آموزه‌ها و متون یهودیت گاهی با خشونت مرتبط بوده‌است. قوانینی در سنت یهودی وجود دارند که ریشه کن کردن شر را، گاهی با استفاده از ابزارهای خشونت آمیز، الزامی می‌کنند. یهودیت همچنین حاوی آموزه‌های صلح آمیز در کنار آنهایی است که خواستار خشونت هستند.[1][2] خشونت و عدم خشونت از سوی گروه‌ها و افراد غالباً در قوانین و الهیات یهودی در کنار هم قرار می‌گیرد. نگرش‌ها و قوانین نسبت به هر دوی صلح و خشونت در سنت یهودی وجود دارد.[1] در طول تاریخ، متون یا احکام دینی یهودیت برای ترویج[3] و همچنین مخالفت با خشونت استفاده شده‌است.[4]
یهودیت هنجاری صلح طلبانه نیست و خشونت در خدمت دفاع از خود در آن پذیرفته است.[5] جی. پاتوت برنز اظهار می‌کند که سنت یهودی به وضوح اصل به حداقل رساندن خشونت را مطرح می‌کند. این اصل را می‌توان اینگونه بیان کرد: «(هرجا) قانون یهود اجازه می‌دهد که خشونت از وقوع شر جلوگیری کند، الزام می‌کند که از حداقل خشونت برای رسیدن به هدف استفاده شود.»[6]
عدم خشونت
متون دینی یهودیت رحمت و صلح را مورد حمایت قرار می‌دهد و کتاب مقدس عبری حاوی این فرمان معروف است که «همسایه خود را مانند خودت دوست بدار».[2] بر اساس پلتفرم کلمب یهودیت اصلاحی در سال ۱۹۳۷، «یهودیت، از روزگار پیامبران، آرمان صلح جهانی را برای بشر اعلام کرده‌است و برای خلع سلاح روحی و جسمی همه ملت‌ها تلاش می‌کند. یهودیت خشونت را رد می‌کند و بر تربیت اخلاقی، عشق و همدردی تکیه می‌کند.»[4]
فلسفه عدم خشونت ریشه در یهودیت دارد و به تلمود اورشلیم در اواسط قرن سوم بازمی‌گردد. در حالی که عدم خشونت مطلق از الزامات یهودیت نیست، این دین به شدت استفاده از خشونت را محدود می‌کند، به طوری که پرهیز از خشونت اغلب تنها راه تحقق یک زندگی با حقیقت، عدالت و صلح است، که یهودیت آن را سه ابزار برای حفظ جهان می‌داند.[7]:242
روایت کتاب مقدس دربارهٔ فتح کنعان و دستورهای مربوط به آن، تأثیر عمیقی بر فرهنگ غرب گذاشته‌است.[8] در طول تاریخ یهود ، سنت‌های رایج یهودی این متون را صرفاً تاریخی یا رخ داده در شرایط بسیار خاص می‌دانستند، و در هر صورت، آنها را مربوط به زمان‌های بعد نمی‌دانستند.[9]
تغییر دین اجباری در زمان پادشاهی هامونی رخ داد. ادومائیان مجبور به گرویدن به یهودیت شدند، با تهدید به تبعید یا تهدید به مرگ، بسته به منبع آن.[10]
چشم در برابر چشم
در حالی که اصل lex talionis ("چشم در برابر چشم") به وضوح در کتاب مقدس تکرار شده‌است، در یهودیت به معنای واقعی کلمه به کار نمی‌رود، و برای ارائه مبنایی برای جبران خسارت مالی برای صدمات تفسیر شده‌است. پاساکوف و لیتمن به تفسیر مجدد lex talionis به عنوان نمونه ای از توانایی یهودیت فریسایی در «انطباق با تغییر ایده‌های اجتماعی و فکری» اشاره می‌کنند. استفان وایلن اظهار می‌کند که lex talionis "اثبات ارزش منحصر به فرد هر فرد" است و "برابری همه انسان‌ها در برابر قانون" را آموزش می‌دهد.
