Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
ZB:
No. That teshuva from Rav Moshe Zatza”l is, of course, in agreement with the gedolim’s view of the heresy and idolatry of Zionism.
He simply stated that the Zionist flag is not technically A”Z. This happens to be very convenient for all of us given the large number of shuls that unfortunately have this flag in their sanctuaries, R”L. That the flag is not A”Z doesn’t make Zionism itself any less idolatrous.
While on that topic, he also doesn’t exactly praise the flag’s inclusion in the sanctuary either, for obvious reasons.
Avi K:
I didn’t accuse anyone of anything. Please read Rav Elchonon Wasserman and many others who clearly and explicitly refer to Zionism as both idolatry and heresy.
Regarding Rabbi Teichtal, his son writes in the introduction to that book that his father’s views, conceived during WW II, are, regardless, not a justification for any “-ism” including Zionism. Regarding the meraglim, please see the previous post.
Zionists have no answers because there are no answers. Zionism is perhaps the one topic that gedolim across the Traditional Orthodox spectrum (both chassidish and “litvish”) have denounced in the strongest terms, as in heresy and idolatry.
It is certainly true that Hashem can do whatever He wants wherever He wants. But that does mean that one should play in traffic. (To be clear, I don’t mean to suggest that visiting or living in Eretz Yisrael under the Zionists is equivalent to playing in traffic.) As well, we daven that Hashem should watch over and keep safe all His children wherever they may be.
But Zionists seem to have this absurd knee-jerk reaction to even the slightest disturbance in chutz laAretz to the effect of, “see, everyone should move to Israel and be idolatrous “Religious Nationalists” like us!” What they neglect to consider, of course, is (in part) that Israel is, by far, the least safest place for Jews, when compared to “normal” places like non-gang/non-violent locales with a normal police force, as Joseph mentioned.
As I recall, after 9/11, the Zionist premier, in a classic Zionist move, attempting to garner love and sympathy from the gentile nations (attempting to “normalize” the Jewish people into a non-Jewish nationalist nation just like the gentiles), declared publicly to the effect that they in Israel had been having 9/11 all the time. The leader, himself, of that idol said it.
Joseph is correct: it seems that as soon as you (easily) prove to a Zionist that, if they were thinking rationally, they would realize that this particular aspect (safety under Zionist rule in E”Y) of Zionism (like the rest of it) is patently and embarrassingly absurd, they then switch tactics and start to get all “religious” and invoke the meraglim.
The Zionist “religious” use of the meraglim is actually part of the Zionist idolatry of grafting Nationalism onto, liHavdil, the Torah. Once you remove the idolatry of Zionism from the equation, the whole thing is revealed to be nothing more than a mirage of nationalism fraudulently posing as, liHavdil, Torah.
Regardless, getting back to the safety question, only the lust of idolatry and heresy (of Zionism) can fool and then convince otherwise bright and accomplished people to attempt to state, and then continue to attempt to defend the statement, that is safest for Jews to live in the Zionist paradise (Israel), with all the rivers of Jewish blood spilled there over the past century since the Zionists invaded, HY”D, rock-throwing attacks by the savages, knife-wielding savages now fully integrated into the population, a politician there calling for all Jews to arm themselves in the streets, etc.
coffee addict:
You wrote:
“we have been having problems with the Arabs since 1949”
This is not accurate.
Actually, the Zionists have caused the Jews (starting in Eretz Yisrael) problems with the Arabs since well before 1949, like the Chevron Massacre in the ’20s, for example, and the Mufti’s becoming an Angel of Death for our WW II-era brethren in response to the already ongoing Zionist invasion and provocations.
This thread might be of interest:
tirtza:
Your definition of Zionism is like defining Jews for J as Jewish. Zionism, in any form, is the heretical (meaning, therefore, anti-Jewish) theology that attempts to “normalize” the Jewish people by turning the Jewish nation is a nationalist nation, Ch”V, like Italy for the Italians, France for the French, et al.
Rav Saadiah Gaon wrote that Hashem gave us the Torah in a midbar, a desert, and NOT in E”Y, specifically so that we should understand that our nationhood is solely (again, that’s only) through the Torah. Not “the people and the land” or any other nationalist “inventions” of that nature. Although there are many mitzvos that depend on being in the land, etc. our nationhood is in the Torah, not the land.
Once again, Zionists unknowingly bring up the Chevron Massacre in 1929 as an attempted “proof for Zionism”, which the savages committed as a direct result of “Religious Zionist” aggression regarding the Kosel, and that aggression was against the wishes of Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld and the Jews who were already in the land.
