HaKatan

Naftush,

You also, of course, have never considered why there is such a great need for “chozrei biTeshuva” in Israel that you trumpet how every family has at least one. Each returnee is wonderful news, but you list this as an asset to Zionism? Indeed, what a churban the Zionists have wrought!

I humbly disagree about your contention that it is inappropriate to say “Hashem forbids it. Period.” This is not my own opinion; far be it from me to have an opinion on this, as you alluded to. Rather, it is mainstream halachic fact from many Rabbis who have written this, some of whom I have previously quoted.

For example, relatively recently, Rabbi Reisman discussed, as seen in the Flatbush Jewish Journal, available free online, how the three oaths remain in effect according to everyone even after 1948 through today; the only difference among gedolim (i.e. what Satmar disagrees with) is regarding “working from within” the State once it has been established. But, according to all of them, whether Satmar or otherwise, the State is forbidden. Period. If you are better-informed than Rabbi Reisman, please enlighten everyone.

Working on it:

Perhaps you should work more on your ahavas haTorah before working on love of Zionism. Zionism is shmad. The State is forbidden by the Torah. Religion and Nationalism is Religion mixed with Avoda Zara. Keep “working on it” from there.

DerechErets is right on.

yichusdik, you are, surely unwittingly, promoting a different theology, known as “Religious Zionism” which in Rav Elchonon Wasserman’s words, is Torah and Avoda Zara mixed together.

It is the Zionists who have literally “redefined Judaism and Jewish observance to the point where you have produced a new religion”.

To answer your question, I would go with an approach like Eliyahu haNavi’s “Ad Masai Atem Pochasim al shitei HaSiifim” question.

If the Avoda Zara of Nationalism/Zionism is your faith, then simply say so. But if, instead, the Torah we received from Hashem at Har Sinai is your guide, then “hasiru es elohei haNeichar asher bisochichem” and join the Jews who remain loyal to the Torah and have been zoche to see past the bitter lies of Zionism.

rationalfrummie:

I cannot answer to that which I have never claimed. Please read my post before claiming I said something that I did not.

The massacred Chevron students HY”D were not Zionists and also, of course, not responsible for their own murders by those savages. I quoted Rabbi Kaplan who said the “Religious Zionists” provoked the Arabs and, in response to a rumor that came up, seemingly as a result of that provocation, the savages murdered these innocent Chevron Yeshiva boys who were anyways not Zionists.

I am not a “kanoi”; what I bring down from gedolim is mainstream halacha.

Your sevaras, on the other hand, are simply your own emotional sevaras and, as stated, these are neither rational nor frum. As a bonus, you seem to have not read my post.

To answer your rhetorical questions:

A) Of course it was Hashem who allowed the Zionists control over the Kosel.

B) The CIA disagrees with your assessment (i.e. unwitting Zionist propaganda) of the 6 day war. The CIA indicates on their web site (check it out) that they knew and told the Israelis they could fight a multi-pronged war against the Arabs and win.

C) Did you really write “In Israel, we no longer suffer at the hands of the goyim”? And the Arab-Israeli conflict, with all its precious Jewish blood spilled is not suffering at the hands of the goyim?

D) Hashem forbade this State. Period. It’s a chesed from Him that some good things have happened there in the midst of the enormous shmad there. But Zionism is treif. Period.

The Yetzer HaRa of Zionism is simply stunning in what it can convince someone who claims to be both “frum” and “rational”.

Please, please learn the sources and leave this idol.

The Zionists have no answers.

Josh, as you probably noticed, this is not a kiruv shul. And Shlomo HaMelech said “Eis leEhov viEis liSno”; hate is not always the wrong approach. Dovid haMelech said “Misanecha Hashem esna”, as I recently saw quoted from R’ Meshulam Dovid Soloveichik where he applies that to (some) Zionists.

However, if someone were to post here and says he is either unaffiliated or grew up brainwashed in Zionist schools in Israel and looking for answers, then the tone of those answers will likely be different than those given to, for example, someone who is believed to be a typical Orthodox-educated person who is arguing an anti-Torah position.

