- This topic has 225 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 1 week, 6 days ago by .
-
Posts
-
Non Political:
Of course they are brought liHalacha, as stated. Your laziness to look at VaYoel Moshe or elsewhere is not an excuse for insinuating that others are making things up.See this post here, on these very boards, for example: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/refuting-the-three-oaths-gimel-shevuot#post-2266950
Chaim:
No, you did not do your job. You did not take the numerous quoted sefarim and ask Rizhin how their alleged mesorah works with or argues with that. The “flip side” is not going to Satmar to ask about your stories about Rizhin; that’s beyond silly. Have Rizhin publish a teshuva that their alleged mesorah disagrees with all the quoted sefarim here and elsewhere including but not limited to Rav Elchonon, the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Rav, the Gerrer Rebbe and all the rest. You can’t, of course.ZSK:
It wasn’t an emotional issue; I (seemingly incorrectly) thought that if I pointed out the obvious fallacies in each of those “arguments” that even Zionists would understand that they were being fooled by their idol. I guess I was wrong about that.No, you don’t have any “mesorah” for Zionism, because there is no such thing. Nobody claimed to be following his rabbeim in promoting Zionism. In fact, Rabbi Dr. Soloveitchik acknowledged that he was breaking from his (rather strong anti-Zionist) mesorah in doing so, and the gedolim did not agree.
My response to Avi K’s nonsense remains, it is your “facts” that are wrong, and you are the one ignoring the facts presented in my perfectly valid IMHO response about. But since you’re so smart, why don’t you take the original sources, including the Satmar Rav (can’t mention his name to Zionists, I know) and Rav Elchonon and all the rest, and ask a talmid chacham to reconcile your alleged mesorah with the plain sourced halachos that they present, even without their own opinions.
Regarding Rabbi Dr. Soloveitchik’s “six knocks” nonsense, I referenced a printed source in which you could see why it is nonsense. Again, you chose to ignore that.
The answer is, as published by the Brisker Rav and signed off by both the Gerrer Rebbe and many others, “Religious Zionism” is “a sea of heresy mixed in with a drop of Torah”, and as published by Rav Elchonon, that Zionism is idolatry and “Religious Zionism” is idolatry and “religion” biShituf. It’s really that simple.
As to your second post:
You are also surely aware that an “ideological dispute” doesn’t cause a gadol to write like that. As Rav Shach pointed out, Rabbi Dr. Soloveitchik was unfortunately influenced by his “external” learning, to the point that Rabbi Dr. Soloveitchik wrote heresy that is shocking to see. That’s well beyond “ideological dispute”. And stories are irrelevant, as noted.I find it amusing (and pathetic) that Zionists ignore all the poskim that bring the oaths and claim they are “only” aggadita and therefore could and should be disregarded because, say, the Rambam didn’t include them in his sefer haMitzvos (for which there are reasons given). Yet, those same Zionists, will go with stories and legends to disregard published halacha simply because of a story that someone learned with someone else or whatever other irrelevancies.
HaKatan, you keep bringing those who disagreed with RYBS and he would agree with you (as he answered the question whether his secular learning interferes with his Torah learning, he replied – when other T’Ch learn, I learn; when others tell lashon hora about me, I study philosophy). But, as mentioned, R Kotler’s position was somewhat nuanced.
I came up to seemingly a factual story – when Rav initiated Talmud Class for college girls in the 1970s, R Schwab and some other Rabonim were considering a cherem and wanted to have R Moshe onboard. Some of Rav’s students went to R Moshe hoping to explain that they are not initiating “new reform”, R Moshe dismissed their defense and said “r Soloveitchik’s teaching approach does not require my defense”. Cherem did not materialize. Seems that we can learn from this
(1) R Moshe respected RYBS’s approach even if it was different from his. Possibly because they were addressing different audiences.
(2) R Schwab and others maybe did not like RYBS’s approach but did not consider him a heretic at least until 1970s (and RYBS was a public figure from 1930s).