While on the subject, Jews LOST the ability to daven at the Kosel in 1948, also thanks to Zionist aggression. The Zionists only mention how they captured it in 1967, of course with oceans of Jewish blood spilled on the altar of Zionism, R”L L”A.
Splitting hairs over the original version of the Zionist national anthem would be funny if it weren’t so sad, that this is so important to Zionists.
Last I checked, even the RCA edition of the Siddur still has “Umipnei Chataeinu Galinu MeiArtzeinu”. Unfortunately, Hashem exiled us from E”Y, as even the “Religious Zionists” are aware. But they believe a forgery of “reishis tzemichas geulaseinu” and other nonsense about this idol that is, of course, baseless.
Of course, believing Jews from long before Zionism pray to Hashem that He send Mashiach to redeem us all from this long galus and return us to Eretz Yisrael, the 3rd Bais HaMikdash, etc. That is Judaism, NOT liHavdil, Zionism.
Avi K, ROB, et al:
It is the Zionists who have been terribly evil in (and to) E”Y. You really believe Hashem derives nachas from Tel Aviv being the Toeiva capital of world!? OR from the Zionists’ century of shmad and destruction!? And all the rest?
The two points you made are completely irrelevant to the massive death and destruction, both spiritual and physical wrought by Zionism for around a century now worldwide and, in particular, in E”Y. Nationalism, whether religious or secular, was no excuse for sacrificing oceans of Jewish blood on the altar of Zionism. That includes during WW II, the State’s founding, its many wars, and more. Yet you still cling to your idol of Zionism. At least admit the facts and then, if you want to, perhaps start debating what to do about it at this point, which is a fair discussion. But the Zionist lies are really brazen because they distort our holy Torah.
As well, nobody is arguing against individual Jews living there and working the land, etc. Assuming your reading and application of the gemara in cheilek is correct, you are simply underscoring that the Zionists ruined this siman geulah and handed the Satan his greatest victory since the eigel by convincing frum Jews to daven for their idol state rather than the true geulah. Thus, Hashem listened to their tefillos and granted the former instead of the latter, most unfortunately.
May Hashem remove the blinders of Zionism from all His children and bring the true geulah BB”A.
ROB:
Your “answer” to Joseph would be funny if it weren’t so sad.
You seriously believe that you should live in E”Y despite any dangers that may be present there only because it is Eretz Yisrael, even though it is indisputable that Hashem kicked us out and Mashiach has not yet returned us?
Regardless, there is a mitzvah to live in whatever place will allow you to best serve Hashem. “VaChai BaHem”, last I checked, is part of the Torah. As are the rest of the mitzvos of the Torah. Even Rabbi Herschel Schachter stated in a recent Yom HaAtzamos address that if one’s own/family’s spirituality would be better outside of E”Y then one should certainly remain outside of E”Y.
The sheer absurdity, of elevating a precept like ahavas haAretz (or, more accurately and lihavdil, Zionism) into the greatest obligation superseding all else including one’s physical and spiritual life, is sad to see.
As the Brisker Rav noted, the State they have managed to achieve is the GREATEST triumph of the Satan since the Cheit HaEigel. He was obviously not joking and just obviously quite aware of things like the destruction of both Battei Mikdash, Shabsai Tzvi, etc. The founding of the State of Israel tops them all as the Satan’s greatest feat. Your post is but a small illustration of this.
ROB:
You are making up things out of thin air.
Hashem allowed other major historical events like, for example, the Holocaust, to happen. His “approval” was, obviously, strictly limited to allowing it to happen for whatever His reasons were. Same with your idol of a State. Of course, Hashem allowed it to happen. Nobody disputes that. But the gedolim were quite clear that He certainly did NOT approve.
(Of course, it is clear as day that Hashem would not approve of such a calamitous force of spiritual and physical destruction of His precious children, and by “Jews”, but that’s besides the point.)
The Brisker Rav, who was there at the time, stated that the State came into being because of the frum Jews who were fooled by the Zionists into davening for the State rather than the true geulah. Had they instead davened for the geulah, Hashem would have given us that instead of, liHavdil, your idol.
The Zionists have no answers for their idolatry and heresy because there simply is no answer.
It’s astonishing that Zionists till use the term “safe haven” for the Zionist State.
