz (2006, 107–46).7. We find at the same time the development of the category of the Gentile (goy);

see Rosen-Zvi and Ophir (2011) and Walzer, et al. (2003, 445–84).8. For the many different approaches of the rabbis in front of the destruction, see the

many studies mentioned in Shremer (2008, 183 n1).9. In Hebrew an act of Kiddush ha-Shem (the “Sanctification of the name of God”).

10. On different medieval and premodern mystical conceptions of power see Garb (2005).

11. On Kabbalistic theurgy and its earlier sources see Idel (1988, 156–99) and Garb (2001).

12. On the profound connection between rabbinic and Kabbalistic emphasis on Jewish law and ritual, Jewish supremacy and ontological boundaries between the Jews and the Gentiles, on the one hand, and the dynamics of venturing beyond the nomian and ontic boundaries on the other, see Wolfson (2006); Garb (2009, 76–122; 2011).

13. See the important and detailed analysis by Wolfson (2006, 90–107, 129–85).14. See the detailed discussion of the different approaches to power and redemption

in modern Judaism in Garb (2009, 37–59).15. Two biographical accounts of Kahane’s life were published by Friedman (1990)

and Kotler (1985).16. “Thus” in Hebrew.17. On the political understanding of violence in Kahane and the right wing see, for

example, Sprinzak (1991, 1999) and Ravitzky (1986a, 1986b).18. See, for example, Kahane (1993, 119) (printed in English as The Jewish Idea), where

he writes: “When He takes the revenge of His people and of Himself, He thereby sanctifies His name, proving to the world that Israel indeed has a God and that He lives and endures. The victory of injustice and wickedness is ostensible proof of G-d’s absence from the world, and there is no greater profanation of G-d’s name. By contrast, God’s victory and revenge over His enemies, the evildoers, prove to the world that “verily there is a God Who judges on earth!” (Psalms 58:12) . . . “It is only through revenge, that God is revived and awakened.” (our translation)


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology213

19. Kahane’s writings are widely accessible on Internet websites such as www.kahane.org/hebrew/or.

20. See the important studies by Aviezer Ravitzky (1986a, 1986b).21. “The People of Israel are a unique and Chosen people. . . . Israel is The Holy

One Blessed He’s messenger in the world, the one who was commanded to con-stitute the reason for creation. . . . That is why The Holy One Blessed He blessed and elevated Israel to the level of ‘superior’ nation—which exceeds all the rest of humanity with its spirit and pure soul” Kahane (1993, 304; see also 279, 297).

22. See the detailed discussion by Wolfson (2009, 185–86, 224–64). See also Ravitzky (1996, 188–93).

23. The “other side” is a Kabbalistic term for the other side of God, i.e., the demonic metaphysical enemy of the God of Israel.

24. Wolfson (2006, 5 n15).25. Judah Halevy’s medieval doctrine draws from different sources and should be

understood in its medieval context, mainly Shia Islam (Krinis 2014). His ideas were interpreted by later authorities to provide a more systematic and “scientific” theory of Jewish supremacy (see G. Afterman 2007). On different models of elec-tion and Jewish supremacy and in particular in Judah Halevy’s Kuzari see the sources and analysis in Walzer, et al. (2003, 29–81).

26. Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, Orot Yisrael, chap. 5, article 10; see further the sources translated and analyzed in Walzer, et al. (2003, 61–67, 506–7).

27. See the discussion in Kahane (1993, 296–311) chap. 23, “The Chosen People.”28. Our translation. Meir Kahane, “Ha’maavak Ha’amiti” (see Cohen Ve’Navi 2001).

The essay was first published in the Israeli daily newspaper Ha’aretz, on February 15, 1983.

29. The pamphlet was only published publicly in 2001 as part of a collection of Kahane’s essays. See Cohen Ve’Navi (2001, 45–49): Hamachon le’hozaat kitvey ha’rav Kahane. See also Kahane’s Hillul Hashem.

30. Kahane, Hillul Hashem (47). Translation from Sprinzak (1991).31. For more on the attitudes toward the establishment of the State in Israel in Ortho-

dox Judaism in general and Religious Zionism specifically see Ravitzky (1996); Walzer, et al. (2000, 463–523).

32. The fact that the Amalekites were still present in the holy land at the time of King Saul suggests that the procedure was never fully followed. See Afterman and Afterman 2014, 11–12.

33. Full submission to the Jewish rule and laws.34. The commentary is published at http://www.geocities.com/nkmpa/passover.html.35. See in general Horowitz (2006), and in particular on Goldstein (Horowitz 2006,

4–12, 315).36. Baruch Ha-gever Literally: Blessed is the Man. Baruch is both “blessed” and the

private name of Baruch Goldstein. The title then could be read as “Blessed is Baruch” or Baruch is the perfected man.

