- This topic has 302 replies, 46 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 6 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
It was either my R”Y quoting Rav Shach or the book about him that I read, where he is quotes as saying something along the lines that Neturei Karta do what we can’t do. I understood whatever the wording of the quote was to mean that he shares the same ideology as Neturei Karta (at least before they started shaking ahmedinejad’s hand) but for what I assume is political reasons, he felt he could not act on it.
Also my R”Y is vehemently opposed to all forms of Zionism, which leads me to believe that whatever Rav Ahron may have agreed to as a possibility of the state becoming, he would not agree with its current incarnation.
That is all I have to say about this topic in its current CR gilgul.
“You can’t throw out the window a bifeirush gemara, the Rambam, poskim, the Maharal, acharonim, the Chofetz Chaim, the Satmar Rov, Rav Elchonon Wasserman, Rav Aharon Kotler, the Brisker Rov, the Chazon Ish, et al.”
You have yet to sight a halachic source, a teshuva or a code, from “Poskim” or Acharonim, that say that the oaths are binding l’halacha. The Rambam in Iggeres Teiman is not saying that the oaths are binding l’halacha. There is no issur in trying to take back E”Y by force. The Rambam is rather saying that attempts to do so by Messianic pretenders are doomed to fail. Rambam is saying it is foolish, not assur. If they succeed on the other hand . . .
In learning Torah Sh’Bal Peh one has to be able to differentiate between aggada and halacha, between drush and pshat, between rhetoric and substance. Each has its place, but if you mistake one for the other you will be in error.
Just Emes, mdd etc. – There’s no point arguing history with trolls, everyone knows that trolls see time backwards.
Again- no one is endorsing secular zionism (ie a land for us in order to be like all other nations)- rather i have said that there were great gedolim-like Rav Moshe-the Moetzes(beis din of klal yisrael)-Ohr Sameach etc.. who allowed the creation of the state- whether because oaths did not apply as per balfour,UN, defensive war etc OR while brought down by some poskim as halacha not halacha limassah according to all opinions OR dont apply anymore as per R”chaim vital after 1000yrs (quoted in thread). Secondly, you say they had a koach that Hashem allowed the state– that’s because we have a concept “lo’ Bashamaim He” it is not in the heavens- but rather we human beings who are worthy of issuing a psak halacha and are in the majority(in our case Rav Moshe, Moetzes, Ohr Sameach etcc) can make it so- so when the Posek Hador and Beis din of Klal Yisrael paken -it’s not just that it was allowed by Hashem- but it is Hashem’s will that it should be so because of the koach of the Majority such as Moetzes Rav Moshe and others. By the way this in no way takes away from the opinion of great gedolei yisrael like Satmar rav,Rav kotler , and Rav elchanon just that it was an eilu vi’eilu and the majority opinion on the Beis Din said ok- and therefore Hashem not only allowed it but willed it. Thirdly, no one is overlooking the problems with the state – rather also recognizing and being machshiv the good just as in mitzraym. And the description that mitzrayim is different because they hosted us is ridiculous – they did not leave chocolates on our pillows! – they killed us and enslaved us and removed us from kedusha for 210 yrs — the state allows us to practice yiddishkeit,tries to protect us with their own lives,and has even given subsidies to yeshivas and kollels for 60yrs -So Please – see the real history here.
Just Emes, stop wasting time with HaKatan and he’ll go away (to Kiryas Yoel).
DM, Rav Shach did not hold that the medinah and IDF must be disbanded as the NK holds.
DH: Rav Shach used to stand up when his grandson entered the Beis Medrash in his army uniform. I find that quote unlikely.
benignuman:
I assume you meant “cite”, not sight in your post.
Anyways:
There are sites that mention the following hold the oaths as halacha:
Piskei Riaz, Kesubos 13:8
Shailos Uteshuvos Rivash, Siman 101
Maharal (Netzach Yisroel, Chapter 24)
Just Emes:
You haven’t addressed my point that the “Beis Din of Klal Yisrael”‘s psak, whatever that was supposed to allow, was not what happened. So, therefore, that “psak” is anyways meaningless liMaaseh.
Again, bringing up the Ohr Sameach only underscores the crucial need to examine your Rav Moshe story in light of the questions I posed above. The Ohr Sameach did not condone Zionism in any form. He himself cited the oaths, too; but, because of San Remo, he allowed simple emigration to E”Y, not any political rule and not by any fighting, both of which Zionism terribly violated and continue to violate.