مجازات اعدام و بدنی
در حالی که انجیل و تلمود مجازات‌های خشونت‌آمیز بسیاری از جمله مرگ با سنگسار، سر بریدن، سوزاندن و خفه کردن برای برخی از جنایات را مشخص می‌کنند، این مجازات‌ها در دوران خاخامی عمدتاً با اضافه کردن الزامات اضافی برای محکومیت اصلاح شدند.[11]میشنا بیان می‌کند که سنهدرین که یک نفر را در عرض هفت سال - یا به گفته العازار بن آزاریا هفتاد سال - اعدام می‌کند تشنه به خون تلقی می‌شود.[12][13] در دوران باستان متاخر، گرایش به عدم اجرای مجازات اعدام در دادگاه‌های یهودی غالب شد. طبق قانون تلمود، صلاحیت اجرای مجازات اعدام با تخریب معبد دوم متوقف شد.[14] در عمل، جایی که دادگاه‌های یهودی قرون وسطایی قدرت صدور و اجرای احکام اعدام را داشتند، به این کار برای جرایم بسیار شدید ادامه می‌دادند، البته نه لزوماً مواردی که قانون تعریف می‌کرد.[14] اگرچه تشخیص داده شد که استفاده از مجازات اعدام در دوران پس از معبد دوم فراتر از حکم کتاب مقدس است، خاخام‌هایی که از آن حمایت می‌کردند معتقد بودند که می‌توان آن را با ملاحظات دیگر قوانین یهودی توجیه کرد.[15] اینکه آیا جوامع یهودی تا به حال مجازات اعدام را طبق قوانین خاخامی انجام داده‌اند یا خیر و آیا خاخام‌های عصر تلمود از استفاده از آن حتی در تئوری حمایت کرده‌اند یا خیر، موضوع بحث تاریخی و ایدئولوژیکی بوده‌است. ابن میمون، محقق حقوقی یهودی قرن دوازدهم، اظهار داشت که «برائت هزاران مجرم بهتر و رضایت بخش تر از کشتن یک بی گناه است». موضع قانون یهود در مورد مجازات اعدام اغلب مبنای مذاکرات دادگاه عالی اسرائیل بود. این مجازات تنها یک بار توسط سیستم قضایی اسرائیل در مورد آدولف آیشمن اجرا شده‌است.[15]
کتاب استر، یکی از کتاب‌های مقدس یهودیان، داستان دسیسه‌های کاخ است که بر توطئه کشتن همه یهودیان متمرکز است که توسط استر، ملکه یهودی ایران، خنثی شد. یهودیان به جای قربانی شدن، «همه افرادی را که می‌خواستند آنها را بکشند» کشتند.[16] پادشاه به یهودیان توانایی دفاع از خود در برابر دشمنانشان را داد که سعی در کشتن آنها داشتند،[17] که تعداد آنها ۷۵۰۰۰ نفر بود (استر ۹:۱۶) از جمله هامان، یکی از عمالیق که نقشه کشتن یهودیان را رهبری می‌کرد. جشنواره سالانه پوریم این رویداد را جشن می‌گیرد و شامل تلاوت دستورالعمل کتاب مقدس برای «به فراموشی سپردن یاد [یا نام] عمالیق» است. محققان - از جمله ایان لوستیک، مارک گوپین، و استیون بایم - بیان می‌کنند که خشونت توصیف‌شده در کتاب استر الهام‌بخش و تحریک اعمال خشونت‌آمیز و نگرش‌های خشونت‌آمیز در دوران پس از کتاب مقدس بوده‌است، که تا دوران مدرن ادامه دارد، که اغلب بر محور جشنواره پوریم است. :2–19,107–146,187–212,213–247[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27]
محققان دیگر، از جمله جروم اورباخ، اظهار می‌دارند که شواهد خشونت یهودیان در پوریم در طول قرن‌ها «بسیار ناچیز» است، از جمله موارد گاه به گاه پرتاب سنگ، ریختن روغن فاسد بر روی یک نوکیش یهودی، و در مجموع ۳ مورد مرگ در پوریم در طول بیش از ۱۰۰۰ سال پوریم ثبت شده که یهودیان موجب آن بوده‌اند.[28] هیلل هالکین در مروری بر کتاب مورخ الیوت هوروویتز، تشریفات بی پروا: پوریم و میراث خشونت یهودیان، خاطرنشان کرد که موارد خشونت یهودیان علیه غیریهودیان در طول قرن‌ها بسیار کم بوده و ارتباط بین آنها و پوریم ضعیف است.[29]
خاخام آرتور واسکوو و مورخ الیوت هوروویتز بیان می‌کنند که باروخ گلدشتاین، عامل قتل‌عام غار پاتریارک‌ها، ممکن است انگیزه کتاب استر بوده باشد، زیرا این قتل‌عام در روز پوریم انجام شد :4,11,315[30][31][32][33] اما سایر محققان اشاره می‌کنند که ارتباط با پوریم تصادفی است زیرا گلدشتاین هرگز به صراحت چنین ارتباطی را برقرار نکرد.[34]
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.