Regarding Rabkin:

His research and book got very favorable reviews worldwide.

Of all the above “criticisms” I have seen of Rabkin, I still haven’t seen any Zionists contend with his research and what he wrote. Posters here launching ad hominem attacks, comparing a frum Jew (Rabkin) to Nazis, is despicable and yet par for the course for Zionists (ROB).

Let’s see any of you disprove his research before you launch childish attacks at him and have to ask his mechila.

Zionists have no answers.

jewishfeminist02, Zionist propaganda holds that the Arabs in Israel know that they always considered themselves part of “Greater Syria”, not Palestine. They couldn’t care less what Western name is applied to the territory as long as it is Muslims ruling it.

Put another way, in their view, any Muslim ruler is better than Israel ruling the land. So, as Health keeps saying, for the Arabs, Turkey would be a major step in the right direction, if not outright acceptable or even preferred.

But it seems this particular point is becoming moot, as it seems negotiations are starting again and, if Gaza is any indication, they mean business.

May Hashem always protect all His children.

The reason Zionism arose is that some assimilated Jews still didn’t feel like true goyim even after the persecutions stopped. So they decided that the only way the goyim would finally consider them as goyish as the goyim would be if the Jewish faith would be eliminated, CH”V, and, like Nationalist movements of the time, replaced with a new “Hebrew” goy. Literally. Not only would religious practice be eliminated, but the identity of a Jew would be based on his Nation and not on the religion. Then, they believed, the goyim would finally consider the Hebrew Goy just as goyish as any other goy and they would then be able to fully assimilate.

Of course, that whole premise is jaw-droppingly terrible kefirah and at least as bad as Lavan haArami and the Greeks of Chanukah, for the simple reason that these were Jews suggesting this.

The results of this very tragic and still on-going disastrous experiment of Zionism, Hashem yishmor, can be seen even today with the bizarre double standard applied to the State of Israel, which I assume is something that everyone here can agree with.

The Nazis, YM”Sh, too, did not differentiate between Jews, regardless of assimilation level. This is, of course, no coincidence according to our gedolim, as this was Mida kiNeged Mida for believing in Zionism and assimilation.

Presumably, the same holds true for the double standard that Israel is forced to contend with. It is the greatest slap in the face to the Zionists and an undeniable repudiation of their heresy and idolatry that the Nations do not accept Israel as a simple peer and one of them. In other words, Zionism is, spiritually, a complete and utter failure.

Matan1, it is not my place to back up Rav Aharon’s words.

However, I question your statements about Rav Soloveichik. How are his works important to Orthodoxy as a whole? Outside MO, what Yeshiva even has those books in their libraries? Which Rabbeim outside YU recommend those to their talmidim?

As to talmidim of Rav JB Soloveichik who are now Rabbanim, the following incident makes me question why one should believe this is (in some cases) a good thing. I actually recently heard a shiur from one of those students of Rav JB Soloveichik. In that shiur, he made a point of propagandizing various Zionist fantasies. He made the usual Zionist mistake regarding Rav Simcha of Dvinsk, etc.

But beyond that, he made a point of saying “tell your kids in Yeshiva” that Israel is not a Maaseh Satan, etc.

In my very humble opinion, this man has severely damaged the Judaism of the people he is addressing and, if they listen, these people’s children (potentially liDoros) as well, CH”V. He is purporting to teach Torah but is instead doing the opposite.

To be clear, I have no problem with someone repeating over what his Rebbi held, or even his own Torah from other sources, and I also know Rav JB Soleveichik was sympathetic to Zionism in his time. But to propagandize Zionism in the guise of, lihavdil, Torah and, worse, to insist to baalei battim “tell your kids in Yeshiva”, is absolutely unacceptable.