Just Emes (cont)
As well, I disagree with your chidush about Hashem willing any of this. CH”V that Hashem should want such a massive and enduring desecration of His holy name and the terrible misfortune on His children as you claim it was the ratzon Hashem because the “Beis Din of Klal Yisrael” paskened. Lu Yitzuyar, however, that their “psak” was actually followed (as per my above point), I would then concede that Hashem allowed it because of lo baShamayim hi; given the Brisker Rov’s position of the State being the Satan’s greatest triumph since the Egel, this would provide insight into why Hashem allowed the satan to put Klal Yisrael to such a test: because the gedolim said so.
You do realize that, essentially, you are blaming those members of the moetzes who did vote for the State (against the world-class great rabbis who voted no), for all the massive chillul Hashem, shmad, aveiros chamuros and other terrible things, spiritual and physical, that the Zionists have committed and continue to commit. According to you, it all happened because of those gedolim.
Just Emes (regarding Mitzrayim):
Given your screen name, and after reading your answer about the State being more worthy of Hakaras HaTov than Mitzrayim, I can only conclude that your Zionist leaning are tainting your ability to think objectively here.
You’re asking a question on a befeirush pasuk (not me) and then somehow trying to extend that to Zionism.
The Torah itself says “Lo Sisaev Mitzri…” and then it explains why, as I said, “ki ger hayisa biArtzo”. So even with all the terrible things the Mitzriyim did to us (and they did not do those terrible things from day one, speaking of “just emes”), they still did host us in their land for tens of decades, and that, the Torah says is worthy of Hakaras HaTov.
“Gadol haMachtio yoser min haHorgo”, certainly applies to Zionists, yet this also doesn’t matter to you.
Besides:
You still haven’t explained why the Zionists, nominal Jews, who still revere the Tanach as a cultural object because, in their warped view, it CH”V justifies their political existence in Eretz Yisrael. Why SHOULDN’T the Zionists allow Jews to be *gasp* practicing Jews? Why does this make them worthy of Hakaras HaTov?
As for the subsidies, the State only does this because they have to. It’s called buying influence, and this is history as well, none of which you seem to be interested in, for some reason, and this is a two-way street, despite the whining of the Zionists about it now.
It’s also interesting that you mention how mitzrayim “removed us from kedusha for 210 yrs”, yet you completely ignore all the shmad the Zionists have committed, where they have certainly changed a Jew to be far less distinct than we were in Mitzrayim, and you immediately mention Zionism in that same sentence while leaving all this out. Why?
And even if you live in Eretz Yisrael under Israel’s “protection”, you still haven’t addressed my arsonist fireman example. But for someone who doesn’t live there, who has no reason to be makir tov to that fireman, I certainly disagree with your assertion regarding hakaras haTov.
mdd, I would imagine that in Kiryas Yoel they would sooner tell you that the holy Rav Moshe was wrong and that their holy Rebbe was correct. I did not do so.
Thanks for contributing substantively to the discussion.
Regarding the 1,000 years allegation, this is also untrue. Rav Chaim Vital did not say the three oaths last only 1,000 years. We cannot post links, but the explanation of what he does say, which is a separate matter, can be found via Google.
Regarding it not being liMaaseh, even the “Religious Zionists” know the oaths are an issue. They convince themselves of absurd “solutions” (some based on distortions and forgeries, some simply not compatible with our Torah) to avoid the issue, but even the Zionists admit to the oaths being an issue. Poskim bring it, the Rambam brings it, the Maharal brings it, the Brisker Rov brings it and the Satmar Rov brings it, among many others.
Again, following that knessiah, the Zionists foolishly did not abide by the “psak of the beis din of Klal Yisrael” (which did not explicitly address the oaths, and what the halachic ramifications of that “psak” were) that the Zionists would not interfere with religion, thereby anyways rendering that “psak”, for whatever it did mean, null and void.
The Rav Moshe story requires far more clarification for it to be meaningful here.
The Chofetz Chaim, the Brisker Rov, Rav Elchonon, the Satmar Rov, Rabbi Rottenberg and many others have been shown to be very correct regarding the many disasters, both physical and spiritual, that the Zionists have brought on our people, Hashem Yishmor.
Again, the Zionists cannot justify their idolatry.
