February26, 1939
Dear Mr. Gandhi,
What you have said recently about the Jews is the one statement I have yet seenwhich needs to be grappled with fundamentally. Your statement is a challenge,particularly to those of us who have imagined ourselves your disciples.
I am sure you must be right in asserting that the Jews of Germany can offerSatyagraha to the "godless fury of their dehumanised oppressors".
But how and when? You do not give the answer. You may say that you are notsufficiently acquainted with the German persecution to outline the practicaltechnique of Satyagraha for use by the German Jews. But one of the great thingsabout you and your doctrine has been that you have always emphasised the chanceof practical success if Satyagraha be offered. Yet to the German Jews you havenot given the practical advice which only your unique experience could offer,and I wonder if it is helpful merely in general terms to call upon the Jews ofGermany to offer Satyagraha. I have heard that many a Jew of Germany has askedhimself how and when Satyagraha must be offered, without finding the answer.Conditions in Germany are radically different from those that have prevailed inSouth Africa and in India. Those of us who are outside Germany must, I submit,think through most carefully the advice we proffer the unfortunates who arecaught in the claws of the Hitler beast.
If you take the sentences of your statement as to what you would do were you aGerman Jew, you will find, I believe, that not only one German Jew, as yourequire, has had "courage and vision", but many whose names are knownand many more who have borne witness to their faith without their names beingknown.
"I would claim Germany as my home". There has never been a communitymore passionately attached to its home than the German Jews to Germany. Thethousands of exiles now to be found everywhere are so thoroughly German mentally,psychologically, in their speech, manners, prejudices, their outlook, that wewonder how many generations it may take before this is uprooted. The history ofthe Jews in Germany goes back to at least Roman times and though the Jewsthroughout their history there have been massacred and driven out on diverseoccasions, one thing or the other has always brought them back there.
"I would challenge him to shoot me or to cast me into the dungeon".Many Jews - hundreds, thousands - have been shot. Hundreds, thousands have beencast into the dungeon. What more can Satyagraha give them? I ask this questionin humility, for I am sure that you can give a constructive answer.
"I would not wait for fellow Jews to join me in civil resistance, but wouldhave confidence that in the end the rest are bound to follow my example".But the question is how can Jews in Germany offer civil resistance? Theslightest sign of resistance means killing or concentration camps or being doneaway with otherwise. It is usually in the dead of night that they are spiritedaway. No one, except their terrified families, is the wiser. It makes not even aripple on the surface of German life. The streets are the same, business goes onas usual, the casual visitor sees nothing. Contrast this with a single hungerstrike in an American or English prison, and the public commotion that thisarouses. Contrast this with one of your fasts, or with your salt march to thesea, or a visit to the Viceroy, when the whole world is permitted to hang uponyour words and be witness to your acts. Has not this been possible largelybecause, despite all the excesses of its imperialism, England is after all ademocracy with a Parliament and a considerable measure of free speech? I wonderif even you would find the way to public opinion in totalitarian Germany, wherelife is snuffed out like a candle, and no one sees or knows that the light isout.
"If one Jew or all the Jews were to accept the prescriptions here offered,he or they cannot be worse off than now". Surely you do not mean that thoseJews who are able to get out of Germany are as badly off as those who mustremain? You call attention to the unbelievable ferocity visited upon all theJews because of the crime of "one obviously mad but intrepid youth".But the attempt at civil resistance on the part of even one Jew in Germany, letalone the community, would be regarded as an infinitely greater crime and wouldprobably be followed by a repetition of this unbelievable ferocity, or worse.
"And suffering voluntarily undergone will bring them an inner strength andjoy". I wonder that no one has drawn your attention to the fact that thoseGerman Jews who are faithful to Judaism - and they are the majority - have inlarge measure the inner strength and joy that comes from suffering for theirideals. It is those unfortunate "non-Aryans", who have a trace ofJewish blood but who have been brought up as German Christians, who are most tobe pitied. They are made to suffer, and they do not know why. Many of them havebeen raised to despise Jews and Judaism, and now this despised people, thisscorned religion is, in their eyes, the cause of their suffering. What a tragedyfor them.
