- This topic has 204 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 4 hours, 42 minutes ago by .
-
Posts
-
a good tziyur for what im saying is if lets say the ben ish chai told you personally to do xyz, you would have to listen unless…
@somejewiknow
Thats right and if a tzadik says it’s the Torah then that’s what it is . So if rizyhin says this is the Torah that supports Zionism then that’s what it is.
Re shluchan aruch, I told you this isn’t a halcha question. Jews follow the 4 chelekim of shulchan aruch for halcha and the 5h one for hashkafa. That’s what this is. Its source is from Gemara many that were quoted here. But a tzadik need not qoute the Gemara or defend it. If he is a tzadik that’s enough. And if ten all say like him that further enforces it.
Vyaol Moshe isn’t a world wide accepted hashkafa. That was the Satmar Reba opinion. He isn’t the shulchan aruch . Other tzadkim can argue and they can argue without answering him or proving . They can just say they argueSo to conclude no rizhin isn’t a made up Judaism . It’s Torah Judaism and Zionism is In our Torah.
@
yankel berelBullies make up their own rules. Some Jew decided that it’s halcha and there is shulchan aruch. And if you argue you need to defend yourself in Sefer. And then he decides who is good and who is not. He makes things up.
Our Torah tells us with hashkafa you listen to your gadol and it need not be that he says a thesis from Gemara. If he is a tzadik and a gadol that’s enough. (Of course there are plenty of answers that they have but some Jew won’t accept that, so let’s keep it simple and say when a tzadik says a hashkafa thing that’s what it is)
Chaim > It makes you wonder if perhaps a bully tactic of spamming is being used.
I admit I never saw them together in one room. But I think they are 2 different humans, just happened to have drank from the same source. If they tell us how is their rosh yeshiva, or their rosh yeshiva’s rosh yeshiva, you can then go and talk to the latter and see whether he actually holds everything they do or they misinterpreted their teacher. One of them is actually responsive to the arguments. but you can try asking chatgpt.
Somejewiknow and HaKatan are likely different people. HaKatan is most likely the reincarnation of a user who used to post here called Joseph. He and that prior user both have/had Neturei Karta/Satmar leanings, if not being outright supporters of such. His arguments tend to be the same statements we’ve heard on this forum before (quoting REW, SR, GR, Brisk, etc.) and from every other Charedi organization. Most unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be any substance to those arguments, because there is no elaboration thereupon (by the way, the Aguda engages in the same tactics). That was the reason why I wrote those long winded posts – to attempt to force a substantive, material response. As of yet, neither one has answered substantively and I suspect they won’t. “מסית ומדיח” and weak arguments from authority is probably all we’ll get from them.
Somejewiknow, based on his responses, is most lkely a knee-jerk reactionist Satmar Chossid (his constant use of “מסית ומדיח” makes this fairly clear). FWIW, I suspect he posts on Reddit under a similar sounding name (with the same writing style).
I don’t think either one of them are using bullying tactics. Their tactic seems to be continuing to repeat variations on the same thing until you lose your patience, at which point they look sane and you look loopy for losing your patience.
On a different note:
@somejewiknow – If the statement “any masis imadiach can say “well, rabbi, that’s what YOU say! haw haw haw!” is directed at me (and I suspect that is the case), well, a few things: (1) That’s an ad hominem attack – now try arguing substantively (you have not done so yet); (2) what I said about you and HaKatan answering to הקב״ה after 120 stands; (3) again, you’ve demonstrated an inability to deal with the various challenges raised against Satmar and those like them in this forum.The R”Z community has provided lengthy תשובות, שיעורי תורה וכו׳ regarding Zionism. They provide all the reasons for “deviating” (as you would call it) from the “established” precedent and norms, even though they don’t have reason to do so. You just ignore such because you don’t like it – and because your Rebbe’s שיטה insists that such opinions are heresy.
Answer Non Political’s question about רב שלמה אבנר or רב אליעזר מלמד. Let’s add רב רימון and the ראשי ישיבה of ישיבת מרכז הרב. I suspect you would question the Torah they teach, as well as their legitimate authority.