Besides for the oceans of Jewish blood (and the shmad they did, etc.) that the Zionists sacrificed for this idol, both before and after 1948, the Zionists still need to draft every 18-year old who will go and they also can’t even protect their citizens without telling them to arm themselves 24/7.
You call that a safe haven?
It’s called idolatry, not a safe haven.
ROB:
Why not answer his question instead of asking something else?
Because you can’t. It’s part of your idolatry that Jewish blood is less important than your Eigel of a State. Anyways, your question is not a question, as you’ll see if you read on.
RR:
Not very rational.
It was the Zionists who (among other actions and non-actions) lobbied governments against allowing Jews in to any country because the choice in Zionist terms was either Palestine (which they knew the British did not allow due to Zionist inflammation of the Arabs) or CH”V what ended up happening.
theprof1:
As has been corrected on these boards numerous times, the Chevron massacre occurred, actually, BECAUSE OF Zionism. See the other threads. Rav Baruch Kaplan, who was in that Yeshiva at the time testified that he would often take walks out to the reputed location of Avraham Avinu’s tree and nobody ever told him that it was unsafe to do so.
As well, the savages did not touch the sefardi Jews living in Chevron because they knew that those JEws were NOT Zionists. The Yeshiva students, who also were not Zionists, were Ashkenazi and therefore the Arabs mistook them for Zionists.
The Jews then and there did, in fact, get along with the Arabs and it was the Zionists who ruined that.
flatbusher:
I doubt that they hate Jews. They definitely have no love for Zionists who, as akuperma explained well, are the enemies of the Jewish people. But I would not accuse them of hating Jews unless I knew that to be the case.
In other words, their mistake is only in their methods. Proclaiming to the world that Zionists do not represent Jews is a very good thing.
Avi K:
In mussaf on yom tov we say “UMipnei chataeinu galinu meiArtzeinu”. That’s what he means by “their territory”. He’s also conveying their perspective.
Neville:
It’s obviously both.
There is no question that the ideology of MO was wrong from the beginning. The gedolim of the time condemned it from the beginning, including Rav Aharon Kotler who stated that its essence was the same as Reform and Conservative.
At the same time, nobody would say that Rabbi YB Soloveitchik would approve of every single thing done by certain groups or individual MO.
Sam2:
You mentioned in another thread that Rabbi Herschel Schachter is your Rebbi. You also defend YU from any possible wrong. So it would seem that you attended YU. But anything is possible…
Tirtza:
That’s not funny. Living in E”Y has nothing to do with the numerous sins of Zionism.
ROB:
Why do you spout such ridiculous kefirah in his name? Of course the Zionists are not more powerful than G-d. By your “logic”, the Nazi leader was more powerful, too. CH”V. Hashem, for His reasons, simply allowed them to do what they did and continues to allow the Zionists to do what they do.
The Brisker Rav noted that the reason the State came into being is that Torah-observant Jews made the grave error of praying for this. He said to the Chazon Ish as well that he fears the State will unfortunately be with us ad beas goel, for similar reasons (for the frum joining forces with them).
As to the “prosperous country”, while some Jews in Israel have been incredibly successful in many matters, that has nothing to do with the absolute prohibition of Zionism. It also speaks nothing of what Israelis themselves call “the matzav”. These savages (whom the Zionists had no problem in riling up) have made Israelis afraid to leave their houses even for a simcha. Yet presumably intelligent people, yourself included, still hold on to their fantasy of Zionism just as Eliyahu HaNavi found that only 600 people did not bow to the Baal idol in his times.
It is absurd to compare the US to Germany. For one, the Zionists already have their State so their policies pertaining to “rak biDam tihye lanu haAretz” are less of a threat to world Jewry, Hashem yishmor. As well, we have a mesorah from the great Torah leaders in Europe that the last station for Torah before the geulah will be America.
Please, if you are a believing Jew, just daven for the true geulah BB”A.
Zogt Besser:
It’s not “my shitah”, and you’re also assuming something that may not be true. The facts of what the gedolim held of the deviancy of “MO” and that of “RZ” are what they are. What to do about it today regarding questions like does that make their wine yayin nesech, et al. is a matter for an LOR. Please see the rest of this post below.
MDG:
I’m not understanding your post.
Again, I’m specifically NOT bashing others, as I mentioned in my posts.
I am, however, conveying that our gedolim have stated that MO and “RZ” theologies are against the Torah. But I have not seen them declare the adherents to be considered ovdei A”Z. So this is, again, a matter for one’s LOR.
