- This topic has 235 replies, 41 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
I posted this in a different thread, but it seems to have been buried in a discussion about the IDF, and it elicited zero responses, so I’m reposting it here:
Why is Zionism such a hot topic of debate? The State of Israel already exists, and there doesn’t seem like there is much we can do about that. (And I think that most Anti-Zionists don’t advocate for destroying the State.) It’s pretty obvious that the State does good things and bad things. On any given issue related to Israel, every posek/important Rabbi/whatever you want to call them should formulate an opinion in much the same way as they do in any other area. If the question is whether or not to serve in the army, then the issues to be determined are whether it is a milchemet mitzvah, whether it is pikuach nefesh (both physically and spiritually) in either direction, whether it is unacceptable bittul torah etc. Conceivably, one can hold that one is obligated to serve in the army on the basis of ????? ????? ??? ?? ??? ????? (Hilchos Melachim 5:1) yet still be an anti-zionist. Similarly, one can be a fervent zionist and still hold not to say Hallel on Yom Ha’atzmaut because that is his/her conclusion in the sugya of Hallel. The various positions on the contemporary mitzvah of living in Israel also should be irrelevant to Zionism. The only real difference that I see, is the extent of focus on Israel/the State of Israel, which hardly seems like something worthy of such divisiveness.
Why is anything debated here – or anywhere else for that matter?
The big debate is because it’s a big thing.
I heard an answer from someone, and as silly as it sounds, there is a grain of truth to it:
In case someone is mekadesh a woman al tenai that the State of Israel is the aschalta d’geula.
Sorry, PAA. You’re late. I made a thread asking this identical question a few years ago. I think I recall using the word “pigeonhole” if you want to search for it.
PAA – I posted a very similar post some years back, I think. You are right. There is certainly what to debate regarding the setting up of a Jewish State. There is certainly what to mourn that today’s world perception of Jewish State = corrupt irreligious Israelis. There isn’t however, anything to do now. Whatever the ???? was regarding the setting up of the state, now that it is there, and thousands upon thousands of yiden reside in Eretz Yisroel, giving up the state would be 100% ????, as it would cause a terrible amount of bloodshed.
There really isn’t much to debate, unless you are a bloodthirsty Neturei Kartanik with psychological problems.
1. The continued existence of Israel is still in debate and its continued existence is up in the air. On multiple occasions, the American rescued the Israelis (in 1948 by forcing the British not to re-occupy Palestine which was clearly their plan, again in 1967 and 1973 where but for the Americans the Soviet Union would have intervened). Given America’s increasingly isolationist policies, such help might not be forthcoming in the future. Given that most of the world regards the zionists as crimials for stealing Eretz Yisrael from the Muslims (note that the zionists reject the idea that G-d gave us any rights there), Israel is facing a permanent threat to its existence.
2. The State has caused tremendous damage to the Torah world by encouraging (some would say by coercing) people to give up a Torah lifestyle and become secular. This has been by design. If you hold that Torah, not political control of Eretz Yisrael, is the key to Jewish survival, Zionism is a fiasco.
3. Before the zionists, Jews lived at peace with the Muslims (okay, it was sort of like being African American in the USA before World War II, but it was peace and the Muslims never objected to Torah), and the zionist decision to go to war with a group that includes about a billion people means we have acquired a enemy who can do very serious harm to us. If the price of defeating the Muslims is to give up Torah, which is what the Israelis claim, it is too high a price.
Akuperma – those problems are reasons for the state not to have started in the first place. What do you want to happen now?
Akuperma,
1. Israel today is recognized as a regional powerhouse both militaily and economically. The US in fact needs it as a bulwark aaginst terrorism. The rest of the world does not regard Zionists as criminals but only rejects settleemnt in Yehuda v’Shomron and eevn thee the objections are mainly lip service and a few meaningless boycotts of products that hurt Arab workers much more than Israelis.
2. Nonsense. In fact, Rav Ovadia said that without the IDF there would be no yeshivot. No one is forced to adopt a secular lifestyle. Far greater damage is doen by the poitical intrigues carried out to keep the Chareidi separate from the rest of the public.