37. An English translation of the source is available at: http://www.angelfire.com/anime5/danilin/PodeUmatzil.htm (accessed May 2014). On Ginsburgh’s


soundings

soundings

214

understanding of Jewish supremacy see the sources translated in Walzer, et al. (2003, 537–41), especially the analysis by Menachem Lorberbaum (542–45).

38. In order to perform a “pure” act of religious revenge the Jew must not only reach the highest mystical state in himself, a state of mind that transcends normal and conventional thinking, he needs to relate or even connect to the parallel point above in the divine “mind.” Overcoming the higher human instincts of justice and compassion and being able to realize in history a “higher” act of brutal vio-lence against innocent people is crucial in order to create an authentic and true Jewish existence in its holy land. By the act of “pure” violence the perfected Jew can draw the highest point in the godhead down to its most concrete dimension and restore God’s name and “kingdom” in history.

Works Cited

Afterman, Adam. 2004. The Intentions of Prayer in Early Ecstatic Kabbalah: A Study and Critical Edition of an Anonymous Commentary to the Prayers. Los Angeles: Cherub.

Afterman, Adam, and Gedaliah Afterman. 2012. “‘Rise up and Kill Him First’: On Modern Attempts to Create a Jewish Ethics of War.” Nova et Vetera 10, no. 4:1183–1213.

———. 2014. “Judaism.” In Religion, War, and Ethics: A Sourcebook of Textual Traditions, edited by Gregory M. Reichberg and Henrik Syse, 8–75. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Afterman, Gedaliah. 2007. Understanding the Theology of Israel’s Extreme Religious Right: “The Chosen People” and “The Land of Israel” from the Bible to the “Expulsion from Gush Katif.” Melbourne: University of Melbourne Press.

Baron, Salo Wittmayer. 1952. A Social and Religious History of the Jews, Volume II: Christian Era; The First Five Centuries. 18 Vols. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.

Cohen, Jeremy. 1999. “Between Martyrdom and Apostasy: Doubt and Self-Definition in Twelfth-Century Ashkenz.” Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 29, no. 3:431–71.

———. 2000. “Christian Theology and Anti-Jewish Violence in the Middle Ages: Connections and Disjunctions.” In Religious Violence Between Christians and Jews: Medieval Roots, Modern Perspectives, edited by Anna Sapir Abulafia, 44–60. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave.

———. 2004. Sanctifying the Name of God: Jewish Martyrs and Jewish Memories of the First Crusade. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

———. 2012. “From Solomon bar Samson to Solomon ibn Verga: Tales and Ideas of Jewish Martyrdom in ‘Shevet Yehudah.’” In Studies in Medieval Jewish Intellectual and Social History: Festschrift in Honor of Robert Chazan, edited by David Engel, Lawrence H. Schiffman, Elliot R. Wolfson, and Yechiel Y. Schur, 279–97. Leiden: Brill.


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology215

Friedman, Robert I. 1990. The False Prophet, Rabbi Meir Kahane: From FBI Informant to Knesset Member. Brooklyn: Lawrence Hill.

Garb, Jonathan. 2001. “Kinds of Power: Rabbinic Texts and the Kabbalah.” Kabbalah: Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts 6:45–71.

———. 2005. Manifestations of Power in Jewish Mysticism: From Rabbinic Literature to Safedian Kabbalah. Jerusalem: Magnes.

———. 2009. The Chosen Will Become Herds: Studies in Twelfth-Century Kabbalah. New Haven: Yale University Press.

———. 2011. Shamanic Trance in Modern Kabbalah. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Goldin, Simha. 2008. The Ways of Jewish Martyrdom. Translated by Yigal Levin and C. Michael Copeland. Turnhout: Brepols.

Green, Art. 2002. “Shekinah, the Virgin Mary, and the Song of Songs: Reflections on a Kabbalistic Symbol in its Historical Context.” Association for Jewish Studies Review 26, no. 1:1–52.

Hartman, David. 2000. Israelis and the Jewish Tradition: An Ancient People Debating Its Future. New Haven: Yale University Press.

ben Horin, Michael. 1995. Baruch HaGever: A Memorial Volume for Dr. Baruch Goldstein, the Saint, May God Avenge His Blood. Jerusalem: Special Publication.

Horowitz, Elliot. 2006. Reckless Rites: Purim and the Legacy of Jewish Violence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Idel, Moshe. 1988. Kabbalah: New Perspectives. New Haven: Yale University Press.———. 2005. Kabbalah and Eros. New Haven: Yale University Press.———. 2009. “On Jerusalem as a Feminine and Sexual Hypostatis: From Late Antiquity

Sources to Medieval Kabbalah.” In Memory, Humanity, and Meaning: Selected Essays in Honor of Andrei Pleşu’s Sixtieth Anniversary, edited by Mihail Neamţu and Bogdan Tǎtaru-Cazaban, 65–110. Bucharest: Zeta.

———. 2011. “Multiple Forms of Redemption in Kabbalah and Hasidism.” Jewish Quarterly Review 101, no. 1:27–70.

