The Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit
Midrash
Faith and the Holocaust
Yeshivat Har Etzion
Lecture
#09a:
The
Holocaust in the Teachings of Rabbi Yekutiel Yehuda Halberstam of
Sanz-Klausenburg
(Part
1)
By Rav
We shall now address the philosophy of the Rebbe of Sanz-Klausenburg,
which was formulated in the wake of the Holocaust and as the conclusion that he
drew from it. In this lecture we
will focus on historical and biographical aspects of the subject and offer some
initial comments. In the next
lectures we will take a more in-depth view of the ideological and philosophical
issues (including Rabbi Halberstam's attitude towards Zionism and the nation of
Israel, as well as the question of faith).
A. His life
Rabbi Yekutiel Yehuda Halberstam zt"l was the son of Rabbi
At a very early age, Rabbi Halberstam was recognized as a genius; he was
tested on the entire Talmud at the age of 13. When he was fourteen, his father,
who had been his main teacher, passed away, and the same year he himself was
ordained as a teacher.
He
married Pessia Teitelbaum, the daughter of R. Chayim Zvi Teitelbaum, the rabbi
of Sighet and author of Atzei Chayim, (the brother of Rabbi Yoel Moshe
Teitelbaum of Satmar), and the couple had eleven children. At the age of 21, he was appointed rabbi
of Klausenburg, Hungary, and he also headed the yeshiva there. During the Holocaust, he was part of a
labor force that was ordered by the Nazis to clear out the remains of the Warsaw
ghetto; he was then sent to Auschwitz.
He participated in one of the death marches and also spent time at the
labor camp, experiencing terrible suffering. His wife and all eleven of his children
died in the Holocaust.
After the war,
Rabbi Halberstam set about establishing Torah institutions in the Displaced
Persons camps in Germany and Austria.
In 1946, he traveled to the US to raise funds to help Holocaust
survivors, and he set up more Torah institutions in Mexico and in New York,
intended for survivors who had settled there. He started his family anew with Chaya
Nechama Ungar, the daughter of Rabbi Shmuel David Ungar, the Av Beit Din
of Nitra, and they had seven children.
In 1955, Rabbi Halberstam visited Eretz Yisrael for the first
time, and he decided to establish a Chassidic center, Kiryat Sanz, in
Netanya. He founded the new Sanz
chassidut, as well as "Mif'al ha-Shas" and Kollel
Shas. He also founded the
Laniado hospital in Netanya, serving all residents of Netanya and the
surrounding areas, as well as many other charitable and communal
projects.
He passed away on the 9th of Tammuz, 5754. He was succeeded by his two sons, who
serve as Rebbes in Israel and in America.
B. Attitude Towards Zionism Amongst the
Jews of Galicia Prior to the Holocaust
As we know, the Chassidic movement was unsupportive of Zionism. While there were roshei yeshiva
and rabbis outside of the Chassidic movement who were in favor of the Zionist
idea in principle and whose reservations mainly concerned the secular character
of the movement's leadership, the approach of the Chassidim was one of
opposition in principle. The
reasons for this have been discussed in previous lectures that have focused on
the Rebbes of Satmar and Belz.
Among the Rebbes in Poland, there were some – including the Rebbes of
Radzin, Sokhachov, and Gur – who encouraged their Chassidim to move to Eretz
Yisrael and who favored pragmatic cooperation with the Zionists. In the more extremist Galicia and
Hungary, however, opposition to Zionism was almost universal. M. Piekarz writes:
The position of
the Rebbes of Belz and Sanz[1]
is characteristic of the tzaddikim (Chassidic leaders) of Galicia. Rabbi Shelomo of Bobov ruled
unequivocally that Judaism… negates a racial definition of being Jewish; rather,
the yardstick for measuring Jewish identity is Torah observance. Furthermore, "The life-force of Am
Yisrael is manifest specifically in the nation's dispersion…;" and also:
"The Zionists aspire to ascend (to the land) en masse and to establish
sovereignty; this represents a violation of the oaths that the Holy One, blessed
be He, imposed on Israel…," and so on in this vein.[2]
Opposition to
Zionism characterizes all the Rebbes of Sanz;[3]
it was also the position of Rabbi Yechezkel Shraga of Shinova,[4]
the eldest son of Rabbi Chayim of Sanz, and of the second son, Rabbi Barukh of
Gurelitz, the grandfather of the Rebbe of Sanz-Klausenburg, and of their other
relatives. We will elaborate
concerning these two personalities as the Sanz-Klausenburger Rebbe drew his
philosophy from them in many respects.
