How Many Yeshiva Students Are Needed?

At last, we have some numbers!

I don’t know where this came from, but someone forwarded me the following:

“I have heard in the name of Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv that while in the times of Chazal it was sufficient for one person to learn Torah in the merit of each soldier, today that our Torah learning is on a lower level, we need ten people studying Torah to protect each soldier.”

Imagine that. So when 400,000 men were mobilized over the last few months, we actually needed four million yeshiva students to protect them!

(Or perhaps it works the other way around. Since there are allegedly around 100,000 men in yeshivah, maybe the IDF should just have cut its forces down to 10,000 soldiers, and none would have been killed.)

Let’s put aside how conveniently self-serving this ideology is, how divorced from reality or even serious contemplation. I would like to focus on the claim that in ancient times, there would be one person learning Torah in the merit of each soldier. This claim was also voiced by Rabbi Avi Shafran, director of public affairs and spokesman for Agudath Israel of America, in a syndicated column titled “Safeguarding Israel with Torah Study.” It contains all the usual distortions of Rambam and other sources that I have dissected on other occasions, but also discusses the alleged 1:1 ration of soldiers and yeshiva students:

“From a Jewish religious perspective, a force of men immersed in Torah study contributes to Israeli national security, and is indeed essential to it. This is an ancient idea in Jewish faith. A well-known ancient Jewish source explains that, during a particular war in biblical times, 3,000 men were drafted from each tribe: 1,000 for combat, 1,000 for logistic support and 1,000 for Torah study and prayer.”

Is there really an ancient Jewish source stating such a thing? Let’s check. The source to which he refers is a Midrash on the following verse regarding the war against Midian:

אֶלֶף לַמַּטֶּה אֶלֶף לַמַּטֶּה לְכֹל מַטּוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל תִּשְׁלְחוּ לַצָּבָא׃

“You shall dispatch to the army a thousand from every one of the tribes of Israel.” (Numbers 31:4)

The Hebrew phrasing is literally “a thousand for a tribe, a thousand for a tribe.” At a pshat level, this is simply a Biblical Hebrew way of saying “a thousand for each tribe.” But the Midrash expounds it otherwise:

יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שְׁנֵי אֲלָפִים מִכָּל שֵׁבֶט וְשֵׁבֶט שָׁלַח, וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שְׁלשֶׁת אֲלָפִים מִכָּל שֵׁבֶט וְשֵׁבֶט, שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר אֶלֶף מְשַׁמְּרִים אֶת כְּלֵיהֶם… וּשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר אֶלֶף לִתְפִלָּה.

“Some say, he sent two thousand from each and every tribe. But others say, three thousand from each and every tribe, [with twelve thousand fighters], twelve thousand to look after the equipment… and twelve thousand for prayer.” (Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah 22)

So there we have it. Rabbi Shafran’s claim is backed up by the Midrash.

Or is it?

This is actually a great example of how people assume that sources unequivocally say something, when in fact they do no such thing.

First of all, and most crucially, note that this is a Midrash. It’s not a halachic source. You won’t find any passuk, any halachic source in Chazal, any halachic source in Rambam declaring that every soldier must have a corresponding “spiritual protector.”

Second, it’s interesting that Rabbi Shafran wants to consider this Midrash to dictate authoritative practice, in the same column in which he claims that “the entire tribe of Levi was exempt from combat duty.” For there is another Midrash on this verse, the Sifrei - cited by Rashi - which expounds the verse to mean that the tribe of Levi were equally included in the draft!

Third, note that even within the Midrash, it’s simply one opinion. The first opinion is that the verse means that there were two thousand from each tribe, not one thousand.

Fourth, as we noted in yesterday’s post, Netziv (in Haamek Davar to Devarim 33:18) notes that these spiritual protectors must actually accompany the soldiers to pray at the front line (presumably either because their protective force is geographically concentrated, or in order to boost the morale of the soldiers).

Finally, did you notice how Rabbi Shafran misquoted it? He claims that the Midrash describes 1000 from each tribe “for Torah study and prayer.” But the Midrash actually only speaks about prayer and mentions nothing whatsoever about Torah study!

Yes, there are teachings elsewhere that Torah study can provide protection. But traditional authorities make it very clear that such teachings are extremely limited in application. The sources absolutely do not teach that tens of thousands (or millions) of men aged 18-24 provide essential protection and are required to ignore the normal mitzvos and ethics of national responsibility! The sources that speak about protection are either ambiguous, limited, or non-halachic, and are irrelevant in light of the halachic sources that explicitly require everyone, including Torah students and even Torah scholars, to share an equal obligation. (And which indicate that those who disregard such a religious obligation are not going to be a source of merit for the nation.)

The real reason for charedi avoidance of army service is, of course, nothing to do with a belief that their Torah study is crucial to Israel’s defense. Rather, it’s that keeping charedim out of the IDF is crucial to them. This is the first reason that Rabbi Shafran mentions: the threat to their religious way of life that Haredim see in entering military service.

Rabbi Shafran claims that “disregarding their fears here is a decidedly illiberal stance.” To which the correct response is that there’s nothing illiberal about requiring the enormous and growing burden of army service to be shared equally, just as taxes are shared equally even if a person has a religious or ideological objection to paying them. And if charedim really wanted to, they could create frameworks for military and/or national service which would accommodate their charedi religious requirements.

Except, of course, for their charedi religious requirement to not have anything to do with participating in national responsibility.