DY and Neville:
The lashon is not at all to the effect of “domeh liMi sheAvad A”Z”. The lashon they used is that this is literally A”Z. And Kefirah.
DY:
I guess that’s why an LOR is an LOR and you are…?
It is not that simple to condemn a person just because of a particular portion of his theology. Please see the rest of this post as well.
zogt_besser:
There is a different group who are considered a sect of Judaism (I won’t mention who they are so as not to extend this thread by another five pages, but I mean people who are considered by most “Frum” Jews to be “bichlal amisecha”, not Jews for J, CH”V) whose standing, etc. might be illustrative here.
I have heard regarding this group that their sect’s extremely problematic beliefs regarding Hashem, while wrong and heretical, do not turn these individuals into heretics. Rather, we treat them as, essentially, idiots and NOT heretics.
Perhaps the same applies here. Just because MO as a theology fools itself into adopting the idol of nationalism and that and other heresies, that doesn’t automatically follow that any of its adherents are therefore idol-worshipers and heretics. Perhaps there are other reasons that its adherents are still bichlal amisecha, that you can trust their kashrus, etc. I am not dealing with any of that.
Regardless, the point, again, is simply that the gedolim have clearly stated that MO theology is idolatrous and heretical. That’s all; nobody is looking to bash anyone.
PBA:
Your joking aside, I expected Sam2 to put forth an argument that would futilely attempt to defend the indefensible (MO/”RZ”). I did not expect grade school-type verbal attacks.
DY:
I said that this is for an LOR to decide.
MDG:
I think I have clarified more than enough. Please see Joseph’s OP for further details.
notyeshivish:
Zionism is a bankrupt anti-Jewish ideology that was invented around a century ago. The other things you are confusing with Zionism including, lihavdil, kedushas Eretz Yisrael, only further emphasize how terrible is Zionism as Zionism is an abomination to our religion and, of course, to our holy land, which the Zionists have invaded and defiled with their many impurities.
Nobody is “knocking on MO”. Someone tried to claim that MO is a valid derech, at which point some others corrected that assertion, clarifying that MO is NOT a valid derech but, rather, that MO contains heresy and idolatry. At the same time, nobody is denigrating, CH”V, MO adherents, who likely do not know any better.
oomis:
This is, unfortunately, not the case.
Whatever Hashem did or did not allow to happen and for whatever reasons He had, does not at allow for the distortion of right and wrong.
Zionism is anti-Torah and terribly wrong according to the great Torah sages from the past century and more.
Achdus is a wonderful thing, but it cannot come at the expense of perverting ch”V the Torah. If both can be accomplished at once, (meaning both achdus and keeping the Torah untainted by foreign ideologies antithetical to it) then, of course, that is best.
anIsraeliYid:
It might be wiser to learn VaYoel Moshe (and think a little, too) before accusing Satmar of nonsense.
Sam2:
With all your erudition and knowledge of both Torah and (lihavdil) Maddah, it’s sad that this is the best you can come up with when posting about me and what I’ve posted. Shabbat Shalom (in MO parlance).
GAW:
I repeated multiple times that according to the greatest Torah sages that Zionism is A”Z. Please see the prior posts.
ronald9:
If you were to read the post linked by Joseph, you might understand that RYBS who invented MO, wrote that he did so out of what he felt was a necessity due to time and place. As well, his sevara to do so was rejected by the gedolim of the time (as was RYBS, himself, rejected by gedolim of the time).
Regardless, his sevara certainly doesn’t apply today and according to his own writings, as posted there in that OP, the ideal Jew is the Traditional Orthodox Jew, and not MO, according to RYBS.
MO theology is against the Torah and is baseless.
Sam2:
Surely since you proudly know so much of both Torah and (lihavdil) Maddah, you know and understand the definition of ad hominem attack and you also certainly understand that my post was very much about the position he took, as indicated by the rest of my post which analyzed that position.
For you to disagree with my analysis of that position is fair. But to simply state that it’s an ad hominem attack is plainly wrong and unfair.
OURTorah:
Had the Zionists not invaded E”Y and not riled up the Arabs, thus causing the British (who the UN tasked with administering Mandatory Palestine) to limit Jewish emigration to Palestine, perhaps many other Jews could have joined those who did make it to Palestine to escape the war. Yet you PRAISE the Zionists for this?
Regarding your various thoughts about me in that post:
Your line about how your grandparents didn’t survive to see people like me exist is clearly out of line and very wrong, too. Regardless, and in case you’re really wondering, if I were talking to any survivors, I would very likely not be discussing any of this.