(3) a harrowing lack of communication between the gedolim from my perspective. Why didn’t they get in the same room or a conference call and discuss all views and implications?here is from 1955:
After more than a half hour of futile effort to get Rav Soloveitchik to publicly oppose giyus banos [female draft into the IDF], Rav Aharon [Kotler] came up with the following brilliancy, of course in Yiddish. He said, Bostoner Rav [R. Soloveitchik], imagine that instead of the three of us discussing this issue, there were another three who were judging the appropriateness of drafting girls into military service. Instead of the Bostoner Rav, there was your zeyde, Reb Chaim. Instead of the Radiner Rosh Yeshiva [R. Mendel Zaks], there was your father-in-law, the Chafetz Chaim. Instead of me, there was my father-in-law, Rav Iser Zalman Meltzer. Bostoner Rav, what would your zeyde have said?This masterstroke did not result in a shift in Rav Soloveitchik’s position. He got up and said that he had to leave, “Kletsker Rosh Yeshiva and Radiner Rosh Yeshiva, a gutten tag” and left.
second part:
Yet, not long after this incident, in 1954 or 1955, Rav Aharon reached out again to him and enlisted him in efforts to raise funds for Chinuch Atzmai. The high point came at the first Chinuch Atzmai dinner where Rav Soloveitchik made the most remarkable speech I have ever heard…[R. Soloveitchik] then lavished praise on Rav Aharon, comparing him in elaborate language, first to the Vilna Gaon, then to Rav Akiva Eger and finally to his zeide, Rav Chaim. I was standing directly behind Rav Aharon as Rav Soloveitchik spoke and as each of these comparisons were made, Rav Aharon tugged at Rav Soloveitchik’s jacket with one hand and implored him to stop and with the other hand he pounded on the table and intoned repeatedly, “Das iz nisht emes, das iz nisht emes.” As I looked more closely at Rav Aharon, I saw that he was crying…
here is some history between early zionists and Rav Chaim Brisker
In 1904, years before Menachem Begin was born, Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism died, and Zev Dov Begin, one of the leaders of the Brisk kehila, wanted to hold a memorial service in the main shul. Rav Chaim Brisker said no and locked the shul. Menachem Begin’s father and his friend, Mordechai Schneidermann (whose grandson Ariel Sharon would later play a powerful role in Menachem’s life) broke the lock of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik’s synagogue to conduct a service in Herzl’s memory.
Does that mean that Begin’s father was not respectful of the Rav? When Begin visited the United States as prime minister, he visited the great rabbis of the Agudah in Rav Moshe Feinstein’s home. He also paid a call on the Lubavitcher Rebbe and held a meeting with Rav Yosef Dov Solovietchik, who insisted on coming to meet Begin, not the reverse. Rabbi Soloveitchik reminded Menachem Begin of the incident in which his father had disobeyed Rav Soloveitchik’s grandfather. The Rav told him that, in the family, they said that this was the one and only time the elder Begin did not follow the Brisker Rav’s guidance in regards to the kehila. Menachem used to tell another story of how his father and the Rav were walking together, and an anti-Semite began harassing the Rav. Zev Dov Begin took his walking stick and hit the gentile over the head. He went to jail, but he was proud that he stood up for the honor of a Jew.
@ UJM
I read through the letters you posted from the Satmar Rav. Perhaps you would care to post where the Satmar Rav sees in Rav Kook’s written works or speeches that: ועל הכלל כולו יצא, לכפור בתורה שבכתב ובע”פ ובעיקרי האמונה לתת אותם לשמצה
enquiring minds want to know
Re Rav Kuk
Yadua lakol in Bnei Brak that Chazon Ish paskined that one is allowed to learn his halacha sfarim , but not his agada sfarim.
That fits very neatly with Karyana De’igrata who clearly says that athalta d/g is wrong but not kfira.
So Rav Kuk would not be an apikorus according to Chazon Ish and according to Staipler.Thats besides a clear letter from Emrai Emet in Osef Michtavim that although Rav Kuk is mistaken in his hashkafa, he still is a Rav who should not be mevuzah chas veshalom.
Again clear proof that athaltah d/g , while wrong- is not kfira.All of the above clearly not like satmar rav .
Attempting to rewrite history is an might seem a viable option , but sometimes some pesky historical facts get in the way ….
.Just to clarify again, Mesora & Psak in Rizyhin is that Zionsim is al pi torah.
Mesora-Psak, is not subject for interpretation and is not a story. Its deeply rooted in torah and stronger than sefarim.
In a letter to Rabbi Kook, Rabbi Isser Zalman Meltzer and Rabbi Moshe Mordechai Epstein greeted Rabbi Kook with “Our honored friend, the great gaon and glory of the generation, our master and teacher, Avraham Yitzchak Hacohen, shlita”. Meltzer was also quoted as saying “Let them, any of us, pray on Yom Kippur the way Rav Kook prays on an average weekday.”[43]
Rabbi Isser Zalman Meltzer also once said to the famed Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grodzinsky from Vilna, “The two of us are considered Torah giants until we reach the door of Rabbi Kook’s office.” (cited by Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, Israel National News, August 8, 2013).
