- This topic has 208 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 4 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Aveirah, your hatred is showing again.
You are mixing two arguments. If the argument is the Oaths, then it doesn’t matter whether it was religious or anti-religious Zionists who started the state. It would still be forbidden.
If your issue is that it’s run by anti-religious groups, then don’t mix it with the Oaths.Yes, the Ohr Sameach said that the Balfour Declaration nullified the oaths. Even if your argument is correct, and the British no longer being in charge reinstated them, the events would nullify them again – the British turned the question of what to do over to the UN, and the UN voted to have a Jewish state.
You are so blinded by your hatred that you can’t think logically.
I don’t know what was meant by “quasi-Zionist”. There is no Zionism just like there is no communist revolution. It happened: they got their state. There’s a country called Israel, in Eretz Yisroel, that houses about half the world’s Jews.
Whether or not you subscribe to 1930’s Zionism has no impact on bring pro-Israel or pro-Palastinian, other than the forces of bias.
Most Ashkenazy Gedolim took the view that although it may not have been good to start, once it’s here it is a legitimate country. That is how the Steipler says it.
The strength, parameters, and application of the Oaths are very not clear. The repulsion of all Rabbonim to the Zionist groups was because of their supplanting the Torah with Zionism.
Either way, it is a weird obsession to get all upset about a dead cult.
@Neville, ^, Ohr Sameach, Avira, and I all seem to agree that there is no problem at the Balfour time. Ohr Sameach of course is the most significant here, not just because he is the gadol between us, but he wrote that at the time.
Now, Avira nd you seem to make a point of “making a state”. I understand your emotions here – this is a major event that you do not like. But this is a very Zionist view, pardon me. Why is a “state” shaich to anything in halocho?
Do the Oaths say anything about a state? or about establishing malchus? having elections? building a Knesset building? Waiving a flag? I think not, they are only talking about arriving to EY. Please correct me if I missed the fine print.
HaLeiVi: You could, more or less, rewrite your comment to be about the Reform (instead of Zionism.)
Halevi…where does the steipler say that? He refers to religious zionism as a “deah kozeves” in kiryana d’igrasa, and expressed anti zionism elsewhere. His son, rav chaim, wrote that the state is not a legitimate country and people are therefore exempt from following its laws or paying taxes if they can get away with it.
I think you’re mixing up “it’s ok bedieved” with “let’s work with it bedieved”, because indeed the majority opinion was that it was a mitzvah or at least allowed to cooperate with the government and even join it for the toeles hatzibur and to minimize the damage that the zionists can do (moreso the latter). On that issue, it was basically the Hungarian gedolim and the Eidah which held not to, and everyone else held you could/should.
Halevi, also, there still is merit in discussing why zionism is wrong – because it has left its mark on even very frum people. Many frum jews identify with Israel on some level, and not just in the sense of defending the millions of jews who live there – that’s perfectly fine. But we’d feel the same if those jews lived in france or Italy; it’s nothing special to a Torah jew, the zionist narrative of being a “free people in our land” or having a “jewish” state which is anything but, situated on hallowed soil, creating laws that contravene halacha and speaking a bastardized corruption of the joly language…
That should bother a jew. He shouldn’t be able to identify positively with that or the tamei culture of the state; yet many of us feel a kinship over Israel. It represents us, somehow, even though it’s not torah observant.
So how can something not torah observant be Jewish, if jews are a nation – as rav saadya says – only because of the Torah? The answer is that zionism got in our heads and told us that there’s more to being a jew and the jewish nation than the Torah. There’s “something else” that makes one Jewish r”l.
That’s ths avodah zara of nationalism, and it has infiltrated our world. And talking about zionism helps to dispel this notion.
Read the letters rav elya ber vachtfogel wrote to the author of “the empty wagon” – most of what I wrote is straight from there.
DaMoshe,
“Aveirah, your hatred is showing again”
There’s irony in your complaining about AviraDeArah’s “hatred” when you consistently twist his username to attack him personally. Has he personally attacked you?
Neville, I’ve been thinking about something – i don’t think believing that the return of many jews to eretz yisroel being part of the geulah is zionism and/or inherently treif.