I don’t know why you feel that “I want to spread angst about” anyone, CH”V. I simply quoted what our gedolim have unequivocally stated is or is not Torah. The Torah is not for sale no matter who feels differently and who they think they can rely on to twist the Torah, CH”V.
Saying that I “pick from every Rabbi the way they slander other Jews” is both wrong and, even if it were true (which it most certainly is not), is still wrong. These Torah greats had zero personal gain, and, in many cases suffered terribly, as a result of their keeping the Torah path clear of various isms and corruptions that came its way. Unfortunately, many have been blinded by Zionism despite those efforts.
Regarding your admonishment that I “start looking at the positives”, nothing that I posted should indicate that I am doing any differently than you demanded. I simply conveyed that MO, according to our Torah sages, is not a valid derech. I took care to clarify that this was not intended to convey any negativity on MO adherents.
As well, you have zero right and zero basis to claim that I don’t “see the beauty in other people”. You have absolutely no idea if that is true or not and you also have absolutely no idea to what extent it is or is not true.
Again, I spoke about a philosophy/theology and its sources, not the people.
Regarding your last statement, that other rabbis can be gedolim even if they have a different hashkafa than I do, this is also wrong. First, I am not expressing my own hashkafa but rather (trying to express) that of the greatest Torah sages of the past few generations. As well, while gedolim can and do certainly have different hashkafos, as you mentioned, they are NOT entitled to do so when that hashkafa is against the Torah, as is the case with MO/RZ.
OURTorah:
In order to have any sort of educated opinion on Zionism and WW II, you first have to know a number of facts, some related to religion and other related to plain history.
Rav Chaim Brisker remarked that people mistakenly think that the Zionists feel the need to shmad Jews (this is around 100 years ago) in order to get a State.
In reality, it is the opposite: they need a State in order to shmad Jews.
The raison d’etre of Zionism is to turn the Jewish nation into a secular nationalist nation, obviously devoid of Torah, just like the Italians in Italy and the French in France.
Next:
The Zionists were already a political power long before 1948 and even before WW II.
The Zionists were recognized by the nations as the representatives of World Jewry.
The Zionists adopted the slogan “Rak biDam tihye lanu haAretz”, that they needed Jewish blood to be spilled in Europe so that the nations would feel sufficiently “guilty” to give them a State afterwards.
The Zionists lobbied governments AGAINST allowing in any Jews fleeing Europe because doing so would weaken Zionism, knowing full well that these Jews would be gassed as a result.
The Zionists’ acts and non-acts during WW II caused Jews to die in WW II.
There’s plenty more, but that’s sickening enough.
The Satmar Rav goes further in blaming Zionism for WW II, but I will refrain from posting further about that.
Regardless, it is a most sad irony to see a Holocaust survivor who is also in any way a Zionist.
ronald9 and DaMoshe:
Please see Joseph’s link in his post on the first page.
GAW:
It is historical fact that the Zionists invaded E”Y and provoked the savages there and in opposition to the observant Jews already living there. What is, unfortunately, still not understood by many, is that Zionism is diametrically opposed to Torah and that the Zionists are the enemy of the Jewish people.
As the Brisker Rav, who lived in E”Y before, during and after the State’s founding in 1948 noted, “The state that they have managed to achieve is the greatest triumph of the Satan since the Cheit HaEigel”.
ronald9 and DaMoshe:
Please see Joseph’s link in his post on the first page.
GAW:
It is historical fact that the Zionists invaded E”Y and provoked the savages there and in opposition to the observant Jews already living there. What is, unfortunately, still not understood by many, is that Zionism is diametrically opposed to Torah and that the Zionists are the enemy of the Jewish people.
As the Brisker Rav, who lived in E”Y before, during and after the State’s founding in 1948 noted, “The state that they have managed to achieve is the greatest triumph of the Satan since the Cheit HaEigel”.
Avi Gordon (and DY):
Actually, the Chevron Massacre occurred as a direct result of Zionism.
Rav Baruch Kaplan, who was learning there at the time (but, B”H, had been away that Shabbos) discussed this:
The “Religious Zionists” incited the Arabs because of the Kosel. They even came up with a play on words, “Shema Yisrael HaKosel Kosleinu HaKosel Echad”. Rabbi Kook was proud of them, too, even after the resulting massacre. Full details are available by searching “Kook Chevron Massacre” (no quotes).