There are also some rabbis who spoke very highly of Kook in greetings of the letters they sent to him.
Chaim Ozer Grodzinski: “Our friend, the gaon, our master and teacher, Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook, shlita” and “The Glory of Honor, My Dear Friend, Ha-Rav Ha-Gaon, Ha-Gadol, the Famous One… The Prince of Torah, Our Teacher, Ha-Rav Avraham Yitzchak Ha-Cohen Kook Shlita…”[44]
Boruch Ber Leibowitz: “The true gaon, the beauty, and glory of the generation, the tzaddik, his holiness, Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak, may his light shine, may he live for length of good days and years amen, the righteous Cohen, head of the beis din [court] in Jerusalem, the holy city, may it soon be built and established.”
Chatzkel Abramsky: “The honored man, beloved of Hashem and his nation, the rabbi, the gaon, great and well-known, with breadth of knowledge, the glory of the generation, etc., etc., our master Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Hacohen Kook, shlita, Chief Rabbi of the Land of Israel and the head of the Beis Din in the holy city of Jerusalem”
Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach: “In the time of Rabbi Kook, the majority of Torah giants were ‘all as if nothing’ compared to him.
Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv: Owing to the close relationship Rabbi Kook had with his grandfather, the Leshem, Rabbi Shlomo Elyashiv, Rabbi Kook made the match of Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv and his wife, who was the daughter of Rabbi Kook’s close student, Rabbi Aryeh Levin. Rabbi Kook officiated at their wedding, and Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv later chose Rabbi Kook to be the Kohen (Priest) to redeem his oldest son, Shlomo, at his Pidyon Ha-Ben. Rav Elyashiv revered Rav Kook for both his piety and his Talmudic erudition. Rav Elyashiv would do all he could to silence those who would criticize Rav Kook and attempt to diminish his stature. He would frequently describe Rav Kook’s saintliness at his Shabbat table and occasionally reminisce about the times he attended seudah shelishit in his home.
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef said of Rabbj Kook that he was “a great man” and it is “forbidden to speak against him.” Rabbi Yosef further called Rabbi Kook “Tzaddik Yesod Olam
We know Haktan will say ots all stories that can be interpreted. Right only his facts are correct. of course he will bully us despite overwhelming evidence that R Kook was a holy man.
yankel berel:
It is you who is rewriting both history and facts.The fact is that Rabbi Kook published outright heresy. Period. Whether or not to consider him a kofer is a dispute among the gedolim. But it is simply a fact that Rabbi Kook wrote heresy. Like his soccer player line and much, much more. And that heresy is still polluting (via lectures by students and students of students) countless Jewish souls worldwide.
The Chazon Ish definitively ruled it is forbidden to even sell Rabbi Kook’s “hashkafa” books, let alone read them. It is false to imply that he therefore *approved* in any way of his halacha books.
Regarding the Imrei Emes’s letter and his supposed approval of Rabbi Kook, even that supposed approval was specifically after Rabbi Kook had agreed to retract his heretical writings – a retraction that Rabbi Kook never did, and Rabbi Kook also later claimed that he meant only to retract the “language” which offended simpletons, rather than the “substance”, of his heretical writings. The Imrei Emes, therefore, never approved of Rabbi Kook, and, in response to the Gerrer Rebbe presenting this, Rav Yosef Chaim and Rav Yitzchak Yerucham did not retract their ban against Rabbi Kook because they found his alleged disavowal of his heretical works to be “insubstantial”.
Regarding all three points: Rabbi Kook’s heresy and the Imrei Emes’s letter and your rewriting history, you conveniently omitted the parts of that letter where the Imrei Emes wrote against Rabbi Kook’s heresy (including the Gerrer Rebbe stating that Rabbi Kook is “omer al tamei tahor” and), like where the Gerrer Rebbe stated that for Rabbi Kook “to elevate the [physical] exercise of sinners and to flatter them in a shocking manner, to say to them, “Welcome, ministering angels from on high” – this angers the G-d-fearing to a point that is impossible to imagine.
Non-Political:
Take your pick if you were to read his works, but, off-hand, just this one should do it: Rabbi Kook’s stating that the entire Torah will be revealed through the atheist soccer players whom, Rabbi Kook claimed, will be on a greater level of prophecy than even Moshe Rabbeinu.@HaKatan
You can write heresy and not be a kofer? Not only that but you can still be the greatest gedolims rebbe????