Rabbi Chayim Halberstam, the founder of the Sanz dynasty, died in 1876 –
before significant Zionist activity was underway. His son, Rabbi Yechezkel
Shraga of Shinova, was thus the first of the leaders of Sanz to address the
issue of Zionism. The Ahavat
Tzion movement began operating in the town of Tarna in Galicia in 1897. Some of the movement's leaders appealed
to the Rebbe of Shinova for his approbation, since the Rebbe was known for his
activity on behalf of Eretz Yisrael; he had visited there and had done
much to raise donations for the "yishuv ha-yashan," the Jews living in
Eretz Yisrael prior to the waves of Zionist immigration.[5]
The events are described by the Rebbe of Shinova himself in a letter to the
newspaper Ha-Maggid, dated 16th Adar of that
year:
When I was told
this, I wrote to upright and faithful people with whom we are acquainted in
Eretz Yisrael… and within a few days they responded that this would
represent, heaven forefend, the destruction of the land, since the people who
were arriving were ignorant and fickle, without even a spark of fear of
heaven…
He
continues:
I saw in the
book Shivat Tzion that it is written: "One who lives in Eretz
Yisrael need not uphold the Torah…
therefore, great is [the merit of] dwelling in Eretz Yisrael,
where even if they do not observe the Torah, they have the merit of repairing
the ground of Eretz Yisrael."…
May their spirit be blasted for the extent to which they desire to lead
Israel astray… for they wish to
make ruins of the settlement of the holy land… for the chaluka [charity sent by
Jews overseas] is limited… and
heaven forbid that the money be spent on these fickle
ones.
We detect in
the excerpt above, as well as in other writings,[6]
two main reasons for the Rebbe's objection to Zionism:
1. The nationalist ideology lends
legitimacy to a secular way of life in Eretz Yisrael. This generates the danger of a mortal
blow to the religious character of the old yishuv.
2. The practical fear for the fate of the
old yishuv and the kollels in Eretz Yisrael if Zionist
activity would have a detrimental effect on them.[7]
The Tzaddik of Shinova's opposition to Zionism was strong, and he
is quoted as having said, "When a Jew says 'Shema Yisrael,' he must
repudiate all forms of idolatry in the world. Zionism is also idolatry, and it, too,
must be repudiated."[8]
His younger brother, Rabbi Barukh of Rudnik/Gurelitz, adopted a similar
position;[9]
his opposition is likewise based mainly on the secular character of the movement
and its nationalist worldview. Some of the Tzaddikim of the Sanz dynasty,
such as Rabbi Hanna of Kloshitz, the grandson of the Rebbe of Shinova, were
opposed even to Agudat Yisrael.
C. The Chassidic Community of
Klausenburg
The process by which Rabbi Yekutiel Yehuda of Sanz-Klausenburg came to
serve as the rabbi of Klausenburg testifies to his anti-Zionist stance at the
time.[10]
Like the other communities of Hungary, Klausenburg had undergone a schism
between "Enlightened" and Orthodox Jews.[11]
In light of this split the "charedi" community of Klausenburg belonged to
the Orthodox umbrella organization.[12]
The appointment of Rabbi Moshe Glasner as spiritual leader of the community
during the 1910's undermined the stability of the Orthodox community, owing to
his support for Zionism and the integration of occupational studies along with
yeshiva study.[13]
Against this background, there was a split within the Orthodox community of
Klausenburg in around 1919,[14]
when a group – composed mainly of Chassidim from Sighet[15]
– separated itself from the rest of the Orthodox camp and fought for its right
to be recognized as an independent community.[16]
As had happened elsewhere, the new community defined itself as
"Sefaradit," in reference to the prayer formula generally accepted by
Chassidim ("nussach sefarad," not
"sefardi").
After achieving recognition as a separate community, the
Sefarad-Chassidic community chose as its leader Rabbi Yekutiel Yehuda
Halberstam. This choice arose both
from his family connection with Sighet and his suitability to serve as rabbi of
a community that defined itself in terms of negation of the Zionism and
modernization that were becoming prevalent in the main community under the
leadership of Rabbi Glasner.
The question
that we wish to address is whether, in the wake of the Holocaust and the
establishment of the center of Sanz-Klausenburg chassidut in the State of
Israel, the Rebbe altered his traditional view of Zionism. Was his absolute commitment to the
tradition of his forefathers also an ideological commitment? Was it at all
possible for him to express views that deviated from the anti-Zionist tradition
of Galicia and Hungary, where he had grown up and served as
rabbi?