Katan,
I looked up that site and his claim is simply not correct. I looked up Rav Chaim Vital’s exact statement in “Kol Kitvei HaArizal” (Rav Vidovski ed.p. 8) and he says “the time of the oath is until 1,000 years” and goes on to quote the Zohar in Vayera 4 117a in the name of Rabbi Yossi.It is clear that he is speaking about our oath.
the collective door of the Jewish people, six awakenings to call us to awaken and reach for greatness. These six knocks were the six miraculous events accompanying the establishment of
the State of Israel:
? The first knock was political; the alliance of the United States and USSR to vote for the existence of the Jewish State.
? The second was military; the victory of the tiny Jewish forces, handicapped by an arms embargo and massively outnumbered.
? The third was theological; the refutation of Notzri doctrine by demonstrating that the Jewish people will again be a vibrant player on the world stage.
? The fourth was sociological; the fact that Jews from around the world felt proud to be Jewish and free to re-engage with their Jewish identity.
? The fifth was an international change of attitude due to the birth of the State of Israel; the fact that Jews had a position of power and a homeland meant that Jewish blood could no
longer be spilt freely and without fear of retribution.
? The sixth and final knock was the influx of exiles; the return to Israel of Jews from across the
world.
Any quote of the Chofetz Chaim against Zionism is really a bad example as he died in 1933 before 1948. Before the Holocaust many Gedolim were against Zionism in its form at that time, they changed their mind after the Holocaust.
One cannot guess what the Chofetz Chaim would have said after the Holocaust and Eastern European Jewery was destroyed and had to move elsewhere.
Avi K,
From searching elsewhere, it seems he is correct; as he says, it refers to Hashem’s oath of 1,000 years of galus, not the plural oaths that Klal Yisrael are bound by.
Besides, it’s brought liHalacha by gedolim and well after that 1,000 years elapsed. I read elsewhere that even Rav Ovadiah Yosef dismisses this by writing that they should read what is said about it in Vayoel Moshe.
He also answers Rabbi Aviner’s kuntreis as well, one of whose points is the one we just discussed.
Here too, the Three Oaths are certainly aggadah but they contain unique halachos. The poskim (though not the Shulchan Aruch, who only brings the most relevant laws) do quote them as halacha.”
There is actually a long list, far longer than what I have mentioned here.
Regarding Kol Dodi Dofek, how does any of this address the three oaths, much less “answer” them? We’re all still in Galus and this protection from Hashem is not less needed because of these “opportunities” granted. Miracles don’t condone anything.
There are explanations for all these, anyways. But #5 is clearly wrong.
“…due to the birth of the State of Israel; the fact that Jews had a position of power and a homeland meant that Jewish blood could no longer be spilt freely and without fear of retribution.”
Israel is the laughing-stock of the nations and is the ultimate “galus Jew”.
ZDad, that would disqualify Rabbi Kook, too.
Once doesn’t need to guess; they could move anywhere, likely including Eretz Yisrael, but nothing can make that idol kosher. The halachic issues are just as valid; the only thing that changed was the tactics in dealing with it post-1948. But the issues, including the 3 oaths, as Rabbi Reisman wrote, never changed.
Hakatan,
1 The new and more viscious Russian pogroms that began in the 1880’s and spurred mass migration had nothing to do with Zionism
2. The widespread death and destruction of Jewish communities of eastern Europe caught between the Russian and German armies in WW1 had nothing to do with Zionism
3. The millions of Jews caught in Communist Russia after the war and were effectively divorced from Yiddishkeit had nothing to do with Zionism.
4. Hitler’s rise to power had nothing to do with Zionism
5. The post war pogroms in Poland are an indication of what Jews would have continued to face, Israel or no Israel.
The point being, Jews have been massacred and shmadded in far greater numbers than caused by Zionism and who is say that it wouldn’t have continued if Zionism didn’t exist? History has shown that Jews would still be dying
While its very true there is no way to know if Rav Kook would have changed his mind after 1948, It does seem more likely The Chofetz Chaim would have changed his mind rather than Rav Kook.