But as to the Jews - I do not know if there is a deeper and more widespreadhistory of martyrdom. You can read the story of it in any Jewish history book,or, if you wish a convenient account, in the Jewish Encyclopedia published inNew York a generation ago. To take Germany alone, you may be interested in onedocument that has come down to us from the middle ages. It is called theMemorbuch of Nuernberg - Nuernberg of the Nuernberg laws, whose synagogue hasjust been torn down and a 15th century covering of a Scroll of the Law stolenand presented recently to the city's arch-fiend.
The Memorbuch gives a list of the places where massacres took place in Germanyduring the Crusades from 1096 to 1298. There are some fifty of these massacresentered chronologically. There is a further entry of some 65 large pagescontaining dates and places with the names of those martyred from 1096 to 1349.Take what happened in this very Nuernberg on Friday the 22nd of Ab 5058 of theJewish calendar, the 1st August 1298 of the Christian calendar. We find thenames of 628 men, women and children, whole families, old and young, strong andsick, rabbis and scholars, rich and poor, slaughtered on that day - burned,drowned, put to the sword, strangled, broken on the wheel and on the rack. Insome places the elders killed the young, and then put an end to their own lives.
In Spain and Portugal where Jews were given the chance of conversion toChristianity, what usually happened in a stricken town was, that about a thirdconverted, and a third succeeded in escaping, and always at least a thirdaccepted their agony with the praise of God and his Unity on their lips. OurHebrew literature is in many ways a literature of martyrdom. Our Talmud, whichcovers a period of about 1000 years, is a literature that grew up in largemeasure under oppression, exile and martyrdom, and it contains discussions,traditions and rules bearing upon our duty to accept martyrdom rather than yieldto "idolatry, immorality, or the spilling of blood". The Hebrewliturgy throbs with elegies in which poets and teachers commemorate the martyrsof one generation after another.
If ever a people was a people of non-violence through century after century, itwas the Jews. I think they need learn but little from anyone in faithfulness totheir God and in their readiness to suffer while they sanctify His Name.
What is new and great about you has seemed to me this, that you have exaltednon-violence into the dominant principle of all of life, both religious, socialand political, and that you have made it into a practical technique both ofcommuning with the Divine and of battling for a newer world of justice and mercyand of respect for the human personality of even the most insignificant outcast.What you could give to help the Jew add to his precious contribution to mankind,"the surpassing contribution of non-violent action", is not as muchthe exhortation to suffer voluntarily, as the practical technique of Satyagraha.
You would have the right to say that some Jew should do this. But we have no onecomparable to you as religious and political leader.
There are, as I am aware, other elements besides non-violence in Satyagraha.There is non-cooperation, and the renunciation of property, and the disdain ofdeath.
The Jews are a people who exalt life, and they can hardly be said to disdaindeath. Lev. 18, 5 says: "my judgements which if a man do he shall live inthem", and the interpretation adds as a principle of Jewish life "andnot die through them". For this reason I have often wondered if we are fitsubjects for Satyagraha. And as to property, it is but natural that Jews shouldwant to take along with them a minimum of their property from Germany orelsewhere so as not to fall a burden upon others. It would, I am sure, give yousatisfaction to see how large numbers of refugees, who in Germany were used towealth, comfort, culture, have without too much complaint and very oftencheerfully buckled down to a new life in Palestine and elsewhere, many of themin the fields or in menial employment in the cities.
It is in the matter of non-cooperation that I have a question of importance toput to you.
