- This topic has 94 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Softwords,
1. Your response makes no sense to me. Gedolim do not retire. They pasken until they die. While I would certainly expect a young oncologist to recommend an older and more experienced doctor for a difficult operation when several are more or less on the same level I would not expect one to send me to another. Chazal pointed out that even great sages do not see when they are wrong in a monetary dispute. However, just as the young doctor will recommend his teacher so too will a rav recommend his rav.
2. My understanding is that “daat Torah” means that gedolim have either a mystical power (if they are Chassidim) or a superior analytical power (if they are Litvaks) to decide questions which are not halachic. For example, a few years ago a construction company in Israel went bankrupt after the owner absconded to Europe. Many Chareidi families lost everything because their rabbanim advised them to accept the offer of a discount on the apartments under construction in lieu of the bank guarantees that are accepted business practice. Of course, this is nothing compared to the error made in advising Jews not to leave Europe when it was still possible as there would be nothing more than some old-time discrimination. I do not believe in this concept. Of course, if a rav is also an expert in some secular field (e.g. Rav Hutner’s talmid muvchak Rabbi Prof. Israel Kirzner is a renowned economist – and BTW he studied Economics with Ludwig von Mises, who was an anti-religious Jew) that is something else. But then he is speaking as a secular expert and not a rav.
See Kesubos 111. See also the writings of the Satmar Rebbe.
This idea that we are ranking Gedolim like people rank colleges or athletes seems both absurd and insulting.
Let’s step back and examine why it matters if someone is a “gadol” or not.
Ideally, each person should learn shas and poskim, learn up a sugya, examine an inyan, and decide for themselves what the halacha is in a given circumstance. Unfortunately, most of us do not have the time and opportunity to do this so we rely on asking others. If you are not qualified to answer a question, you should find a Rebbi who is, and learn from him what to do. Similarly, if you live in a city where there is one clear-cut Rav of the city, he is considered your Rebbi.
If you do not have a Rebbi, or your Rebbi does not know the answer, only then would you turn to the gedolim. (see Teshuvas Harashba, Chelek Aleph 253). If there is a majority, you would follow the majority. If there is no majority, then “if you know” that one side is “gadol b’chochma u’b’minyan” (minyan here refers to number of followers/talmidim) and that side has a reputation as such, then you follow that person(s). (Id.) If you do not know that one side is greater, then by d’oraisa you should go l’chumra, and by d’rabbanan go l’kula. (Id.)
Thus, the relevance of whether one “gadol” is greater than another, is limited to the above (hopefully) rare circumstance.
For the most part today, there is no “Rav of the City or the community” . Most jews live in the US or Israel and it would be laughable to say there was one accepted rav in either place. There isnt even one accepted rav in Brooklyn or Jerusalem
benignuman
“No one has had nevuah for 2400 years.”
Therein lies the error of benignuman, Avi K and Co.
cf Ramban BaVa Basra 12a
Though this has veered off topic..
benignuman,
Avi K,yichusdik,
While it is worthwhile to have a healthy amount of skepticism regarding who might be regarded a Godol
and While the term
daat Torah
is of relatively modern vintage
Emunas Chachamim is from Chazal
Back to topic
The satmar rav was fighting an uphill battle and it seemed he was mostly losing
Young Israel almost put him Cherem in the ’50s
However, He said also that few of his all or nothing chassidishe followers were really fully capable of understanding
him
He said that
the yeshivishe
e.g R’boruch Kaplan,
understood him better than his own
Understanding the reality of that Era is crucial
Zahavasdad,
I don’t disagree. But there are still situations and circumstances where that would apply. For example Rabbi Leff on Moshav Matisyahu, or Rabbi Teitz in Elizabeth. And, of course, many people have Rabbeim that they follow consistently.
It is time,
I am not sure what I have written that would make you think that I was going against emunas chachamim or was saying it is difficult to tell who is a gadol. I was talking about differentiating among gedolim to determine who to follow when they are in disagreement.
