A Torah Lesson for Election Time: The Responsibility Not to Waste Votes
As Israel approaches another election, an important question deserves serious consideration: What responsibility do those who seek to represent the Torah public have towards the people who place their trust in them?
The question becomes especially important when religious parties run separately and compete for the same voters. There can be good reasons for separate parties. Different communities have their own rabbinic leadership, educational priorities and public concerns. A separate political voice may sometimes be necessary to ensure that these concerns receive proper attention.
But legitimate differences do not remove the responsibility to consider the consequences. A party may have sincere intentions and a genuine commitment to Torah, yet its decisions may not necessarily achieve what it hopes to accomplish.
The Torah portions of Lech Lecha and Vayera offer a valuable lesson through the example of Avraham Avinu.
In Parashat Lech Lecha, Hashem tells Avraham:
“וֶהְיֵה בְּרָכָה” — “And you shall be a blessing” (Bereishit 12:2).
Avraham was not called merely to preserve his own beliefs. His mission was to bring blessing to others and to build a spiritual future that would extend to generations to come. His greatness lay not only in what he believed, but also in the responsibility he accepted for others.
In Parashat Vayera, this responsibility becomes even clearer. When Avraham learns that Sedom is to be destroyed, he turns to Hashem and asks:
“הַאַף תִּסְפֶּה צַדִּיק עִם רָשָׁע” — “Will You sweep away the righteous together with the wicked?” (Bereishit 18:23).
Avraham does not limit his concern to his own household or those closest to him. He asks what will happen to others. His example teaches us that responsibility requires looking beyond our immediate interests and considering the consequences of our actions.
This lesson has particular relevance at election time. Political representation is a means of serving the public, not an end in itself. For parties that seek to represent the Torah public, the purpose is to strengthen Torah education, support Torah institutions and protect the place of Jewish values in public life.
Israel’s electoral system makes the issue especially important. A party must cross the electoral threshold to enter the Knesset. If it fails to do so, it receives no seats, and the votes cast for it do not transfer to another party.
When parties with similar aims run separately, they risk dividing the very voters whose support they need. If one party fails to cross the threshold, many votes may produce no representation at all. Had those voters supported a list that crossed the threshold, their votes might instead have helped elect representatives able to advance their concerns.
A vote cast in the hope of strengthening Torah should not be lost because those seeking to represent Torah have failed to consider the consequences of running separately.
This does not mean that every small party should withdraw from an election, or that legitimate differences should be ignored. Nor should anyone be expected to support a party they do not trust. There may be sound reasons for maintaining a separate political voice, particularly when a community has distinct needs or when important principles might otherwise be neglected.
But these decisions require honest examination. Does a separate list give meaningful expression to a community that would otherwise be overlooked? Is there a realistic prospect of crossing the electoral threshold? Could cooperation preserve the community’s essential principles while giving its voters a more effective voice?
These are not easy questions. Negotiations between parties can be difficult, and cooperation may require compromise. But compromise does not always mean abandoning one’s principles. Sometimes it is the willingness to look beyond one’s own political framework that allows those principles to have a greater practical effect.
The question is whether maintaining a separate party has become more important than advancing the cause for which it was established.
A political party exists to serve the public and the values it represents. Its continued existence cannot be the highest priority if the way it operates risks undermining those very values. Leaders must consider not only how many votes they hope to attract, but also whether their decisions are likely to turn those votes into effective representation.
This principle applies beyond religious politics. Anyone who seeks to represent a community or advance a particular cause has a responsibility to consider whether their choices will help or hinder that purpose. Sincerity matters, but good intentions alone are not enough. Responsible leadership requires sound judgment and an honest assessment of likely consequences.
For the Torah public, the stakes are particularly significant. The future of Torah education, the strength of Torah institutions and the place of Jewish values in public life affect generations to come. Eretz Yisrael stands at the centre of Jewish spiritual life, and decisions made here have consequences far beyond the immediate political moment.
The Torah teaches us the importance of אחריות ציבורית — responsibility towards the community. Hashem told Avraham, “And you shall be a blessing.” In his encounter concerning Sedom, Avraham demonstrated what that responsibility demands: concern for others and a willingness to look beyond oneself.
His example challenges anyone entrusted with public responsibility to ask not only whether their intentions are sincere, but whether their decisions will achieve what they are intended to accomplish.
The same question faces voters. A vote expresses a person’s convictions, but it is also a practical means of influencing the future. Voters should consider the choices before them and the likely consequences of their decisions. Those who lead political parties bear an even greater responsibility, because their decisions can determine whether the support of many people translates into representation.
No single party owns the Torah vote. These votes belong to the people who cast them, trusting that their convictions will find a voice. Those who seek that trust must think carefully about how best to honour it.
The lesson of Avraham Avinu is that serving a cause means accepting responsibility for its outcome. It is not enough to stand for what is right; we must also consider whether our actions will help preserve and strengthen it.
At election time, the Torah public deserves more than good intentions. It deserves responsible decisions. Separate religious parties may have legitimate reasons to maintain their independence, and their differences should be taken seriously. But when a party has little realistic chance of crossing the electoral threshold, the possibility that its supporters will be left without representation must also be faced honestly.
The future of Torah must matter more than the preservation of any one party’s political identity. That is part of the responsibility of those who seek to lead, and part of what it means to be a blessing to others, as Hashem commanded Avraham Avinu.
