- This topic has 285 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Daas Yovhi: sorry, but your argument is pure sophistry. Every day now, people are getting stabbed that has nothing,zip,nada,to do with the Har Habayis discussion. As many others have said, the provocation is that we, as the Jewish people,exist and that we as jews, have come back to live in our ancient homeland, the gift from the Almighty.
It never ceases to amaze me how the same people who will go on a crusade for safety in so many places (smoke detectors, vaccines, and metzitza bi’peh all come to mind) will endanger themselves and others with such completely disregard for safety and human life whenever Zionism is introduced into the equation.
To all those who insist “they hate us anyway, it can’t make the situation any worse”:
Of course they hate us. And of course they wish us harm. But this hatred, along with the actions that unfortunately stem from it, is not static; it has peaks and ebbs. The security situation was worse during the second intifada than it is now now, and it was better three years ago than it is today.
These ebbs and peaks are caused by many different factors, many of which are beyond our control. But one of these factors is the actions of the Jews. Remember, the spark that set off the second intifada was Sharon’s visit to HHB. If he hadn’t made that visit, things may have ended very differently.
Of course, the terrorists are the one who bear responsibility of terrorism; but those who enable or provoke them are not entirely blameless.
AviK:
MW13, please post the exact quote in Hebrew where Rav Nevantzahl says that non-Jews “own” the site.
All I did was copy and paste a story from the News section of this website; if you would like a clarification or proof of authenticity, you’re gonna have to take it up with them.
DY, our very existence “provokes” terror. You have joined the ranks of our enemies by blaming us for anti-Semitism.
Just out of curiosity, what about those who blame the architects of the Oslo accords for the second intifada? Would you similarly accuse them of “joining our enemies by blaming Jews for anti-Semitism”?
Some criticism is constructive; don’t just reflexively bury it by labeling it “joining the enemy”.
Rav Baruch Ashlag (son of the Sulam) says that bitachon also means that one must have faith in himself
Foolishly endangering oneself and others must never, ever be confused with bravery. It is nothing more than stupidity, stupidity of the worst and most dangerous kind.
ROB, for the umpteenth time, yes, they hate us, yes, sometimes they kill us. With more provocation, though, they do it more.
To borrow an idea from Syag (http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/bending-to-our-will#post-582892):
Avi, ROB, Sam, ZD, is it okay for frum Jews to act like jerks (putting aside midos) in a bowling alley, gym, etc., since they hate us anyways?
A quick clarification on a point which is consistently being glossed over by the advocates of ascending HHB:
Nobody is suggesting that the sole reason Arabs attack us is due to Jewish provocations. That is quite obviously just not true. However, it should be equally obvious that Jewish provocations will lead to an increase in Arab attacks.
So all these stories of unprovoked Arab attacks do not disprove that more Jewish provocations will bring about still more Arab violence, and increase the danger to Jewish safety and Jewish lives.
But really, I think bja613 made a point worth reiterating: Why WOULD somebody go up on HHB? Even if one would not be dissuaded by the overwhelming majority of the Gedolei HaPoskim that this is an issur kurrais, and even if one somehow does not think that Jewish provocations will lead to an increase in Arab attacks against us; what exactly is this person gaining?
Is it really worth all those risks for no discernible reward?
One can go to the Har Habyis without fanfare.
What would be the point?
Daas Yochid: OK , your explanation accepted although I disagree.
mw13: Some of your statements are factually incorrect but this is not what I want to discuss. The simple fact is that unless you keep on showing that you are the “baalbos”, you lose your rights. If we forbid jews to go into he Har Habayis, our rights to that piece of land will be lost and, soon our right to any piece of land in Israel will be lost.Principles are important.
Posession is 9/10 of the law
Why do innocent babies have to die for your farkrumte principles? Why do children have to become orphans for your false ideology?
ROB:
mw13: Some of your statements are factually incorrect but this is not what I want to discuss.