The Facts were totally different, It wasnt the same Shailah anymore. for many Palestine was the only place to go (While the US did open borders, it wasnt unlimited)
After 1948 Many who were opposed dropped their opposition and only the Satmar Rebbe kept his previous position
Prior to 1939 the Satmar Rebbe forbid his followers from going to the US, yet he himself emigrated there in 1946 (I think) after going to Palestine first (which is also forbid in 1939)
he realized things had changed and going back to Hungary was not an option anymore
Katan,
1.Rav Chaim Vital specifically refers to our oath just before saying that :”the oath” is only for 1,000 years.
3. The answers to Rav Aviner are not answers. For example, he asks why previous generations did not try to conquer EY if it is a mitzva in our time. The answer is simple: they were anoosim. Jews did not receive military training and were barredfrom owning weapons. Thus whenever a riot broke out they had to beg or bribe the local nobleman to protect them.
4. The thesis of “Kol Dodi Dofek” is that Hashem has knocked.
Just as an interlude to all this discussion, I just this evening came across a story (from a few months ago) of a Jew who was stabbed by 15 pereh adam savages in Venice.
Here are the closing comments of the reporter “lifi tumo”:
“It is sad to see that such racial violence in still prominent in the world we live in today. This is only one of many recent attacks on the Jewish people. With all that is going on in Israel these days, it is unlikely that these acts of hate will stop.”
Note that last line. Again, this was in Venice, not Gaza.
While the murderers who committed this act are the ones who are responsible, this incident (among countless others) happened very likely only because of Zionism and their idiotic and irresponsible antagonizing of the Arabs.
lesschumras:
With all due respect, your post makes no sense. Zionism and Israel have nothing to do with freedom to practice our faith throughout the western world. Zionism and Israel are, however, responsible for tens of thousands of Jews who were sacrificed on the altar of their idolatrous State, thousands in the 1948 war alone. We discussed all this.
And none of the shmad perpetrated the Zionists can be expected to have occurred elsewhere. Before the Zionists shmadded them in Israel, the Yemenites had their Mesorah and resultant seforim, etc. intact from bayis rishon. Similarly, other sefardim and ashkenazim as well, were shmadded to Zionism (and I don’t mean “religious Zionism”).
None of this would (presumably) have happened without Zionism.
(Regarding the Holocaust, I believe it was Rav Gifter who wrote that it was common knowledge among the gedolim in the 1900s that Hitler YM”Sh was a divine agent of chastisement due to supporting Zionism. Other Gedolim may not have held that way, but it seems there were many gedolim who did. So your point there is not true according to some.)
ZDad:
Practical issues of some refugees emigrating to Eretz Yisrael is not the issue. And Jews lived in Eretz Yisrael before Zionism, too, and I am not aware of anybody who claimed it was a problem for them to do so.
The issue is Zionist conquest and intentionally bringing people there en mass which were both terrible violations of those respective oaths pre-1948 and remained just as assur post-1948.
The only change post-1948 for “non-Satmar” was dealing with the State from within to salvage whatever was possible there. As Rabbi Reisman wrote, the oaths did not change.
Avi K:
Regarding R’ Chaim Vital, again, he is not speaking of these gimmel shevuos.
The whole premise is absurd for the following reason:
The oaths are a protection for us in galus, even according to Rabbi Aviner. So, again, as we are still in galus past that 1,000 years, expiring that protection before the end of galus is foolish for obvious safety reasons.
To try to clarify further, however:
He brings the following, in his piece:
The oath in question is a separate oath about the length of the exile.
[than 1000 years]
So, even according to Rav Chaim Vital, that 1,000 year was not a hard limit. But it’s anyways irrelevant because he’s discussing a different oath.
Regardless, it’s not our oaths. Also, even if it were, there are two oaths that Zionism violates, not “just” one. So at least one is still being violated even if you were correct.
About Rav Gifter — total baloney -propaganda.
HaKatan still insists that 2+2=9. Anybody agreeing? Where is Joe(About Time)?
And let him not speak of cheap pot shots. They are as cheap as his propaganda.
Avi K:
Regarding Rabbi Aviner, if they are not answers to him then that is only because his questions are not really questions.
Unlike his “answer”, which he needs because he is a Zionist, previous generations did not do what Zionism did, not because they were “anusim”; in fact, many in previous generations did go to Eretz Yisrael to live there and this was okay; the simple reason they did not do so militarily and en mass is that they knew it was assur because of the oaths.
The Yemenites were under such deplorable conditions (shmad) that they did ask the Rambam. And in Iggeres Teiman, the Rambam told them not to rebel against the nations because of the oaths.