This talmid of Rav JB Soloveichik was telling them to tell their kids to ignore (or, perhaps, bypass) their own Rabbeim in favor of, at best, his own Rebbi. He surely knows of Rav Aharon’s and others’ opinion of his Rebbi’s views on Zionism (and secular studies) in particular. As well, most likely, the kids don’t know enough about the sugya to counter these serious errors.

Very briefly, part of what the “Religious Zionists” missed (and what they still don’t get) is that, as the Brisker Rov did say (I recently saw this) the Balfour Declaration, while absolutely not a heter for Zionism, was indeed a “smile” from Heaven.

But the Zionists ruined this eis ratzon with their State. Had everyone davened for the geulah, he said, the geulah would have come. Instead, they ruined it and davened for the State to come to life, and, like the eigel, it did; they got what they asked for and not the geulah. “Miharsayich uMacharivayich miMech Yetzeiu”, indeed; Galus would have been over instead of this eigel and all its karbanos, etc. and we are all still in galus, Hashem Yiracheim.

jewishfeminist02, if you ask people who were there (i.e. their children, at this point, or else listen to the recordings), they say that the Arabs in Mandatory Palestine were decent and did NOT hate the Jews for coming to live there.

The Arabs were, however, rightly worried about Zionism, which promoted their take-over of Palestine. The Mufti, no lover of Jews, had a cordial relationship with Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld. The former told that latter that they had no problem with Jews coming to live there; but if the Jews try to take over then they wouldn’t accept that.

As also discussed numerous times on these boards, the Zionists think the Chevron Massacre is a raaya to their fallacies.

In fact, Rabbi Baruch Kaplan, who was there, spoke publicly and was recorded saying that he used to take walks in Chevron late at night by himself with no fear of Arabs. It is the “Religious Zionists” including their leader who, against the express will of Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld, provoked the Arabs regarding the Kosel “Shema Yisrael HaKosel Kosleinu HaKosel Echad”.

The (false) rumor spread among the Arabs that Al Aqsa was threatened and the Arabs responded, thinking the Chevron Yeshiva boys were Zionist, CH”V, because of their skin color, murdering these innocent boys. Rabbi Kaplan blames the Zionists for this.

Sam2:

I agree that there “is an important Kiyum in militarily defending any area with lots of Jews” and I alluded to this when I mentioned the arsonist, above.

But, even without the myriad issues posed by Zionism biNidon Didan, I disagree with your conclusion that “defending Jews is a Mitzvah so there should not be any Issur Mitzad Bittul Torah”. If it is “ee efshar al yidei acheirim”, that’s a different story, but then the Zionism issues would have to be addressed first.

As to “calling a spade a spade” regarding Rav H. Schachter, it is neither of the possibilities you mentioned. Zionism is not Judaism but my calling him Rav is certainly not fake kavod either.

There are two issues: the gavra and the cheftza, so to speak; or, specifically, the person and the belief. Errant beliefs, even heretical beliefs, do not necessarily make one a heretic.

Besides, it’s not my place to label him or anyone else of his stature despite the many insurmountable problems of Zionism as our gedolim have stated and continue to state.

As well, I can’t link to it, as usual, but Rav Aharon Kotler said about Rav Schachter’s rebbi, Rav JB Soloveichik, that he (Rav JB Soloveichik) “destroyed an entire generation”. So since Rav Shachter presumably learned Zionism from his Rebbi, how can one detract from his kavod for following his Rebbi?

Again, to propose, as you do, that it’s better to save lives than to learn, is debatable within a Torah framework. But to say, as he was quoted as saying, that it’s better to sacrifice lives to save the (putative and heretical) nation-state (again, with nothing to do with the pikuach nefesh of the citizens), is offensive and clearly outside the Torah’s framework.

But I will call a spade a spade regarding the position he is quoted to espouse: it is terribly wrong, as per our gedolim, as above.

Daas2, how does it not address the question?

Every civilized country has a volunteer army. Some Israelis also want this. There is anyways no military need for chareidim in the IDF.

The reason the IDF is mandatory for anyone is that it is a tool of Zionist indoctrination.

An MK recently said publicly that this whole to-do is a chance to change the chareidim.