My comment that we can determine who is a bigger authority stands. Your response to the comment didn’t rebut it.
MLK,
1. They are not paskened in any of the codes.
2. Rav Chaim Vital says in his introduction to Sefer Etz Chaim that they were only for 1,000 years.
3. The pasuk quoted refers to the klei hamikdash not to the people.
4. Rav Meir Simcha says that the San Remo Conference cancelled them as now we have permission from the other nations.
5. Rav Soloveick says in “Kol Dodi Dofek” that Hashem has called several times.
5. Tgey violated their oath on several occasions (Crusades, Khmielnitzki massacres, pogroms, Petlura massacres, Holocaust). Thus, the deal is off (Sotah 10a with Rashi d”h huchal shevuato shel Avimelech and Shulchan Aruch YD 236,6).
Joseph, what makes you think that you can give grades to gedolim? Are you a navi? Are you saying “My gadol is bigger than your gadol. YA ya ya ya ya”?
Avi K,
You are a consistent cherrypicker,ay?
4.He and others also said we might yet blow the opportunity
5.He began speaking rather less positive and more cautious in the mid-70s
Finally,
Joseph, what makes you think that you can give grades to gedolim?
Absolutely yes
Just as we could be aware which rabbanim of today
are greater than others
We could rely on those who were there to tell us who was greater then
I already explained we can determine who if a greater authority among contemporary decisors. See my earliest comment.
The Rambam in Igeres Taimon warns the Jews not to violate the Oaths, or else. He writes there that the Jews are suffering an evil, persecuting government that commits atrocities and wars against the Jews, and therefore the Jews should watch out not to violate the Oath by rebelling against them. It’s clear that even though the Goyim violate their Oath we cannot violate ours. The Medrash Aichah says clearly that the Romans violated their Oath, yet the generation of Bar Kochba was punished Chazal say because they violated the Oaths. The Maharal writes that even if the Goyim force us with torturous death to violate the Oath, we should rather submit to torturous death than violate them. The Oath that G-d gave us not to rebel against the Goyim was NOT for the sake of the Goyim, but for our OWN sake, that we dont end Golus early. It says this in every single interpretation in the commentaries about the Oath. It was not for the sake of the Goyim but for us. So just because the Goyim violated their Oath and hurt us does nto mean we can violate another one and hurt ourselves more! Shevet Efraim left Egypt in violation of the Oaths. Egypt surely violated their Oath when they tortured Jews for centuries. Yet Ephrain, Chazal say, were all hunted donw and killed in the deset for violating their Oath by leaving Egypt early. The Oaths are brought down l’halachah in Rishonim and Achronim as viable and very real. This, despite the fact that the Goyim have been violating their Oath for thousands of years. And besides all this, the second Oath, nshelo yaalu b’chomah has nothing to do with the Goyim, and woud not be dependent on the Goyim’s Oath.
The Maharal and R. Yonason Eyebushitz write that even if the Goyim give us permission to take Eretz Yisroel we are not allowed to do it. Better we should die than take Eretz Yisroel, the Maharal says. And the Gemora itself disproves the idea, since the Gemora says that the reason Chazal commanded us not to go from Bavel to Eretz Yisroel is due to the Oaths, even though Bavel violated their Oath for sure with the atrocities they committed during the Churban (The Shulchan Aruch writes that the Brachah of Vlamalshinim was enacted to praise Hashem for destroying the evil kingdom of Bavel). The Gemora then asks on R. Zaira who says that the Oaths only include not taking Eretz Yisroel forcefully, but the Oath not to rebel against the nations is not included. The Gemora could easily have answered that Bavel violated their Oath and therefore our Oath of rebelling against them is null. But the Gemora says no such thing. R. Avrohom Galanti (Zechus Avos) brings a story of the people of Portugal who wanted to defend themselves against the government by making a rebellion. The government then was making forced SHmad and all sorts of persecutions. They asked the “shem hameforash” and were told not to do it because it would violate the Oaths.