Although “BiMakom Chilul Hashem Ain cholkim kavod LaRav”, since I don’t wish to paskin that this is such a case, I write the following with all due respect to Rabbi Soloveichik.
Regarding Kol Dodi Dofek, I already asked you where the Torah allows “opportunity” to, CH”V override halacha. I also wrote that Rabbi JBS was also historically mistaken about this “opportunity” of Israel which, objectively speaking (even without the oaths), we would have been likely far better off without, just as he was famously mistaken with his other prediction about traditional Orthodoxy not lasting in America while a few decades later the MO decries traditional Orthodox “triumphalism” as MO moves either further left or to the “right”.
Zionists have no answers.
mdd, please learn a little bit about the topic before you post.
I guess you’re still considering 5+4 to be 2+2, which is why you are surprised when the answer comes up as 9, to use your example.
Regarding cheap shots and propaganda, did you not learn in pre-school that two wrongs don’t make a right? And did you not learn to discuss something at its merits and not take cheap shots?
Even if what I wrote were only propaganda or otherwise wrong, that would not give you the right to take cheap shots.
mdd, the quote I mentioned regarding Zionism and the Holocaust seems to have been from the Satmar Rav, not Rav Gifter. I apologize for the error in who said it. I had actually meant to refer to Rav Hutner in his piece in the Jewish Observer, October 1977 where he referred to Zionists rewriting history to cover up their role in the Holocaust.
But since I mentioned Rav Gifter, here is part of what Rabbi Gifter said about Zionism:
“We know the truth. The truth is that Zionism is a curse, and that’s the way it is. Zionism is murder! And that’s what it really is, because it is true! Who threw the Jews into the ocean when they wanted to travel to Eretz Yisroel in 1941? Who sank the boat (called the ‘Patria’) with about 1000 Jews on it? Who? The Nazis? Zionists did it! Yes, the Zionists! What is that? Is it not murder? Murderers!! Because of Zionism, one is allowed to kill Jews? Didn’t these murderers say that the Jews of Europe are the “sacrifices” which we have to bring to have a Jewish “state” in Eretz Yisroel (G-d forbid)? Didn’t they say this? Don’t they have printed black and white statements which everybody can read? Didn’t this man with the name, “Yitzchok Greenbaum” say in Warsaw that all religious Jews should be thrown into the ocean? And all this because of Zionism! And he wasn’t ashamed of these words! I ask you: Is this right? Is this being nice? Is this grace? This is MURDER! Without any excuse, it is murder!”
Katan,
1. Rambam says that they are ??? ???. Moreover, he does not bring them in Mishna Tora. The Tor and Shulchan Aruch also do not bring them. They are not halacha.
2. The Patria was sunk by accident. The intent was to disable it so that the British ym”s could not send it back.
3. What you wrote about the Yemenites is nonsense.
4. I do not know of the this quote. In any case, many peopel have said many things about opposing factions. This says nothing about the movement or its function in history.
5. The oaths, if they were ver binding, were limited to a maximum of when Hashem obviates them through His hand in history. Those who do not see it are, as Rav Soloveichik termed it,”those whose eyes are shut”.
Avi K -“2. The Patria was sunk by accident. The intent was to disable it so that the British ym”s could not send it back.”
I honestly don’t know if it was or not. But was all those terrorist acts that I listed in the other topic also “Accidents”?
hakatan- 1)you must differentiate between zionism and the state of israel today- zionism – the belief that we should be as all others was wrong- and many of the gedolim you quote wrote prior to the holocaust- and were referring to that belief system -but the state- in and of itself- is neutral because it’s a democracy- if the frum will be the majority (which it will be given the current birth rate in some years) then it will be run completely frum and even now — we have a rabbanut and religious divisions that oversee religious issues- marriage divorce kashrus etc..–plus these jews who are not frum are tinokos she’nishba – and are considered not to be acting bi’mezid intentionlly and it is our duty to bring them closer to yiddishkeit to accomplish this goal further.
