Rabbi Moshe Tzureil's Stern Warning Against Abstaining From Voting
Translated & summarized from Arutz Sheva by baba
A resurfaced video shows Rabbi Moshe Tzureil stating that abstaining from voting for political reasons is a sin, violating the principle of "You shall not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor." He connected voting to the responsibility for the safety and security of other Jews, regardless of personal danger. The rabbi argued that voting has life-and-death consequences, making abstention a public, not private, matter.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Rabbi Moshe Tzureil stated abstaining from voting is a sin violating "You shall not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor."
- He linked participation in elections to the responsibility for the welfare and security of other Jews.
- The rabbi stressed that personal safety does not negate the obligation to consider others' danger.
- Rabbi Tzureil viewed voting as an act with life-or-death consequences, not just a political choice.
- He argued that abstaining from voting is a public, not private, matter.
A recently resurfaced video features the late Rabbi Moshe Tzureil, a prominent Torah scholar and former supervisor at the Sha'alvim and Torat Chaim yeshivas, issuing a strong condemnation of abstaining from elections for political reasons. Rabbi Tzureil stated unequivocally that refraining from voting constitutes a sin and a violation of the biblical prohibition "You shall not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor."
He linked participation in elections directly to the responsibility for the welfare and security of other Jews. The rabbi emphasized that even individuals who do not personally feel threatened are obligated to consider the well-being of others who may be affected by governmental decisions. "A Jew is in danger, even if you are not in danger... you don't live in the settlements... but they are in danger, and you say: What is it to me?" he questioned.
Rabbi Tzureil's perspective frames voting not merely as a political choice or expression of opinion, but as an act with profound implications for human lives and security. Therefore, he argued, abstention cannot be considered a purely private matter.
