Q&A: More on the Military
More on the Military
Question
I argued with a Haredi friend about the issue of the military, and he presented me with the following argument, which basically goes like this:
According to Jewish law, if for example two people see someone drowning, but one is studying while the other is occupied with ordinary matters, then Jewish law says that the person occupied with ordinary matters should save the drowning person. And the same applies to military conscription. It is important to note that this Jewish law was said in a case where both people are able to save him, but if the one who is studying is needed, then obviously he must save the drowning person. It’s just that this is not relevant right now, since the army does not need additional soldiers.
Of course, my immediate response was that he is mistaken, since additional soldiers are indeed needed. But that is a factual dispute. My intuition tells me that he is also mistaken in the Jewish law itself, or at least in applying it to the present case. Meaning, from the very fact that you live in a secular state, you must be subject to the government. But that is a slippery point.
What do you say? I know you’ve written a lot about this, but if you can, I’d appreciate a focused answer to the argument itself. Thank you very much
Answer
I don’t know of any source that establishes such a thing. One can talk about a commandment that can be done by someone else versus Torah study (Moed Katan 9b), but it is not clear that in a situation like this it is considered something that can be done by someone else. Both because in cases of danger to life everyone goes out and we do not make fine distinctions, and also because the commandment involves dangers and heavy costs for the person and for his family, so who says that this hidden righteous man who studies Torah can impose those costs on others?
Beyond that, this hidden righteous man is apparently occupied with a few other things besides Torah study. I assume he goes out during breaks, shopping, recreation, taking care of children, and so on. So let him go to the army and study afterward.
There is no point in engaging in these idiotic hair-splittings. We are dealing with a group of wicked and foolish people who, instead of studying Torah, occupy themselves with empty and absurd casuistry in order to explain why they should not have to contribute anything and only receive.
Beyond that, this is not a commandment at all. The defense is also for his sake, so he is obligated to take part. I assume that at the next stage he’ll also argue that I should buy his food for him and have marital relations with his wife in his place because he has no time from all his studying.