Truth (sagi naor),
1. TY for calling my targets easy.
2. Obviously none of the RZ gedolim (Rav Tzvi Yehuda, Rav Soloveichik, Rav Herzog, Rav Avrahma Shapira, Rav Mordechai Eliahu, etc.) agreed with the SR. In fact, he himself admitted that he wasa daat yachid.
Joseph,
1. Reish Lakish says that Hashem hates those who did not go to EY en masse (Yuma 9b).
2. The Pnei Yehoshua on Ketubot says that if the gentiles persecute us too much they will cause Hashem to bring aboutthe Geula early.
3. R. Avraham Galante lived in Tzefat so apparently he was not opposed to aliya. I do not know what the comment about asking the “shem hameforash” means. Did they have nevua in Shmutz laAretz? Perhaps they should have used it to transport themselves to EY. The Gra wanted to use it to free Avraham ben Avraham so apparently he did not consider it rebellion. Besides, if it is rebellion to cancel gezerot shmad then it is rebellion to defy them in any way.
One could contend, the SR and other personages like him
lived in the years of Labour Mapai Preponderance/hegemony [with a Mizrachi hechsher plumba]
Would he have somewhat toned down had he been here in these days?
It’s plausible.
Although everthing can be turned with one single election upside down
His followers/ chassidim [and others all over
the hashkaphic spectrum]are likely stuck in a freezeframe
??? ????? ???? ???? ??”? ? ?? ????? ????
The blood of our father [Rabbi Yosef Leib Bloch]
funny how nobody quotes those gedolim who forbid emmigration to America. The Satmar Rebbe forbid emigrating to america too as did many others (who unfortunatly did not survive the war)
Avi K – I have to agree with others that you have a tendency to nitpick which is unhealthy. An analogy is not supposed to be analyzed with a fine tooth. Rather it is a comparison of the main point. My main point was that it is well known that the Gedolim of each generation seek out those that will be the next Dor’s Gedolim and reveal them at the right time. If you come from a DL background it could be that this concept was never told to you.
In regards to Daat Torah, in light of the topic at hand (Zionism-Apikorsos?) and in light of your definition of “Daat Torah (…means that gedolim have either a mystical power… to decide questions which are not halachic.) I fail to see what “Daat Torah” has to do with what the Status of Zionism is. Both HaRav Kook, z”l and those Gedolim that opposed him in regards to Zionism held their opinions purely from a Halachic perspective, each bringing Torah sources to back their discussions. This is no different than any other halachic argument. Even those topics such as “serving in the army”, “working vs. Kollel”, “voting”, “taking money from the Medina”, etc. the Poskim (including Rav Druckman and other leading DL poskim) are all arguing their side purely from a Halachic perspective, not from Political or personal preference. All the more so, from a “mystical” power. Daat Torah plays no role here (based on your definition).
As far as the topic at hand, the poskim argue. I assume that those Gedolim that oppose Zionism and call it Apikorsos are basing it on their understand of the driving force behind Modern Zionism and what are the Gedarim that constitute Apikorsos.
Softwords,
1. That is not what Rav Moshe said. He was asked by a secular reporter how he became accepted as a gadol and he replied that people asked him questions and liked his answers. They asked more questions and he became known. In fact, while sometimes gedolim tell avereichim to go into the rabbanut (e.g. the Chofetz Chaim with Rav Kook) once they start paskening a consensus develops in the Torah world. Sometimes it happens “by accident”. After Rav Shlomo Ganzfried got married he opened a liquor business (this was a common Jewish business then and there). While he was waiting for customers he learned and wrote. Customers never came and he was more or less compelled to agree to be a the rav of a city.
2. Rav Kook’s positions on Zionism were more from hashkafic and kabbalistic perspectives. Perhaps that is why non-Zionists are quite willing to cite his halachic opinions.