It’s when they mix the state up in it that it gets to be a problem; the state being a harbinger for moshiach is baseless, but the fact that jews returned(not all of whom came b’issur – only declaring the state was totally assur) could be kibutz golios – just like koresh was not moshiach or a vehicle for him… He was a goy.
Zionism is the identification of jews as a nation state by virtue of more than the torah, and an incorporation of political statehood, language, and land into our identity.
I don’t think it’s zionistic to think that the return of jews is a sign of moshiachs arrival. It’s zionistic to think that a prohibited, secular and anti Torah state in itself has redemptive powers, because again you’re saying that something outside the torah has Jewish value.
I personally don’t hold of it and the gedolim said it’s not true, but i don’t think such a shitah in and of itself makes someone zionistic
Avirah, this is the root of our differences.
I am a Zionist, but that doesn’t mean I support the government of the State. I wish the State was run by a religious government, in accordance with halacha. The fact that it isn’t doesn’t mean I have to oppose the very idea of the State of Israel.
Actually, chareidim are partly to blame for the way it is now. When the State was founded, they could have participated, and set up the groundwork for the laws to be based on halacha, but many refused, partially because of the urging from Satmar.
R’ Yoilish HAD to continue to oppose Zionism because of his actions during the Holocaust.
Had the chareidim tried to include religion during the formation of the State, things could be a lot different now.
At the end of the day, I support Jews having their own land, a place where the other nations can’t persecute us for being Jewish. Where the government won’t torture and kill us for practicing our faith. I look at that as a blessing from Hashem. I see the nevuah of “Od yeshvu z’keinim u’z’keinos b’rechovos Yerushalayim…” fulfilled. When R’ Akiva saw a fox on the Har haBayis, he laughed, because one nevuah coming true meant the others would as well. So I, too, can be happy about seeing a nevuah fulfilled, even if it’s not in a way that seems 100% good to me.
So in short – I can separate the government from the State itself. You seem unable to do so.DaMoshe,
“I am a Zionist, but that doesn’t mean I support the government of the State. I wish the State was run by a religious government, in accordance with halacha.”
What are the practical ramifications of this position, if any?
“When the State was founded, they could have participated, and set up the groundwork for the laws to be based on halacha, but many refused, partially because of the urging from Satmar.”
This is historical whitewashing. Do you really think the militantly secular Zionists, who viewed religion as primitive and chareidim as parasites would have entertained the notion of a “halachic” state?
“R’ Yoilish HAD to continue to oppose Zionism because of his actions during the Holocaust.”
I guess the former Satmar Rav is your version of the George Soros puppet master?
“a place where the other nations can’t persecute us for being Jewish”
We can practically still hear the echo of the red alert sirens and explosions over Israel, and Hamas is openly threatening to attack the Jerusalem day parade. The last time I was in Israel, I saw swastikas drawn on walls on Mt. Scopus. The medina certainly has not ended the persecution.
“Where the government won’t torture and kill us for practicing our faith.”
Tel Aviv recently forbade religious Zionists from setting up a prayer service on Yom Haatzmaut because there was to be a mechitza.
“When R’ Akiva saw a fox on the Har haBayis, he laughed, because one nevuah coming true meant the others would as well.”
Har Habayis is still desolate, R”L.
“I can separate the government from the State itself. You seem unable to do so.”
I’m not clear on what this means, similar to my first question.
Neville
In the Rebbe’s liftime? He still is alive! Just “neelam” for the time being. Com’on someone debating Chabad gotta know that 🙂
Avira > the state being a harbinger for moshiach is baseless, but the fact that jews returned(not all of whom came b’issur – only declaring the state was totally assur) could be kibutz golios
Great, this is a meaningful step forward! So, if we see Yidden coming to EY is positive, what next should have happened? (unrealistic ideas above about charedi medinah notwithstanding).
I don’t think Yidden in EY at the time were less religious than pre-war Poland and USA, with majority non-religious. Polish state tried to establish something along the lines of historical Vaad arba artzos, and Chofetz Chaim was writing forceful letters to Polish minister, explaining that such arrangement will make Rabbis subject to control of non-religious Jewish leaders, and he did not want it, and tried to make a case that Polish medina should not want it either.
