Anti-Zionists Criticized in Matzav Inbox

@HaKatan

For the umpteenth time, stories are irrelevant. They are subject to memory, interpretation, and more. Stories cannot come close to answering black-and-white sefarim.

Thats your own made up theory. Often the opposite is true. We know many sefarim that are unclear or only written for its time or for a certian population.
Now it is true the certain stories cannot come close or are just memory. But when the story is repeated over and over again. Or when an entire chasidus saw the story vs just a few. Or when speechs were given over and over and it becomes part of the mesora told for 50 -100 years by all its leaders then even if its not in a sefer its just stronger than a sefer. So for example, maybe the idea of one story such as the Aver Yakov ferring tish on Yom hatzmut or the Hystna saying its hischlata degula isn’t a [roof. But when those stroies keep on repeating itself and when its a huge part of all Rizyna mesora where rebas for 100 years held of idelas of Herzel and spoke publicly that’s alot alot alot stronger. I confirmed this with quite a few rizyna reba einkleach and chasdim. It isn’t just like one isolated thing here and there. Its a theme over and over with 100’s of stories and drashas (Rizyna rebas don’t speak much but the little they speak). I dare you to confirm this instead of being so stubborn.

Rizyn alone should settle it. Then you have R Sharga feivel who also constantly told his talmidim this and not just one time or one story. Its less of a proof than rizyhn where you had mutiple rebas across 100 years time consistently telling thousands of chasdim the same message while stunchly doing things that support zionsim.

Other actions when summed up tell a better story then a sefer. So when quite a few gedolim work for the state of israel for decades staright that clearly proves more than a sefer that its not kefira. We all agree its assur to work for the reform or conservatives no matter what. And if it were on gadol Ok maybe he had some reason. But its a pattern of gedolim who worked for the state.

So yes a story like a rebasha masa that you say over form the Besht by melva malka maybe has less meaning. But when you see that same story told by tons of people who saw it happen, and when it keeps on being repeated over and over again, thats already mesora. Mesora is stronger than a sefer.

I hope that steels your umpteenth argument. Again we need not follow your narrow rules to say only a sefer counts. Repeated stories and MESORA are richer

@Chaim87
you haven’t quoted ANY seforim that are authoritative in any way.

What do I mean by “authoritative”? I mean a sefer that is used and referenced by other Gedolim as being a source of true Torah. This “peer endorsement” is key to obligating the public, as is spelled out in Shulchan Aruch yoreh deah (kivud rabunim) and choshem mishpat (hilchos dayanim and klalei psak).

What are “Gedolim”? As in Shulchan Aruch hilchos dayanim, a “gadol m’chaveiro” is either a bigger in minyan (talmidim) and/or bigger in wisdom on a specific subject (like for example Rav Vaye shlit’a is the “Gadol” of hilchos tolaim”). A “Gadol HaDor” as is commonly used is simply the person who is at the top of that Torah hierarchy. While there is place for pilpul on who is the “greatest” vs another Torah leader, it is either obvious or easily provable who is at least close to that stature.

What is “Torah”? The “Torah” is not whatever you want it to be, nor is it any action you might glean from the 3rd hand account of what someone else said or did once. The Torah is a specific body of teachings that were given at Sinai to the Jewish Nation and passed down to each generation. The “Torah Sheb’al Peh” that we have successfully passed down was fully collected into the Talmud (Bavli and Yerushalmi) and after the Talmud was completed (“chasimas haShas”), Jews are not allowed to add or detract from that Torah. Every single piece of Torah that obligates us Jews is necessarily in the Talmud, and for this reason every single Gadol in every generation explains his psak as directly connected to something taught in the Talmud. No Gadol ever introduced a new stikel Torah, chas v’shalom, that was not sourced in Shas and not given at Sinai.

So, @Chaim87, I don’t know what religion you follow. But, in Judaism, we are obligated to follow the Torah and not add or subtract from it. You have NOT provided any Torah seforim (writings that connect a psak to the Torah) by any authority (an known Gadol) that ever attempted in any meaningful way to defend Zionism.

