More on "rabbi" Segal's Three Oaths...

You'll remember not too long ago, a certain "rabbi" made some very nasty comments about the murder victims at Mercaz Harav, essentially blaming them for their own murders because the Jews, especially the Zionists, and even more especially the Religious Zionists, had broken the following three "oaths" supposedly made between God and the Jewish people:

1. “Shelo yaalu bachoma” – that the Jews should not forcibly “breach the wall,” and enter Eretz Yisrael
2. The Jews should not rebel against the nations of the world
3. The nations of the world should not oppress the Jewish People excessively during the Exile

These are the famous oaths Yolish Teitelbaum quoted when he, pretty much the ONLY major Jewish leader, objected to the creation of the state of Israel and the Jews returning to their homeland (talk about a Golus mentality!).

But there are the problems with these oaths.

First, They were invented by Amoraim of the Talmudic period (Kesuvos 111A). No mention of them had been made before. This was simply an interpretation of the following verse in Shir Hashirim, the Song of Songs:

הִשְׁבַּעְתִּי אֶתְכֶם בְּנוֹת יְרוּשָׁלִַם, בִּצְבָאוֹת, אוֹ, בְּאַיְלוֹת הַשָּׂדֶה: אִם-תָּעִירוּ וְאִם-תְּעוֹרְרוּ אֶת-הָאַהֲבָה, עַד שֶׁתֶּחְפָּץ
'I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, by the gazelles, and by the hinds of the field, that ye awaken not, nor stir up love, until it please.'

And they were invented long after the nations of the world, at that point the Romans, had ALREADY excessively oppressed the Jewish people, not only with the destruction of the Bais Hamikdash and the murder of countless people, but afterward as well.

Second, if this was a mesorah handed down through the generations, OBVIOUSLY Rabbi Akiva and his friends knew about it. If so, what was their justification for supporting the rebellion of Bar Kochba, whom they all thought to be Moshiach? (never mind the question that very little time had passed since the destruction of the Bais Hamikdash and that current golus was supposed to have lasted far longer than any before it, at least according the Midrash the explains Yaakov Avinu's dream about the angels ascending and descending the ladder - a Midrash that, if true, should have made it quite painfully obvious to the great rabbis of the time that the time for the Geulah had not yet come...). Further, ALL these rabbis rebelled against the Romans when they secretly learned Torah the Romans had on a regular basis banned... So, in essence, ALL THREE of these oaths had ALREADY been broken in the Tanaic period, which brings serious doubts regarding the validity of these oaths.

Third, assuming these oaths were in effect from the time of Shlomo (King Solomon), the very HUMAN author of Shir Hashirim, well, then, those oaths, especially the third one, which, if broken, nullifies the others, had been broken several times since. The most obvious were the golus of the Ten Tribes (by Assyria), which have never been recovered and probably never will be. The next was Babylon bringing such total destruction to the Jews not too many years later. And there were the Greeks. And only THEN came along the Romans. It seems pretty obvious that last oath had been broken MANY times, and if that one was, the other were nullified.

Fourth, if you don't want to accept those instances, how about Europe for nearly two thousand years. Just some highlights here, and not necessarily in chronological order: Spanish expulsion, Crusades, the Plague (which was blamed on the Jews), Blood Libels, Pogroms, Gezeiros Tach v'Tat (1648-1649 - Chmielnicki Massacre), and, of course, the Holocaust. And let's not forget more recent terrorism the Jews have suffered at the hands of the "Palestinians." In short, that third oath has been BROKEN. Many, MANY times. And ALL these events took place AFTER the time of the Gemara (quite likely, those Amoraim came up with these oaths to prevent people during their time from rebelling).

Fifth, the argument goes the with the Balfour Declaration, the nations of the world had given permission to the Jews to return to their homeland.

Sixth, this entire idea of the "oaths" comes from an aggadita in the Gemara. In other words, it is a MEDRASH, not a halacha, not literal, and probably NOT to be taken literally.

Finally, not only is this idea of the "oaths" Midrashaic, the Talmudic rabbonim extrapolated this idea from, of all places, SHIR HASHIRIM, the one single book in Tana"ch in which NOTHING is meant to be taken literally, especially according to the more "frum" elements, who believe the entire thing is only an allegory (have you SEEN the Artscroll translation?). And yet, here's a verse (and midrash) they take very literally. That's just pure hypocrisy, nothing less. When it's convenient, things aren't literal. But when it's not, suddenly things ARE literal. Funny, that.

Put it all together, and the bottom line is these "oaths" if they ever truly existed, are now completely null and void. Saying these victims were murdered because of their own Darchei Torah (something about which "rabbi" Segal seems to know NOTHING) and because they didn't abide by some mythical oaths, is simply an evil way to try to impose one's will upon others. In reality, it's truly sickening, childish, and petty, and it's something a true Gadol and Torah scholar would NEVER do.