You are full of yourself! LOLKatan is rewriting the Emrai Emets letters .
Read them in the original.
Osef mihtavim.Hazon Ish is yadua lakol in bnei brak, that he was matir lehedya rav kuks halacha sfarim.
Not as a diyuk.Katan lost his heskat ne’emanut.
He simply is not ne’eman when the topic is zionism.Rav Shmuel Auerbach z’l did not let the printers take out rav kuks haskama from his fathers sefer , Me’oreh ha’esh.
Rav shlome zalman z’l printed rav kuks haskama BEFORE R yosef chaim zonnefelds haskama.All this is mefursam . If katan wants he can close his eyes and claim that the sun is not shining.
.The ONLY people who are required to listen to the Satmar Rebbe are Satmar Chassidim.
Satmar Chassidim do not listen to Modern Orthodox Rabbis or Young Israel Rabbis
or Religious Zionist Rabbis or Chabad Rabbis or Sephardic Rabbis or Tzahal Rabbis,
even when those Rabbis are expert in all of Shas and all of Shulchan Aruch.Since I am not a Satmar Chassid [Baruch HaShem],
I have *** NO REASON *** to listen to the Satmar Rebbe.Baruch SheLo Asani Satmar!
“Rabbi Kook’s stating that the entire Torah will be revealed through the atheist soccer players whom, Rabbi Kook claimed, will be on a greater level of prophecy than even Moshe Rabbeinu.”
Where are you quoting this from?
@ HaKatan
even that supposed approval was specifically after Rabbi Kook had agreed to retract his heretical writingsThat’s a story based on interpretation. According to you that doesn’t count. Show us that in writing
1] Rav Shmuel Auerbach z’l did not let the printers take out rav kuks haskama from his fathers sefer , Me’oreh ha’esh.
2] Rav shlome zalman z’l printed rav kuks haskama BEFORE rav yosef chaim zonnefelds haskama.All this is mefursam .
If katan wants he can close his eyes and claim that the sun is not shining.
..
I wrote a response, but the mods did not let it through – I assume due to the harmless links I accidentally left in (one being to Rav Ahron Soloveitchik’s defense of his brother on the Seforim Blog, and the other being a link to Yom 9b). I’m not rewriting it. The mods can remove the links and then let it through it if they wish.
To the subject at hand.
HaKatan: At the end of the day, no RZ community (other than maybe Chardalim) cares what the Charedi community thinks about RZ being heresy. When confronted (rarely ever) about RZ being heresy, the reaction is either: (1) Don’t care, you have your path, we have ours (also known as Elu V’Elu, something you obviously don’t accept but should); or (2) with many of the arguments and questions Chaim, others and I have presented here and in the other threads about this subject. The reaction is usually silence or being cursed out in Yiddish, and I have personally experienced and witnessed this reaction many times.
The Rabbonim I have asked these questions to have all responded in the manner I answered or along such lines. These answers did not come out of thin air. Contrary to what you may want and fervently wish to be, they are not “pathetic”. Nor are they heresy. You declaring in an authoritarian manner that something is “pathetic” or “heresy” doesn’t make it the case in the slightest. No, I am not going to go to a Gadol with such questions for the simple reason that a Gadol doesn’t know me from a hole in the wall. A Gadol doesn’t know my background, where I stand on the religious spectrum, what my education is or even what my beliefs are. A local Rav would, and that’s who I’ve asked. None of them have suggested I elevate the questions to another “higher” Rabbinic authority.
What I want to know is the following: Did Rabbi Teitelbaum ever read Rav Kook’s works? If so, what was exactly stated therein that was heresy? (From what I’ve learned (after you figure out the difficult Hebrew used), there’s nothing heretical. A bit too focused on תורת הנסתר וקבלה for me to be sure, but nothing that violates any עיקר אמונה). If not, the charge of heresy is erroneous at the minimum, and is slander. Did R’ Teitelbaum ever interact with Rav Kook? My impression is that he went out of his way to avoid anyone who spoke positively of RZ or Zionism out of fear that he may change his mind.
What the RZ community cares about is not relevant to this thread because it involves a lack of IDF service (Charedi blood is not סומק טפי in comparison to the צדיקים מק״ק דתי לאמי למיניהם, who have sacrified everything in a פיקוח נפש situation while Charedim refuse to do anything), working and otherwise behaving in a manner that is not מתחלל שם שמים.