If you believe anything I said to be “factually incorrect”, feel free to show your proof of the true facts. But kindly do not cast aspersions if you cannot back them up.
The simple fact is that unless you keep on showing that you are the “baalbos”, you lose your rights. If we forbid jews to go into he Har Habayis, our rights to that piece of land will be lost
We have already lost our right to ascend HHB. This right was not taken away by the Arabs, it was taken away by Hashem and His Torah. And nothing short of the geulah shelaima will change that.
and, soon our right to any piece of land in Israel will be lost.
Nonsense. Barring Jews from ascending HHB (in accordance with the opinions of the overwhelming majority of the Gedolai HaPoskim), except for Israeli police acting in security interests, will have no discernible affect on the Jewish hold on the rest of the country.
Principles are important.
True. And one of the most important principles in Judaism is the value of life, and the lengths we go to protect it. There are very few principles that override this one – namely avodah zara, giluy arayos, shvichas dumim, and certain forms of chillul Hashem. But asserting Jewish sovereignty is simply not one of them. We do not, and we may not, risk lives for this principle.
We do not put our lives and the lives of our fellows on the line just to prove that we own a piece of land. We know it is ours,and when Moshiach comes, the rest of the world will know it too.
mw13
“And one of the most important principles in Judaism is the value of life, and the lengths we go to protect it. There are very few principles that override this one – namely avodah zara, giluy arayos, shvichas dumim, and certain forms of chillul Hashem. But asserting Jewish sovereignty is simply not one of them”
That isnt completly true. Milchama both shel chov and reshus are allowed in cetain situations (not that this qualifies) Asserting Jewish sovereignty in cetrtian circumstances (again not neccesarily this) deffinitly overrides human life.
“Remember, the spark that set off the second intifada was Sharon’s visit to HHB. If he hadn’t made that visit, things may have ended very differently.”
No that was the excuse used. The intifada was planned for months beforhand if sharon hadnt gone up then there would have been another excuse
“It never ceases to amaze me how the same people who will go on a crusade for safety in so many places (smoke detectors, vaccines, and metzitza bi’peh all come to mind)”
Is there data showing that as more yidden ascend har habayis more attacks occur?
DY
“ROB, for the umpteenth time, yes, they hate us, yes, sometimes they kill us. With more provocation, though, they do it more.”
Is that true? There was no har habayis excuse in the 50’s yet fedayeen attacks became a routine occurance. This isnt about har habyis make no mistake about it. If not for har habayis it would be the kosel, if not the kosel it would be tel aviv and if not tel aviv it would be new york.
DY: I honestly never understood how going onto Har HaBayis became treated as a “Zionist/non-Zionist” issue. Why do people want to go there? Because they find inspiration and meaning in visiting the holiest place on Earth. We don’t question why people go to Meron or Kivrei Tzadikim. Kal V’chomer Har HaBayis.
Is that true?
Of course it is. The fact that they murder without this provocation, as others have pointed out, simply has no bearing in the fact that this does incite them even more, and causes even more bloodshed, R”l.
Sam, if not for the fact that it is so problematic, I could agree with you.
L’maaseh, it’s a political statement (as has basically been admitted by the proponents on this thread) and not a spiritual undertaking.
DY
“Of course it is”
Do you have any data to back that up?
“simply has no bearing in the fact that this does incite them even more,”
why not? You also neglected to address this :
“There was no har habayis excuse in the 50’s yet fedayeen attacks became a routine occurance.”
“Is there data showing that as more yidden ascend har habayis more attacks occur?”
One must be blind not to see that.
One must be blind not to see that.
is that a scientific answer?
You also neglected to address this :
“There was no har habayis excuse in the 50’s yet fedayeen attacks became a routine occurance.”
I directly addresses that.
Do you have any data to back that up?
is that a scientific answer?
Is there data, a scientific study, to demonstrate that playing in traffic is dangerous?
I’m a scientist, so yes.