D. Building up Eretz Yisrael and the
Rebbe's attitude towards the State
The following
are various aspects of the activities and leadership of the Rebbe of
Sanz-Klausenburg that testify to his positive attitude towards the
State:
a.
The choice of
Eretz Yisrael as the center for his Chassidic court: The activity of the
Rebbe of Sanz-Klausenburg after the Holocaust proves that he viewed the
establishment of his Chassidut in Eretz Yisrael as a central objective of
his role as leader and rehabilitator of the ruins. Unquestionably, this reflected more than
just a realistic assessment of the conditions in Eretz Yisrael as being
conducive to the establishment of his court; after all, he was well acquainted
with – and even brought to fruition – the American alternative, which continues
to exist. The decision to make the
center of his Chassidut in Eretz Yisrael was made at a time when the
foundations of his court in the US were already stable. His announcement, upon leaving the DP
camps in Germany for New York – "I am going to Eretz Yisrael via
America"[17]
– was meant in the practical and literal sense.
b.
Activity on
behalf of all Jews, not only the Chassidic community: The extensive,
"all-inclusive" scope of the establishment of his court and its institutions
proves that his intention was to integrate into the reality of Eretz
Yisrael as it was and to contribute towards it – whether through
institutions for Torah, charity, or volunteering, or through establishing a
hospital in Netanya (Laniado) to serve all Israelis, and not only the Chassidic
community.
c. The choice of the
Netanya coast as the location for the center of his Chassidut: in continuation
of point b., the choice of Netanya, and specifically the sea shore, was
important. The choice of this
large, secular city and a location on the coast rather than an existing
ultra-orthodox center such as Benei Berak or Jerusalem proves that the Rebbe did
not perceive his settling in Israel as "Jewish exile within Eretz
Yisrael,"[18]
but rather as a permanent settling with a self-awareness of belonging to the
State and to the general population, despite its secular character.[19]
d. Dialogue with the
leaders of the State: The Rebbe of Sanz-Klausenburg maintained ongoing dialogue
with the leaders of the State and its institutions, and he had expectations of
them both on the practical level (such as approving the establishment of the
hospital or the Chassidic center) and in the cultural, spiritual realm. There were times when he was sorely
disappointed, and even left the country as a result.[20]
However, those very expectations show that he did not relate to the State as a
merely material or economic framework, but rather as an entity with inherent
significance. In this context, we
should also take note of the harsh attacks that he suffered from his
conservative-minded Chassidic opponents as a result of this attitude. In 5721, an ultra-orthodox newspaper
published a picture of his meeting with David Ben-Gurion, and stated that the
meeting had centered on the establishment of a State-religious educational
network for Sanz. The picture was
accompanied by harsh words against the Rebbe: he is referred to as a "Johnny
Come Lately" (he had arrived in the country a year previously), and accused of
attempting to create "shaatnez" between two "opposing forces" –
Chassidism and Zionism.[21]
All of the
above shows that the Rebbe, for the most part, maintained a positive dialogue
with the State and its institutions, and that he viewed settlement in the land
in the national sense as a true value, and not just as a personal commandment,
as many of the founding fathers of Chassidut in previous generations had
maintained. In our next lecture, we
will examine the ideological basis for this view.
(Translated by
Kaeren Fish)
[1] These two
Chassidic dynasties were connected from their very origins. Rabbi Chayim of Sanz journeyed to visit
Rabbi Sar-Shalom, the first Belzer Rebbe, while the Rebbe of Sanz-Klausenburg
twice visited
[2] See M. Piekarz,
Polish Chassidism: Philosophical Trends Between the Two World Wars and During
the Holocaust (Heb.), (Jerusalem, 5750), pp. 227-228; A.A. Ehrenberg, Arzei Ha-Levanon
(Jerusalem, 5727), pp. 95-96; Rabbi
Ben-Tzion Halberstam (of Bobov), Kedushat Tzion, part II, pp. 60-85. See also Y.D. Weisberg, Rabbeinu
Ha-Kadosh Mi-Sanz: Ba'al Divrei Chayim, part II, pp. 131-139 (about the
Rabbi of Shinova) and p. 283. After
the Zionist movement adopted the magen david as its symbol, the Rebbe of
Bobov ordered that the symbol be removed from the coverings of Sifrei
Torah.
