Righteous Non-Jews: Jacques Ellul
Continuing (but not yet completing) the discussion on the necessary reformation of the Jewish spirit in our generation, HaRav Ginsburgh discussed the merits of a rectified anarchy based on individual responsibility to serve God and observe the commandments. In this short discourse, he reviews some of the ideas proposed by the French philosopher Jacques Ellul, fitting thoughts for parashat Bereishit, the first of two universal Torah portions that address the nations of the world.
An Elevation of the Soul of Jacques Ellul
Jacques Ellul (1912-1994) was an important French philosopher, sociologist, and resistance-fighter during World War 2. His philosophy was that the ultimate form of government is anarchy. What is special and sets him apart in this respect is that he believed that anarchy should include both an anarchist king and an anarchist Torah, the topic we have been exploring recently.
On his mother’s side he descends from the Conversos, the forced converts of Spain, so it is possible that he is even of Jewish descent. His family name, Ellul, is a Maltese name, from the island of Malta, south of Italy, but it of course also resonates with the month of Elul.
Let’s continue examining the thought of Jacques Ellul: in his personal life, he conducted himself as a Christian. His story—everyone has their own story—was that at age 17 he had a mystical experience, a feeling of Divine presence. From then on, he became a believer, and so he arrived at what he arrived at in his philosophy. At Yad VaShem he is among the Righteous Among the Nations. On that merit alone it is already worth doing an elevation of soul for him. Again, he is a devout Christian, but he risked his life and the lives of his entire family to hide Jews during the Holocaust. True mesirut nefesh. Saving Jews was the application of his thought, his anarchism.
Sources for Anarchy in Scripture
Since he was a Christian, he studied Tanach, and he based his philosophy on four points he gleaned from it.
The first point he took from the opening of the Ten Commandments, the beginning of the Giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai, which states: “I am Havayah your God, who took you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.” These are the words that forged the mindset of the generation of the wilderness, the third period in the history of the Jewish people. It is meant to detach them from the mindset they had in Egypt, which was the second era of Jewish history. How will the mindset change? Ellul argues that what is usually described as the “second commandment,” “You shall have no other gods before Me,” is the necessary change.
Some commentaries count these as two separate commandments in the Decalogue (we call it by this name because there are various opinions as to how many commandments actually appear in the words spoken at Sinai and usually referred to as the Ten Commandments). But according to the cantillation marks of the text, it is all one, a single utterance, as is explained at length elsewhere. That is, the purpose of “I am Havayah your God” is “you shall have no other gods before Me.” He says that “other gods” actually refers to the state government. Ellul argues that subjugation to the state is the source of all idolatry, all the “other gods” that exist in the world. This is a very nice idea—that “other gods” means faith in the state, attachment to the state. It could also refer to faith in military power, following the warning that one should not think that it is “my strength and the might of my hand that has brought me this success.” The general principle is that a faith that makes human life dependent on physical causes (on economics, and so on) is a false god. Subjugation to the state, in his eyes, is idolatry. This is his first source.
The second source is what we have already discussed a bit at length—the era of the Judges. He says that the leadership of the Judges is an ideal condition, where there is no king. We have not mentioned this before, but among the Judges, who expressed this best? In a story stated explicitly in Tanach—they wanted to crown Gideon king, and he refused: “I do not want to be king; God is the King.” Not that his refusal to be crowned led to anything good; in the end, Gideon was also a failure. Still, this is how Gidon understood it from the outset: no king is needed—God is the King. With his words, Gideon effected the beginning of a rectification for the kings of Edom, each of whom (according to Kabbalah) wanted to be the sole sovereign, stating, “I shall reign.” This is the second story that, according to Ellul, clearly proves that the ideal is anarchism.
The third Biblical story that he learns from is the cautionary words spoken by Samuel when the people came to demand a king. Samuel cautions the people: you will have a king, and it will be bad. You will have a government, and it will be bad for you. Ellul argues that there is no greater declaration of the evil of monarchy than “the law of the king” that Samuel states and warns the people about.
The fourth source Ellul brings is perhaps his strongest support for anarchy from the bible. He says that all the prophets of Israel prophesied against the kings that ruled Israel and Judea. The prophets recognized the kings as the root of the corruption of the Jewish people, in every generation. No true prophet was ever “loyal” to a king blindly—they were all against the wicked kings, and critical even of the righteous kings. Even when a prophet stood at the right hand of a righteous king, he did not curry favor with him or flatter him. Instead, the true prophet criticizes the king regarding every mistake he made: he found in him the weak points that needed rectification. In fact, the difference between a true prophet and a false prophet is that the latter type was all flattery for the king.
These are his four proofs for “anarchism from the Torah” as an ideal. Something nice worth pondering. As we said before, this is the first nature of the Jew—this is how God created him, upright. The “many machinations” that corrupt humanity begin from the monarchy, from the state, from the government.