3. While often a pesak is purely halachic (e.g. opening bottles on Shabbat) it is often the result of hashkafa. For example, those who are meikal about Ashkenazim eating in Sephardi homes during Pesach feel that the unity of a mixed community is more important. Those who are machmir feel that communities should be separate (even to the extent of ethnic discrimination in school admissions).
4. Some who call it apikorsut are using the traditional Jewish tool of exaggerated language (lashon guzma). In fact, once Rav Aahron Kotler referred to a certain rav as an am ha’aretz. The Satmar rebbe was very upset until someone said “The rav says ‘am haaretz’ like the rebbe says ‘apikoros'”.
How do i change my password for YWN. the one i was given is long & unmemorizable. Thank you
I haven’t read everything in this thread and it seems to have veered off topic. I want to ask the original question again worded slightly differently and please let me know if this was answered already.
As an example, I will use Chalav Yisroel. Some poskim say that you can drink non-Chalav Yisroel milk because of government health supervision while others say you can’t rely on that supervision. Those who paskin that you can only drink Chalav Yisroel think the other side is wrong, maybe even eating/drinking not kosher, but not apikorsus. It’s a machlokes in halacha.
Some poskim hold that the 3 shevuos are authoritative, some do not, some hold they were never actually violated with the founding of the State of Israel. Each side thinks the other side is wrong in this area of halacha… but why does it make the followers of that side apikorsim? Why is this different than any other of halacha?
Obviously, I’m not talking about the original secular Zionists who believed that having a State in Israel was a replacement for Torah and Halacha. I’m talking about religious Jews who either hold that one is allowed to have a State in Israel before Moshiach or even that it is a positive thing to have a State in Israel before Mashiach. Why is that apikorsus for those who hold of a strict interpretation and authoritative nature of the 3 Shevuos? Why is this not just a machlokes in halacha like all of the others?
simcha: because the Torah requires us to wait patiently until Hashem will redeem us and not to rebel against the nations or try to “force the end,” which the Zionist State is doing.
People who support Zionism are implicitly saying that they don’t believe that Hashem will redeem us, because they are trying out to carry out the redemption themselves, prematurely. Not believing that Hashem will redeem us at the time that He deems fit is a violation of the Rambam’s 13 Principles of Faith.
As you mentioned, the original Zionists believed that having a State in Israel was a replacement c”v for Torah, which is avoda zora.
It is time,
The Ramban you cited is describing what is commonly referred to as “ruach hakodesh” not the Nevuah of Tanach wherein someone received a communication from Hashem (in fact that is the entire point of the Ramban). The Gemara the Ramban is commening on also says ?”? ????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ??????? ?????? ?????? ????????? ??????. Obviously, it doesn’t mean that children and simpletons have nevuah in the same sense that Shmuel HaNavi did.
What is your source for that quote from Rav Shneur Kotler? I have never heard it before and it sounds fishy.
simcha613 – first of all, thanks for trying to bring this topic back to center. You’re not the first to try though, so thanks to the others that tried as well.
I’ll do the Jewish thing and answer with a question. 🙂 Can anybody quote the Satmar Rav or anyone other Gadol from their writings that state that Rav Kook’s vision of Zionism is Apikorsos? I’m not saying that he did not write such a thing, but I have never actually seen such a statement in writing.
That letter from Rav Bloch is odd. The Netziv and the Bais Halevi were certainly of the Yeshiva World and they supported Chovevei Tziyon (before it started being taken over by the secular). Rav Shmuel Mohilever, who was the Rav of Bialystock and a product of Volozhin, was also a founder of Chovevei Tziyon. Rav Yitzchok Yaakov Reines, the Rosh Yeshivah and Rav of Lida and a product of Volozhin, was the founder of Mizrachi.
Softwords, see ???”? ???? ???? ???? ??? and ???? ???.
As Avi K mentioned, the “3 Oaths” are not brought down l’halacha in the Shulchan Aruch, the Tur, the Mishna Torah, the BaHaG, or any other codification of halacha.