[3] The position of the
Rebbes of Bobov is mentioned above in the citation from Piekarz. Rabbi Shelomo, the founder of the Bobov
dynasty, was the grandson of Rabbi Chayim of Sanz; Meir Natan was his
father.
[4] See note 2,
Rabbeinu Ha-Kadosh Mi-Sanz.
[5] He founded the
Beit Midrash for Sanz Chassidim in Tzefat, which has retained its central
role for Sanz Chassidim to this day.
[6] Very similar
words were addressed to Rabbi Feivish Segal, the Rabbi of Berdshin in Galicia,
in a letter published in the same newspaper on the 7th of Adar II,
5657. See also his letter to Rabbi
Yosef Feigenbaum of Tarna.
[7] I have not
found in his writings any opposition to Zionism on the grounds that it negates
the perception of a miraculous redemption or the like. The very fact that he corresponded with
people whom he knows in Eretz Yisrael in order to clarify the nature of
the new movement's activities testifies to his approach to the question in
practical terms rather than as an ideological or historiosophic
issue.
[8] See source
cited in note 6.
[9] His letter against
Zionism was published in the book Dovev Siftei Yeshenim. See Rabbeinu Ha-Kadosh Mi-Sanz,
pp. 337-338.
[10] See also the
biography in the first section of this shiur.
[11] See Y. Katz,
Ha-Kera Shelo Nit'acha, (Jerusalem, 1995).
[12] See S. Zikhroni
and Y. Schwartz, Zikhron Netzach
li-Kehillat Klausenburg, (Tel Aviv, 5728) and the biography of the Rebbe of
Sanz-Klausenburg: A. Suresky, Lapid Ha-Esh (Benei Berak, 5757-5763)
(hereafter – Lapid Ha-Esh, p. 88.
[13] See Lapid
Ha-Esh, p. 89. The authors do
not disqualify the Rabbi personally, despite their desire to justify the
appointment of the Rebbe of Sanz-Klausenburg. Rather, they describe the spiritual
decline evident in the city and the establishment of the Tarbut school as part
of its "Zionization." See S.Y.
Gross, "Ish Ha-Machshava Ve-Ha-Ma'aseh," in Diglenu (Kislev,
5715). Concerning the Zionist
yeshiva, see M. Brayer, "Ha-Yeshivot Be-Romania," in S.K. Mirsky (ed.),
Mosdot Torah Be-Europa Be-Vinyanam U-Ve-Churbanam, (New York, 5716),
which contains a chapter on the yeshiva of
Klausenburg.
[14] See Shefa
Chayim by the Rebbe of Sanz-Klausenburg, part VI, p. 171 and onwards, which
contains the "Articles of the Sefarad Beit Midrash of Klausenburg." The nature of the articles reflects the
customs of an extreme Chassidic group.
[15] The father-in-law of
the Rebbe of Sanz-Klausenburg, in his first marriage, was Rabbi Chayim Zvi
Teitelbaum, author of Atzei Chayim, of Sighet. He himself was related to (and named
after) the great rabbi of Sighet in the mid-19th century, Rabbi
Yekutiel Yehuda Teitelbaum, author of Yitav
Lev.
[16] For a discussion of
the controversy surrounding this split, see Y.Y. Cohen, Chakhmei
Transylvania (4080-4304), (Jerusalem, 5749), part I, pp. 249, 257; A.Z.
Friedman, "Nachpesa Darkeinu," in Diglenu 12, (Elul-Tishrei,
5682-5683).
[17] Lapid Ha-Esh,
p. 389
[18] This is an
oft-repeated expression among ultra-orthodox ideologues. It reflects a distinction between real,
tangible, historical existence in Eretz Yisrael and the historiosophic
view of the period as one of exile, foreign to the new Zionist Israeli
identity. This dichotomy is at the
core of Aviezer Ravitzky's book, Messianism, Zionism, and Jewish Religious
Radicalism (Chicago, 1996).
[19] At the circumcision
of the son of one of his Chassidim in Emmanuel in 5744, he encouraged and
praised the man for fulfilling the commandment of settling the land despite the
dangers involved. This is yet
another example of his view of establishing a settlement – an overtly public act
– as commendable.
[20] See Shefa
Chayim, end of part VI.
[21] The picture is
attached at the end of the shiur.
My grateful thanks to my brother-in-law, R. Maoz Kahana shlita,
for copying it at the National Library.