I’m done answering you. This discussion/argument is utterly pointless, and it is most definitely not מלחמתה של תורה. For the last time: You are wrong. End of discussion. Be well.
HaKatan> In fact, Rabbi Dr. Soloveitchik acknowledged that he was breaking from his (rather strong anti-Zionist) mesorah in doing so, and the gedolim did not agree.
I think he does acknowledge this difference from his grandfather (but not his father). It does not mean that he abandoned his grandfather’s Torah. In multiple places, he brings his grandfather’s ideas, explains them, uses them as a guide. Every generation has their own issues to deal with, you don’t expect every rav to just confirm what his grandfather said. For example, when outlining his plans for YU Rabbinical school, he focuses on a streamlined system preparing multitude of local rabbis for many small communities that lacked them – so that they are able to do basics according to halakha and be attractive to American Jews: run the shul, say dvar Torah on shabbos, deal with kiddushin, and refer get cases appropriately. He contrasts it with Litvishe yeshivas (in Lita), where he says, in addition to gadlus of certain individuals, you had people who were hanging around for decades without any specific learning and outcome achieved.
Anyway, I have a feeling that your references here reflect that you read articles arguing against the Rav on specific controversial topics. I don’t think you ever opened an article by him.
It is great that we seem to have a majority here that are ready to accept the other side as being stam wrong and not kefirah.
The next question is who is right.
First version is – under the circumstances of the times someone lived and information he had, was someone right? In this case, most of those rabbonim were right in their own way, provided they were baki b’Torah and were able to approach the issues honestly. You go to shoftim of your times. Sanhedrin might need to bring a karbon if they make a mistake. So, if someone was a great Rav in all other aspects, he had a right to pasken according to his understanding. Should the Rabbis work hard to obtain military information about relative strength of Nazi, Soviet, and Polish army to figure out that Polish cavalry was doomed against tanks? Looking from our times – maybe, but nobody did. If they did ask Polish experts at the time, the answer was wrong.
Second version – what is the right decision from Hashem’s POV? I humbly think that we are not yet able to answer this question yet. The history is still being developed. When Jews started building second BM, there was abundant rain at night and they, thus, felt that there is Hashem’s brocha upon their work. Thus, (1) before the rain, they were not sure, (2) you need to watch for hidden signs. Are modern Zionists or modern Haredim experiencing hidden miracles? Maybe both are – Israel is a blooming country and Haredi yeshivos are full of students, all bli ayn harah.
Could they both be right? R Soloveitchik writes that one and same kohen godol has a tzitz (symbol of halachik decisions) and a choshen (symbol of politicla decisions). He says that “in our times” (1950s) the problem is that you have kohanim with tzitz (yeshovos) and kohanim with choshen (zionist politicians) trying to work on their own, ignoring the others.
Here is an example of cross-camp halachik cooperation:
R Ovadia Yosef has a teshuva whether a couple in Israel who got married outside of Rabanut requires a get (it is probably was some sort of a joke marriage between non-religious Israelis) and whether the lady is considered grusha for a kohen. He paskens that because Israeli Rabbanut requires marriage to be conducted through them, and the Hatan acknowledge their power when saying “al dat Moshe v _Yisrael_”, then the marriage is not valid.@ ZSK
I saw Yoma 9b. Not sure how it “refutes the 3 oaths. Note, I am not taking a position here on if one does or does not have to refute the oaths. I am asking how you and Avi K see Yoma 9b as a refutation.
You wrote: Charedi blood is not סומק טפי in comparison to the צדיקים מק״ק דתי לאמי למיניהם, who have sacrified everything in a פיקוח נפש situation while Charedim refuse to do anything
This may reflect how the R”Z community sees the Charedi community but it is unfair generalization. A large number of first responders who rushed directly into harms way on Oct 7 to save lives where Charedi Hatzola volunteers. One of my Rabbonim is certainly Chareidi and I still remember him coming in with his IDF uniform during meluim. R’ Yisroel Zev Gustman was a Chareidi Rosh Yeshiva (who was offered to be R”Y of Ponovich), he said that speaking against soldiers in m’gala pnei Torah shlo k’halacha.
On the other hand I don’t think most Charedi Gedolim recognize the legitimacy of having secular Jews in positions of (military / civil / Judicial authority.