Carl. 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.
Lemche, Niels Peter, The Old Testament between theology and history: a critical survey, Westminster John Knox Press, 2008, pp. 315–316:"The [Biblical] story 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".
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:
"Capital Punishment. In Practice in the Talmud". Encyclopedia Judaica. The Gale Group. 2008. Similarly, the passage in Mishnah Makkot 1:10: "A Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in seven years is called a murderous one. R. Eleazar ben Azariah says 'Or even once in 70 years.' R. Tarfon and R. Akiva said, 'If we had been in the Sanhedrin no death sentence would ever have been passed'; Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel said: 'If so, they would have multiplied murderers in Israel.'
"Capital Punishment. In the State of Israel". Encyclopedia Judaica. The Gale Group. 2008. This refers to the statement in the Mishnah (Mak. 1:10; Mak. 7a) that a Sanhedrin that kills (gives the death penalty) once in seven years (R. Eleazer b. Azariah said: once in 70 years) is called "bloody" (ḥovlanit, the term "ḥovel" generally implying a type of injury in which there is blood).
Lustick, Ian, For the land and the Lord: Jewish fundamentalism in Israel, Council on Foreign Relations, 1988. Quote: "Of decisive importance to Jewish fundamentalists is their belief that contemporary political developments are part of an unfolding cosmic drama that will determine, depending on the willingness of Jews to act decisively on its behalf, whether God's redemption of his people Israel, and of the whole world, will or will not soon reach its completion…. The massacre in the Hebron mosque on the Jewish holiday of Purim is a tragic, but telling, example. Preceded by a rash of killings of Jewish settlers by Muslim fundamentalists … it is not in the least a coincidence that the massacre took place on the Jewish holiday of Purim. For most Jews Purim means listening to .. the Book of Esther .. .It is an occasion for merry-making, games, charity and the exchange of gifts. But as Goldstein sat reading that same book on Purim even in 1994, it is almost certain he identified Yasir Arafat with Haman, the arch-enemy of the Jews of ancient Persia, and the killing of Jewish settlers over the previous months with Haman's murderous designs. Accordingly, he [Goldstein] focused on often-ignored verses at the end of the book [of Esther] which, for Jewish fundamentalists, capture the essence of the story under contemporary circumstances and contain a divine imperative to act. According to the Book of Esther the Jews are saved by the king who reverses Haman's evil decree and declares instead that Jews may do unto their enemies what their enemies had intended to do unto them 'to stand up for themselves, to destroy, to slay, and to annihilate any armed force of any people or province that might assault them, with their little ones and women' (Esther 8:11)….By mowing down Arabs he believed wanted to kill Jews, Goldstein was re-enacting part of the Purim story." (pp. ix–xi.)
Quotes from Horowitz 2006, p. 16: "This book deals not only with the theme of Amalek and responses – Christian as well as Jewish – to the book of Esther over the centuries, but also with Jewish violence connected with the holiday of Purim, from the early fifth century to the late twentieth."
