Derech Emuna settlement

Not mixed college, mixed high school**

Ujm, I spent the best summers of my life in camp Ohr Shraga

Avirah, Rav Pam, Rav Moshe Schain (Ruchoma Shain’s husband) and Rav Avigdor Miller all went to mixed colleges (CCNY). Rav Soloveichik and the last Lubavitcher Rebbe also did (the University of Berlin). The Ner Yisrael yeshiva has an arrangement with Johns Hopkins. Yeshivat Chaim Berlin has also always sent men to colleges.

Avi, there’s a vast difference between sending a child to a mixed high school versus an adult attending a mixed college or workplace.

Colleges that Avigdor Miller and Lubavicher Rebbe attended probably did not have a lot of women at the time. It is a known social observations that groups with less women are more moral (i.e. women are in demand and can insist on their rules).

There is also a difference between attending a local college with kids attending classes and going home v. shipping kids to a campus.

Btw, we need to have some understanding what is a child that needs to be protective. From ketubot, a father can send a 6-y.o to earn money, a 12.5 y.o. girl can get married on their own. With this in mind, one can argue that a high-schooler, and surely a college student, are “legal adults”. Of course, we should be mindful of downsides that we know are happening.

Ujm, I will admit that there’s a difference between an adult being in a mixed environment where socializing is avoidable; much like many workplaces. many good jews went to Brooklyn college and held their nose; they came for what they needed and left. High school is a different story; almost nobody who went is saved from sin. It’s the formative years when hormones are raging and socializing is a huge part of the school life.

Avi, it was a typo, i fixed it.

I don’t believe the story about the brisker rov and chazon ish. Where did you see it/hear it from? Briskers keep a very clear log of stories; if such a thing happened, i would have heard it (the other half of my rebbeim are briskers). Not only do they record stories meticulously, my rosh yeshiva says that rav berel, when saying a story, would use the same exact words with the same exact inflection every single time. If one time he used a different word, the talmidim would discuss it!

You left out other dinim which support the mitzvah of yishuv EY, including a spouse being able to force the other to move there. Rav Moshes peshara is said in many achronim to answer these contradictions. Worth noting that some rishonim don’t hold of these dinim(or many of them), there’s tosfos, rabbeinu chananel, etc.

The megilas esther writes that the rambam didn’t hold it’s a chiyuv. Assur latzeis is a gemara. Different din altogether; it’s not an obligation to go and live there, but if you’re there, you’re not allowed to leave, because it’s disrespecting the opportunity Hashem gave to you too be mekayam mitzvos and be in the paltrin shel melech. Or because of Rav Moshes pshat. Either way achronim assume that the rambam held it’s not a chiyuv.

Where is there hatred and if there is, why is it baseless? If i were to have ill feelings towards our misguided brethren, would they be without cause? I just gave a long list of reasons why it’s wrong and against the Torah. Hating someone for going against Hashem isn’t baseless.

“Nowadays yeshivos only allow touro/other “Jewish” colleges.”
Not Ner Yisrael.

Ujm- I don’t know where the Teshuvah is, and therefore haven’t seen it inside. I owe Rav Henkin the courtesy of learning his Teshuvah inside to see what he has to say; the context etc. before concluding that he’s “unqualified for anything serious” as you write.
Keep in mind “Bnei Bnom” is a Shu”t Sefer, and as such Rav Henkin responded to questions posed to him. Assuming that Rav Henkin concludes that you say Zatzal, you don’t have a Taaynah on Rav Henkin, just on the one who asked it.
Truth be told, I find it very ironic that you’re so bothered by the lack of Kovod Hatorah in this Teshuvah. You’re willing to adress Rav Henkin, who was a huge Talmid Chochom as “Hertzl Henkin” and “no more than a little joker” because you disagree with his Hashkafah, yet you don’t think Rav Henkin can discuss calling the Satmar Rebbe Zatzal.
Or even further, some in the Chareidi world wouldn’t refer to Rav Kook as Zatzal (including probarly the Satmar Rebbe), even though he was a tremendous Talmid Chochom because they disagree with his Hashkafah. Are you as ouraged by these people? If you saw a Teshuvah by a Chareidi Gadol discussing calling Rav Kook Zatzal. Or Rav Shlomo Goren Zatzal. Or any of the Gedolim who’s Hashkafah you think is terrible. Would you be as upset, and dismiss that Gadol as unqualified for Psak. If the answer is no, then you have absolutely no Taaynah on Rav Henkin.
You can’t have it both ways.