@Non Political –
I don’t want derail this thread, so very briefly:
Yoma 9b has Reish Lakish stating that Aliyah BaChoma was an ideal to be done during the time of Ezra. Aliyah BaChoma banned by one of the 3 oaths. Thererefore, one of the oaths is in question by at least one Amora, with the source being in the same Sefer as the three oaths themselves. Yes, it’s admittedly not ideal because it’s Aggada sourced in Shir HaShirim and not Halachik in nature, but it does make the point that the oaths may not so cut and dry.
Avi K can step in if he wants to to clarify anything.
As for my statement about “Charedim not doing anything”:
It is unfair, but it happens to be true for the most part.
It is amazing that there were Charedim who did what they did on Oct. 7. HKB”H knows I could have never done that. Kol HaKavod and Yiyashar Kochacham for doing so. We are eternally in their debt. The same goes for those who flooded IDF bases with meals and other supplies. It is my hope that those first responders now understand exactly what the cost of war is and what the RZ community has sacrificed in this war, because it is that community that has suffered the most losses. Perhaps they will then be more willing to allow their children to serve in Charedi frameworks in the army (they already exist). I also hope they receive the mental health counseling they no doubt will need in order to process and move past what they saw.
But I lived next to Bnei Brak for 6 years and was there almost every day. Hatzola minded people are the minority and certainly those who serve in the IDF are an even smaller minority. In order to not speak Lashon Hara, I won’t detail what I saw while living there, but suffice it to say that after that, I have a hard time believing everyone is shteiging all day and not just wasting time that could be better spent working or serving in the IDF.
The Charedi commmunity also doesn’t know what it is to walk into Shul on Shabbos morning with half the people present carrying loaded rifles and phones because they’re all in Miluim and may be sent to Gaza or Lebanon at any moment, as well as having half of Shabbos Tefilllos moved to parks so people can take cover with their families quickly if need be. I have a neighbor who was injured (lightly, thank G-d) and two more that weren’t home for months. A Shul member lost his nephew in Gaza. I personally have had turn around halfway to Shul and sprint home as fast as possible because of rockets.
I’ve been impacted by this war in a very direct fashion. So please excuse me for being a more than a bit critical of our Charedi brethren for not doing more, and having absolutely no patience for HaKatan, somejewiknow, ujm and their ilk.
Have you seen the titles the Brisker rav gives in a handwritten letter to rav kuk ?
Have you seen the titles the baal haleshem writes [handwritten] to rav kuk ?Seems that Katan should buy some glue for his eyes , he might stumble onto very inconvenient sights ….
.yankel berel and all the Zionists with the pathetic stories:
Please stop wasting time, and get back to the OP’s point.Yes, even gedolim wrote nice titles. They had no choice, as Rabbi Kook was very powerful politically, and they had to deal with him.
Do you know that the Brisker Rav convened his Beis Din for each title that he wrote?As I mentioned numerous times to Chaim, this is why stories are irrelevant. They are subject to interpretation, and could be missing crucial details, like here.
Rav Shlome Zalman did not have to ask Rav Kuk for haskama.
Rav Shmuel Auerbach could have kept quiet when they wanted to reprint me’orei ha’eish without rav kuks haskama.
The emrai emet was not scared of a “politically powerful” rav kuk.
Btw. it would be much more convenient for emrai emet politically if he would not take it up supporting rav kuk.
Nevertheless he did.
Because he held that’s the emet.Brisker rav would not write any title to a rabbi for ‘j’ or for reform , lehavdil. No matter how ‘powerful’ they would be.
Facts are facts. Even katan cannot wish them away.
.Is there ANYONE in the anti-Zionist community who can actually formulate a cognizant response to the many thoughtful challenges presented to you in this thread?
@ YB
You wrote: Facts are facts. Even katan cannot wish them away.
Apparently he can. Witness the power of Indoctrination.
@ HaKatan
Your laziness to look at VaYoel Moshe or elsewhere is not an excuse for insinuating that others are making things up. See this post here, on these very boards, for example: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/refuting-the-three-oaths-gimel-shevuot#post-2266950
I did read that post, and other posts on that thread. You got trounced over there as well.
ZSK: No one needs your patience. The bottom line is even if someone is working or otherwise not a learner or Torah scholar, there is still every reason in the world that he absolutely should not join the Zionist army. Under any circumstances. Staying away from them isn’t contingent on being in full time Torah study.
@HaKatan
Yes, even gedolim wrote nice titles. They had no choice, as Rabbi Kook was very powerful politically, and they had to deal with him.Again with your lies. I thoguht you said something thats in writing can’t be interpreted?? Now you are doing just that. So Satmar reba sefarim can’t be that he was really just anti secular and this was just a way to stop the secularism. Thats would be called an Interpretation. But all the gedolim claling him such high names including those in europe were because he was “powerful”. No interpretation there?