If you believe I am straw manning your argument, I would ask you to first define Zionism, it must be a definition that crosses all commonly known Zionist camps (liberal, labor, religious, revisionist, and cultural Zionism, etc) and it must be a definition that narrowly expresses the novelty of the Zionist movement that started in the late 19th century. Then I would ask you to provide specific quotes or references to any authoritative Torah sefer and specify explicitly what point you claim they are making that defend your definition of Zionism.

I don’t believe you are in this conversation in good faith (pun intended) because I don’t believe you have a shita in Torah to rely upon rather you live a made up feel good religion of “trust me bro”, known in the Torah world as “masis i’madiach”. Your response doesn’t have to be long and it should be very easy for anyone to write if they have already learned this from their rabonim.

P.S. “Rabbi Kook is irrelevant, as noted, in case you want to argue that he does.”

Again @somejewiknow being the bully and deciding who is relevant and who is irrelevant. You don’t come near the man’s shoelaces. Its not up top you to decide. And sure you’ll quote all the torah leaders against him some of which are fake news or distorted. But there are still many others not accpeted by you who held of him. And yes they were “releavnt” accpeted” torah gedolim too just not in your circles. Its not up to you to be the bully

@hakatan
you seem to say that rav kotler zatsal did not say to support the medina’s needs klapei chuts when speaking to the US administration ?
Do you really stand by that ?
This is yadua lakol .

The sichlus of the pro zionist comments are laughable. Zionists make up their minds and try to bring Rayos to it any raya

Anti zionists don’t make up their mind first they say what is this shitah being presented and immediately it is exposed as nonsense

yankel, quotiong others > They used it to take countless yehudim away from the torah.

Is it really so? Did Zionists take shomer shabbos youngsters and lured them to kibbutzim? I don’t think this was a major trend – most non-religious zionists came from already assimilated Jews. If they were not to become zionists, they would be bundists, socialists, or communists. So, among such public, those who became Zionists – moved to Israel, their grandchildren are most likely to be Jewish, and some became observant or traditional. Those who went for other -isms, ended up niftar in Stalin’s and Hitler’s camps, or at best their grandchildren most likely assimilated and intermarried in Europe, Russia, and America.

Religious zionists indeed attracted observant Jews, but they did not take them away from Torah.

@ lbj
It’s actually the opposite. The anti Zionists didn’t like that the Zionists were secular and creating a country not religious. Nebach tons of Jews became irreligious. So they were mad. And rightfully so. This was also a time when the R Hillel Kamai Aka Lichtenstein built a new following around the idea of an “aintailing” separation from the neologs. Being chasdish all of a sudden meant building walls around you and strong kehilas. So now when Zionism came along and posed a threat they came up with Gemaras that were a chiddush so that they can upshlog Zionism. They took R Hirsch zl 3 shavous which was a very big chiddush. So in reality it was the opposite of what you suggest.

Just to add there were chovevi Zion and talmidim of both the besht and gra moving to ey for 200 years. Granted they didn’t outright advocate for their own country or governance. But common sense says that when enough people immigrate together that’s what you’ll need. Besides Palestine was run by huge monarchs and it was a far out idea. They for sure wanted something on the local level.

Lastly that doesn’t mean that anti Zionists didn’t have a point. And yes because it’s so secular and dangerous, opposing even the ideal of Zionism could be was the right thing. I firmly believe that despite the Satmar Reba Zya saying otherwise if Israel was run by chasdisha yidden or the eida who just pinkt believed in Zionism he wouldn’t have been opposed. I know he writes against just the idea but I suspect otherwise. Nevertheless, the holy Reba and others being against it are definitely very Torahdik. But to say the other side like the holy rizyna rebas who had 1000s of chasdim, to say they made it up or are less Torahdik is just your own bias at best .

@yankel-berel
the whole sefer vayoel moshe is meant to answer that question of “a medina without any repercussions. Is that against ikarei emuna?”
and, I can’t wrap my head around your “all he does is quote other” critique of hakatan. I’ll warn you now, that’s also all that the Satmar Rebbe does in Vayoel Moshe.

In fact, the whole Torah is simply quoting others and learning what they taught to apply it to our current situation. Other foolish people make up their own ideas and say “prove me wrong!”.

SQUARE_ROOT and all the other Zionists:
You’re still attempting to defend the indefensible.