Can someone clarify what was the thinking of Rav’s son who sent his son to a co-ed school, esp if, as mentioned above, against the wishes of the grandfather? Were these some ideological considerations or practical ones?

Not all teshuvos are from submitted shailos, but let’s say a person wrote a shailah to a rov asking what the best ice cream is; does he have to answer it? What if he asked “is it allowed to kill my neighbor when I’m mad at him”? There are some questions that are illegitimate. Choosing to write answers and publish them means that you take the question seriously. Henkin “grappled’ with this question, because a tzadik, a kadosh vetahor who survived the concentration camps and learned and taught more torah than henkin with his tiny yarmulke followers can ever imagine. He also literally built up half of of klal yisroel when henkin was a child.

Comparing the satmar rov with henkin is like comparing me in 8th grade biology to jonas salk. that itself is insulting. It sounds like much of your jewish education came from online forums; in the yeshiva world, henkin’s name is not even known. In the dati leumi world, henkin was a posek, but even they acknowledge the greatness of the satmar rov as a giant among giants, and would not compare the two.

As for rabbi kook; some do not want to write zatzal because of the damage he caused, leading to the henkins, riskins, lamms, stavs, and melameds of the world, which undermine torah and mesorah.

> Henkin “grappled’ with this question

Just guessing: maybe this was a common question among his hevrah and he thought it important to give this answer in public and explain it so that they understand.

> some do not want to write zatzal because of the damage he caused,

R Yochanan was not sure until his death whether he made a huge aveirah by asking for too little from Vespasian. Sofek on his zatzal also? what about crowds that became or stayed observant because of Rav Kook? Don’t count?

You’re right that i don’t agree with calling rabbo yoshe ber soloveitchik by that epithet. None of my rebbeim did, and one was very against it, quoting his rebbe, rav simcha sheps, as throwing a cup of orange juice at a talmid who said it in his shiur (rav sheps was diabetic and kept the juice there in case his sugar went low). Rav belsky respected his learning, too, but explained that the gedolim were upset at him for not giving any tochacha. I’m not sure if rabbi soloveitchik bought into nationalism either; I’ve seen different versions of it, but using kiekeergard to explain adam harishon is enough reason for me not to accept him as authoritative.

Also, i do not engage in making fun of rabbis,even those who I don’t think deserve that title. Im officially a “rabbi” but I don’t call myself one. To me that title has a status that i do not possess.

As for comparing, I’m quick to discount a young rabbi writing teshuvos (he was, it seems, in his 30s) having the gall to insult the satmar rov, while people on the same level as rabbi kook were hesitant to say zatzal – it’s not me who made that assertion.

In terms of damage; if rabbi kook would see what his movement led to, the lack of tznius, the far lefy LGBT invoking him, the movies and TV chevra, the mixed army (he passed away before the state and said that he was certain that everyone would become frum very soon…his predictions about that and moshiach coming were clearly wrong), i think he would have changed his mind. I also think it’s clear that his time spent on haskalah ideology, which stressed nationalism at the time in Europe, directly led to his own jewish nationalism. Grafting on avodah zara on to Torah is a grave insult.

The satmar rov never discouraged aliyah. Ever daven jn satmar kn yerushalayim? It’s pretty big. That’s one of the big lies that are told about the satmar rov; it ranks up there with the “don’t let the goyim see that we’re against the state and if a goy is anti israel he must be antisemitic!!”, and that he was affiliated with or led to Nk.

None of that is true. The satmar rov said that mass allyah, at once, is assur. He also said that it’s for people who are fitting to live in a holy place. A derelict man doesn’t belong in a yeshiva,a sinner doesn’t belong in eretz yisroel; the land doesn’t tolerate sinfullness, and it’s the reason we’re in Galus to begin with. He aaid it’s a madrega. Many mitzvos are madregoa. Wearing tefilin the whole day should be a chiyuv, but we don’t do it because we’re not fit for it. Same thing with yishuv eretz yisroel; he didn’t invent the idea either.