So, what kind of entity could Jews have realistically? Ask British to stay or submit to Jordan and ask them to maintain separation between charedim and chiloim? I think the system that emerged with charedi community in many aspects separate from the state is close to what could be done realistically. So, as long as there is ability to maintain religious institutions, we should have at least same respect to Medinah that Chofetz Chaim had for Medina Polin.
I still have not gotten an answer from the Anti-Zionists as to what would have been wrong had they put the state in Africa, seemingly circumventing the Three Oaths.
If “The State” would have been a “Jewish” country which didn’t follow the Torah, the issue of redefining Jewish nationhood as something other than a nation which follows the Torah would still be there. עיין ספר בעיות הזמן מר’ ראובן גרוזובזקי זצ”ל.
The repulsion of all Rabbonim to the Zionist groups was because of their supplanting the Torah with Zionism.
That’s still a huge problem. Lots of Jews, even (maybe primarily) שומרי תורה ומצוות look at the Stare of Israel as our national pride rather than exclusive the Torah.
For example, many view the PM of Israel as a leader of our nation (and not merely pragmatically).
Neville, you wrote: “So you would say there’s no point in opposing communism today?”
You misunderstood the point there. All communist countries refer to their government as “the revolution”. This self-entitles them to a perpetual state of emergency, and anyone spreading wrong think is accused of counter-revolutionary behavior. But, we all know that once the revolution takes the reigns they are the government, and not the revolution anymore.
Likewise, Zionism was an ideology to move all Jews to Israel and establish a homeland. There is no such movement anymore. Now there is a country. When it was an actual, contagious movement, it caught people’s imagination and supplanted any other ideology — including Yiddishkeit itself — with the Zionist ideology. That was a real, actual threat; not a vort.
Avira, I can’t go and look it up now. It was a while back. But it was a response to a fanatical anti-Zionist.
HaLeiVi: Israeli Nationalism is the Zionism of today that is the ideology and movement claiming to supplant Yiddishkeit, and capturing people’s imagination, much the same way as pre-State Zionism.
Ujm, it’s a movement to do what?
Wow. Someone was just Motzi Shem Ra on an undisputed Gadol BiYisroel right here? I would expect this on Twitter. But are we really going to stoop to Gedolim bashing here?
Besides for the obvious false connection being drawn, to accuse a Gadol of hypocrisy and then to mess with the Torah as a cover-up, is the most hideous post in this site.
Who’s next? The Ramban Paskenned things to make his mother-in-law happy? Do we stop at Amoraim, Tannaim, Neviim?
The old time discussions always ended up getting closed. I guess they overheated. I was hoping we can give it a shot without that happening.
Speaking of which, avoid things like “you’re just being absurd”, and cut to the chase.
“As for Zionists being a mythical creature, you’re just being absurd. Would you also say that to someone who self-identifies as a religious zionist?
We can all picture the archetypal zionist…”
That’s a group, not really a movement. There’s no goal, no capturing the imagination, definitely not contagious, and they’re religious anyhow. I do not agree with how they put the state as a central Jewish piece, which puts them out there as one amongst many groups that I/we feel are somewhat misguided to varying degrees.
There really is no threat today, and Zionism per se is gone ever since the actual Zionist movement accomplished their goal. Fighting them, warning about them, is as important as being wary of corporeal theology.
True Zionism will not be gone until Mashiach comes. That is the true Zionism – wanting to be returned to Eretz Yisrael, with the Beis haMikdash, and for galus to end. The true Zionists are the ones who daven every day, who say hamachazir shechinaso l’tziyon.
I wouldn’t call this a debate. It’s a rabble.
…The sound of something being above your head…
Is that a dare?