2)The Moetzes( BD of Klal Yisrel) voted in favor by a majority– and it is not i but the Brisker rav who said that ,because of this ruling the state will come about — plus they held it was no problem if had true Torah borders. They also said it should be frum. They hoped it would be frum (this was debated 11yrs before the state was created and much transpired in that time.) I don’t know if you know this but it is a historical fact that the people who created the state meant well even if not religious and there were rabbanim at the announcement of the state in Tel aviv. Further- even the flag of israel is made of blue and white (resembling techeles) and the 2 blue lines with the magen david in the middle represented the jews going through the yam suf on the way to get the Torah and EY –read any history book for these symbolisms. Their intentions were to go back and live in EY – our land. Even the Baal Shem and the Gra sent their talmidim there. Plus the gemarah says that when EY starts blooming again we have entered the stages of geula and after hundreds of years of desolation the land is green and flowing – proving that this was a positive development. No one is saying that secular zionsists didn’t do anything wrong- we are saying they did -but even so the state is not zionism in and of itself but a seperate democratic entity and should be judged hashkafically and halachakily independently of zionsim
Avi K.
1. Yes, they were obviously written in an allegorical manner (hishbati eschem…im tachpitzu…es haAvaha….). But their halachic status and the Rambam’s advice to the Yemenites quoting those oaths was clearly not Derech Mashal. And many other poskim bring them liHalacha, some of whom I already quoted for you. They are clearly halacha, Zionist fantasies not withstanding.
2. Health dealt with #2. Besides, even if it were accidental as they claim, they took a chance detonating explosives on a ship full of Jews because of Zionist reasons.
3. Even the Zionists admit this; they had a Committee of Inquiry about it. HaModia recently had a whole piece on the Yaldei Teheran scandal too. You don’t need to be more Zionist than the Zionists, though I do understand that uncomfortable facts could diminish one’s belief in this idolatry.
4. Your lack of knowledge says nothing about their history.
5. Again, this makes no sense, as I wrote. Even if your “no longer needed” sevara were theoretically true, it’s clearly not true in this case because of the disaster of Zionism on both a physical and spiritual level, with its ongoing shmad even today.
Zionism has no answers.
Just Emes, the core issues of the oaths applies to both Zionism in general and the State of Israel in particular.
The Brisker Rov, among others, quoted at that same Knessiah (I think) said even if it were run “al pi Torah” and had gedolim at its helm, it would still be assur to found that State.
You’re also mixing up living there individually or in small groups with CH”V violating the oaths. That the Gra and Baal Shem sent talmidim there, then, is also irrelevant because doing so did not violate the oaths, unlike Zionism and Israel which did and does.
You wrote:
“the gemarah says that when EY starts blooming again we have entered the stages of geula and after hundreds of years of desolation the land is green and flowing – proving that this was a positive development.”
This is not emes. The gemara, of course, is. The land certainly does seem to be “green and flowing”. But your conclusion, however, is your own. The land blooming does not mean it was muttar to disregard the oaths and vaChai baHem and viNishmartem and whatever else, even if that would mean that we would “enter the stage of the geulah”. Other than for pikuach nefesh, you’re not allowed to do any aveiros no matter how wonderful you think the outcome will be.
As an example, Eishes Potiphar also had a good cheshbon: she knew that she and Yosef HaTzaddik were going to have a common descendent who would be a tzaddik. She had a nevuah! So, according to your logic, this should have allowed Yosef to live with her. Yet he obviously didn’t because doing so was wrong. It’s Hashem’s cheshbon to make that nevuah happen. It so happens that it came true via his marriage to Osnas.
The ends don’t justify the means, and, in this case, both the ends and means of Zionism and the State have been disastrous for our people, despite the Yeshivos and learning there.
Just Emes:
Again, the outcome was definitely not positive.
Both Zionism and the State have committed appalling acts of treachery against our people.
The Brisker Rov and Chazon Ish and many others were absolutely against the State even after it was founded, regardless of minor differences like voting and other damage control measures. Your “B”D of Klal Yisrael” only goes so far. It certainly can’t change the Torah (nothing can), only work within it. According to what you mentioned, Hashem allowed these Rabbis to dictate world events via their psak that the State should be founded. This seems possible. But this does not make it good.
Do you also think the egel was a good thing, too? After all, Aharon HaKohein asked for the jewelry which was used to make it. (Obviously, we know that he was stalling, etc.) Again, here, you are blaming those Rabbis who voted for the State’s creation as the ones responsible spiritually for its creation (maybe they also had a cheshbon). So, it’s like the egel, except, there, it was the Micha who threw in Alei Shor, whereas here it was those Rabbis who paskined it should be created so Hashem listened to them. Wonderful!