> rabbi kook would see what his movement led to, the lack of tznius,

Do we know that? what would have happened without him? Maybe, same people would end up in kibutzim and there would still be a commi-socialist state in Israel. Same, as people complain about some Chabad baalei teshuva behaving inappropriately. Maybe their alternative was to be in drug rehabs or gender studies before they bumped into a shaliach on campus. (hope, I am equal opportunity offender here).

If you blame R Kook for admiring Jews playing soccer on shabbos, what did he do while he lived in more observant places in Europe: did he encourage observant Jews to play soccer even on chol? If not, maybe you should not complain.

The imrei emes also said that rabbi kook calls “that which is tamei, tahor and that which is tahor tamei” even though truthfully it was obvious… Just sometimes you need a gadol to say something to get us out of the brain fog of the yatzer hora.

Want to know other things he said that weren’t daas torah? He called Rembrandt, a goy who was not a 7 mitzvos person, and who drew many untznius paintings…a tzadik! Because he had one portrait of the tosfos yom tov. He writes in “oros” that the neshomos of the secular are “yoser mesukanos” (exact quote) because they yearn for the land… That great egel hazahav.

Avira> He called Rembrandt, .. a tzadik! Because he had one portrait of the tosfos yom tov

first, this is not the reason R Kook might have used, at least in the only source I found. Could you please elaborate?

Rembrand’s student van Hoogstraten painted Tosfos Yomtov and called him ‘Old Man in a Window.’

Rembrandt etched his neighbor Chacham Menashe B’ Israel – and seemingly did several illustrations to Menashe’s sefer. There are also interesting hidden parallels: Menashe brings only one of several ways how “mane tekel fares” might have looked on the wall – and that is how Rembrandt painted them a couple of years ago.

Zushy- Just to add to your list.
Rav Isser Zalman Meltzer was very close to Rav Kook and once told Rav Chaim Ozer “We are only Gedolim untill we come to Rav Kook’s front door”. He also gave a Hesped for Rav Kook.
Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank was very close to Rav Kook and had a “Talmid Chaver” sort of relationship with Rav Kook.
Rav Elyashiv was approached by one of the editors of “Otzar Mifarshei Hatulmud” who refused to quote Pshatim of Rav Kook in the Sefer; and was therefore fired from his job. Rav Elyashiv responded “Rav Kook was an Ish Kadosh. I would have fired you also”.
According to Rav Nosson Kamenetsky, Rav Yaakov said about Rav Kook that he was “A Gaon and a Tzaddik”.

more stories that could have been completely made-up; not accusing you, but whomever it is you’re reading from. Zionists are known to make up stories about rabbonim; manachem kasher is one example. Rabbi yoshe ber soloveitchik met rabbi kook in eretz yisroel, and told an interviewer that he was not impressed with him in learning, and that he was an interesting, mystical personality. For the crowd who accepts rabbi yoshe ber, this is pretty significant. And it’s in written record.

The only source you have mentioned in this last post is r. nosson kamenetzky (not exactly accepted as reliable, as it happens to be…people whose books are banned I don’t trust that much, but I digress) – when did he hear that from rav yaakov, and where did he write it? in making of a gadol? Perhaps rav yaakov said it in passing, before many things came to light.

A similar story is the lubavitcher rebbe. At first, it was only the satmar rov and chazon ish who saw through him. Then everyone else understood; some after his petirah, some before, but at this point the yeshivos all basically agree on him. Rav Pam, for instance, originally said not to get involved in what rav shach was saying in eretz yisroel, that it isn’t meant for us, but then changed his mind later on; same with rav avigdor miller, who used to praise him, but stopped when information became more available.

It’s not like today when we can google “controversial statements made by rabbi kook” and find it instantly.

In contrast, if you want more sources – rav elchonon writes that rabbi kook is a rasha in kovetz maamarim. A big sefardi beis din in yerushalaim said that he was “grabbed by the sitra achra” in their printed cherem. The steipler in kiryana de’igarsa says in a letter that one can send a kid without an alternative to merkaz harav “despite the fact that it was started by rabbi kook”. So do you really think that the list of gedolim who you claim were over the moon for rabbi kook really said that?

The first wave of awareness came with the circulation of “oros me’ofel”, where he says the line about secular, ochlei nevelos, mechalelei shabbos, kofrim baShem, that they are spiritually greater than the frum, who are complacent about the building of the land-god avodah zara.