A plan is being worked out between the Evian Refugee Committee and the GermanGovernment which appears to be nothing short of devilish. The details are notyet known. But it seems to amount to this: The German Government is toconfiscate all German Jewish property and in exchange for increased foreigntrade and foreign currency they will permit a limited number of Jews to leaveGermany annually for the next several years. The scheme involves the sale ofmillions of pounds of debentures to be issued by a Refugee or Emigration Bankthat is to be created. Whether Governments are to subscribe to these debentures,I do not know. But certainly the whole Jewish world will be called upon to doso.
Here is the dilemma: If one does not subscribe, no Jews will be able to escapefrom this prison of torture called Germany. If one does subscribe one will becooperating with that Government, and be dealing in Jewish flesh and blood in amost modern and up-to-date slave market. I see before me here in Jerusalem achild who is happy now that he is away from the torment there, and his brother,or parent, or grandparent. One of the oldest of Jewish sayings is: "Whosaves a single soul in Israel is as if he had saved a whole world". Not tosave a living soul? And yet to cooperate with the powers of evil and darkness?Have you an answer?
You touch upon a vital phase of the whole subject when you say that "ifthere ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a waragainst Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would becompletely justified. But I do not believe in any war. A discussion of the prosand cons of such a war is therefore outside my horizon and province."
But it is on "the pros and cons of such a war" that I would ask yourguidance. The question gives me no rest, and I am sure there are many likemyself. Like you I do not believe in any war. I have pledged myself never totake part in a war. I spoke up for pacifism in America during the world waralongside of many whose names are known to you. That war brought the "peace"of Versailles and the Hitlerism of today. But my pacifism, as I imagine thepacifism of many others, is passing through a pitiless crisis. I ask myself:Suppose America, England, France are dragged into a war with the Hitlerbestiality, what am I to do and what am I to teach? This war may destroy a largepart of the life of the youth of the world and force those who remain alive tolead the lives of savages. Yet I know I would pray with all my heart for thedefeat of the Hitler inhumanity; and am I then to stand aside and let others dothe fighting? During the last war I prayed for a peace without defeat or victory.
The answer given by Romain Rolland in his little book Par la revolution la paix(1935), seems to be, that while he himself as an individual continues to refuseto bear arms, he will do everything he can to help his side (in this case,Russia) to win the war. That is hardly a satisfying answer.
I ask myself how I might feel if I were not a Jew. Is the Hitler iniquity reallyas profound as I imagine? I recall that during the last war the argumentsagainst Germany were much the same as these of today. I took no stock in thosearguments then. Perhaps it is the torture of my own people that enrages meunduly? Yet it is my conviction that, being a Jew, my sense of outrage atinjustice may, perhaps, be a bit more alive than the average and therefore moreaware of the evils that the Hitler frenzy is bringing upon all mankind. The Jew,scattered as he is, is an outpost, bearing the brunt earlier of an actionagainst mankind, and bearing it longest. For a dozen reasons he is a convenientscapegoat. I say this in order to make the point that if the Jew is thoroughlyaroused about an evil such as the Hitler madness, his excitement and indignationare apt to be based not only on personal hurt but on a more or less authenticappraisal of the evil that must be met.
If you will take the trouble of looking at the little pamphlet I am sending,Fellowship in War (1936), you will see that I have an ineradicable belief thatno war whatsoever can be a righteous war. The war tomorrow for the "democracies"or for some other noble slogan will be just as unrighteous or as fatuous as wasthe "war to save democracy" yesterday. Moreover, to carry on the warthe democracies will perforce become totalitarian. Not even a war against theghastly Hitler savagery can be called righteous, for we all of us have sinned,conquerors and conquered alike, and it is because of our sins, because of ourlack of generosity and the spirit of conciliation and renunciation, that theHitler beast has been enabled to raise its head. Even on the pages of theNuernberg Memorbuch we find the words "Because of our many sins" thisand that massacre took place. There can be no war for something good. That is acontradiction in terms. The good is to be achieved through totally differentmeans.