You haven’t brought even a single sefer to support the idolatry and heresy of Zionism which is the same idolatry and heresy as it was for a century both before and after the Zionists sacrificed rivers of Jewish blood against the Torah (and also common sense) to create (and expand and attempt to maintain) their pseudo-“State”.

Regarding your last comment, in addition to the above, the Satmar Rav continued to publish after the 1950s, including, of course, “Al haGeulah viAl haTemura”. It is both disingenuous and outright dishonest to pretend that the latest anti-Zionist sefer was from the 1950s. So, the dishonesty deserved a special mention.

yankel > It is well established fact that in Europe and the ME before the medina ,the Zionists were a substantial force for abandonment of yiddishkeit
Likewise after the medina

I did not study this, but my impressions from reading about that time that it was, at worst, one of several forces, and, at best, the only one of options available to those who did not want to be observant that lead to some Jewish future: Jews were becoming non-religious for various social and cultural reasons – looking for respectful life, attractiveness of general culture, lack of serious Jewish education, etc.

R Soloveichik quotes Rambam on how to evaluate political figures and movements. This approach is applicable to many issues we discuss here. In this case – were it not secular zionism, what would those Yidden do? They would not likely go to a yeshiva, but they would become bundists, cultural Jews, socialists, communists – with worse outcomes for them and their children.

There were specific cases of Zionist-led effects on children, for example when orphans were arriving at the end of WW2 (such as Polish Jews who survived exile in USSR and left it via Iran and polish anders Army) – many were taken to anti-religious kibbutzim even when they were from observant families. But while this was tragic, it was not a general trend.

As to religious zionists, the quote above from R Soloveitchik is from his speech in 1950s as applied to Mizrahi – he considers how much Mafdal was able to achieve in terms of marriage, shabbat, kashrut in Israel despite their small numbers in politics comparing with anti-religious Zionists.

@ somejewiknow

you wrote: “I can’t believe any Jew is calling “70 years old” outdated!

You are either intentionally or unintentionally misconstruing his meaning.

@somejew
I looked at vayoel moshe several times . He for sure gives the impression that he is of the opinion which Katan is propagating on these pages. But even while learning his sefer , I could not come to any clarity as to the absolute proofs to his shitah .

The mere fact that he says that it is against the 13 ikarim is not enough for me [/ us].
I [and all the non – Satmar Jewish Orthodox world] are not his talmidim or his hasidim.

So , if not for re’ayot muhrahot to this shitah , we do not see ourselves obligated to follow his da’at yahid in this respect that even a non zionist medina is against ikarei emuna.

Nor should we be influenced by katan’s exaggerations about other rabanim who according to katan also held by his shitah.

For sure since following katan’s overblown hashkafa is being used as an excuse for curtailing US Government support for the medina.
[Cf, US Senate Majority Leader’s quote of Satmar as part of his Senate speech for withholding certain arm shipments.]

All the while the medina is surrounded by bloodthirsty monsters who would make [chvsh] the Yazidi’s lot considered paradise compared to those of the Jews under their domination.
The unspeakable atrocities of Oct 7 are ample proof.

It is clear that the overwhelming majority of gdolei yisrael disagreed with this satmar proposition.
There even is a niggling hashash that even satmar rav himself did not fully hold that the mere existence of the medina is against the ikarei emuna.
As mentioned before – and ignored by katan – Hafets Hayim writes clearly that it is permitted for a rebbi or parent to exaggerate the rish’ut and danger to a pupil or child in order to get the child to distance from the danger.

There are certain internal contradictions in Satmar which point towards this idea.
But this is for another post.

lema’aseh , the topic here is whether existence of a medina before mashiach is against ikarei emuna . If yes, which one and how so ?

yankel berel:
“It is clear that the overwhelming majority of gdolei yisrael disagreed with this satmar proposition.”
That’s a very strong statement to make. You must have numerous sefarim from which you can quote (or at least name!) that indicate what you wrote.

Obviously not. All the gedolim agreed as to the heresy and idolatry of Zionism, as elucidated by the Satmar Rav, but some (not all) did disagree on minor points like visiting the Kosel or Israeli citizens voting in Israeli elections.

