Demanding Answers from God – and Ourselves – In Gaza

As Israel wages war in Gaza, it must simultaneously focus on eradicating Hamas while freeing the hostages, all while taking pains to minimize civilian casualties. 

For Israelis and their supporters in the American Jewish community, it’s a dynamic that raises hard moral and ethical questions. But grappling with hard questions is central to Jewish identity. 

Our tradition provides models, codified in our religious texts, of individuals wrestling with God and holding God accountable. Our covenant with God encourages us not just to ask “why” of the Divine —  but to turn those hard questions inward and hold ourselves to account. 

This is more important than ever today as we look at Gaza and try to come to terms with the weighty responsibility of Jewish power there. 

The tradition of grappling with hard questions begins in Genesis, where we encounter Abraham questioning God, shortly after they’ve entered into their covenantal relationship. Abraham asks what to do with Sodom – a city God declared was so full of wickedness that it must be destroyed. Abraham openly challenges God’s judgment. 

“Perhaps there are 50 righteous men in the midst of the city; will You even destroy and not forgive the place for the sake of the 50 righteous men?” Abraham asks. 

This bargaining continues until Abraham is finally satisfied with God’s response – that God will spare Sodom if there are just 10 righteous men who live there. 

We can draw from this story as we struggle to understand the dilemma Israelis face in Gaza: rooting out the wickedness of Hamas while, like Abraham, seeking to spare the innocents, which agonizingly include Israeli hostages.

This calls to mind one of the greatest mitzvahs in Judaism: pidyon shvuyim, redeeming Jewish captives. And Israel must weigh how far it will go to fulfill that mitzvah. 

This decision impacts Israel’s military calculations of where it strikes and when it pauses for humanitarian aid so as to ensure the release of hostages.  

Mishnah Sotah 8:7 distinguishes between an elective war and an obligatory war. Maimonides (Rambam) helps us to understand the difference with the example of Amalek, the first enemy the children of Israel encountered after crossing the Sea of Reeds. Israel, he argued, is required to defend itself against an enemy that attacks it.

Even as Israel fulfills its obligation to confront and destroy the genocidal terrorists bent on annihilating the Jewish state, the Jewish tradition encourages us to ask uncomfortable questions of God and ourselves.  

The war with Hamas fits within this parameter.  The horrors of Oct. 7 created for Israel milchemet ein breira — a war of no choice. The same was true of the the War of Independence in 1948, the border raids in the 1950s, and the wars of 1956, 1967 and 1973 and. These were deemed to be wars of no choice. But even as Israel fulfills its obligation to confront and destroy the genocidal terrorists bent on annihilating the Jewish state, the Jewish tradition encourages us to ask uncomfortable questions of God and ourselves.  

This war of no choice still leaves Israel with vexing decisions: Who is targeted? How much should be destroyed? How does Israel determine who is righteous? 

This is no easy task. Consider, after all, the allegations that physicians and United Nations Relief Works and Agency (UNRWA)  educators held Israeli civilians captive. Consider the uncertainty about who in Gaza see themselves as bystanders and who have succumbed to the herd mentality of Hamas.  

Israel possesses real power – the kind that defines who will live and who will perish – and this makes some uncomfortable. 

Many younger Americans, including Jews, struggle to understand a country’s obligation to respond with military force. For them, war is an abstract concept, and it is difficult to accept that not all conflicts can be resolved through collaborative problem solving and conflict resolution. The use of force feels anathema to their ideological predispositions. 

Israel is also limited by its self-imposed standards. Former Israeli Chief Justice Aharon Barak famously said that Israel must fight “with one arm tied behind her back.” As a liberal democracy, it must retain the upper hand and follow the rules of military engagement – even when the enemy has no regard for the rules. 

But Israel’s military action in Gaza is both required and justified, especially as Hamas hides terrorists and stores armaments among densely populated neighborhoods, hospitals and schools. 

There is no shame or guilt in reckoning with the responsibility that comes with holding power. In his time, Abraham did so with God. In our time, Israel has both the ability and the moral obligation to protect citizens. So how do we reconcile that duty with the harm brought on another population? 

Judaism urgently calls us to examine such questions — to argue with and even question God. 

Asking how to protect the righteous and struggling to determine who is righteous while holding ourselves accountable is the Jewish way. It’s what Abraham spent his life doing, and we are invited to follow his example.

Rachel Fish, PhD, is Special Adviser to the Brandeis University Presidential Initiative to Counter Antisemitism in Higher Education. She is the co-founder of Boundless.