And whats the reason that after his passing for many years gedolim like R Elyashiv pubclally held him in high respct? Also because they were scared of his “power”?
And was he really so powerful politically that gedolim in Europe should be scared? Give me a break. He wasn’t so powerful. Ypu made that up and continue to make up youtr own rules. He was just well respected.
Botttom line, its Ok to say that most gedolim did not agree with zionsim from a hashkafa. We therefore need to go like the majorty. But to say that there is zero of a makor in out torah or to say its heresy is just your own hot headedness making things up.
“Non Political”
As I recall, your claim was that no poskim bring down the oaths as halacha.
So, I correctly pointed out that numerous poskim indeed do so, as the Satmar Rav brings down and as shown in that thread.Chaim:
Why are you accusing of lies? First of all, the Brisker Rav lived in E”Y, but that’s besides the point. His summoning the Brisker B”D for every title he had to use when addressing Rabbi Kook is documented in the Brisker Rav books, if I am not mistaken.Anyways, we’re making progress, B”H. You went from “eilu viEilu” to “most versus a few”. Please G-d, you will see the truth that Zionism is indeed universally acknowledged as the heresy and idolatry that it most obviously is.
Once again, to all the Zionists with the pathetic stories:
Please stop wasting time, and get back to the OP’s point.Re: my question about Yoma 9B.
Pnei Yehoshua (on Ketubot 111a) points out that Yoma 9b implies the opposite – that the redemption did not come because the Jews did not ascend as a wall. And since these two aggadic sources contradict each other, we must understand them in some other, non-halakhic way. (From footnotes on a shiur from R’ Eliezer Melamed).
I guess HaKatan got me on “just being lazy”
@ R’ Meir Simcha HaKohen of Dvinsk
אמנם כעת הסבה ההשגחה, אשר באספת הממלכות הנאורות בסאן
רעמא ניתן צו אשר ארץ ישראל תהיה לעם ישראל. וכיון שסר
פחד השבועות, וברשיון המלכים קמה מצות ישוב ארץ ישראל
ששקולה כנגד על המצוות שבתורה למקומה, מצוה על כל איש
לסייע בכל יכלתו לקיים מצוה זו.However, now providence has arranged, that through
the gathering of the great nation is San Remo a
mandate was made Israel belongs to the Jews. And
since the fear of the Oaths are gone, and with
permission of the nations comes the Mitzvah of
resettling Israel…..@ The Satmar Rav, V’Yoel Moshe
ויש טפשים האומרים שיען שהיה בהסכמת רוב האומות אין כאן
לא איסור שבועה ולא איסור העברה על הקץ, וכל כך גבר
החשכות וסמיות העינים שנפל על העולם לטעות בדברי הבלים
כאלו.There are fools that are saying that since there was an
agreement amongst most of the nations there is no
longer an Oath nor a prohibition of forcing the end.
This darkness and blindness has increased so much
that people are mistakenly following these words of
vanity.I will leave it to Hakatan, Somejew, and UJM to explain this passage in v’Yoel Moshe in light of the quote from R’ Meir Simcha HaKohen of Dvinsk.
Also, maybe they can shed light on why we should give greater weight to what the Satmar Rav wrote vs what R’ Meir Simcha wrote. In the meantime I will go watch some paint dry as I listen to the sweet chirping of crickets
@ Ramban
ולא נעזבה ביד זולתינו מן האומות או לשממה, והוא אומרו להם:
‘והורשתם את הארץ וישבתם בה כי לכם נתתי את הארץ לרשת
אותה’- הרי נצטווינו בכיבוש כל הדורות.It [the land] won’t be forsaken in the hands of other
nations nor won’t be destroyed, and it says ‘And you
shall take possession of the land and settle in it, for I
have assigned the land to you to possess.” We see that
we are commanded in conquering it in all generations.@ HaKatan
You are misquoting me. I did not claim that “no poskim bring the 3 oaths as Halacha.” I did ask you you to provide citations for your claims so that the specific points made can be addressed in the context of this post.
Rav Shmuel Auerbach, not a zionist by all accounts , refused the attempt to take out rav kuk’s haskama in me’orei ha’eish by r shlome zalman.
Look at the new edition published just a few years ago.