Kahane, Meir. 1971. Never Again! A Program for Survival. Los Angeles: Nash.———. 1975. Listen World, Listen Jew. Jerusalem: Institute of the Jewish Idea.———. 1983. “Ha’maavak Ha’amiti.” Ha’aretz. February 15, 1983.———. 1993. Or Ha’Raayon. Jerusalem: Institute for the Publication of the Writings

of the Rabbi.———. 1996. The Jewish Idea. 3rd ed. Brooklyn: Institute for the Publication of the

Writings of the Rabbi.———. 2001. Cohen Ve’Navi, Oseph Ma’marim. Jerusalem: Institute for the Publication

of the Writing of Rabbi Kahane.Kotler, Yair. 1985. Hail Kahana. Tel Aviv: Modan.Krinis, Ehud. 2014. God’s Chosen People: Judah Halevi’s “Kuzari” and the Shī ʻī Imām

Doctrine. Turnhout: Brepoles.Liebes, Yehuda. 2008. God’s Story: Collected Essays on the Jewish Myth. Jerusalem:

Carmel.


soundings

soundings

216

Pedaya, Hadiva. 2001. Name and Sanctuary in the Teaching of R. Isaac the Blind: A Comparative Study in the Writings of the Earliest Kabbalist. Jerusalem: Magnes.

Peels, H. G. L. 1995. The Vengeance of God: The Meaning of the Root NQM and the Function of the NQM-texts in the Context of Divine Revelation in the Old Testament. Leiden: Brill.

Ravitzky, Aviezer. 1986a. “The Roots of Kahanism: Consciousness and Political Reality.” Jerusalem Quarterly 39:90–108.

———. 1986b. The Roots of Kahanism: Consciousness and Political Reality. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem Press.

———. 1996. Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious Radicalism. Translated by Michael Swirsky and Jonathan Chipman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Rosen-Zvi, Ishay, and Adi Ophir. 2011. “Goy: Toward a Geneaology.” Dine Israel 28:69–122.

Sagi, Avi. 1994. “The Punishment of Amalek in Jewish Tradition: Coping with the Moral Problem.” Harvard Theological Review 87, no. 3:323–46.

Schafer, Peter. 2002. Mirror of His Beauty: Feminine Images of God from the Bible to Early Kabbalah. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Scholem, Gershom. 1970. Kabbalah. Jerusalem: Keter.———. 1987. Origins of the Kabbalah. Translated by Allan Arkush. Philadelphia: Jewish

Publication Society.———. 1991. On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead: Basic Concepts in the Kabbalah.

New York: Schoken.Shepkaru, Shmuel. 2006. Jewish Martyrdom in the Pagan and Christian Worlds.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Shremer, Adiel. 2004. “Eschatology, Violence, and Suicide: An Early Rabbinic Theme

and Its Influence in the Middle Ages.” In Apocalypse and Violence, edited by Abbas Amanat and John J. Collins, 19–43. Yale Center for International and Area Studies Working Paper Series. New Haven: Yale University Press.

———. 2008. “‘The Lord Has Forsaken the Land’: Radical Explanations of the Military and Political Defeat of the Jews in Tannaitic Literature.” Journal of Jewish Studies 59, no. 2:183–200.

Sprinzak, Ehud. 1991. “Violence and Catastrophe in the Theology of Rabbi Meir Kahane: The Ideologization of Mimetic Desire.” Terrorism and Political Violence 3, no. 3:48–71.

———. 1999. Brother against Brother: Violence and Extremism in Israeli Politics from Altalena to the Rabin Assassination. New York: Free Press.

Tishby, Isaiah. 1987. The Wisdom of the Zohar: An Anthology of Texts. Vol. 2. Translated by David Goldstein. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Walzer, Michael, Menachem Lorberbaum, and Noam J. Zohar, eds., with Ari Ackerman. 2003. The Jewish Political Tradition, Volume 2: Membership. New Haven: Yale University Press.


after

man

and

after

man

Kahane and C

ontemporary Jew

ish Theology217

Walzer, Michael, Menachem Lorberbaum, and Noam J. Zohar, eds., with Yair Lorberbaum. 2000. The Jewish Political Tradition, Volume 1: Authority. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Wolfson, Elliot R. 2001. “Martyrdom, Eroticism, and Asceticism in Twelfth-Century Ashkenazi Piety.” In Jews and Christians in Twelfth-Century Europe, edited by John H. Van Engen and Michael A. Signer, 171–220. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

———. 2006. Venturing Beyond: Law and Morality in Kabbalistic Mysticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

———. 2009. Open Secret: Postmessianic Messianism and the Mystical Revision of Menahem Mendel Schneerson. New York: Columbia University Press.

Yuval, Israel. 2006. Two Nations in Your Womb: Perceptions of Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Translated by Barbara Harshav and Jonathan Chipman. Berkeley: University of California Press.


"Meir Kahane and Contemporary Jewish Theology of Revenge", Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Volume 98, Number 2, 2015, pp. 192-217

Documents