Zionists should stop trying to defend the indefensible.

@HaKatan
Yup Only people who you can bully and will fall for your hard rules are earnest. Everyone else is nonsense. Or is it just that you know you are wrong because I won;t agree to squeeze into the box and follow your own narrow rules that are not al pi torah? Let us set the record straight yet again.

1) You don’t need a “gadol” necessary for this. One can follow tzadkim too. And one can follow mesora such as the Rizyna mesora that says Israel is a haschlata degula and a good thing. Rizhyin had thousands of chasdim and tens of rebas. Nor do you need a sefer
2) if you want sefarim, we have from very holy jews. Eim habonim simchas was a tlamud of the michas eluzer who as staunchly anti zionsim pre war. And by the way the Minchas Eluzer’s own son-in law R Boruch’l was pro zionsist. Now I know he will be knocked. But let me tell you all something. During the war R Boruch’l risked his life many times over to warn and save Hungarian jews. Meanwhile others refused to cooperate with tzionim and seculars against r Michoel ber zl’s pleas.
3) The Holy stamar rebas sefer was not accepted by many and the reba was not indisputable despite what people say now. (Ask Klausenburg)

One more point for the readers to ponder. I heard from R Moshe wolfson zl that teh state of Israel was an hischalta degula and shiveri kelim. the six day war was a miracle too. Granted he doesn’t fit into HaKatan’s “gadol” box but whpo do you believe more? Do you believe a tzadik who hung around so many prior holy yidden like R Shloma Heiman, Modtza reba, Satmar reba, the alter skvera reba, Lubivtha reba zl? or do you think HaKatan is right? Am I “espusing Nonsense” when i qoute a holy tzadik or is someone just to stubborn to see the truth?

@Always_Ask_Questions,

The other thing @HaKatan misses which talks to your point is that you always need to look at how religious and toradik a sect is after they introduce a controversial idea. So especially did they stay as jews who are shomer torah and mitzvas?

Take for example Shabasi tzvi’s followers, what became of them? They became muslims. Now lets look at Reform jews? Nebach they intermarried and there is nothing of them. Now lets take conservative jews. The movement started as a means to keep people religous. The heter to drive to shul shabbos was because “out of a town” families were driving to the mall anyhow so at least draw them to shul and be mekrav them. Many of its rabbonim in the 1960’s were frum observant jews who never dreamed of chilul shaboss. In fact when Sol Liberman invited Rabbi Finkelstein to his vacation home in marthas vineyard, Finkelstein refused because it was the 9 days and he was worried that his children would go swimming if he went on vacation in the 9 days. Thats how frum they were. Yet what happened to the following generations? Did the conservative movement succeed in making jews more religous? Well lets look at where it is today.

Now lets look at other controversies, Where talmidim of R Yonason Ebishitz accepted now? I;d say yes. how about the whole controversy of chasdim that were put in cherem and viewed as borderline kefira at the time? How about R Hirsch’s idea of torah em derech ertez? All those ideals and more we look at its offspring and we see did it stick? Did it bring people closer to torah judiasm?

Now lets look at religious zionism. Are its people keeping shabbos, kashrus, learning torah and being shomer torah umtizvas today? Look around and see. i think its even stronger and they are more ehrlich then they once were. Can one possibly call them not jews or kofrim? I’d bet even the briska rav or satmar wouldn’t really think so despite all that they say on the surface.

HaKatan, has a very unique way of twsiting things into a pretzel. He has very narrow rules as to what counts and what doesn’t. Everything is a deep thing and if you can’t twist out of a his pretzel you must be wrong. Some things in our torah are not just what it says. Its what you see too. The obvious stares at us in the face. Of course you can’t just go with feel good judaism . if something is assur and clearly stated you can’t defy that. But there is no clear out issur that says One cannot be zionsits. He is inferring it with lgoic. This is where you need to draw a line and follow your rav.

P.S. our torah isn’t limited to Brisk and the Hungarian R Hillel Lichtnestien talmidim. (Nowdays its kind of one group). As R Hutner said about Briska rav, “The torah is nisht gegebn uf har grezim” and I’d add neither was it given on ” Har Yoel”.