Rav kuks haskama is first.Also because rav’kuks powerful political influence of some 100 years ago ?
Come on.
Le’olam yehei adam modeh al ha’emet …
.The person who calls himself “Non Political” just gave us a relevant Ranban.
Someone please tell us, from where is that Ranban?
What is the source of that Ranban?
“Non Political ” gave us a relevant quote from Rabbi Meir Simcha HaKohen of Dvinsk.
What is the exact source of that quote?
somejew, I see references that Ohr Sameach signed multiple appeals for Keren Hayesod. Presumably, they appeared in newspapers that supported the same. How is that suspicious? What is the proof that those quotes were fake.
@ Square Root
Here you go:
רמב”ן השמטות לספר המצוות להרמב”ם, מצוה ד’
רבי מאיר שמחה מדווינסק הובא הרב מ. כשר מספרו התקופה הגדולה עמ’ קע”ה
The original source for the statement from R’ Meir Simcha of Dvinsk is a letter on behalf of Keren HaYesod
The original source for the statement from R’ Meir Simcha of Dvinsk is a letter on behalf of Keren HaYesod
@HaKatan
Most charedim held that Zionism is wrong and not that it’s Hersey. Furthermore non Charedim are holy too .
Your story with Briska rav sounds made up and it’s one story with one person . To say that all the big gedolim who addressed R kook were are all scared ? That’s just baloney beyond. Even more laughable is that R elashyuv proclaimed publicly many times what a goan R Kook was. Most gedolim almost all held R kook was a tzadik even if they disagree with Zionism . You won’t admit that because that proves in essence that Zionism isn’t heresy it’s just misguided according to many.HaKatan
Furthermore I still stick to what I said that most gedolim were against Zionism because of secularism and not because of the ideologyThis quote from Ranban demolishes the claims of the anti-Zionists:
_____________________________________________________
רמב”ן השמטות לספר המצוות להרמב”ם, מצוה ד’ולא נעזבה ביד זולתינו מן האומות או לשממה, והוא אומרו להם:
‘והורשתם את הארץ וישבתם בה כי לכם נתתי את הארץ לרשת
אותה’- הרי נצטווינו בכיבוש כל הדורות.It [the land] won’t be forsaken in the hands of other
nations nor won’t be destroyed, and it says:‘And you shall take possession of the land and settle in it,
for I have assigned the land to you to possess.”We see that we are commanded in conquering
[The Land of Israel] in ALL generations._____________________________________________________
If you understand what Ranban said in this message,
then you are one step closer to understanding that
Religious Zionism is the true Derech HaTorah of Moshe Rabbeinu
and Yehoshua his student, and all the Rabbis of the Mishnah.Religious Zionism is NOT Avodah Zarah or Kefirah.
On the contrary, it is ANTI-Zionism which is Avodah Zarah and Kefirah!
_____________________________________________________
Now watch the anti-Zionists ignore this message completely,
because they know that they cannot refute it.This quote from Rabbi Meir Simcha HaKohen of Dvinsk
refutes the claims of the anti-Zionists:
_____________________________________________________
רבי מאיר שמחה מדווינסק הובא הרב מ. כשר מספרו התקופה הגדולה עמ’ קע”האמנם כעת הסבה ההשגחה, אשר באספת הממלכות הנאורות בסאן
רעמא ניתן צו אשר ארץ ישראל תהיה לעם ישראל. וכיון שסר
פחד השבועות, וברשיון המלכים קמה מצות ישוב ארץ ישראל
ששקולה כנגד על המצוות שבתורה למקומה, מצוה על כל איש
לסייע בכל יכלתו לקיים מצוה זו.
_____________________________________________________
However, now Providence has arranged,
that through the gathering of the great nations in San Remo,
a mandate was made that the Land of Israel belongs to the Jews.And since the fear of the [Three] Oaths is gone,
and with permission of the nations comes
the mitzvah of resettling the Land of Israel,
which is equal to all of the mitzvot in the Torah.Every Jew [literally, every man] is required to help,
with all his ability, to comply with this mitzvah.
_____________________________________________________
If you understand what Rabbi Meir Simcha HaKohen
of Dvinsk said in this message,
then you are one step closer to understanding that
Religious Zionism is the true Derech HaTorah of Moshe Rabbeinu
and Yehoshua his student, and all the Rabbis of the Mishnah.Religious Zionism is NOT Avodah Zarah or Kefirah.
On the contrary, it is ANTI-Zionism which is Avodah Zarah and Kefirah!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.