Don’t build more galuyot.

יברכך השם מציון-….. Not from any other galus…

1. Regarding “Kever David”, it’s certainly a holy place, since so many thousands of Jews, over the course of many centuries, have sanctified it with their tehillim and tefillos and tears, but it is *not* David’s kever. It is *possible* that it’s over, or in the immediate vicinity of, an entrance to the tomb of the later kings of Beis Dovid, which was built somewhere in the western suburbs of Yerusholayim after the original royal tomb in Ir Dovid filled up. But it might be nothing but a place of Torah and Tefilah, with no graves at all.

2. Those who go to Uman for Rosh Hashono do so because Reb Nachman specifically asked his chassidim to do so, and promised that he would go to bat Above for anyone who comes. Therefore they cannot substitute some other place, whether in Eretz Yisroel or anywhere else. They are going to their rebbe, and he is not in some other place. It’s not for Rabbi Berger, whoever he is, to say that the same benefit can be had by going to “Kever Dovid”. Maybe it can and maybe it can’t, but there is no way he could know .

It is not so much the “Israel is in galus” as that Eretz Yisrael is occupied by some sometimes-nasty, and often annoying occupiers. While in some ways the zionists are better than the Brits or the Turks (and in some ways, not), it is still occupied.

Whose bashing anyone? I merely made a very simple, obvious and uncontroversial observation about galus.

You cannot be in golus in Eretz Yisroel when it’s under Jewish sovereignty and it doesn’t matter if it is run by tzadikim or reshoim. Examples of it being run by reshoim is most of malchei Yisroel in bayis rishon and the whole end of the chashmonaim dynasty and then the bais Hurdus.

You cannot be in golus in Eretz Yisroel when it’s under Jewish sovereignty and it doesn’t matter if it is run by tzadikim or reshoim. Examples of it being run by reshoim is most of malchei Yisroel in bayis rishon and the whole end of the chashmonaim dynasty and then the bais Hurdus.

This comes from someone who doesn’t realize that a loss of a beis hamikdash and countless tisha bavs in tzar is galus

Oy how far we have fallen

The beis hamildash and hashems shechina isn’t a plus

Coffee Addict
Who said everything is perfect already? Who doesn’t want the bais hamikdash built?
All I’m saying is that the term galus in the Torah and neviim all refer to yidden living or not living in Eretz Yisroel under their own sovereignty , like the rambam says that we celebrate Chanukah שחזרה מלכות לישראל יתר ממאתים שנה. The rambam is Clearly including the bais hurdus even though it was a disaster.
May we merit to see the binyan bais hamikdash in our days.

Galus Mitzrayim was in Mitzrayim. Galus Bavel was in Bavel. Galus Edom was and is everywhere. So, where was Galus Yavan? Did we go to Greece? We were in galus right here in Eretz Yisroel. Although galus is also physical, it can be spiritual too without actually leaving E.Y.

Joseph
Jewish sovereignty includes even reshoim like most of our rulers in the first bais hamikdash under malchei Yisroel and some from malchei Yehuda as it says clearly in nach. Same goes for the second bais hamikdash under the herodian dynasty.
As far as today, why is it against Halacha? Because one posek said so? They have to go with your posek??? You do realize that not everyone agrees with the Satmar rav.

Coffee addict
Of course we want the bais hamikdash to be built and whenever we had sovereignty we made sure to build it. After all it is one of the taryag mitzvohs, I’m sure there was never even a hava Amina that when Klal Yisroel comes back that they wouldn’t be mekayem this fundamental mitzva.

Of course we want the bais hamikdash to be built and whenever we had sovereignty we made sure to build it. After all it is one of the taryag mitzvohs, I’m sure there was never even a hava Amina that when Klal Yisroel comes back that they wouldn’t be mekayem this fundamental mitzva.

However now we have sovereignty but we decide not to build it?

Meaning we’re still in galus (even if it’s a galus caused by our own people)

Joseph
Reb Aharon never said that it’s against halacha to have a medinah today.
The point is that you cannot expect other people to only accept your poskim’s psak.

Manitou,

You’re missing the point if you think the problem of no beis hamikdash is not performing a mitzvah

AviK, their Rebbe is not on the bookshelves, he is in Uman, just as the Ovos and Imohos are in Chevron, and Rochel is in Beis Lechem. A person’s nefesh remains with the body and is aware when people visit and talk to him.