@ Hakatan

You wrote: We just read this past Shabbos that Hashem made us into a People at Har Sinai stating that we will be a “mamleches kohanim viGoy kadosh”,

This pasuk speaks to the status of the Jewish nation (Kadosh) and role of the Jewish Nation (mamlechis Kohanim. There was an existing nation being addressed here, no? But this is a minor point, because I think everyone (who is not secular) agrees that the Torah is essential (as in not incidental) to Jewish Nationhood.

You wrote: As opposed to being the Zionists’ active redefinition of Judaism (shared by the “Religious Zionists”, other than the “godless” part) to just another European-type godless nation (meaning common land, language and culture, etc.) whose nationhood is based in the portion of the holy land…

Do you have written evidence from recognized Dati Leumi Roshei Yeshiva to substantiate the above claim? If not, then it’s simply motzeh shem ra. Probably b’shogeg, but motzeh shem ra nevertheless.

You wrote: While all the gedolim have written that Zionism is against the Torah (and the Brisker Rav – not only the Satmar Rav – wrote that Zionism/its “State” is against “the entire Torah”

So, is it (1) “all the gedolim” or (2) the Satmar Rebbe and the Brisker Rav,

You wrote: you have an open example of Zionism being in violation of multiple of the 13 ikkarim (from Chabad org), including:
5. The imperative to worship G‑d exclusively and no foreign false gods.
7. The belief in the primacy of the prophecy of Moses our teacher.
8. The belief in the divine origin of the Torah.
9. The belief in the immutability of the Torah.
10. The belief in G‑d’s omniscience and providence.
11. The belief in divine reward and retribution.
12. The belief in the arrival of the Messiah and the messianic era.

Once again, either substantiate your claim that Religious Zionists reject the above ikrim or please do teshuva for motzeh shem ra.

@ Chaim87

You wrote: As R Hutner said about Briska rav, “The torah is nisht gegebn uf har grezim”

This is off the topic but I never heard this quote before. What do you think R Hutner meant by that?

@ YB

I am going to respond to your points on behalf of HaKatan (based on things he wrote). He is welcome to correct me if he thinks that I misunderstood or am misrepresenting his position.

You wrote: All your arguments are against the Zionists who were heretics and lived their life against torah.
But that was not the Q.

HaKatan wrote: “Religious Zionists” are of course not what you stated. Rather, as Rav Elchonon wrote, which holds true ever since, the “Religious Zionists” believe in both religion (Torah) and the idolatry of Zionism. They happen to be even more fanatical in their Zionism than are their secular counter-parts, because they worship Zionism “for real”. They literally hold that the “State” and everything about that “State” is holy, a”l.

“The idolatry of Zionism” means here to identify as a nation primarily based on a common ancestry, culture, language, and land. Furthermore, it means being lead by a political body representing it’s entire constituency (especially the majority secular one), hereafter “The State”. This is Nationalism. Being a secular Nationalist is kfira. Being a religious Nationalist and holding that “The State” is Kodesh is A”Z.

So per the above: All Zionism = Jewish Nationalism = Kfira or A”Z

The fact is that common ancestry (being descendants of Avroham, Yitzchok, and Yaacov), language (Lashon HaKadosh), and land (Eretz Yisroel) are not exclusively components of secular Nationalism but are, in fact, crucial components of our Jewish National identity is probably not lost on HaKatan. I think this is why he makes a point of writing in terms of “The State”.

I rather like your mashal of “ripping the shovel out of their hands”. I think it is a good mashal for what is probably the majority position.

Yankel Berel:
As mentioned, no less than the Brisker Rav stated openly that the establishment of the “State” is a kefirah in the entire Torah, and that would be even if the Chofetz Chaim were its Prime Minister. The entire Torah obviously includes all 13.

However, anyone can easily see that establishment of any state before Mashiach comes is a violation of at least:
8. The belief in the divine origin of the Torah.
9. The belief in the immutability of the Torah.
12. The belief in the arrival of the Messiah and the messianic era.

Hashem said that your are forsworn not to return to the land (certainly not en masse and with force and politically and against the nations – all of which the Zionists flagrantly violated) until I return you to the land.