The non-Zionists begged the “Religious Zionists” to stop bothering the Arabs and be grateful that they were able to pray at the Kosel at will (until the Zionists lost that in 1948, which they don’t tell you either).
The rumor spread that Al Aqsa was being threatened (kind of like the news these days), and the savages murdered these Yeshiva men in Chevron as a result. Of note, they did not touch the sefardim in that area whom they knew to be non-Zionist. But the Yeshiva men were Ashkenazic and, therefore, the savages assumed they were Zionists, too.
ronald9:
I’m sorry you misunderstood that post. Rabbi Schachter likely does believe his views are legitimate, but would not claim he is greater than Rav Chaim Brisker, et al.
ronald9:
Let’s try this again.
Zionism, which is a basic tenet of the MO faith, has been around for well over a century. Hence, it was addressed by gedolim of generations past.
However, it is, with all due respect, absurd to claim that MO has “just as much or more tradition behind it than whatever titles haredim are making up for themselves these days” when MO was invented by RYBS around a half-century ago while the Torah was given to us thousands of years ago.
DY:
I don’t understand your question. It is very clear to me.
GAW:
Regarding Zionist money and Agudah, et al., I still don’t understand the relevance: Just because Zionism is A”Z, I don’t see how it automatically follows that getting money from the Israeli government must be mamon A”Z. Again, their Rabbinic board can paskin on that. But if Agudah were CH”V espousing Zionism, that would, of course, be a different matter.
Regarding the Israeli Parliament, I don’t see your point. Let’s assume that it was permitted for Rabbi Lorincz to enter that abominable place (and for the current ones to do so). That has no relevance to the overall issue that Zionism is A”Z.
Regarding the wine:
Please see my response to DY above (assuming it gets posted).
But, no, just because their wine is not ruled yayin nesech does not change the reality that the gedolim held that Zionism is A”Z.
Regarding the Zionists setting E”Y aflame and foolishly provoking the savages:
I’m glad we agree on this.
Sam2:
I am honored that you bothered to read my posts which I thought you ignored. But since I clearly stated that MO people should be loved as Jews no less than traditional orthodox people, why do you imply that I was “[h]urling invective and [engaging in] ad hominem attacks”?
I do not find that post at all ironic.
DY:
No, I would not do so and would not say it’s an excellent question.
Unlike by a Buddhist, it is not at all clear to me that every MO adherent believes in the heresies of MO to the point that it would render them heretics. Therefore, I cannot assume that their wine is yayin nesech and would need to ask that question.
ronald9:
You are assuming that RHS is a “gadol” and on par with his peer “gedolim” and, more importantly, assuming that he is on par with the recognized gedolim who preceded him, some by generations, who oppose his views.
Since even he would not say that the latter is true, your premise falls apart.
As well, a “machlokes”, as you surely know since you are so well-educated and have “opened a gemara”, denotes two legitimate opposing positions, as in, for example, Rava and Abaye, and NOT, for example, Torah Judaism vs. lihavdil, Jews for J.
GAW:
Agudah would, presumably, take money from whomever their rabbinic board permits them to take money. I don’t understand the relevance of that to this topic.
The Israeli parliament is referred to in some sefarim as “knesses haMinim”. I am not aware of the heter the Agudah “MK”s use to enter that place, but I do know that the Brisker Rav would advise “MK” Rabbi Shlomo Lorincz Z”L about various Klal matters, and that Rabbi Lorincz did what he could for Klal Yisrael “working from within” the Zionists.
Regarding the wine, I have not seen anything brought down about that so I would have to ask my LOR. I think it’s an excellent question, though.
Regarding the nonsense at the end about Israel and ISIS that you “put in my mouth”:
Had the Zionists never invaded E”Y, meaning over a century ago (not just in 1948), there would have been no need for an IDF (and there would have not been the Chevron Massacre in the 1920s, et al.), which is what the holy Chazon Ish told the first Zionist Prime Minister, as I mentioned above.
Now that the reality is that the Zionists have invaded E”Y and clearly are powerless to protect their citizens as, unfortunately, is quite evident from not only recent news reports but going all the way back to 1948 and before, it seems we need a miracle to resolve this. But davening for the Zionists is still 1000% wrong; we daven that Hashem should keep all Jews safe and sound, however HE chooses to do so.
May Hashem redeem us all with the true geulah BB”A.