This (i.e. shmad) is the only reason the Zionists want the Chareidim in the army. They’re trying to finish their evil and treacherous work from the Yaldei Tehran atrocity, from even before the founding of the State and all they’ve done since then.

Netzach Yisrael Lo Yishaker.

The more uncomfortable (for Zionists) issue is that if serving in the IDF is the same as engaging in/being a part of shmad (not to mention the gilui arayos) then one would be forbidden, yehareig viAl yaavor, from serving in that den of immorality and shmad known as the IDF.

writersoul, it is the Zionists that tar themselves, and it was the gedolim who spoke about it.

Zionism is shmad (and more).

It is important to realize that even “Religious Zionists”, despite their (likely) good intentions, are de facto integrating this shmad into their yahadus.

Understand that this is not like being a member of one political party over another; a “Religious Zionist” on these boards quoted to me in Rabbi Kook’s name that their theology holds “we are Jewish because we are Zionist and Zionist because we are Jewish”. Does that sound like anything Moshe Rabbeinu would agree with?

Given this quote, it underscores the holy words of Rav Elchonon Wasserman HY”D, who wrote in Ikvisa DiMishicha that Nationalism is Avoda Zara and Religious Nationalism is religion in conjunction with Avoda Zara. (And that’s besides for and before the terrible shmad the Zionists did and still do).

Here are his words:

“It is clear that since modern nationalism is fundamentally idol-worship, it follows automatically that the Religio-Nationalist viewpoint is nothing less than idol-worship coupled with service to G-d.”

So, given the above, how would you answer your own question?

rationalfrummie, your first fundamental error is assuming “we” need to keep control of Eretz Yisrael. This is something Mashiach will do, BB”A. Before then, we are strictly forbidden to take control of E”Y even if the nations want “us” to have it. Unlike many other halachic issues, nobody outside of Zionism (that I have seen) says that Zionists have “al ma lismoch” in their forcible conquest of E”Y and rebelling against the nations, both of which are separate and severe violations.

Your second error is assuming “we” are, CH”V, the same as the Zionists. The Zionists hate our/their faith, and their greatest wish after replacing Judaism with Zionism is, as recently expressed in their “Knesset”, to change Chareidim to Israelis. The Torah is, of course, diametrically opposed to Zionism. We are most definitely not Zionists.

This whole “share the burden” nonsense is a pathetic smokescreen for their real endgame of “integrating” Chareidim into Israeli culture, as the Zionists have openly proclaimed, as above.

Your third error is assuming that a “Chareidi” unit is so wonderful. See the recent articles by the Rabbis who run these units and they all say that even these units are no place for a frum kid. If, for example, a kid would anyways be, CH”V, “in the streets,” then that’s who these Rabbis want in these units. But these same Rabbis in charge of these units write clearly that these units are a very bad thing for a regular frum/chareidi kid.

Additionally, as this tragic movement of getting Chareidim in to the IDF has gained steam, more horror stories, CH”V, have emerged. For example, recently, there was a terrible story of how the Zionists convinced a chareidi man to “temporarily” switch to a different (i.e. non-Chareidi) unit for advancement purposes. As a result of this switch, this man experienced terrible yeridos and his anguished wife cried to a Jerusalem rabbi that “the State of Israel has betrayed me”; the Zionists have, unfortunately, destroyed another frum person and his family.

Finally, only to a Zionist would it make sense to, CH”V, sacrifice even a drop of precious Jewish blood for the sole purpose of helping the State of Israel increase its land holdings. As you seem very concerned about this issue of pikuach nefesh, pikuach nefesh is certainly not pushed aside for the Zionists to try to control more land even if they had the halachic right to any of it in the first place, which they don’t.

I’m sorry for writing the wrong name, and I thank you all for pointing out my mistake.

But the point remains.

And the Zionists still have no answers.

Thank you, toi.

“truthsharer”:

Perhaps your screen name would be better written “wishsharer”.

Are you calling Rav Chaim Brisker a liar?