MW,
1. There is no halachic requirement to go without a smoke detector. There is a halachic requirement to assert our sovereignty over all parts of EY. Personally, I would be satisfied with a total ban which would also apply to Moslems and Xtian tourists. However, being that Moslems are allowed and some poskim allow and even encourage Jews to go up Jews should also be allowed
2. Those who blame the architects of Oslo for the second intifada are making the opposite argument. They are saying that appeasement always has the opposite effect. This is not only true regarding Jewish=gentile relations. Neville Chamberlain’s “peace in our time” is the classic example.
DY: That’s because the people in this thread are stupid internet commenters. For 90%+ of the Jews who go up, it’s either for inspiration or an expression of Hoda’ah to HKBH at the ability to be able to go up.
Joseph
then maybe I’m blind. I have been following ISraeli news for quite some time. There have been waves of violence “ebbs and flows” as somebody put it. I really dont see any increase in violence associated w har habayis visits.
DY
“I directly addresses that.”
Im sorry, i missed it. Mind repeating or directing me please?
“Is there data, a scientific study, to demonstrate that playing in traffic is dangerous?”
So…. no?
Does one need a scientific, statistical study to determine that walking up to an armed, anti-Semitic thug and slapping him across the face is more dangerous than just walking by him?
Can anybody here honestly tell me that they’d say “hey, walking by him is dangerous anyways, so what’s the difference”?
(ubiquitin, I saw your post, but don’t have time for a detailed response right now. Hopefully later.)
3. Here is Rav Neventzahl’s statement:
So you see,he says the exact opposite of what you say. It belongs to us. However, he rules that we do not have permission to go up at this time.
once you start pretending that playing in traffic –
(facing a physical and gravitational situation with a predictable outcome due to the laws of nature)
– is somehow related to carrying on your business while terrorists who are armed and looking for an excuse to shoot pick random reasons to do so, then it isn’t even worth having the conversation. There is no proof that the arabs kill less when we are not on har habayis, or kill more than when we are. If anyone believes otherwise, site your sources. Isn’t it enough to say we shouldn’t be going up there because that’s the halacha? What is the need for making up secondary reasons?
ubiq, then you’re clearly not following the Israeli news cycle very closely.
“What is the need for making up secondary reasons?”
Syag, Gedolei Yisroel, including Rav Eliashev, have explicitly and repeatedly cited antagonization resulting in anti-Jewish violence as one of the reasons it is forbidden to go up to the HH”B.
“Five years ago on Sukkos, President Shimon Peres paid a visit to the Sukka of Maran HaGaon Rav Elyashiv ZATZAL, where Rav Elyashiv called on the President to prevent Jews from visiting Har Habayis, stating it is an act that that is viewed as extremely provocative by the goyim. Maran stated everything possible must be done to avoid a religious war, and the provocateurs are playing with fire.
Maran is quoted as explaining to the president that Halacha forbids going onto Har Habayis but today, it is more than this, it is an act that may lead to a religious war and bloodshed.”
Joseph
“ubiq, then you’re clearly not following the Israeli news cycle very closely. “
I do as I have for decades. Even if you argue that more people are going to har habayis now than in the past. You cant use this to blame the first intifada nor the second (which started before sharon went on har habayis and was planned for months before that) and certianly not on fedayeen attacks in the 50’s. There is zero realtionship between visiting har habayis and upticks in violence in ISraels’ history. If you argue that for now on theri is with an “n” of one. That is possible but those who dont see it are not blind.
mw13
“Does one need a scientific, statistical study to determine that walking up to an armed, anti-Semitic thug and slapping him across the face is more dangerous than just walking by him?
Can anybody here honestly tell me that they’d say “hey, walking by him is dangerous anyways, so what’s the difference”?”
YES!
If Reuvein walkds by the thug and gets killed, Shimon walks by and gets killed. LEvi doesnt get killed, Yehuda does, Yissachor smacks him and gets killed.