But a war against something evil? If the Hitler cruelty launches a war againstyou, what would you do, what will you do? Can you refrain from making a choice?It is a choice of evils - a choice between the capitalisms, the imperialisms,the militarisms of the western democracies and between the Hitler religion. Canone hesitate as to which is the lesser of these two evils? Is not a choicetherefore imperative? I am all too painfully conscious that I am beginning toadmit that if Hitler hurls his war upon us we must resist. For us it would thusbecome, not a righteous war, nor, to use your term, a justifiable war, but anecessary war, not for something good, but, because no other choice is left us,against the greater evil. Or do you know of some other choice?
I have already written you an inordinately long letter, but I must abuse yourpatience further and refer to Palestine, I hope in not too lengthy a way.
I am burdening you with a further pamphlet of mine called Like all the Nations?.May I refer you to pages 14 and 15, and then to pages 29-32. You will see thaton page 31, I say that we must overcome all obstacles in Palestine "throughall the weapons of civilisation except bayonets .. brotherly, friendly weapons",and on page 32 the Jew "should not either will or believe in or want aJewish Home that can be maintained in the long run only against the violentopposition of the Arab and Moslem peoples." There are other Jews who holdthe same views and who regard the Mandate as suspect because, as you say,"the Mandate has no sanction but that of the last war". In an addressin New York in May 1919, I said: "Palestine is, so they say, to be given tothe Jewish people. To my mind, no peace conference has the right to give anyland to any people even though it be the land of Israel to the People of Israel.If self-determination be a true principle for other peoples, it is just as truefor the Jewish people... If we are to be true democrats we must be truedemocrats in Jewish life as well. Our new beginnings in Palestine are burdenedby this gift." (page 60 of the above pamphlet).
But the attachment of Israel to Palestine is as old as the Bible, and there hasbeen no period of history in which this attachment has not expressed itself,and, as we know more and more clearly from archaeological excavations and therecovery of lost documents, there has never been a time when Jewish settlementswere utterly absent from the Holy Land.
Jewish life will always be lacking in an essential constituent, if Judaism andthe Jewish people have no spiritual and intellectual Centre in Palestine. It istrue they can exist without it, as history shows, but they have never ceasedexperiencing the deep need for such a Centre and of trying to establish it inPalestine on innumerable occasions. Such a spiritual and religious Centre must,for the Jewish people, take on the qualities of a National Home. The Jewishpeople are not like the Catholic Church for whom the ecclesia is the supremeauthority. Judaism is peculiar in this, that it derives its final authority outof the life, the sufferings, the aspirations, the accumulated traditions, theGod-consciousness of a people composed of ordinary everyday, hard-working humanbeings. It is for this reason that the Jewish Centre cannot be composed only ofpriests and scholars. The Jewish Centre to fulfill its true functions should beendowed with all the problems and possibilities that life itself imposes, and,as no one knows better than yourself, life expresses itself in many forms,political and social, as well as religious and spiritual.
It is, I think, in recognition of all of this that 52 nations accepted thedoctrine that the Jews are in Palestine as of "right" and not just onsufferance. Do you not think that all of this, added to the barbarous treatmentmeted out to the Jews in all too many places, constitutes a kind of "right"at least as valid as the other varieties of "rights"?
But essential as this Centre, or National Home, seems to be, in the opinion ofmany, for Judaism and the Jews, I think you would find great numbers of Jewsagreeing with you that "it would be a crime against humanity to reduce theproud Arabs".
The question is, what is meant by reduce, and are the Arabs being reduced?
You say that "Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that Englandbelongs to the English".
"Mine is the land" (Lev. 25, 23) saith the Lord.
May I point out at least two ways in which Palestine does not "belong"to the Arabs as England does to the English?