On a related note:
Rabbi Herschel Shachter, in a Yom HaAtzamos address (posted online) a couple of years ago mentioned how the Brisker Rav asked his daughter and son-in-law to move back to Eretz Yisrael from America. To which RHS remarked, “Sounds like a Zionist to me”. Of course, the Brisker Rav was very much not a Zionist; quite the opposite as, presumably, RHS knows quite well.
As RHS, himself, noted in that same address, RHS’s own “psak” is that if someone would learn better, shiurim, etc. outside E”Y, versus if he were to move to E”Y, then he should NOT move to E”Y and stay where he is.
Obviously, then, the Brisker Rav recalling his kids to live in E”Y had to do with their particular reasons and nothing to do with Zionism of any flavor, CH”V.
I won’t speculate as to why RHS conflated the issue of Zionism with an objective decision of when to or not to live in E”Y especially given his own view on the matter stated in that same address. But the Brisker Rav was obviously not a Zionist and that same Brisker Rav said that Zionism is A”Z among other things.
MDG:
Seriously? Are you really even questioning that the MO faith requires Zionism and how important it is to them?
RYBS himself was the head of Mizrachi, “Religious Zionism” and was upset (as per his writings) when, at some point, some doubted his allegiance to their views.
Regarding RHS’s view on Nationalism and pikuach nefesh, please see this post:
(As well:
The fanatic obsession in MO institutions with Zionism, Zionist holidays like Yom HaAtzamos, et al. and much more, also makes it quite clear that Zionism is a very big part of the MO faith.
Do you not know what goes on in MO schools?)
I hope that satisfies your question.
ronald9:
Hurling invective and ad hominem attacks does not make you right. It does, however, show that you don’t have an answer – which, is okay, because there is no answer for MO theology.
Again, although MO people are our brothers, and Rav Schwab said so explicitly (addressing them as “achim biEidah”) when he begged the MO to rejoin the true Torah world, MO theology is baseless and wrong according to the Torah greats.
OURTorah:
I am writing based on actual knowledge, not theoretical book knowledge, of that which I discuss, if that’s your concern.
And, unfortunately, they are not “literally following the same Torah you do”. For example, MO theology includes Zionism, which is heretical and idolatrous, as an essential religious tenet of their faith. That’s besides the numerous problems with “synthesizing” Torah and secular culture (“foolishness bordering on heresy” according to Rav Schwab).
GAW:
I am not expressing what I hold, as I don’t have a personal position on a matter that is for gedolei Torah to decide. I merely expressed what is the universal position of the gedolei Torah. The Brisker Rav, who was known for being very careful with what he said, stated explicitly that Zionism is Avoda Zara.
Interesting, the father of a young boy once came to Rav Chaim Brisker to tell him that his (this father’s) son had given a coin to the shmad-named “Keren Kayemet”, a blatant identity-theft of the “keren kayemes” we say in davening each day.
They happened to be standing near a church at the time; Rav Chaim pointed to the church and said to the young man that he’d be better off throwing out his money there than giving it to the Zionists. This is, of course, way before 1948.
As well:
“Working with” and “wanting” and two completely different things.
Although Agudah does “work with” the State of Israel, which the gedolim seemed to allow while that is something to which Satmar would object, that does not at all mean that they “want” that State, CH”V.
And the many yeshivos and yeshivish shuls that say tehillim after the latest attack of the savages (whom the Zionists carelessly rile up after they carelessly invaded and stirred up all this trouble to begin with, as the Chazon Ish pointed out to David BG) on the Jews, are doing so solely for the welfare of the Jews in Eretz Yisrael and having nothing to do with the State of Israel.
OURTorah:
I appreciate the sincerity and thoughts expressed in your posts. But I disagree with both its premise and conclusion.
None of us knows whom are anyone’s friends, whom are their family members, in which shul do they daven, which day schools/Yeshivos they attended, etc.
None of us also knows who is “accepting and loving” and (if any) who is not. I haven’t seen anything in this thread about hating MO people, CH”V.
To illustrate this point:
The Satmar Rav, a known great anti-Zionist, is reputed to have cried when he heard of an Israeli soldier that died. Why would an Anti-Zionist cry over the death of a Zionist soldier? Because that soldier happened to be a Jew.
VERY importantly, however, this did not change even one iota his definition of right and wrong. Zionism was still the same tumah, heresy, idolatry, shmad, et al. as it was before. But he still mourned that Jew.
Unless someone explicitly states it, I don’t think you have a right to accuse anyone that they “aren’t accepting and loving”.