That wouldn’t be a very bright thing to do since, aside for the obvious reasons, he lived there and then and knew from personal experience both pre-1948 and post-1948 what Zionism was and is.

Historical fact and current events happenings are not subject to your or anyone else’s denials. Zionism was and is what it was and is: shmad. This is still true even though their methods of shmad have changed since Yaldei Tehran, etc. Zionism was and is shmad.

If you’re better informed than Rav Chaim Brisker (pre-1948 and post-1948) and Rav Elchonon (pre-1948 only, HY”D), who lived there and then, please provide a comparable source that disagrees with them and with, lihavdil, the Zionists themselves. This is not a secret.

In other words, if you claim Rav Chaim’s words (and history and current events) are not true, then please provide a reliable same-level source who contradicts those facts.

rebdoniel, that’s not exactly true. Not all of those were Zionists. Rav Kalischer, for instance, pre-dated Zionism and came long before the State of Israel. Even Rav Reines, who led Mizrachi at the turn of the last century, is not mentioned as one who condoned Zionist merida baUmos and certainly not the ongoing Zionist shmad which he was against.

Like many of the Zionists “sources”, the above Rabbis were no longer around when it was still decades before the State of Israel was to be founded. So these are not sources for anything practical.

I’ll leave it at that.

ROB, according to Rav Dovid Soloveichik, the hatred towards “the other side” should actually be much greater than it is because of “Misanecha Hashem Esna” and more. And Zionism, both theoretically and practically, is indeed shmad, kefirah and more, which, in your illogical and unshakeable loyalty to your egel, you always refuse to see.

The Brisker Rov said the Zionists need a State to shmad, not the other way around. And the Zionists did and do shmad. It is grossly despicable for “Jews” to force Jews to give up even one of the Torah’s beliefs and practices. That’s your Zionism. We have discussed this before, but you still refuse to face the reality of your idol.

In case this isn’t obvious, Shmad is not only literally forcing someone at gunpoint to bow to an idol, though if the Zionists did that you’d still probably find some heter for this egel, the Satan’s greatest triumph since the Egel HaZahav, as quoted numerous times.

I haven’t seen a Torah that mentions a chiyuv to join, lihavdil, the State of Israel’s “Tzava”. Maybe the Zionists have a different Torah than the one from Moshe Rabbeinu?

Also, the people who were sent to the tzava were great tzaddikim and Moshe had a way of ascertaining that. We have neither Moshe nor a way of knowing who are “anshei chayil”, etc.

Moreover, we don’t know who is from what shevet, other than kohanim/leviim who know their yichus, so we can’t knos who is from which “Mattos Yisrael”.

Finally, our modern-day Torah sages (Yiftach biDoro kiShmuel biDoro, for ROB) already forbade entering that den of shmad and tumah that is the IDF.

And if that’s not good enough for you, read the stories of people who were spiritually destroyed, them and their families, after going to the “chareidi” units of the IDF, and listen to the Rabbis who are in charge of sending kids to those IDF programs who readily admit that even the chareidi units are not a place for a frum kid.

Charlie, your positions seem very difficult to understand, though I will limit my comments to a few of those. Presumably, you arrived at these strange ideas because of MO/RZ’s blasphemous merger of Zionism and lihavdil Judaism.

Pirkei Avos says “Asei Licha Rav”. It does not say to allow the IDF to replace or supersede your Rav.

Regarding Chilul Shabbos, even “Religious Zionist” Rabbanim, never mind the IDF, have made psakim regarding chilul Shabbos and pikuach nefesh than have been roundly condemned by great rabbis outside Zionist circles.

ROB, you have already stated on these boards that you would not renounce your idolatry of Zionism even if proof were presented to you that your eigel is treif, and it was. So anyone reading your leitzanus post above should understand your “qualifications”.

Two of your fellow-countrymen who reside under Zionist rule have chosen to point out in this thread to their fellow Jews that the Zionists are turning up the heat in their 100+ year-old quest to turn Jews and our Judaism into, CH”V, Zionist warrior “Hebrews” and Zionism.

