Guardians vs. Destroyers

Listening to media reports from Israel over the last few weeks, I began to wonder how a terrorist group came to be viewed as a legitimate government. When did we start treating those who blow themselves up on busses and lob rockets into kindergartens as soldiers in a legitimate army? How did the news media morph lawless terrorists into formal combatants?

The answer is, of course, that Hamas was democratically elected by the Palestinian people. The implication being that once a terrorist group is empowered by the people it should be granted international recognition.

Our sages taught differently.

Rabbi Yehudah sent his disciples Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Assi to tour Jewish communities across the land of Israel. When the two would arrive to a city they would ask to see the city's "guardians." The citizens would invariably usher in the commanders of the city's guard, to which the rabbis would remark, "These are not the city's guardians, these are its destroyers."

Why did the rabbis insist that the city guardians destroy that which they are sworn to protect?The townspeople would then inquire, "Who are the city's guardians?" The rabbis would reply, "The scribes and the teachers, who study, teach and preserve the Torah day and night."1

We can easily understand that Torah study offers spiritual protection, but why did the rabbis insist that the city guardians destroy that which they are sworn to protect?

Lawful, But Immoral

A police force is an instrument of violence; the gun held by a policeman is no less violent than the one held by a terrorist. The only difference between them is the rule that governs them. The police force is governed by the rule of law whereas the terrorist is governed by the rule of anarchy.

But what happens when the law that governs the police derives from immoral policies? What happens when a democratically elected government unleashes a barrage of rockets against innocent civilians? What happens when commanders direct their troops to open fire against women and children or when armies force civilians to act as human shields? The very agencies charged with protecting the city, end up destroying its moral fiber.

Legality does not always equate with morality. Hitler directed his armies to enforce legal, but immoral laws and unleashed a holocaust such as the world had never seen. Brutal dictators use their armies to consolidate power, terrorize their population and rape their own country. This trait goes back to Biblical times. The laws of Sodom were legal, but cruel. When Lot invited guests into his home the people demanded that they be brought out and sodomized. This immoral practice, forever linked to the cursed city, was enforced by its judges and guardians. They were not guardians; they were destroyers.

This does not mean that all security forces are immoral. We are required by Torah to appoint guardians in our cities and at our gates; we are not permitted to disband our security forces and rely on miraculous protection. However, for a security force to secure, rather than destroy, it must be governed by laws that are consistent with absolute moral values.

Teachers who inspire and direct the guardians' conduct are the city's true source of protectionA city that turns to its scribes and teachers for guidance, secures its own protection. Because the teachers formulate policies that are predicated on Torah true values, which in turn guide the lawmakers in their legislation. These laws direct the security forces to conduct themselves in a manner that protects rather than destroys.

Teachers and scribes, who inspire and direct the guardians' conduct, are the city's true source of protection. That is why Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Assi described the scribes as the city protectors and the guardians – when disassociated from the teachers – as its destroyers.

If the two rabbis were alive today they might have stated it thusly: Governments that are democratically elected, but are driven by cruel and immoral policies, are sources of destruction. They might have legal legitimacy. But they cannot be recognized by the international community until they develop moral legitimacy.2