Are they cited in any major Shailos V’Teshuvos of the Rishonim or the Acharonim prior to the 20th Century? I know they are discussed in the Rambam’s Iggeres Teiman.
In any case, as explained above, the issue of which Gedolim are greater, or even which opinion is that of the majority, is only relevant if you do not have your own Rebbi who you follow. So followers of Rav Kook or Rav Soloveitchik are not doing anything wrong, and in fact are doing what they are required to do, in following the teachings of their Rabbeim on Zionism.
Here’s a partial list of authorities ruling we must abide by the three oaths:
Here is a list of authorities that hold even with permission from the nations of the world we still have to keep the oaths:
Also important to note is not only the fact that the Shevuos are quoted l’maaseh in Chazal, Rishonim and Achronim and have been used throughout the ages, but also that there has been nobody who disagreed with them or their binding nature (until the Zionists came and, as they have done with Jewish history (see Israel’s Declaration of Independence for example) and Halachah (see the Zionist apologetics cranked out regularly by religious Zionists) tried to replace well established facts with fantsy).
Important to note in this context is that even the rabbonim who the religious zionists consider their forerunners (c”v), recognized the binding nature of the oaths.
When R. Zvi Hersh Kalisher defended his movement to make settlements in EY, he insisted that he would never think of doing so if it means antagonizing the ruling powers of the land, as that would constitute a violation of the Shevuos. He said that others hwo have tried an “aliyah” idea earlier, who came illegally using force were nichshal and bordered on violating the shevuos – but he is not like them (writings, p.204).
Also R. Alexander Moshe Lapidos defends the colonist movement by saying that they would never violate the oaths by taking the land form the turks by “sword and bow” nor do they have any plans of creating a government there. (Shivas Tzion 1:p.35)
The binding nature of the Oaths is universally accepted by Torah Jewry throughout history. Zionists are either in denial, in “gilui panim batorah shelo kehalachah”, or indoctrinated – theres all of the above in their community.
Actually, the forerunners of Zionism were not the rabbonim who advocated the “first aliyah” to EY in the 1800’s (and even they, for the record, who had no intention of violating the shevuos, were a minority and oppsoed by the majority and greater Gedolei HaDor); Zionism started way before them – over 1,000 years ago. See: Daniel al-Qumisi
The idea that settling in Eretz Yisroel will bring the Geula first came from the Karaim. They were kanayim about it, too. Said Daniel Al-Qumisi, Karai “godol” and first Zionist on record:
“The scoundrels among the people of Israel who say to one another: ‘We need not go up to Jerusalem until we are ingathered bu He Who has thrust us out.’ These are the words of fools who provoked G-d’s anger.”
That was the first real Zionist. These 20th century ones are merely repeating what the Karaim said then. And just as the Karaim then lashed out at the Rabbonim for being against their “Zionism,” so too do today’s Zionists follow that path as well.
Joseph – thank you for the marei makomot and for all the other info you posted. I’ll try to look it up today. However, in regards to all your proofs, I’m afraid that your effort will probably go to waste. The problem is that most of the people that post here aren’t interested in hearing another side. They just want to complain and state that they are right. That’s why I usually stay away from the CR. I have an interest to hear people’s sides to any given issue. However, I am not interested in people that just want to shoot their mouths off. It would be nice if everyone could walk away with an appreciation having learnt something new even if we don’t agree with each other.
BTW – I noticed that MOSHE S never made a single comment after starting the topic, nor did he ever thank any of the commentators for giving him answers (or at least trying).
Moderator – maybe it’s about time to close this topic?
There are many posters who do not fit that description but are just less vocal. I will be moichel on their behalf.
In general most debates on the internet are not to convince the other side they are right, but rather aimed at people who just lurk.
