Get Think Jewish Delivered to your Home or Office
HOME | CONTACT US | DONATE LoginLOGIN Ask the RabbiASK THE RABBI
Chabad.org - Torah, Judaism and Jewish Info News & Current Events
 
Chabad.org » Community & Family » News & Current Events » Editorial & Commentary » Gandhi or Moses?
PrintSend this page to a friendShare this
Comment10 Comments

Gandhi or Moses?


The Hebrew Bible shares only three incidents in Moses' life prior to G-d choosing him as a leader and prophet:

1) As a young man, Moses "goes out among his brethren" and sees an Egyptian overseer brutally beating a Hebrew. He strikes down the oppressor, burying him in the sand. (Exodus 2:11-12)

2) The next day, Moses attempts to pacify two fighting Hebrews, admonishing, "Why do you strike your fellow?!" The aggressor is indignant and says, "Who appointed you as a prince and leader over us? Do you mean to kill me as you killed the Egyptian?" Realizing that his actions of the previous day had already become known, Moses escapes from Egypt and finds refuge in Midian. (ibid., verses 13-15)

3) In Midian, Moses probably wants nothing more than peace and tranquility. Instead, he finds himself embroiled in yet another conflict. He witnesses the local shepherds bullying a group of girls who came to draw water from a well. He immediately rises to their defense, driving off the offending shepherds. (ibid., v. 17)

These are the only episodes the Torah explicitely relates about Moses (besides the circumstances of his birth) prior to his selection by G-d as a leader. They express a paradigm indispensable to leadership: A leader must have the courage to battle injustice wherever it exists. In all three instances, Moses is deeply committed to fighting injustice. He intervenes when a non-Jew oppresses a Jew, when two Jews fight, and when non-Jewish men oppress non-Jewish women.

When it is necessary to kill, he is prepared to kill. When it is sufficient to speak, he suffices with verbal rebuke; when it is necessary to fight, he is prepared to fight. One who rejects the choice of aggression out of a sense of compassion may be a kind human being, but a wholly inadequate leader, because the long-term violence resulting from a failure to battle evil is far worse than the violence of the battle itself.

In modern terms, Moses is politically incorrect. He does not lecture the Egyptian taskmaster about the cycle of violence or give him a lesson on rage management. Moses knows that by the time he will complete his lecture, the Hebrew might be dead. Moses is aware that at times, violence is a moral, though difficult, choice. It saves the lives of the innocent.

Prohibiting moral killing guarantees immoral killing. It is "violence" used by police that stops violent criminals from murdering and hurting innocent people. There are many innocent men and women alive today solely because someone used violence to save their lives. If someone had killed the hijackers of 9/11 before they commandeered the planes, thousands of lives would have been saved.

Gandhi's Advice

Throughout history, many chose not to emulate Moses' example. During the Second World War, for example, when it appeared that Nazi Germany would attempt to capture England, Mahatma Gandhi offered the British the following advice:

"I would like you to lay down the arms you have which are useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions. Let them take possession.... If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out, you will allow yourself, man, woman and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them."

To the Jews of Germany, Gandhi offered a similar message:

"I am as certain as I am dictating these words that the stoniest German heart will melt [if only the Jews] adopt active non-violence. Human nature... unfailingly responds to the advances of love. I do not despair of his [Hitler's] responding to human suffering even though caused by him."

Had Gandhi convinced the English to lay down their arms and practice non-violence, the Jewish people would have been annihilated, democracy and human rights would have disappeared, and our world would have been plunged into a new Dark Age of unimaginable cruelty. War, while always unfortunate and painful, is not always evil; sometimes, fighting a war is the most moral thing to do.

Astonishingly, the nation that Moses created has in recent years emulated Gandhi rather than Moses. With the Oslo accords, we invited our sworn enemies to take parts of our homeland in the belief that they would reciprocate with peace and good will. Instead of declaring outright war against the terrorists and their infrastructure, we chose to practice restraint and non-violent diplomacy. Many of us believed then, and some still believe, that the stoniest terrorist heart will melt in response to our peaceful advances.

War, Dishonor, or Both?

In 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain appeased Adolf Hitler by allowing the German Fuhrer to occupy the Sudetenland for a mere promise of peace. Chamberlain then returned to England and announced that he had brought "Peace in our time." Winston Churchill denounced him as a naive appeaser who believed that he could buy Hitler's good will by giving in to his immoral demands: "You were given a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war."

Sadly, the same has transpired with Israel. By relinquishing parts of our homeland, Israel chose dishonor. In return, Israel received war. Today, we are in the midst of the worst bloodletting in Israeli history. The relentless terror is a direct result of the tragic policy that believes in appeasing terrorists and not destroying them. Appeasement is suicidal for the innocent and ensures victory for the evil.

The terror war on Israel, like World War II, is a war against the Jews. Losing is catastrophic. Losing is not an option. This is no time for appeasement or restraint. This is a time for righteous might.

The prophets of Israel were the first to conceive of peace as an ideal. Isaiah gave voice to the great words engraved in the imagination of the West: "Nation shall not lift up sword against Nation; neither shall they learn war anymore." But the way to hasten Isaiah's vision is to fight evil, not allow it to flourish.

At another time, when the Jews needed to forcefully confront their enemies, the prophet Joel declared, "Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruning hooks into spears." The use of moral violence must always be the last resort. But when all other attempts fail, righteous might is the only response to immoral violence.