Non Political:
These are obvious.
#7 is an easy one, as it happens. Rabbi Kook, in one of his many heretical statements he published, and one for which the Gerrer Rebbe specifically called him out, claimed that the atheist soccer players will be on a higher level than Moshe Rabbeinu.
#10 and 11 is also straight out contradicted by the “Jerusalem Program”, as mentioned. Claiming that the Jewish people are dependent on a safe and secure “State of Israel”, as the Zionists believe, is an obvious contradiction to sechar viOnesh.

Regarding:
“The fact is that common ancestry (being descendants of Avroham, Yitzchok, and Yaacov), language (Lashon HaKadosh), and land (Eretz Yisroel) are not exclusively components of secular Nationalism but are, in fact, crucial components of our Jewish National identity is probably not lost on HaKatan. I think this is why he makes a point of writing in terms of “The State”. ”

The point is that Zionism (including “Religious”) tries to change Judaism into a (godless, for secular flavors) nationalism, and this is heresy and idolatry.

Unlike secular nations, we do not have any of those components to make us a “nation”; rather, we are a people of the Torah (Jewish) religion. Most of us are indeed descendants of the avos. But geirim are not (simply speaking), yet they are also Jews as are descendants of the Avos. Lashon haKodesh is surely unique to us, as the lomdei Torah. But it is not our “national” ancient spoken language. Most Jews today speak the language of their country in which they reside (or Yiddish). Finally, Eretz Yisrael is the land to which we will be restored when Mashiach comes, and even before then there are some mitzvos that we can fulfill only in Eretz Yisrael. But it is not our homeland, birthplace, etc. unlike (liHavdil) the lands of secular nations.

@HaKatan
No its not nonsense. I don’t need to find a sefer. I found MESORA. Speak to Riyzna chasdim. (You made up this rule that I need to find a sefer).

RE EHS using “emotions”. And what do you think the holy satmar reba used? You think that was free from emotions?

i will ask the readers if they should trust HaKatan or R Moshe wolfson zl who said it was haschlata degula and shiveri kelim. Who was/is a bigger tzadi? you tell me if its “nonsense”?

@Non Political: I think R Hutner meant exactly how he said it. People nowadays think that we must follow Brisks ideals and style because they are pure. Noone is saying they aren’t pure. But they don’t decide everything in yddishkit. There are differing opinions and approaches that count as well. In other words the torah doesn’t stop on Har grezim. Just because the holy Birska rav zl held or did something doesn’t mean that klal yisroel has to do it.

You also talk way too deep for me. You are over analyzing zionsim with these deep thoughts. You need to take a step back. Most don’t and I don’t think ever thought so deep. Why is this like a PHD thesis can of ideology. Forgive me for saying you are getting carried away. So is Hakatan.

What is Zionism in simple terms? its that us jews have homeland run by other jews who won’t kill us like the Nazis YMS did and that those who are persecuted like the Soviet jews can be welcome. And that it be in Eretz yisroel. Thats all it is. Why are you making so many torahs out of this? And this in it of itself is not kefira. Many gedolim and ehrlicha jews hled of this such as Ryzhin and others.

Now was it abused by secular jews to throw off torah and try to shmad frum jews? yes it was. But its two separate things. the ideal itself which is to have a homeland and those running it who are ant torah. You’ll find that even people like the Imeri emes only opposed it because of the people running the show. Not because the idea of a home land was bad.

To recap: Rizyna chasdim always held ZIONISM = TORAH. And Mesora counts more than a sefer. Interestingly, that Hakatn won’t dispute that undeniable fact. Also interesting that R Moshe wolfson zl said different than hakatan . Who should we listen to?

HaKatan > They happen to be even more fanatical in their Zionism than are their secular counter-parts, because they worship Zionism “for real”.

you continue your circular writing, where you are using unclear terms and attack them. So far, I am presuming that you never read or taken a class from a religious zionist. Please prove me wrong and bring quotes (real, not taken out of context) from religious zionists you disagree with and discuss what you see as a problem there. If you consider them as avodah zorah and can’t open a sefer (*), maybe we can discuss R Soloveitchik, who is acknowledged as T’Ch even by those who disagree with him, and who is not 100% with everything that was done in Israel.