Usually a land "belongs" to that people which has conquered it. Thatis an ugly fact. The Jews conquered the land long ago. They lost it toconquerors, who themselves lost it, and eventually the Arabs conquered it. Butthe Arabs lost it to the Crusaders, and they again to the Arabs, and they to theMongols and to the Mameluks, and they to the Turks, from whom it was conqueredby the Allied Powers, primarily by England. The Arabs do not therefore possesspolitical sovereignty from conquest, and the land does not "belong" tothem in this sense.
Palestine does "belong" to the Arabs in the sense that they have beenin the land in large numbers since the Moslem conquest, that most (by no meansall) of those working the land are Arabs, and most (by no means all) of thoseowning the land are Arab landholders (a comparatively small number), and Arabicis the chief spoken language.
But Palestine is different from England also in this, that it is a sacred landfor three monotheistic religions, and in this, that a people, the Jews, whobecame a people in Palestine and whose great classic, the basis of whose life,the Bible, was produced there, have never throughout all the centuries forgottenthe land and ceased to yearn for it.
That is a unique fact of no mean importance.
The basic problem is, as you put it, the need for the Jews of settling inPalestine "with the goodwill of the Arabs", and not "under theshadow of the British gun".
I would not be honest if I conveyed the impression to you that in my opinion mypeople have always gone at this in the right way. They have done wonderfulthings in building up the land. They have planned intelligently and with highsocial ideals. They have borne sufferings and hardships willingly. They love theland and they have rescued it from further decay. They have revived the Hebrewtongue. In this sense the land also "belongs" to them. But I am surethat it has been the tragic pressure of Jewish life in Central and EasternEurope that has made my people impatient and often intolerant. The tragedy ofthe Jewish wanderer and refugee did not begin with Germany. We have had thisproblem with us always, and it was one of the chief reasons for the rise ofmodern Zionism. And now with the German barbarities, and what is impending inPoland and elsewhere, the pressure for space and a Home has grown to be almostunbearable.
During the past three years when the Jewish community here has been undercontinual attack, it is a fact that the Jewish community has been non-violent.Our young men and women are hot-blooded as are others. But there are very fewrecorded cases of attack on their part and there have been no ascertainedreprisals. This self-restraint, this Havlaga, as it is called, can be ascribedto many factors. But, as the never ceasing discussion of Havlaga shows, a deepethical passion has been the predominant factor in this non-violence.
I wonder therefore if the question of the Jews offering "Satyagraha infront of the Arabs" arises in Palestine. The Jewish youth has had organisedself-defence units which are now, for the most part, merged with the constitutedforces of the country. As far as I am aware, you do not advocate the abolitionof police or military forces anywhere. The record shows that in no singleinstance have the legalised Jewish forces in Palestine committed an act ofaggression. I should like to know if you think that the Jewish settlementsshould have remained, or should now be, unarmed, and that when bands come into atown like Tiberias and murder and mutilate babes in their mothers' arms, theyshould offer "themselves to be shot or thrown into the Dead Sea withoutraising a little finger against them". As I have understood Satyagraha, itmust, in order to be effective, be offered in front of Constituted Authority,and not in front of roving bandits.
Will you not speak to the Arabs in terms of Satyagraha? That would also have aprofound influence upon the Jews.
Great as is the need for finding a refuge in Palestine for persecuted Jews, andgreat as are the possibilities of spiritual and intellectual, social andpolitical achievements in the Jewish National Home, there are very many whoagree with you that we must not "reduce" the Arabs. If I understandwhat you mean by the word "reduce" I would give it as my opinion,after many years of residence in Palestine, that the Arabs have not been reduced.But that does not at all absolve the Jews from the primary duty and the vitalnecessity of "seeking to convert the Arab heart". Perhaps you couldhelp us in this through suggestions?
Sincerely Yours,
J. L. MAGNES.
Jerusalem, February 26, 1939
P.S. You may be interested in a third pamphlet containing a recent address atthe Hebrew University on the Jews of Bologna, Italy, particularly from page 8onwards.