Avira, how did so much information about him only become available recently?

It is true that Zionist-leaning sources sometimes distort things to fit their agenda, but this is also true sometimes with ant-Zionist sources. Many anti-Zionist publications, for example will claim that all Gedolim were against the state, completely ignoring Rav Dessler’s letter (Michtav Meliyahu volume 3, page 352), The Tzitz Eleizer’s Teshuvah, the Ponivitzer Rav’s positive view, as well as the many other Gedolim who viewed it positively. With Rav Kook as well, read any Neturei Karta publication; they pretend Rav Kook was a pariah rejected by all the Gedolim. To pretend that distortion only happens in one direction is just silly and untrue.

About Rav Yoshe Ber, i heard a completely different version of what he said. I heard that he said that he wasn’t impressed by Rav Kook’s scholarship, but he was impressed by his Tzidkus. This changes the whole picture. If it’s in writing though, then i would love to see it inside. where is it written? Also, keep in mind that Rav Yoshe Ber delivered a Shiur titled “Remembering Rav Kook” in which he praises Rav Kook and discusses the great contributions he made to the Jewish world (the Shiur can be found on YUTorah). Rav Herschel Schachter a close Talmid of the Rav often quotes Rav Kook, as well.

It is funny you are accusing Rav Nosson Kamenetsky of not being reliable being that he spent decades painstakingly doing research for “The Making of a Gadol”, making sure his information was accurate. The fact that it was banned has nothing to do with the credibility of the book; it’s because some of the Gedolim felt that some of the stories should not be published because people might interpret them in a bad light. It seems, however, that there were Kanoim who spread lies about the book to some of the Gedolim, including telling them that Rav Nosson continued to distribute the book after they told him not to (listen to “Making of a Ban” by Rav Nosson Kamenetsky (on YUTorah)). Incidentally, Rav Moshe Shternbuch, who you quoted earlier in this thread, thought highly of the book and encouraged people to read it. As did Rav Zelik Epstein ZT”L. The quote can be found in “Making of a Gadol, page 1087).

I am in fact familiar with what Rav Elchonon writes; however he is clear from the language of the letter that he is writing this in only in response to the fact that “It is well known that he [Rav Kook] supports Keren Hayesod”. It is clear, however, that contrary to what many people thought, Rav Kook did not support Keren Hayesod. As such, Rav Elchanan would not have wrote what he wrote.
The Sephardi Beis Din may have put Rav Kook in Cherem; as many Kanooim did, but the views of the Gedolei Hador matter much more. Rav Ovadya Yosef, the leading Sefardi Posek, quotes Rav Kook all the time in his Seforim, giving him honorable titles.
Where does the Steipler write the comment you wrote? Anyway, it’s clear that Ruba Diruba of the Gedolei Yisroel viewed Rav Kook as a Gadol; not necessarily did they agree with his Hashkfah, but they viewed him as a great Gadol. You’re assuming that they would have been Chozer, but i don’t see any reason to say assume that.

About the Lubavicher Rebbe, many Gedolim were Machshiv him, including Rav Avigdor Miller who equated him with the Satmar Rebbe. See this quote
“Look, if you advance beyond that stage, then all Rebbes become “My Rebbe.” All Rebbes! The Satmerer Rebbe! Ahh! Zol ehr lang leiben! He’s a wonderful man. A big warrior; and he accomplished for us so much. The Lubavitcher Rebbe, zol ehr lang leiben! He accomplished so much and he is accomplishing. They should both be our Rebbes” (Toras Avigdor)
What makes you say that they were Chozer?

UJM- It can be found in “An Angel Among Men”, a biography on Rav Kook.

Now on to the spin off:
“rashis tzmichas geulosienu,” which someone here said even R’ Isser Zalman and R’ TPF used, shocks me. Because if you delve into it, what they’re saying is that the geulah will come THROUGH the state of Israel. Which means that the State will be the impetus for kibbutz goliyos, and then Moshiach will come.
But that’s a direct contradiction to “achakeh low bchol yom sheyavoi ” because if it comes THROUGH the state, then naturally it won’t happen in one second. It will take years until a state builds up. But if we’re waiting for any day, then the kibbutz goliuyos could happen in one second, al kanfei nesharim, and will have nothing to do with the state.