Neville, firstly thanks for confirming what i’ve suspected these past years. Now in one of your 1st posts on this extensive thread, you mentioned the romanticizing of the 50s/60s era. I for one don’t romanticize any era, because I see the shtick that goes on these days too. The only thing i’ve romanticized all along (and which is barely found) is:
(1) the attribute of speaking simply & concisely to-the-point (with kind intent), rather than sophisticated jargon penned by non-empaths
(2) the attribute of true empathy, and that includes being an enabler rather than a suppressor. So for example, Zetruth hit the nail on the head when stating “why cant we find an option here to edit/delete our posts and accounts”.Just like designers of houses and vehicles can make/or/break people depending upon how compassionate their designs are, the same goes for programmers.
Edited – sorry no links
So Neville, after 2 weeks and 175 posts later, has anything really changed or will you be taking another 4 year hiatus and returning again in 2027 like the Rip Van Winkle of the CR bemoaning the fact that Trump had another election stolen from him and Hunter Biden has announced his candidacy to run against Don Jr. in the 2028 Presidential elections.
So it wasn’t you getting off that plane with an umbrella in your hand smiling at the cameras and intoning “peace in our time”???
This site is a real throwback. People post what they want, and others respond. A non response is nothing. ‘Not interested’ and ‘not worth my time’ and ‘offline’ all get the same nothing. Almost everywhere else, your post is constantly being measured in views and likes.
Also, many of the modern day social sites, cater to groupthink. Post certain thoughts, and you will get hounded or go viral. I sometimes notice new posters here seeming surprised at a limited response. On twitter or WhatsApp it would be never ending.
The mods are a big reason for this. A lot that does not get through is not because of the actual post, But because they know what the next potential post will be. So long as we have mods at the wheel, the fabric of the site is the same. The changes are partly in that the interface has aged. But mostly in the users.
Neville you asked (above) “when did i romanticize the 60s?”
hark back to page 1:QUOTE: With all due respect, what was called “Orthodox” in your youth was just a misnomer. There were shuls without mechitzas that identified as Orthodox in the 50s/60s. That’s not an era that we should be romanticizing.
and so i responded to that:
“I for one don’t romanticize any era, because I see the shtick that goes on these days too. yada yada”On 2nd thought – oh for simpler days when 4 bucks could buy you a case of 4oz. snack-bags rather than a measly bag of 4oz. snacks. Though I don’t even recall for sure if there were 4oz. snack-bags back then! And no AI (which even makes IT guys’ blood run cold) and no GPS which misguidedly directs cars to wrong sides of big buildings.
P.S. to the last poster, i like aged interfaces, depending how they were designed when they were “young”. I never liked the YW interface from squat, least of all its limitations, but also i’ve barely anything in common with most people online and off. BTW i do =not= like aged-wine or aged-cheese nor young-wine or young-cheese.
mr avira de ara.
youre gedolim tought you that torah was given לעשות שלום בעולם or the oppisite.
what about motzi shem ra? lashon hara, shkarim??
you believe in hashem? how can you say such apikorses?
learn some chassidus, and start derhering that there is a g-d, he loves every jew – including you.
and you should love every jew because every jew is g-d’s child.
the rebbe also loves you more than you love yourself, and he loves every jew even the biggest misnagdim who hated him.
so sad to see litvishe hashkofos – if only they tasted chassidus, טעמו וראו כי טוב הDear Sechel,
Avira doesn’t have litvishe hashkofos. The few litvaks left in the world have all tasted chassidus. Now what?
They are barely any left. Yemach Shmoi took care of that 85 years ago. All “Litvishe” today are either full blooded Hungarians, Romanians, Yekkes or a mix. Almost all minus the Yekkes and Oberlanders shtam from Chassidim. They just learned in “Litvish” yeshivos.
But real blue blooded “Litivise” barely exist. Same with the Poilisher. Almost the whole Ger Chassidus hails from Hungary etc.American; 90% wlof Lithuanian jewry were korbanos, and most of the rest went off the derech. My family is a miuta d’miuta… my father’s father was from a very yeshivishe town called Meretch. He went to America before the war, and was in Switzerland in the very beginning…he then came back to America.
American Yeshivish (The communal sub type not the poster.) has little in common with the Litvaks of yore.
The same goes with the Modern Day Chassidim and the Chassidim in Europe. Chabad too.
Dear Neville,
The point mentioned in this debate was not knowing toras hachasidus. That is not a factor anymore.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.