PrintSend this page to a friendShare this
Comment10 Comments

By Dov Greenberg   More articles...  |   RSS Listing of Newest Articles by this Author
Rabbi Dov Greenberg is excutive director of Chabad at Stanford University
About the artist: Sarah Kranz has been illustrating magazines, webzines and books (including five children’s books) since graduating from the Istituto Europeo di Design, Milan, in 1996. Her clients have included The New York Times and Money Marketing Magazine of London

The content on this page is copyrighted by the author, publisher and/or Chabad.org, and is produced by Chabad.org. If you enjoyed this article, we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply with the copyright policy.
 

Reader Comments
Latest Comments:
Posted: Jan 16, 2009
Fighting Back
The Almighty has laws that are consistent across the board. When Abraham settled in the land promised to him by the Owner of the universe, Abraham did not throw out the residents of the place. His coming was a mercy to the inhabitants of the land. He bought land, wells and caves. Did not use or abuse his special relationship with the Most High.

This Israel was created by Theodore Herzl who was given four children, but his generations are no more. Abraham in contrast has more children than any other man! Mercy leads to blessings. Injustice of Atilla the Hun or for that matter the Muslim hordes only breed hate. Those who choose to follow Atilla or the Muslim hordes can not be blessed. Those who follow Abraham in mercy, but also fight for justice shall have nothing to fear or to regret!

The truth is clear to those who think beyond prejudice. The Mighty One created all of us, but has put the righteous above the unrighteous among us all.

Shalom,
Posted By Ali

Posted: Oct 29, 2007
not in riddles
And G-d loved Moses so much that he answered his emails and phone calls.
Posted By Patricia
via chabadpasadena.com

Posted: Mar 11, 2006
As Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye only leaves the whole world blind." It takes more might to be moral humans than to fight back.
Posted By Danya

Posted: Jan 21, 2006
A ruler like Haman...
So, how do we stop Olmert, and all the other Leftists who will continue, with ever increasing ferocity, their war against the Land, the Observant, and the Torah?
Posted By yonason

Posted: May 20, 2005
Response to Vicky Anderson
You are correct that, as the many accounts of his life indicate, Mahatma Gandhi was a great man who performed many extraordinary acts of self-sacrifice. Indeed the nonviolent resistance espoused and practiced by Gandhi and Martin Luther King in their respective struggles against British imperialism and American racist institutions was a monumental moral achievement: It attained its moral ends without recourse to killing. In many instances, however, nonviolence would not attain its moral ends and would lead to the triumph of the evil it wished to resist.

When Winston Churchill is the enemy, active nonviolence is an appropriate moral response. But when Stalin or Hitler or Osama bin Laden is the enemy, nonviolence is suicidal for the innocent and ensures victory for the evil. Against Nazism, active nonviolent resistance is worse than meaningless. All it does is increase bloodshed.
Posted By Rabbi Dov Greenberg , Palo Alto, Ca

Posted: June 8, 2004
Gandhi or Moses
One foot in the mud, one foot in heaven! Always a realistic, history gleaned and proven perspective will keep us going into our ultimate (spiritual) destiny. Example: in my more recent years I have come to be hawkish over Israel's external policy (Neighbors) but I take a leftist stance on internal affairs. Gandhi was (and may still be) right for his time/situation and Moses is right for us, NOW!
Posted By mark, Baltimore, MD
via chabadqueenmary.com

Posted: Mar 30, 2004
I am not a Jewish person, but I have close Jewish friends and I have been fortunate enough to visit Israel. For many years I have read as many good books about the Middle East conflict as I can. I am so grateful to hear someone with the courage to stand up and speak the truth. I am an American Christian, and I believe that we have been watched over by God because we have sided with Israel. But it looks like we are no longer clearly standing with Israel. That holy land was given by God as an eternal inheritance, and not one grain of sand should be given away. As I have watched events transpire, it seem very clear to me that the more Israel concedes, the more the Arabs take and pillage. All of this is clearly foretold in the old testament, but it seems no ones looks at that. I really appreciate your article and I pray for your continued proclamations of the truth. Thank you so much,


Posted By Anita Akridge

Posted: Mar 27, 2004
I can't believe that you overlooked the power of disobedience and ACTIVE non-violence. You tore Gandhi apart and left him in shreds. People -- that is my belief -- usually don't think for themselves; how many people will now view this great man with real distaste because of an article written by you, where you failed to say anything at all about the power of disobedience and active ( active ) non-violence.

You just about portrayed him, Gandhi, as no better than a Nazi.


Posted By Vicky Anderson

Posted: Mar 26, 2004
"Todah" for your wonderful article. I must say in all honesty Mr. Greenberg this is one of the "finest articles" I have read in recent years in defense of Eretz Yisrael's position. Excellent, simply Excellent. Please keep up the great work that you do in defense of our "homeland."


Posted By Tom & Linda Morris

Posted: Mar 9, 2004
I have always been under the impression that Mahatma Ghandi was a leader because he had prevented the slaughter and destruction of his own people.... [But] in the context of the Jewish Nation, it is obvious that Ghandi had no real, in-depth understanding of the systematic oppression and destruction of Hebrews in world history, amongst ALL nations.

Indian history did require leadership of the kind he was able to provide. His leadership was relevant to his society, culture, and own traditions. He touches people everywhere, for he reflects that quality of Shalom. However, this is not pertinent to the Historic Jewish Nation, in its travails for redemption.

Jewish Heritage, as far as I have always understood it, has required a sense of bravery, and commitment to a much higher standard than is required for the world 's nations.

Pacifism is definitely not conducive to healing the world. It represents a misunderstanding of what the true quality of Peace is.
Posted By Otillia de Andrade



 


Editorial & Commentary
My Friend, My Teacher
The Children of Terror
The Kabbalah of Defeating Terror
Gandhi or Moses?
Darkness is a Coward
Our Rosh Hashanah Blackout
Galileo's Trajectory
Showing 58 - 64 of 95