3. More nonsense. Read Martin Gilbert’s “In Ishmael’s Garden” and Joanne Peters’ “From Tme Immemorial”. In fact, the Moslem world is now at war with everyone else in fulfillment of the verse that Ishmael’s hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand will be against him. Moreover, no one says that the price of peace is to give up Tora. Some still cling to the delusion that the price is giving up land but apparently they are so wedded to their conception that it is emotionally impossible for them to give it up.
Avi K.
Most of the world feels otherwise which is why almost a third of the world embargos trade with Israel and almost unanimous votes against Israel in the United Nations.
Obviously Rabbanim disagree. R. Yosef spent most of his employed life working for the Israeli government, and obviously supported involvement with the zionists, and receiving government funding.
Of course no one is forced to give up Torah – if the hilonim were “anusim” rather than “apikoresim” the views towards zionism among hareidim would be different. Unfortunately, secular Israel consists almost entirely of the descendants of frum Yidden who went off the derekh when they became zionists.
The only way the Israelis can have peace is to give up zionism (no problem for hareidim) or to sucessfully wipe out the Muslims (similar to how the Spanish took care of the Aztecs and the Incas, or least similar to how the Anglo-Saxons got rid of the Celts in what is now England, etc.). The zionists claim that Jews need to give up Torah and become good modern secular Israelis in order to defeat the goyim – and even if that were true, which it isn’t, it would be too high a price to pay.
DY: Yes. And re-reading that has reminded me that we haven’t had a good flame war here in far too long. Popa’s not doing his job.
Maybe the CR has become flame retardant.
Israel is a democratic state.
Judaism is not democratic.
So Israel is not a Jewish state.
Akuperma, there is another way. To show the Arabs that violence will be crushed. giving up Zionism will not work. Look at all the non-Zionists who are being beheaded. As for the rest of the world, they vote one way and act another. As for going off the derech, Rav Kook explains that in his day in Europe it was caused by anti-Zionism. And what about all the frum kids in America who go off the derech? According to Faranak Margolese (“Off the Derech”) it is mainly because of religious figures who behave negatively (as predicted by Chazal – Yoma 86a).
Tviki, on the contrary, it is not permitted to appoint a leader without asking the public (Berachot 55a). Even gezeret of Chazal needed to be accepted. Thus, tevillat Ezra and the gezera on gentile oil had to be rescinded
tzviki16:
“Jews” and “Jewishness” are now recognized in ways that do not involve Judaism and are not necessarily even compatible with it.
“the American rescued the Israelis (in 1948 by forcing the British not to re-occupy Palestine which was clearly their plan”
Nonsense. The US didn’t force the UK to do anything in 1948, the UK wanted out ASAP (and in fact it left earlier than originally scheduled), and the US even slapped an arms embargo on the new state, prosecuting people whom it caught violating the embargo. Thank HaShem for Josef Stalin Yemach Shemo who ordered his Czech stooge Klement Gottwald to send arms to the new state of the Arabs would have murdered another 600,000.
‘Read Martin Gilbert’s “In Ishmael’s Garden” and Joanne Peters’ “From Tme Immemorial”.’
Don’t bother with Peters. Her work has been thoroughly debunked. Israel does not need to justify its existence on falsehood.
@patur avul assur u don’t want to get me started
@yekke2 I’m not bloodthirsty nor do I have psychological problems and I’m. Not even part of Neturei Karta but I do believe the state should be dismantled
Ok. @patal aval assur Zionism has had drastic effects on the Jewish world Some say it had good effects and others ( me) say it had. Bad effects that’s the big debate these days
@patul aval assur u can read the. Sefer. I used as my username for. More Information
If I was a zionist in charge of things, I would’ve made Yom Ha’atzmaut to fall on Rosh Chodesh. Everyone would say Hallel with a bracha instead of having all these fights.
The revelance is that your question is why is it still debated right? So that’s a reason it’s still debated
It does have current revelancy were all effected by the state in some way or another.