The Zohar says that when the world needs rain we take a sefer torah to the cemetery to alert the people who lie there, and then they will go to Chevron to alert those who lie there, and together they will go up to the higher worlds and alert their neshomos Above, who will intercede with Hashem and ask for rain.

manitou, Golus Yovon was not about loss of sovereignty, because we never had sovereignty before it. The second beis hamikdosh was built under Persian sovereignty, which lasted until Alexander took it from them, and then we were under Macedonian and Seleucid sovereignty long *before* Antiochus the 4th and his gezeros. Golus Yovon only starts then.

So it is not about sovereignty but about a beis hamidkosh. Golus Yovon was the period when the BHMK was turned into a temple of avoda zara, and ended when it was liberated and returned to regular service, even though the war continued for several more years.

Rav Aharon said the reason is because it is against Halacha. As did the other Gedolei Yisroel who voted against it, such as Rav Chaim Ozer, the Brisker Rav, Rav Elchonon and the Chazon Ish. Just because the second tier rabbis “outvote” the Gedolei Yisroel is irrelevant even though the organization unfortunately is run by quantitative majority.

But all that’s because the point, anyways. According to Rav Aharon, Rav Chaim Ozer, the Brisker Rav, Rav Elchonon and the Chazon Ish, what I wrote earlier in this thread is correct.

That is certainly not the only reason. But regarding the ג׳ שבועות, everyone holds from them except the Zionists. This isn’t a Satmar position. This issue and point has already been discussed extensively on this forum. I’ve demonstrated this point on multiple old threads and won’t repeat the same. Search this forum for the three oaths and the Maharal.

Avi K
While all the points you brought regarding the ג שבועות are true that most don’t hold its valid now, the main point should be that even for the ones like Joseph that do hold of it that doesn’t give them the right to call all those who disagree a rasha. Its like an ashkenazi calling a Sephardi a rasha for not paskening like the rama.

manitou, ” The rambam says שחזרה מלכות לישראל יתר ממאתים שנה”

Yes, what about it? How does this support your claim? Yes, after Chanukah there was a brief period of Jewish sovereignty, but so what? That isn’t and can’t be why Golus Yovon ended then, because there was no Jewish sovereignty before Golus Yovon, and yet the Golus only started when Antiochus 4 captured the Beis Hamidosh.

Milhouse
I don’t understand what you’re saying, the rambam says that we celebrate Chanukah that we regained our sovereignty. We were under Greek rule and the chashmonaim took over. Galus yavan was the period before, when the Greek ruled over us in Eretz Yisrael. My point was then and now that it is not considered by the neviim and Chazal to be in golus when we are living in Eretz Yisroel under Jewish sovereignty even if the rulers are as bad as achav or hurdus.
As a side note it is absurd to say that today’s democratically elected leaders in Eretz Yisrael are reshoim when they are overseeing the funding of so much Torah.

manitou, “Galus yavan was the period before, when the Greek ruled over us in Eretz Yisrael.”

That is not true. The vast majority of the time when the Greeks ruled over us in EY was not golus. Between the first churban and Chanukah there was never a time when we had sovereignty, and yet we were not in golus. Therefore sovereignty or the lack thereof <i>can’t</i> define golus.

AviK, in Bayit Sheni we received <i>none</i> of the Land, but nor did we agree to give any of it up. And yes, the KG said it was better to have nothing but keep our claim on everything, than to get something at the price of giving up the rest. Soon Moshiach will come and we’ll get the whole thing, but how can he do that if we’ve sold it?

The whole rationale of the zionists who accepted the partition plan was that Moshiach is never coming, so our claim on the whole Land is worthless and meaningless, and by giving it up in return for some of the Land we’d be exchanging nothing for something.

AviK, in Europe we also had internal autonomy. The kehilla managed its own affairs and so long as the taxes were paid the government did not interfere. That is not sovereignty.

Re Resh Lokish, I had a quick look at the amud and couldn’t find anything like your claim. I see RL complaining that the Jews of Bovel didn’t come up with Ezra, but I don’t see anything about conquering any territory, let alone more of it. Because of course Ezra & Co didn’t conquer anything at all. They merely moved to EY to live there under foreign rule, just like yidden did under the Ottomans.

Avi, your last comment doesn’t even challenge Milhouse’s underlying point.