To be even more blunt (and keep in mind the internet doesn’t forget): Would you consider wine I’ve touched, or wine that others who are R”Z have touched, or wine that those who have disagreed with you here, to be יין נסך? Answer the question. Yes or no will do. That will tell us everything we need to know. Keep in mind that such a thing has never happened.
my last statement was a response to chaim87, and that is why i address the response to him at the top of that comment. However, I wasn’t per se claiming he is or is not a masis imadiach, rather I was pointing out the obligation specifically to follow what the torah teaches as is well established in our mesorah, as shas and poskim.
to reiterate, Jews are obligated to keep that Torah. Not because it was taught by a specific person, rather because that is what Hashem told us to do at Sinai. Now, there is much to add about the obligation to listen to certain established authorities, most obviously Moshe Rebaini. So too the aforementioned shas and poskim. But, the point I made before and would expect any Jewish person to agree with is that the authority of those authorities is specifically because they are teaching the Torah that G-d gave us at Sinai.
I don’t understand why you wrote “try arguing substantively (you have not done so yet)”. Is the above not the most substantive thing?
Regarding the specific authority of the Satmar Rebbe. There are two parts to that conversation: 1) the authority of the previously established Torah he mentions and 2) the authority of his own established expertise and/or influence. As outlined in SA, a “Gadol” is someone who is greater in expertise and/or influence (students). A “Gadol Hador” would be someone who is the top-tier in his generation as per that mesure. Again, this is not me, this is Shulchan Aruch.
While there is indeed an argument to be made that the Satmar Rebbe has significant expertise and influence and would be considered the “greatest in his generation” by either of those measures. I don’t hinge my argument here on that, if only because it is not a necessary point to the core of the argument. Additionally, by framing this conversation that is really about Judaism vs clear heresy as a conversation about the Satmar Rebbe dishonestly turns it into an argument over shitas or schools or whatever.
The sefer Vayoel Moshe is explicitly a halachik sefer that was written (as per the author) for all of klal yisroel. That being said, if we ignore the authority of the author, we are still obligated to the sources he brings and perhaps obligated in the authors conclusions.
It goes without saying that the Satmar Rebbe didn’t say anything novel ,neither in his sources nor in his conclusions, as there is much documentation of his points in earlier works. However, what he did (attempt to) do was distill the halachik axios and apply them to the post ’48 reality of zionist heresy in the form of a self-procaimed “Jewish” state. In case there was any ambiguity as time went on, the Satmar Rebbe again published a follow up “Al Hageila. val HaTemira” in ’68, strengthening the Torah and halacha in light of the heretics and their violence.
The length of Vayoel Moshe is in part to the authors constant self questioning of his sources and conclusions as he asks many of the common challanges to what was written before him. He spends most of the sefer “second-guessing” each step. You, @zsk, wrote “The R”Z community has provided lengthy…” but I have asked multiple times for any meaningful Torah response to the halachik conlusions of Vayoel Moshe. I have not recieved one from you. To be clear, I would expect such a resource to have read and dealt with the pilpul of Vayoel Moshe both because of the authors lifelong expertise in the subject as well as to produce a meaningful work. What I mean to say is that if someone says “Jews are not bound by the shevios because the non-jews broke theirs”, they would need to at least address the clear multiple responses to that which are in Vayoel Moshe. I suppose, I could compile an incredible pro-heresy (zionist) “sefer” by just compiling all of the Satmar Rebbe’s kashas, and not include his answers, but that would be very dishonest and hollow.
While I don’t learn Torah from kofrim, I am still bound by – lehavdil – the shulchan aruch even if they quote it. So too, if a kofer (chalila they should learn) mentions a Torah source that informs something about the status of zionism or out relationship to it, I would of course be obligated to those Torah sources as per the Jewish mesorah.
Regarding yayin nesech, none of this conversation has to do with “what I consider”. Ask your rabbi what the halach is. As per the Satmar Rebbe and his psak in Vayoel Moshe, I never heard him paskin that R”Z have a din ovdei avoda zureh. But, you would have to ask a Satmar chussid who might know if their rebbe addressed your question.
@ZSK
I prefer that other route. Philosophy and substance can always be debated and twisted against you. I like to stick to a narrow pointer first and then you can expand. For starters when you say that no true gadol ever held zionsim is al pi torah and then you find a whole chasdius of leaders clearly gedolim who said over and over and over that zionism is al pi torah, thats where a conversation needs to start. To say utter nonsense that its just stories or they didn’t publish sefarim nor refute it, doesn’t change facts. Every single rziyna chusid head and know this. Its an undisputable fact that they held of Zionism.
And then there are also tzadkim who i heard from in todays days that it was a haschlata degula. These tzadkim heard of the stamar reba, r Elchonan and Brisk. To say they don’t count or only work with emotions on such big tzadkim is borderline kefira. Who are you to know better?And so once we establish that zionsim is a machlokos then one can fairly argue that one side seems to have more soruces and be more grounded. But without knocking the other side or defaming jews.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.