Judaism And Warfare

Normative Judaism's views on warfare are defined by restraint that is neither guided by avidness for belligerence nor is it categorically pacifist. Traditionally, self-defense has been the underpinning principle for the sanctioned use of violence,Fighting the War and the Peace: Battlefield Ethics, Peace Talks, Treaties, and Pacifism in the Jewish Tradition. Michael J. Broyde, 1998, p. 1 with the maintenance of peace taking precedence over waging war.
While the biblical narrative about the conquest of Canaan and the commands related to it have had a deep influence on Western culture, Lemche, Niels Peter, ''The Old Testament between theology and history: a critical survey'', Westminster John Knox Press, 2008, pp. 315–316: "The iblicalstory of the 'morally supreme people' that defeats and exterminates another, inferior, nation was part of the ideological baggage of European imperialists and colonizers throughout the nineteenth century. It was also carried by European Jews who,... migrated to Palestine to inherit their ancestral country … In this modern version of the biblical narrative, the Palestinian population turned into 'Canaanites', supposed to be morally inferior to the Jews, and of course the Arabs were never considered their equals … The Bible was the instrument used to suppress the enemy". mainstream Jewish traditions throughout history have treated these texts as purely historical or highly conditioned, and in either case not relevant to contemporary life. Greenberg, Moshe, "On the Political User of the Bible in Modern Israel: An Engaged Critique", in ''Pomegranates and golden bells: studies in biblical, Jewish, and Near Eastern ritual, law, and literature'', Eisenbrauns, 1995, pp. 467–469:
"No 'national' commandment such as that of 'conquest and settling the land' occurs in any of these udaicsummaries f the Torah�� rguments for applying herem to modern Israelintroduces a distinction that Scripture does not recognize; nowhere are the obligations referred to in the summaries contingent on the achievement of the land-taking or the destruction of Israel's enemies. To suppose that they may be set aside or suspended for the accomplishment of national ends is a leap far beyond scripture…. The iblicalinjunctions to take the land are embedded in narrative and give the appearance of being addressed to a specific generation, like the commandment to annihilate or expel the natives of Canaan, which refers specifically to the seven Canaanite nations… Now, had there ben any inclination to generalize the law f extermination it would have been easy for the talmudic sages to o so But in fact the sages left the ancient herem law as they found it: applying to seven extinct nations." However, some minor strains of radical Zionism promote aggressive war and justify them with biblical texts.

Contemporary warfare conducted by the State of Israel is governed by Israeli law and regulation, which includes a purity of arms code that is based in part on Jewish tradition. Tension between the conduct of the Israeli government and Jewish traditions and halakha on the conduct of war have caused controversy within Israel and have provided a basis for criticisms of Israel.

Views of violence in Judaism

Judaism's doctrines and texts have sometimes been associated with violence. Laws requiring the eradication of evil, sometimes using violent means, exist in the Jewish tradition. Judaism also contains peaceful doctrines.Reuven Firestone (2004), "Judaism on Violence and Reconciliation: An examination of key sources" in ''Beyond violence: religious sources of social transformation in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam'', Fordham Univ Press, 2004, pp. 77, 81.
Attitudes and laws towards both peace and violence exist within the Jewish tradition. Throughout history, Judaism's religious texts or precepts have been used to promoteCarl. S. Ehrlich (1999) "Joshua, Judaism, and Genocide", in
''Jewish Studies at the Turn of the Twentieth Century'',
Judit Targarona Borrás, Ángel Sáenz-Badillos (Eds). 1999, Brill. as well as oppose violence.The Columbus Platform: The Guiding Principles of Reform Judaism, 1937

Normative Judaism is not pacifist and violence is permissible in the service of self-defense. J. Patout Burns asserts that Jewish tradition clearly posits the principle of minimization of violence. This principle can be stated as "(wherever) Jewish law allows violence to keep an evil from occurring, it mandates that the minimal amount of violence be used to accomplish one's goal."

General teachings on war

The ancient orders like those of wars for Israel to eradicate idol worshiping do not apply today. Jews are not taught to glorify violence. The rabbis of the Talmud saw war as an avoidable evil. A passage in ''Pirkei Avot'' reads, "The sword comes to the world for the delay of judgment, and for the perversion of judgment," In Judaism, war is evil — albeit, at times, a necessary one — yet, Judaism teaches that one has to go to great length to avoid it.

The Talmud insists that before going to non-defensive war, the king would need to seek authorization from the Sanhedrin, as well as divine approval through the High Priest. As these institutions have not existed for 2,000 years, this virtually rules out the possibility of non-defensive war.

The permissibility of war is limited and the requirement is that one always seek a just peace before waging war. Some modern Jewish scholars hold that biblical texts authorizing offensive war no longer apply, and that Jewish theology instructs Jews to leave vengeance to God.

Jewish writers in the 2nd-century CE defined their wars as either a mandatory war, a religious war, or a voluntary war.

Wars of extermination in the Tanakh and Jewish responses

The Tanakh