RCA statement for Tisha B'Av

“his own stated admission that he broke from his own mesorah to support Zionism”

He realized his own mesorah was wrong, and adjusted appropriately. His father had done so decades earlier, working for Mizrachi in Poland and then for what became Yeshiva University in the US. Rabbi Yisachar Shlomo Teichtal, the author of *Eim HaBanim Semeichah*, realized it too, but unfortunately he did not survive the war.

Today most Religious Zionist rabbis come from either the school of Rav Soloveitchik z’tz’l or Rav Kook z’tz’l. They differed on a lot of things (including the nature of Religious Zionism!) but agreed that a Jewish state in the Land of Israel is a good thing. They met once, in 1935, and Rav Soloveitchik, who wasn’t yet a Zionist (he was on the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah of Agudath Israel of America) would praise Rav Kook tremendously then and later. It should be noted that both were on excellent terms with many non-Zionist and even anti-Zionist rabbis in America and Eretz Yisrael.

HaLeivi and Dr. Hall:

I would still refer you to the question I posed in my previous post.

Charlie:

The whole strength of our faith is in mesorah, the faithful transmission of the Torah from Rebbi to talmid. Otherwise, anyone can make up anything they want and ch”V make a mockery of the Torah.

Now, if you want to take a different Rebbi with an equally valid mesorah from his Rebbi then that is one thing. But to invent your own new mesorah is quite another thing.

I don’t want to discuss the tremendous disagreement that the Torah world’s greats had with both Rav Kook and Rav JB Soloveichik regarding their inventions of their respective new ideas. And Rav Teichtal was not condoning any -ism, including Zionism, as clearly stated in his sefer’s hakdama. He was also writing under tremendous duress, etc. And the gedolim disagreed with him anyways.

But even if you feel they somehow were able to create a new valid mesorah, to do so kiNeged their own mesorah along with the vehement opposition of their peers who claimed their new ideas were against the Torah, is quite difficult to understand.

Again, I refer you to the question I previously posed.

HaKatan, Rav Kook didn’t say that about himself. It was said about him by someone who doesn’t view such a concept as out of the question.

I don’t think Rav Kook viewed himself as a trail blazer. He noticed the trend of people populating Eretz Yisroel and expressed his approval. He considered himself part of the Yishuv Hayashan, and he never officially broke.

So, he would tell you that his Hashkafa was not influenced by Goyim, while those who don’t see that as such a big deal would agree to say that he was. Your question hits a dead end Mima Nafshach.

Everything recycled here could and should easily be demolished

For Example

“They met once, in 1935, and Rav Soloveitchik, who wasn’t yet a Zionist..”and was rather unimpressed with Rav Kook

cf.Holzer’s book

(that actually proves little .Different proclivities)

Rav Soloveitchik gave his definition of Zionist in 1975.Sounded

very non-Zionist

‘The charedi world is full of “new ideas”‘

Perfect.

They integrate with their focus towards the end goal

Without getting sidetracked like so many well meaning naive idealists (including those previously mentioned)

Hakatan,

Keep up the good work,

but you could do better than

“The whole strength of our faith is in mesorah, the faithful transmission of the Torah from Rebbi to talmid. Otherwise, anyone can make up anything they want and ch”V make a mockery of the Torah.

Now, if you want to take a different Rebbi with an equally valid mesorah from his Rebbi then that is one thing. But to invent your own new mesorah is quite another thing.”

I wouldn’t say that a circumstance calls for a new outlook as much as a new application of the old outlook.

The Gemara talks about people getting married and then going off to learn. That is worse than Kollel.

Rejection of secular education is very, very old. Finding a particular Sefer that trumpets a certain thing and saying that this is your way, is not called following a Mesora. It is the downside of Torah Sheb’al Peh being written.

American Chareidim have no issue with learning secular (non-Apikursus) topics, while we associate with the Israeli Chareidim who are different from us. This is an example of different situations requiring different applications of the same Shita. What we won’t find in any of the most open-minded Rishonim, is the merit and requirement to study Avoda Zara and Apikursus, especially before Milo Kreiso Beshaas Uposkim.

The Kesubah is not an Halacha Sefer. It is an agreement. The ultimate responsibility for Parnassa never changed hands. When push comes to shove the man gets a job. Actually, we live in a society where most women work. So, what exactly bothers you about somebody’s personal arrangement.

toi, u disagree with the gedolim like rav shach, rav eliashev who accept chasidishe gedolim and mehalech as their equals on the moetzes?