As valuable as their posts are to people who don’t live there, they’re also not the only ones who recognize this about Zionism (besides for, of course, people who were not deceived by Zionist lies and fallacies in the first place).

I read an article the other day that recounted yet another horrifying story about how a chareidi man joined the IDF in a chareidi unit and the Zionists convinced him to “temporarily” go to another non-chareidi unit so he could advance. After the inevitable yeridos occurred, along with the (immediate) consequences from those yeridos, the poor wife of this man went to a Torah-observant rabbi crying that “the State of Israel has betrayed me”, which, of course, the State was happy to do as they shmaded yet another Jew and created yet more tzaar in Klal Yisrael.

As the Brisker Rov wrote, and as a study of Zionism’s tragic history and current events would easily indicate, the Zionists shmad – not because they need a State; rather, they need a State in order to shmad.

Yet people actually believe in Zionist heresy contrary to the Torah giants of yesteryear’s dire warnings and severest condemnation and the hindsight of history and power of modern communication to inform on current events.

As he also said (as I recall), if one seeks to understand the eigel (haZahav), one need only observe (people’s relationship to) Zionism; it is the same matter.

JF: I disagree. A slippery slope is “only” a slope as opposed to a free-fall drop because there indeed are differences between different points on that slope, like one you’ve pointed out here between “gay marriage” and bestiality. But the slippery slope is very much valid, just not a straight (no pun intended) drop down.

But, even by your logic, if your sole criterion is “people should be able to marry– and be married to– whomever they choose” then incest (and polygamy – why limit to one?) should also be valid marriage material.

Regardless, the “slippery slope” is indeed a very big concern.

DaMoshe, nice try with more meaningless rhetoric.

The criteria he gave for what makes one an apikores, according to what I quoted earlier, was one who celebrates the Israeli Yom HaAtzmaut. Nowhere in your story (assuming it is true), does it say that Rav Yaakov CH”V celebrated that Zionist “holiday”.

I am not interested in speculating on an unverified story, but he certainly was not condoning Zionism and ignoring the shmad, et al. of Zionism. Here is a quote from Rav Yaakov’s son about Rav Yaakov, as seen at Yated:

Regardless, Rav Yaakov was obviously not an apikores.

Sam2, I disagree. I didn’t say the OU should go out and protest. But if you make a public statement as an Orthodox organization then you have to uphold the Torah’s honor as much as possible.

I maintain my position in my last post.

I find MorahRach’s post to be very interesting and very sad. It is a shame that so many MO choose “Modernity” over, lihavdil, the Torah.

JewishFeminist02 (there’s an interesting screen name): this abomination absolutely does affect our right to practice our faith and does encourage people to “come out of the closet” and be proud of their perverse behavior and intentionally promote that behavior, which clearly affects men, women and children, as I wrote above.

rationalfrummie:

Regarding your misunderstanding of my use of the word Zionist:

Obviously, the “Religious Zionists” understand that the Torah is our lifeblood and not, as Zionism holds, that Tanach is a cultural relic, CH”V; that’s the religious side of their identity, and I did not intend to suggest otherwise.

However, R”Z mixes and tightly integrates Zionism into, lihavdil, their religious Jewish identity.

On these boards, I was quoted from Rabbi Kook that “Religious Zionists” believe about themselves: “we are religious because we are Zionist and we are Zionist because we are religious”.

So they are inextricably tying in their identities as Jews with their identities as Zionists. That’s strong stuff. Because they are staking their Judaism on what gedolim have pronounced idolatry and, lihavdil, what Zionists are proud to declare: the “galus Jew” (and its religion, etc.) must be replaced with the “warrior Hebrew”, Hashem Yiracheim.

But I was not looking to show the faults of the “Religious Zionist” movement; rather, to convey just a small taste of how Zionism is expressly incompatible with, lihavdil, our holy Torah, as per our gedolim and, lihavdil, the Zionists themselves.