The antizionism amongst religious Jews has no legitimate detractors

@HaKatan
By the way till the machlokos R chaim ozer and Rubenstein the mizrachi was part of the agudah party. They didn’t see zionism as heresy even if they disagreed. It wasn’t until the chaftez chaim protested due to the lack of respect shown to r chaim Ozer in vilna, that the mizrachi split. (That was only the last 20 years of before the war) Again not “all gedolim” were against zionsim

Chaim > they all held of Zionism

Chaim, maybe you need define what the “held of Zionism” means. I presume they were not members of the hashomer hatzair. Were they supporting settling EY; or said that it is better for all Jews to be in EY than die under Commies and Nazis; or agreed to join government, etc. There are a lot of gradation.

For example, R Soloveitchik criticizes both non-religious leaders of Israel (and before) and also those religious leaders who refuse to cooperate with them …
in one 1945 speech, he talks about Tzitz (head, halachik decisions) and Hoshen (political decisions) being attributes of the same Kohen Godol. That politics should be dealt with, and dealt with in torah ways, and he says unfortunately we now have Kohanim with Tzitz and Kohanim with Hoshen each dealing only in their own area and refusing to cooperate.

HaKatan > Rabbi Kook and Eim HaBanim Semeichah are both irrelevant

I agree with you that the point of this discussion is not to rely on those with the most pro-zionist position. You obviously disagree with them vehemently.
It would be more productive if you can address more mainstream rabbis (quoted above all over) who accepted interaction with zionists – to some degree, in a limited way, conditionally, with reservations – but more than Satmar Rebbe. The best way would be for you to quote their seforim and explain what you think of those. This is not too much to ask.

@ HaKatan
You keep on hocking that I need a “written teshuva” . You made that up. I do not need that. Mesora is enough. You don’t get to make up the rules.

Yes R kook is relevant. You can say 100 times he is not and I will say he is. Again you don’t get to decide that.

@Chaim
By the way till the machlokos R chaim ozer and Rubenstein the mizrachi was part of the agudah party. They didn’t see zionism as heresy even if they disagreed. It wasn’t until the chaftez chaim protested due to the lack of respect shown to r chaim Ozer in vilna, that the mizrachi split. (That was only the last 20 years of before the war) Again not “all gedolim” were against zionsim
[chaim]
—
Historically incorrect.
Aguda was never part [or one] with mizrachi.
They were AGAINST mizrachi.

This is alef bet in history.
.

My question is, everyone knows that R Yoel was an anti Zionist. But why should one care what he says? R’ Yoel was not a gadol hador. He was a great Rebbe for HIS chasidim, but the majority of Jews are NOT his chasidim or even hold of him or his sefer. This does not mean he was not a great Rebbe.
So if he does not want to live in Israel, so be it. I don’t care. I also don’t care what he has to say about the topic because I do not hold of him either. If he is YOUR Rebbe, you follow him.

@HaKatan – I fail to see humor in anything you say. The parody was to show you what you sound like. Apparently it wasn’t effective because you *still* don’t get it.

You’re never going to convince me of your position, just as I am never going to convince you of mine. Like Chaim, I will continue to answer you Rav for Rav, Midrash for Midrash, Gemara for Gemara, despite your pathetic one-line pronouncments delegitimizing anyone who doesn’t agree with you. And I will continue to point out the critical methodological error in the SR’s work – We do not issue Psak Halacha based on Aggada, which *is not* up for debate. What you and somejewiknow should do is quit slandering the Religious Zionist community once and for all and apologize.

@Always_Ask_Questions – The issue with threads concerning Zionism, the IDF, etc. is that backers of HaKatan’s position define Zionism as it was defined in the 1800-1900s within the realm of nationalism that was de rigueur at the time. They also (incorrectly) lump ideologically secularist Zionism together with Religious Zionism. To them, it is all black-and-white. That isn’t how things were and they are certainly not so today, which does in fact require HaKatan and his ilk to reexamine their position. The average Religious Zionist doesn’t define Zionism or Religious Zionism the way HaKatan and company do. Neither do ideologically secularist Zionists. And secularist Zionists don’t define Zionism in the manner of Religious Zionism or per HaKatan’s camp. There is a gulf between Rav Kook and Herzl/Ben Gurion, just like there is one between the SR and Rav Kook, but HaKatan and somejewiknow will not admit to such. Instead, it’s all the same because of “Zionism” (Nice Tzad HaShave on their part, but it’s quite erroneous). That makes any sort of discussion impossible.