I think its hard to argue Yissachar got killed becasue he smacked the thug
Avi K., I was indeed referencing the three Shevuos. However, my point was NOT that they Halachically bind us right now. It was to offer proof that although the Goyim certainly hate us, Chazal recognize that some actions are more provocative than others.
Gedolei Yisroel, including Rav Eliashev, have explicitly and repeatedly cited antagonization resulting in anti-Jewish violence as one of the reasons it is forbidden to go up to the HH”B.
That is correct. This is a second halachic reason, and this is not something we’ve made up.
For 90%+ of the Jews who go up, it’s either for inspiration or an expression of Hoda’ah to HKBH at the ability to be able to go up
Oh, was there a scientific study done? 😉
Seriously, though, I’ve got a hard time wrapping my mind around the idea of people violating the accepted, majority psak that it’s assur for two reasons, with pure motives.
Im sorry, i missed it. Mind repeating or directing me please?
I don’t know why I bother, because this seems to happen on every thread, but here goes:
“The fact that they murder without this provocation, as others have pointed out, simply has no bearing in the fact that this does incite them even more, and causes even more bloodshed, R”l.”.
DY
The majority of the Charedi Gedolim are against going up, Many if not most Dati Leumi Gedolim allow going up.
You follow your rav.
“Hence concludes Rav Aviner, visiting Har Habayis is an affront to both the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and Gedolei Yisrael.”
DY: Most people aren’t that politically aware. They see the idea, ask their Rabbi, if he says it’s okay, they go. It’s not about an “accepted, majority Psak” (I agree it’s a majority; I don’t agree that it’s accepted by everyone, as an aside). It’s about what their Rabbi says.
I said many, Not all. I am well aware that Rav Avneir felt differently
TO all the posters -especially mw13 , joseph and others- Fifteen years ago, after the failed Camp David talks, the most murderous terrorist attacks were unleashed by that uber-terrorist Arafat. I well remember Sbarro, the blown up buses, the heartbreaking murder of Doctor Spero and his daughter on the eve of her wedding and many more.Close to a thousand Jews were killed till the Israeli army finally took over Ramallah. There was no Har Habayis controversy then. It was just pure hatred of jews wherever they lived. Rabbi Henkin and his wife, hashem jenokom domom, were not on the Har habayis when they were murdered.They were in Eretz Ysroel. The only reason they were killed were because they were Jews. If you cannot understand that, there is no debating with you.
Mobico, the oaths do not imply any such thing. They are only a statement of the fact that there was a decree of galut. The fact of the matter is that every action and non-action is equally provocative. If we keep to ourselves we are clannish and if we try to participate in the general civic life we are trying to take over. We invented both capitalism (never mind that Adam Smith was a Scotsman) and communism (never mind that Marx had been baptized as a child and was anti-Semitic). The real reason was given by our greatest enemy in modern times who wrote that he hated us because we represent morality. In other words, violent anti-Semitism is simply Amalekiut and not dependent on what we do or do not do.
I have encountered many who are very pushy – if not militant, even – regarding their own and other’s ascension to Har HaBayis. It seems clear that the reasons are more than simply personal inspiration.
BTW, I don’t know why anyone would deny that part of the motivation for those who wish to ascend is political. As others have pointed out, this Machlokes falls generally along Chareidi / Dati Leumi lines. Dati Leumi, or religious Zionism, is by definition a Hashkafic worldview that combines Torah/Halachah with Zionism/nationalism, which is a political movement.
ubiquitin:
“Remember, the spark that set off the second intifada was Sharon’s visit to HHB. If he hadn’t made that visit, things may have ended very differently.”
No that was the excuse used. The intifada was planned for months beforhand if sharon hadnt gone up then there would have been another excuse
Source?
Clarification: I am in no way saying that that Sharon’s visit was responsible for the second intifada, just as I assume nobody will claim the Oslo Accords were responsible. The despicable terrorists who perpetrated it are the one who are responsible.
