While Israelis repeatedly run to shelters and reservists are called up to serve yet again, Shas is busy with what really matters: handing out rabbinic posts to insiders.
In recent weeks and in the weeks ahead, dozens of rabbis are expected to be appointed to local authorities. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the appointees will be Shas men – rabbis with no connection to the character of the locality they will serve or the wishes of its residents. Zionist rabbis who might actually be a good fit are either on reserve duty or simply not to Shas’s liking.
It is bizarre to be dealing with this in the middle of a war. But since the war seems to trouble Shas less than it does everyone else, there is real reason to fear that by the time it ends, it will be too late to stop this.
In Jewish religious thought, the local rabbi – the mara d’atra, the master of the place – is meant to be the community’s spiritual leader, one who enjoys its trust. This means the proper way to choose a rabbi is through the community itself, and the right rabbi for a community reflects its spirit and connects with its people.
As things stand, local rabbis too often have little relevance to the residents in the jurisdictions they serve. When they come from a distant cultural and moral universe, their chances of fulfilling the role properly are lower still.
Shas moves to seize control of local rabbinic posts
But Shas does not care. Under the law, every local authority – and there are some 470 of them –is supposed to have its own rabbi. In recent years, mostly for political reasons, almost no rabbis were appointed, leaving roughly 50 local authorities without one.
Shas, which controls the Ministry of Religious Services, sees this as a historic opportunity to install its loyalists in these rabbinic vacancies. If it succeeds, it will secure years of influence in these municipalities as rabbis serve without term limits.
It will also be able to show its voters a handsome achievement ahead of the next election. And Shas, being Shas, is pushing ahead with this goal, heedless of values or sentiment.
Matan Kahana, the previous minister of religious services, tried to give communities a much greater say in choosing the rabbi who would serve them, but Shas sees these dozens of vacant posts as nothing more than a political opportunity.
So, to control the outcome, former religious services minister, MK Michael Malkieli, changed the regulations governing the composition of the electing body. The result – surprise, surprise – is that Shas will have near-total control over who gets appointed.
And the fix is in. Arye Deri’s nephew has been appointed chief rabbi of Beersheba. In Jerusalem, Deri’s brother is expected to get the job, and his son-in-law is slated to become the city rabbi of secular, liberal Herzliya.
And the list goes on. In Hod Hasharon, Rabbi Elharar, who is identified with Shas, was chosen over a Religious Zionist rabbi who is serving in the reserves and is far better suited to the city’s character. The same appears likely in Kiryat Ono, another secular city, where the chief rabbi chosen is not the candidate currently on reserve duty but a Shas-backed haredi rabbi.
The next major battle will be over the Tel Aviv rabbinate. As things stand, there is a very real chance that the capital of liberal secularism will once again find itself with a haredi city rabbi.
It must be said plainly that while Shas is leading this blitz of appointments, it has partners in crime. First and foremost, the Religious Zionism party.
Although one of the banners it waves is the promotion of Religious Zionist Torah scholars who serve in the military to rabbinic office, in practice, it ceded this arena to Shas long ago. And alongside it – somewhat surprisingly – stand unapologetically liberal parties such as Yesh Atid, which, for the sake of petty local political deals, barter away the appointment of rabbis who actually fit their communities.
A large majority of the public neither wants nor needs an official local rabbi. Perhaps some of these posts should be abolished. But as long as they exist, the appointed rabbis should be those who can genuinely lead the community because their values and outlook align with it.
Shas’s ethical corruption in this matter is, of course, a betrayal of the public-mindedness that ought to govern rabbinic appointments. But the graver sin is against Judaism itself, in whose name it acts. Instead of bringing people closer and sanctifying God’s name, the likely result in many cases will only be more alienation from, and anger toward, Judaism and those who represent it.
The writer is director-general of JPPI – the Jewish People Policy Institute – and a senior lecturer in law at the Peres Academic Center.