It’s also impossible to have a discussion because HaKatan’s camp insists on preconditions for the discussion, which everyone has to accept. Those “facts” are: (1) Zionism in any form – even Religious Zionism – is heresy; (2) Rav Kook, Ein HaBanim Semeicha or any other source that supports our position (Orot, Avnei Nezer and Alo Na’aleh specifically come to mind, as do parts of Lev Avraham, even Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik) are all illegitimate sources; (3) Zionists are “kofrim” (an ad hominem attack against those who disagree, which is a logical fallacy); (4) Zionism is an aveira; and (5) the only unimpeachable sources are VaYoel Moshe and a few terse statements by several Litvish Rabbonim. That’s exactly what HaKatan and somejewiknow did, and the record on this form proves as such.

This sadly and unfortunately is like the Israeli government negotiating with the PA or Hamas, where Hamas sets preconditions that Israel has to accept before negotiations can even begin. Yes, I did just make that comparison – because it is true. No discussion can be had under such circumstances, because there isn’t anything to discuss.

@somejewiknow – I answered you in the other thread. Go read Rav Aviner’s work – it’s available on multiple websites. While you’re at it, also Avnei Nezer and Rav Drukman’s work about it. This really isn’t difficult.

FULL DISCLOSURE:

I did NOT write this letter or any part of it.
I do NOT know who wrote this letter.
I just copied it from www (dot) matzav (dot) com.

==============

Dear Matzav Inbox,

I have absolutely no problem with anyone holding a shitah that is anti-Tzioni.
I understand fully the perspective of those who oppose the medinah.

Every individual and kehillah is entitled to their views on this matter,
and we should not forget that there are many legitimate reasons
to question or oppose the modern state of Israel and its government.

This is a topic that has many layers.
We must be able to have these discussions, respectfully and thoughtfully.

However, what I cannot tolerate, and what I am calling out in this long overdue letter,
is when this anti-Zionist stance ceases to be a viewpoint or a political position,
and instead becomes the very foundation of someone’s Yiddishkeit.

There is a great difference between holding an opinion about the medinah
and allowing that opinion to consume and define your entire avodas Hashem.

When opposition to the medinah and the Israeli government transforms
into the entire essence of one’s Yiddishkeit, something is terribly amiss.

Then it is no longer simply about politics or ideology.
It actually becomes a warped form of Avodah Zarah,
where the focus is no longer on serving Hashem,
but on serving an anti-Tzioni agenda.

Yes, you know exactly what I’m talking about.

And for those who have fallen into this trap, how is it that every drasha,
every event, and every conversation somehow
revolves around the same refrain of anti-Tzioni sentiment?

Is that your whole avodas Hashem?
How is it that every shmuess, every message,
and every teaching is framed through the lens of opposition to the medinah?

When one’s Yiddishkeit is entirely defined by this opposition,
we must ask: Are you still serving Hashem?

Or are you now serving your anti-Tzioni views,
as if they were the central aspect of our Torah observance?

Let me be clear:
When the agenda of opposition to the medinah infiltrates every aspect
of avodas Hashem, one is in danger of losing sight of what is truly important.

When you are teaching 5-year-olds this type of stuff
on an equal footing with Torah and mitzvos,
you have gone off the plantation.

It is no longer about serving Hashem through the Torah and mitzvos,
but about serving an ideological position.

And once that happens, one is no longer engaging in avodas Hashem
as the Torah teaches us, but is rather caught up in a false religion,
one that elevates these views above the true avodah of a Yid.

I implore my fellow Yidden to call this out for what it is and what it has become.

Never lose sight of the fact that our true identity as Yidden
is not defined by one specific ideology,
but by our connection to Hashem, His Torah, and His mitzvos.

Sincerely,
A Yid Who Has Had Enough

SOURCE: Matzav Inbox: “When Being Anti-Tzioni Becomes Your Avodah Zarah”
2024 December 24 www (dot) matzav (dot) com

==============

PERSONAL COMMENT:

In Brooklyn there is a yeshivah for Baalei Teshuvah where
the FIRST lesson the students learn is to HATE “The Zionists”.

Why should that be the FIRST lesson they learn?

I was once lectured about the evils of “The Zionists” by
a very new student from that yeshivah, who was so new
that he did not yet know how to recite Shma Yisrael.
When I tried to change the subject, he refused to stop.
He was completely brainwashed and unbearably irritating.