The debate over zionism is relevant since there is a halachic argument that is made that as a result of the State having been established by zionists and run as a zionist state therefore it is impermissible to join the army or participate in the organs of the government. Not everyone subscribes to this halachic argument, but since there are those that do the zionism question remains relevent. Additionally, the shalosh shavuos issue, a discussion integral to the zionism debate, is cited halachicly as preventing joining the government in Israel. The Vayoel Moshe even writes that one shouldn’t go to the Kosel (he’s a daas yochid on this point but I cite it to you to demonstrate the relevence of the zionist debate that you’re asking about) since it has become a major icon and source of chizuk for the zionists since they captured it, and on the basis of ??? ??? ????? ?? ??????????, one shouldn’t go there even though it is otherwise muttar and even proper.
@ari-free I doubt any leading Zionist was concerned about whether or not to say hallel
@lior thank you!!
Oh, but the RZs *do* disagree and don’t consider the secular Zs apikorsum. Unlike the halachic opinion I cited. And it does have to do with the Z question. How could you possibly separate the Z issue from the Kosel halachic issue that I cited? The apikorsus is directly about them.
@lior you took the words out of my mouth
Maybe the term zionism is being used by different people to mean different things. How are you defining “zionism”?
PAA, I agree with you. The problem is that people get so fixated on their position that nothing else matters. They just get more and more extreme when things don’t go their way.
The bottom line to me is that the creation and existence of the State of Israel, though it’s current status is certainly not the Jewish ideal, is obviously Min HaShomayim. The nissim that take place here is unbelievable. The stages are being set for the ultimate geulah and we can make it come in the best way possible, with the least hardship to us, if we stop the nonsense bickering.
The secular founders did some horrendous things that are well documented. They also did some good things. They spent, irrespective of their motivations, more money to support Torah learning than ever before in history. Hashem often uses that which appears to be profane to fool the Sitra Achra; such as Yehuda and Tamar, Rus and others such situations. It seems to me that the secular founding of the State is just another such example.
Hashem decided that it was time for us to come home. The secularists were the primary ones to take the initiative to make it happen and they deserve credit for that.
What happens from now on is up to us. The religious world is so fractured with political and control issues, with the Yeshiva world split in to so many self serving factions that its ridiculous.
If the Chareidi and Dati world would join forces with the traditional world, i.e. semi-religious and very spiritual Sfardim, the country would change over night.
So instead of pointing fingers at the secularists or others, we need to reflect inwards and work for the greater good of Am Yisroel without all this petty nonsense.
Hashem Yiracheim if we don’t. We only have ourselves to blame.
The majority of the secular today are just victims of Zionism that don’t know any better
In my opinion, there are countless ways to describe Zionism and describe who a Zionist is, making this topic one that is out of control. In any case, Moshiach will have to untangle the huge knot the world is in.
PAA i feel for you. Noone is responding to the question and its quiet funny.
Wow I got a under thingy so fast??!? I don’t
Like
Because I’m not a TROLL!!
PAA: “However you want.”
That leaves too much ambiguity to have this discussion.
“Now once we agree on whether or not they are apikorsim”
But it isn’t agreed and won’t be. I’ve cited a sefer saying they are. We both know the RZs say they’re not and aren’t amenable to thinking otherwise, since it would collapse their entire position.
oyy: I’ve very much addressed the question at hand here.
I don’t know. Why not read the sefer I referenced authored by an ish kadosh m’od that makes that declaration.
Truthfully, I’m assuming the RZ don’t agree with the aforementioned halachic position that they are as it would fundamentally undermine their own position. Is that an unreasonable assumption?
According to Faranak Margolese (“Off the Derech”) it is mainly because of religious figures who behave negatively”
False. I read the book – her conclusion is essentially that
people go off the derech when their needs are not met within the
community. Once people fall below certain levels of belief, happiness, and familial/communal connection (they vary by individual), it is virtually certain that they will go off.
Something like that, anyway – I recommend reading the book.
(There was such an element, but it wasn’t about religious
figures – it was the general population, if I remember correctly.
It was not given as a primary factor, though.)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.