But does that change the reality of what happened in either case? Do you not understand that far more Jews died for this idol than (directly) from the egel? Why is this so difficult to understand? You admit the secular Zionists did bad things, which is putting it very mildly. So why are you so enraptured by their egel, which is still a disaster and shmad entity? Does their shmad and other aveiros mean nothing to you that you want their State because of the minimal State religious trappings and the significant Torah that is learned there, especially when it’s assur to create that State and its continued existence continually violates the oaths?
And just today, even after all the rivers of blood spilled on the altar of Zionism and the State of Israel, there is yet another story on YWN:
Just Emes:
This is all not normal and none of this is (remotely, on balance) positive, unless you hold like the “MO/RZ” who feel it is “worth it” to sacrifice lives for a state, CH”V.
The State is very much a Zionist state. Netanyahu, at the recent chilul Hashem known as the Chidon HaTanach, claimed that our Tanach is, CH”V, the basis to justify their Zionist state. Of course, the same Tanach that says lo sikrivu liGalos erva, was promptly (further) trampled on as a group of women sang (haTikva) in front of the crowd and these boys whose heads are filled with Tanach. Even for this, they couldn’t have at least gotten men to sing HaTikva. Again, this is at a celebration of learning/memorizing the holy Tanach, not, lihavdil, at some IDF induction ceremony. Does this not bother you?
But, regardless, you can’t divorce the State from Zionism; since the continued existence of the State, like Zionism, is a severe violation of both oaths. So while it might take a neis to correct these violations, that doesn’t change the reality that both Zionism and the State are against the Torah, even if Israel were to be headed by religious Jews.
There is no way to kosher this idolatry, neither Zionism nor its State.
Ad Masai atem pochasim al shtei haSiifim?
Katan,
1. Then why doesn’t he mention them in Mishna Tora? Why doesn’t the Tur? Why doesn’t the Shulchan Aruch.
2. True but it was a calculated risk in time of war.
3. Several committees of inquiry, including two established by Likud governments, showed that there was no such policy. All but a few of the children were accounted for as having died. The tehran children were, in fact, saved form Soviet shmad.
4. You can make up whatever you want.
5. On the contrary, Zionism is a beracha on both a spiritual and physical level. Rav Soloveichik said that if not for the establishment of the State the Jews would have converted out in the national depression following the Holocaust (which could have been averted if not for anti-Zionism, as Rav Teichtal writes in Em HaBanim Semeicha – he equates it with the Sin of the Spies).
6. This is specifically said to be a sign of the Geula. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
7. The Three Oaths have not been binding for a long time, if they have ever been. I have proven this conclusively many times. I refer you to my previous posts on the subject.
Avi K -“3. Several committees of inquiry, including two established by Likud governments, showed that there was no such policy. All but a few of the children were accounted for as having died.”
How come you have No Busha to repeat over the same lies to promote Zionist propaganda? I posted this historical article in the topic of Yemenite children:
It seems that even the Israeli Govs’. last commission didn’t have the guts to outright deny the truth, like you just did. I guess you believe in Zionism more than they do. At what point is believing in something and lying to cover up all the wrongs committed by that thing considered AZ?
Hakatan- I am not blaming anyone chas vishalom- I am just reporting the brisker rav’s thought on the moetzes decision that the state will come about. From what I understand the gedolim that allowed it said that it should be religious as well. That was their decision. They said that- 11yrs prior to founding of state and before the holocaust- it is very possible that because of the holocaust the practical outcome of the state becoming primarily religious had changed because many frum Jews were killed and Torah institutions were uprooted during that time. Plus the gedolim at the time were dealing with a theoretical issue as the state required a lot more items in the process to come about. Plus that is all based on a story from the brisker rav’s position on the issue – it does not mean that the that everyone held that bizmanenu their decisions would make the outcome
Avi K:
1. Popa already answered you earlier. Again, he used the oaths as the basis for a recorded psak. And other poskim did bring them. And Zionist Rabbis still struggle (unsuccessfully) to explain them away. They are halacha, despite Zionists wishing they weren’t.
2. There only took that risk for political reasons. It was totally unnecessary, except that to Zionists any benefit to the State is more important than pikuach nefesh.
3. Health dealt with this.
4. You opt to remain ignorant, and this does not change history.
5. Rabbi Teichtal was not a Zionist. His hakdama says so. This is all nonsense.
6. Who said it is? Zionists, who have no problem with shmad of Jews, and who make nationalism a religious obligation greater than pikuach nefesh?