Joseph, how is it that you are always wrong? The oaths are not found anywhere in he codes. Thus, they are not halacha. If they were used they were used to assuage gentile authorities who were very nervous about possible rebellions (in fact, the Czarist governemt outlawed the Zionist movement until it was convinced that it was an emigration movement and the Netziv felt constrained to write in the mitzva to appoint a king that different countries need different forms of government rather than different generations even though the mitzva clearly only applies to Am Yisrael in EY).
In any case, I have already posted several times why they no longer apply even if they once did. I will repeat the main points to jog your memory.
1. The gentiles violated their part of the bargain. Certainly the pogroms and Holocaust, both of which were government instigated, constitute persecuting us too much – and both occurred after Rav Kalischer.
2. The other nations gave us permission at the San Remo Conference so it is not rebellion (Rav Meir Simcha).
3. Hashem called on several occasions (Rav Soloveichik).
4. They were only for 1,000 years (Rav Chaim Vital).
So far as this Karaite is concerned, so what? The Reform movement was against Zionism until the establishment of the state and then a splinter group that called itself the American Council for Judaism continued to scream. So if you put in the company of a Karaite I will put you in the company of Reformers.
There’s a great shiur going on now in English on VaYoel Moshe, which hopefully, will be translated soon.
I even heard Rabbi Rakeffet of YU explain that even Tziyonim should learn this sefer.
Joseph,
Thank you for the maareh m’komos. I will look some of these up (those I have access to). Where did you get this list from?
First Zionists, Joseph? I thought they were the Jews who first sang Al Neharos Bavel, some 2700 years ago. Foolish me for not reading up on Satmar talking points. Chatosi Ovisi.
To the Moderator – I didn’t mean to say that ALL the commentators are like that. Just that there are many that are and they have to start listening to others and contemplating what they say instead of brushing words aside. Point at hand. The original question was “why call Zionists Apikorsim?” Several answered the question. That doesn’t mean that one needs to agree that it is correct to do so, but the question was answered. How many, however, decided to turn the topic in to a discussion of who’s right? Does that ever get anywhere? For sure not.
Over the years I have noticed that certain commentator are looking for clarity and remain with an open mind while others just look to argue and push their agendas. It’s the latter that I was complaining about.
You are right, however, that there are many who are earnest and just less vocal than others. They definitely deserve respect and recognition. Kudos for the Tochacha. Kisiva V’chasima Tova.
Avi K,
For the record ,even the early secularizing zionists were candid that their Aliya was meant for better or worse as an act of rebellion
they called themselves.. the ma’apilim
Avi k,
Obviously you ,like most younger modox, glean your information from too many years on the blogosphere and regurgitate it convincing yourself” you have the light”
So it seems from all your posts over past couple of years
“Netziv felt constrained to write in the mitzva to appoint a king that different countries need different forms of government rather than different generations even though the mitzva clearly only applies to Am Yisrael”
What in the world?! Who told would have told you,other than your prior prejudices,he felt that modern generations would be better without monarchs?!
I was so happy that this thread had gotten pushed to the back during Aseres Yimei Teshuva… I haven’t really read the thread, and it’s possible that there is nothing mamash assur here, and maybe it is just an important and necessary philosophical discussion clarifying the Torah perspective on zionism without criticizing any Gedolim or putting down any people or groups on a personal level (and maybe one that I would want to join at another time)… but, I wonder if Aseres Y’mei Teshuva is the best time for such a discussion that inevitably brings up chesronos within groups within Am Yisrael?? Just a thought..
?????,
?? ????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ??????
?????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ?????,
??? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?????…
????? ????? ????? ????
???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????…
??? ?? ??? ????
– ??? ?????? ???????
Avi K.: ?????,
?? ????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ??????
?????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ?????,
??? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?????…
????? ????? ????? ????
???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????…
??? ?? ??? ????
– ??? ?????? ???????
Avi K – perfect!!! Great ending to the threat, and great way to go into Yom Kippur & to start the new year!
TY, lilmod ulelamaid. Gemar chatima tova.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.