Bayme, Steven, "Saddam, Haman, and Amalek", in Jewish arguments and counterarguments: essays and addresses, KTAV Publishing House, Inc. , 2002: Quote: "For many centuries Purim has been a source of both joy and embarrassment for Jews. … Still others have challenged the doctrine of violence associated with the holiday… Martin Luther, for one, accused the Jews of bloodthirsty and vengeful spirit in the Book of Esther… [Luther] reflect[s] the close association of Purim with the biblical doctrine of war against the Amalek. The theme of Jewish violence against Haman and his supporters, the doctrine of Amalek, has caused Jews the greatest discomfort with the Book of Esther and the holiday with which it is associated…. Judaism teaches that violence is justified under certain circumstances – particularly defense against aggression … Amalek, the rabbis argue, is the eternally irreconcilable enemy who represents a value system that promotes murder … Herein lies the enduring relevance of Purim. Aggression must be stopped and evil eliminated…. The meaning of Purim is relevant to the question of the war in the Persian Gulf today [2002]…. [Saddam Hussein's] unprovoked Scud missile attacks against entirely civilian targets in Israel are reminiscent of Amaleks's treacherous attacks upon the … Israelites...." (pp. 75–80)
The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha, Augmented Third Edition Michael David Coogan (Ed). Quote:"Jews and Christians have also been troubled by the story's [Book of Esther] enthusiastic account of the violence of the Jewish community's response to their enemies, which involved not only self defense but also the slaughter of women and children, including the sons of Haman. The bloodthirsty language, however, derives from the story's symmetric pattern of reversals.." (p. 708)
Gopin, Marc, Between Eden and Armageddon: the future of world religions, violence, and peacemaking, Oxford University Press US, 2000. Quote: "I have known many Orthodox rabbis, for example, who would be happy to ensure that a holiday such as Purim, with its obligatory reading of the Book of Esther, which cluminates with the slaughter of the people – including their children – who tried to exterminate the Jewish people, would never be used to justify the killing of anyone today. They certainly are deeply ashamed by Baruch Goldstein's mass murder at the Hebron mosque, which was inspired in part by Purim…. They can and do give moralistic sermons, and they can and do interpret the story in less violent terms…. The hermeneutic give and take of Purim is but one example of the way in which a deeply embedded tradition will not disappear even when many people reject its implicit message of violence…. It is not likely [that Purim would diminish in importance] in the current climate of religious revivalism, but it is possible that the violence of the story could be overshadowed with time by the numerous benevolent characteristics of the holiday, such as aiding the poor…. Jewish empowerment allows for a new hermeneutic that could centralize the violence of the story. If the political situation were to rapidly deteriorate, it is conceivable that Purim could become for radical Jews what Ramadan has become for radical Muslims in Algeria, a killing season…. Even the most radically pacifist Jews that I know do not eliminate this holiday, although they do not really know what to do with sacralized violence yet, and are now only evolving a spiritual and ritual reworking of traumatic and violent episodes." (pp. 52–53)
Nirenberg, David, Communities of violence: persecution of minorities in the Middle Ages, Princeton University Press, 1998. Quote:"There is evidence … that Jews could use ritual violence to criticize the Christians in whose lands they dwelled An obvious example is Purim, on which see E. Horowitz, The Rite to Be Reckless ..; and for a late medieval Iberian example, S. Levy, "Notas sobre el 'Purrim de Zaragoza", Anuario do Filologia 5 (1979): 203–217. (p. 220)
Gonen, Jay Y. , Yahweh versus Yahweh: the enigma of Jewish history, Univ of Wisconsin Press, 2005. Quote:"In 1994, on Purim day, Jewish physician Baruch Goldstein burst into an Arab Mosque in Hebron … and sprayed Arab worshipers who were kneeling in prayer with bullets from an automatic weapon. Twenty-nine Palestinians were killed before the enraged crowd tore him to pieces. It was a shameful day in Jewish history, the memory of which should be injected into all future Purim celebrations as a sober reminder of the potential barbarism that is hidden within the old myths of vengeance wrought by the Sons of Israel upon their enemies…. [Baruch's] memorial plaque affirmed that 'he was murdered for the sanctification of the Name…'. In this manipulative phrasing the old Jewish ethos of martyrdom, the sanctification of the Name, was given new meaning - messianic, activist, and murderous…. Purim celebrations in Israel in 2001 were again blotted by ugly incidents. As Jewish hotheadedness increased … harassments of Palestinians took place. During Purim it was a mitzvah, or good deed, to sock it to the modern Amalekites… In Jerusalem dozens of Jews gathered in the Sabath Square, pelted cars with stones, tried to set a minibus on fire, and threw various objects at residents of the Arab quarter. In Zion Gate Jews beat up Palestinians, calling them 'dirty Arabs' and 'terrorists'. One drunken Jew who wounded an Arab in the eye subsequently attacked the police as he was arrested. There was no loss of life in these incidents, but this cannot be said about the Baruch Goldstein precedence of violence that was deliberately injected into the Purim ritual. And if it has become a Purim commandment to drink and then attack Arabs, how should the Arabs react?" (pp. 63–64)
Robins, Robert S. and Post, Jerrold M. , Political paranoia: the psychopolitics of hatred, Yale University Press, 1997. Quote: "On February 25, 1994, when Dr. Baruch Goldstein walked into the mosque atop the Tomb of the patriarchs in Hebron and fired his automatic weapon into the worshipping Muslims, killing or wounding at least 130 of them … Also on the night before … Goldstein had read … from the Book of Esther which tells the story of the Jewish festival of Purim…. Purim [Baruch's] friend explained 'is a holiday to kill the people who are trying to kill the Jews'" … For most Jews Purim is a joyous celebration of deliverance. But for some it is a celebration of violence, commemorating an uprising of the Jews against their enemies, a day of righteous wrath when 'the Jews smote all their enemies with the stroke of the sword and with slaughter and destruction, and did what they would unto them that hated them' (Esther 9:1)." (pp. 162–163)
Hunter, Alastair G. "Denominating Amalek: Racist stereotyping in the Bible and the Justification of Discrimination" in Sanctified aggression: legacies of biblical and post biblical vocabularies, Jonneke Bekkenkamp, Yvonne Sherwood (Eds), Continuum International Publishing Group, 2003. Quote: Hunter quotes Arthur Waskow on p. 103: "on hearing of the murderous attack by Baruch Goldstein": "I know at once that this is no isolated crazy, this 'Baruch Goldstein' who has murdered forty of my cousins. I know at once, he has decided on this Purim to 'blot out the memory of the Amalek' not with a noise maker but with a machine gun… So then, in our generation, for some Jews the Palestinians become Amalek."
Boustan, Ra'anan S. , Violence, Scripture, and Textual Practice in Early Judaism and Christianity, Brill, 2010. Quote: "..Christians had grown apprehensive at what they perceived, not without reason, as the ill-will that Jews harbored against the Christian Church… Such concerns are already reflected in the legislation passed in 408 CE against the alleged Jewish practice of burning Haman in effigy on 'a form made to resemble the sainted cross' during the festival of Purim, which the authorities suspected was a gesture of ridicule aimed at the Savior himself…. And, indeed, a verse parody in Jewish Aramaic .. .which features Jesus Christ amid a host of Israel's enemies … justifying the punishment of Haman and bewailing their own cruel fates, may suggest that the dim view of Purim taken by Christian authorities was far from baseless." (p. 218)
Quote from Horowitz 2006 p. 4: "On [Purim in 1994] Dr. Baruch Goldstein .. opened fire, with his army-issued semi-automatic rifle, on dozens of Muslims who were praying inside the mosque at the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron, killing twenty nine. At the time [I was writing] a Hebrew version of an article about the history of Purim violence … as I saw the raucous celebrations in the center of Jerusalem continuing unabated, that there was a clear connection between past Purims and the present one was both exhilarating and disturbing… And the Sabbath before Purim … opens with the command to 'remember what th Amalek did' and concludes with .. the … exhortation to 'blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven'.
Hunter, Alastair G. "Denominating Amalek: Racist stereotyping in the Bible and the Justification of Discrimination" in Sanctified aggression: legacies of biblical and post biblical vocabularies, Jonneke Bekkenkamp, Yvonne Sherwood (Eds), Continuum International Publishing Group, 2003. Hunter quotes Arthur Waskow on p. 103: "on hearing of the murderous attack by Baruch Goldstein": "I know at once that this is no isolated crazy, this 'Baruch Goldstein' who has murdered forty of my cousins. I know at once, he has decided on this Purim to 'blot out the memory of the Amalek' not with a noise maker but with a machine gun… So then, in our generation, for some Jews the Palestinians become Amalek."