But both of these events did influence the beginning of the intifada. Without them, it probably would not have been as severe, and it may never even have started.
“ROB, for the umpteenth time, yes, they hate us, yes, sometimes they kill us. With more provocation, though, they do it more.”
Is that true? There was no har habayis excuse in the 50’s yet fedayeen attacks became a routine occurance.
“Does one need a scientific, statistical study to determine that walking up to an armed, anti-Semitic thug and slapping him across the face is more dangerous than just walking by him? Can anybody here honestly tell me that they’d say “hey, walking by him is dangerous anyways, so what’s the difference”?”
YES! If Reuvein walkds by the thug and gets killed, Shimon walks by and gets killed. LEvi doesnt get killed, Yehuda does, Yissachor smacks him and gets killed. I think its hard to argue Yissachar got killed becasue he smacked the thug
True, if this theoretical thug has so far killed 100% of the Jews he’s bumped into. Therefore, things can indeed get no worse.
However, nowhere near 100% of Arabs kill 100% of Jews they bump into. Therefore, practically speaking, things can get much, much worse. So unnecessary provocations are a bad idea.
(Applying this our theoretical thug, if the thug killed only Shimon and Yehuda, and let Reuven, Levi, and Yissachar go, would you advise Zevulen to smack him in the face?)
Avi K:
1. There is no halachic requirement to go without a smoke detector. There is a halachic requirement to assert our sovereignty over all parts of EY.
Name me the Poskim who hold there is chiyuv to conquer all of EY today.
2. Those who blame the architects of Oslo for the second intifada are making the opposite argument. They are saying that appeasement always has the opposite effect. This is not only true regarding Jewish=gentile relations. Neville Chamberlain’s “peace in our time” is the classic example.
So let me get this straight: You do believe that Arab violence can influenced by actions of the Jews. But you think they are only influenced by appeasement, and totally unaffected by provocation?
Once again, I did not write that piece. YWN did. Any issues you have with it must be taken up with them.
Sam2:
DY: That’s because the people in this thread are stupid internet commenters. For 90%+ of the Jews who go up, it’s either for inspiration or an expression of Hoda’ah to HKBH at the ability to be able to go up.
Says you. I think 90% of them are going up to make a political statement and/or to “show sovereignty”, as people here have put it. I doubt more than 10% are going up for purely spiritual reasons.
rabbiofberlin:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/har-habayis-revisited/page/2#post-582938
A couple of excerpts from a recent Jerusalem Post story:
The clashes in Jerusalem seemed closer than ever to Tel Avivians on Wednesday morning, at least according to the headlines. The night before a motorcycle procession and rally in solidarity with protests over al-Aksa Mosque spun out of control, bringing the recent turmoil to the Tel Aviv area for the first time in months…
[Jewish]
I didnt see this on YWN today, but there was a stabbing in Tel-Aviv today, Do you really belive the Stabbing in Tel-Aviv really had anything to do with Har Habyis, the Arabs think ALL of Israel is occupied, not just Jerusalem
hey, if we cant trust khaled for his honest and unbiased opinion, who can we trust?
mw13: First of all, how many people do you know who go up? I know a lot.
Secondly, are you reading what you’re quoting? The Temple Mount is run by Jewish extremists? The Israeli government puts you in jail if you so much as move your lips while on Har HaBayis. Davening is illegal up there. Wearing a Tallis or Tzitzis out is illegal up there. The status quo is that the Muslims run it and the Israeli police enforce it. Their version of “returning to the status quo” is that we would cease to exist. If you give them Har HaBayis, they’ll find another excuse. Don’t buy into what antisemites say about us.
there was a stabbing in Tel-Aviv today, Do you really belive the Stabbing in Tel-Aviv really had anything to do with Har Habyis
1) Nobody has claimed that every single terrorist attack is related to HH”B.
2) Read the Post prior to yours.
hey, if we cant trust khaled for his honest and unbiased opinion, who can we trust?
Rav Elyashiv?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.