7. Your fantasies have been disproven, and I have tried to bring that for you.
You remain deluded by this egel. Rav Elchnon, the Brisker Rov and many others condemned nationalism and Zionism in the harshest terms. You rely on sevaras which anyways aren’t sevaras to go against them. Good luck.
Just emes:
“Plus that is all based on a story from the brisker rav’s position on the issue”
This position is documented numerous times and the Chazon Ish and Brisker Rov discussed this after the State’s establishment. Unlike the Agudah’s knessiah, this was not a theoretical discussion.
The Torah never changes. That’s emes, unlike some of the other assertions here. Please answer the questions I posed before trying to find sevaros to be mattir A”Z and kefira and throwing out gemara, poskim, et al.
It is outrageous that HaKatan continues with his lies and distortions. Namely, he tries to ignore the fact that most Gedolim do not hold like Brisk/Satmar.
HaKatan has no answers!
OK so here is what I learned in Beis Ya’akov in Eretz Yisroel in our history lessons about the establishment of the state:
After the state was established the Brisker Rav said “The state of Israel is a smile from the Kadosh Baruch Hu. Just like we are happy when HKBH gives us a mentally handicapped child. True the state is mentally handicapped but is a child of Hashem”
mdd, I did mention both sides of the Moetzes debate, for what that debate was worth. Since you obviously missed it before, here is Rabbi Reisman, as quoted in the Flatbush Jewish Journal:
“Although most of the Torah rabbis opposed the establishment of a Jewish state in our ancient homeland, once it was established in 1948, the attitude of some leading rabbis changed to one of working with the government…As Rabbi Reuven Grozovsky wrote, the ideals don’t change. The ideal of sticking to the three oaths remains. But because the facts on the ground have changed, therefore our behavior is different.”
Notice he wrote “most of the Torah rabbis”, not “Brisk/Satmar” rabbis. Notice also that even after 1948 “sticking to the three oaths remains”. So regarding lying/distorting, is this, perhaps, a case of kol haPoseil biMumo Poseil?
To clarify your mistake, it is the Zionists who have no answers.
“Grow up Already”:
It’s possible someone else said this (as wrong as it may be). But considering everything the Brisker Rov said about Zionism, it is not possible that that the Brisker Rov said anything like what you quote. Did your B”Y teacher happen to give you a source for this alleged quote?
By the same token, was the Egel HaZahav also a “smile from HaKadosh Baruch Hu” and a “child of Hashem”? Because he said the State of Israel was the Satan’s greatest triumph since the egel, among many other things about Zionism and the State.
HaKatan, stop your lies!! Forget about 1937, etc. Agudah Gedolim who are a clear majority do not go by your extreme Satmar/Brisk shittos. Your dreing is outrageous!
Again, HaKatan has no answers!!!
NO, She clearly quoted the Brisker Rav. She is the daughter in law of one of the previous generation’s gedolim and as such I did not question her source (which she probably gave but as it was 20 years ago I don’t remember the source and yes I remember correctly as I too was shocked!)
As to the statements about the Egal Hazhav,I personally don’t see the ?????. Zionisim is an Egal Hazahav and the way the zionists treat the state is an Egal Hazahav. However once the state was established the Rav saw it as a retarded child.
Katan,
1. This was not a pesak but advice not to listen to a certain false messiah. He does not bring it in Mishna Tora. You cannot explain it away.
2. If it was unnecessary why were the British ym”s so intent on preventing their aliya? Obviously every additional Jew was of the utmost importance in the war.
3.Health merely reiterated old blood libels and relied on a mentally disturbed person who is in prison for violent crimes.
4.You opt to remain ignorant, and this does not change history.
5.I did not find that statement in either of his hakdamot.The closest was a modest statement that he did not come to settle a machloket among the gedolim. He also says that every setttlement in EY is a pekida of the Geula.
6. The Gemara says (Sanhedrin 98a – and see Rashi d”hmeguleh mizeh).
7.Your fantasies have been disproven, and I have tried to bring that for you. You are guilty of the sin of the spies. This was the whole thrust of Em HaBanim Semeicha and a long list of gedolim concur.
- The topic ‘The Dov Lipman Response�Controversial?’ is closed to new replies.