(*) R Eliezer is willing to produce magical cucumbers to demonstrate to R Akiva how this is done, even as that was chayav misa. So, if you ask your rov whether you can read seforim in order to argue with us, you might get permission.

@non political
I do not see in your post any response to my Q.
My Q pertains to the essence of self government before mashiach, according to katan.

Self gov by non zionist shomrei torah.
Is that against ikarei emuna ?

If yes, Which one and how so ?

@hakatan

“….. Establishment of any state before Mashiach comes , is a violation of :

8. The belief in the divine origin of the Torah.
9. The belief in the immutability of the Torah.
12. The belief in the arrival of the Messiah and the messianic era.

Hashem said that you are forsworn not to return to the land (certainly not en masse and with force and politically and against the nations – all of which the Zionists flagrantly violated) until I return you to the land….

[Hakatan to YB]
============================

Cannot understand your logic at all-
If someone sincerely believes that a certain food is permitted by the torah , while it really is prohibited,
DOES THAT CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF …
8. The belief in the divine origin of the Torah , and
9. The belief in the immutability of the Torah ???

Obviously those haredim [and many of the national religious] who support the existence and establishment of the medina do not consider this against the torah ??

Read all the posts on this thread , all of them keep claiming that the torah AGREES to Zionism and a medina.
You might argue that they are MISTAKEN in the way that they understand the torah ….
But REJECTION of the torah – man dechar shemei ???

Would you say that in each argument about the real pshat in torah that the mistaken opinion is in violation ikarei emuna 8 and 9 ???

——

Besides that , AVNEI NEZER [end of YD] clearly paskans that establishment of a medina before mashiach is not against halacha.

How can you say that someone who paskans not like DIVREI YOEL is kofer in 8 and 9 of the ikarim ???

Hafleh vafeleh !!! How could you even say that ???

——

And regarding ikar 12 –

How is establishment of medina a denial of mashiach ?? Why can’t they both exist ???

He still yearns for and believes in Mashiach who will restore the Bet hamikdash , metaher klal yisrael and meishiv them bitshuva, take away the lev even mibsarhem ,bring back malhut bet david , take away the nations’ hate of the yehudim , bring the shechina back down to this world and the kiyum of all of the nevu’ot of the nevi’im.

and in the meantime, while he awaits and yearns for all this , he brings parnasah for his family … and he governs himself too.
Does that HAVE TO BE contradictory ???
How so ?

.

@hakatan
The Steipler in Karyane DeIgrata VOL 1 clearly says the belief in the medina as athalta digeoulah ,while a big mistake [!] , is not kfirah.
Al pi ha’emet , It is a descent into a more dark form of galut than previous galuyot .
To experience a galut between our own errant and hateful brothers.
But this mistaken belief of athaltah d/g is definitely not kfira.

Please check inside the sefer.
It is not kfirah .

Black on white.
Its there.
——
None of the rabbanim in mainstream Orthodoxy .
None . [maybe some extremists within satmar]
Have ever declared wine touched by a fully frum believer in athalta d/g as Yayin Nesech .

None have ever declared kidushin formed with the edut of a fully frum believer in athalta d/g as invalid .
None have ever declared subsequent kidushin to the same kalla by a strange man as valid and binding .

All mainstream rabanim would not require a get , even lehumra , from the second mekadesh.

They would ALL , totally invalidate the second kidushin , on the basis of the validity of the first kidushin.
Which is valid only b/c of the edut of our fully frum athalta d/g believer.

EVEN IF OUR ATHALTA D/G BELIEVER IS AN EX SATMAR HASID WHO ONCE KNEW THE ‘TRUTH’ AND CHANGED HIS HASHKAFA.

So much for halacha’s acceptance of the so called ‘heresy’ of athalta d/g.

For contrast – lehavdil , if our ed for the first kidushin would be a fully mitsva observant conservative jew , or a fully mitsva observant member of Jews for “j” , it is clear that all Orthodox rabanim would invalidate the first kidushin and need a get from the second one.

Which gives a clear illustration that even those who do talk about ‘heresies’ , do so in a theoretical manner only , but not in practical hahacha manner.
Leharchik et ha’adam …
Etc .