Just to further clarify the point, and not to make a direct comparison:
If you knew of a Reform or Conservative (or perhaps something less offensive) community that was successful, happy, learned lots of Torah and thought they were the greatest Jews alive, how would you respond if they posted here “so we all agree that we have a legitimate derech, too, right?”
Unfortunately, the answer to that question is, of course, “Absolutely not; you do not have a valid derech.” That doesn’t mean we love MO any less than we do Traditional Orthodox Jews. But we dare not accept as a valid Torah derech, anything that is, lihavdil, heresy or idolatry, or even general laxity, as stated by our gedolim.
In addition, this point remains even if this hypothetical Reform or Conservative group were the greatest philanthropists in the world and learned Torah 24/7. Because, very simply, a valid Torah derech cannot have in it anything that is against the Torah.
ZDad:
Nope. Please see my post above.
Charlie:
Having a good and even respectful relationship with someone does not at all condone acceptance or agreement with them or their views. Rabbi Kook, in particular, had immense political power, and others were certainly mindful of this.
ronald9:
Perhaps being MO (if we are peasants then I guess you are aristocracy?) prevents you from understanding that I merely quoted preeminent Torah giants. I did not attack anyone.
Unfortunately you seem to also not understand that a great amount of Torah knowledge does not guarantee gadlus baTorah or anything close to it. If one corrupts one’s mind with secular values, particularly if those foreign values are antithetical to Torah, then they end up with…anti-Torah things that MO rabbis have said, as per the greatest Torah sages.
I posted some examples earlier, such as Rabbi Kook’s claiming secular nationalism as Torah, as per the Imrei Emes.
If you disagree with the likes of the Brisker Rav (again, a generation BEFORE your “Rav”), Rav Shach, the Imrei Emes and others, you’re welcome to your opinion. But it would not be reasonable to expect others to concur.
MDG:
Zionism does not hold anything of the sort. Judaism, lihavdil, believes in the coming of Moshiach, may it be BB”A.
GAW:
No gadol holds that Zionism is “kosher”. To do so would be preposterous.
The “pasul” of Zionism, and the gedolim’s various statements about it, have been posted many times on these boards.
Satmar, to their credit, minimizes their interaction with the Zionists as much as possible. Others also do not take Zionist money.
But that’s not really relevant because the Zionists invaded Eretz Yisrael even though the Jews did not want them there and the Zionists therefore administer the infrastructure, etc. as much as the Jews wish they didn’t.
So Jews need not leave Eretz Yisrael just because the Zionists invaded, although Brisk seems to be getting a little closer to possibly leaving, as Rav Meshulam Dovid mentioned not that long ago.
ZD:
I did not mean to imply that Rabbi Kook was MO. But he is the basis for the heresy and idolatry (gedolim’s words) of “Religious Zionism” which is an essential tenet of the MO faith.
DaMoshe and mw13:
Let’s be very clear, since it should be offensive to any Torah Jew when they see anyone trying to adulterate the Torah and claim that as authentic.
The gedolim have declared unequivocally that MO is not a valid derech. See Joseph’s post linked on the first page for some quotes. There’s much more, though.
For example, Rav Shach strongly condemned (in writing) Rabbi Soloveichik (“the Rav”, in MO terms), stating specifically that his words (related to Zionism) were heretical to the point that it is shocking to even see this kefirah. The Imrei Emes wrote that Rabbi Kook, despite his great knowledge of Torah, cannot be a valid transmitter of the mesorah.
Both Rav Shach and the Imrei Emes wrote about these men (respectively) that their “ties” to the philosophies and movements of the time (e.g. Nationalism) is what caused them to write these terrible things, to project these heretical philosophies as Torah.
Since Rabbis Soloveichik and Kook are essentially the sole underpinning of MO theology, it follows that MO has absolutely no “mesorah” (including from Rav Hirsch whose views are also very much opposed to these heresies).
None of this should, CH”V, be taken as casting negativity on MO adherents who don’t know any better; they are likely simply following the misguided theology that they learned in their institutions.
But the fact remains that MO’s “derech” is absolutely baseless, no matter who professes it.
To address the easy part of the OP’s question: No, going to college and working is not at all what makes someone MO; it is perfectly normal for Traditional Orthodox men and women to go to college (typically a Jewish program or online) and then work in the workforce.
As to the rest of the OP: Even some MO admit, like one of their “feminists”, that NOT everything they do is in accordance with halacha.
Joseph’s post, in the other thread linked at the beginning of this thread, is well worth reading.
This is far more insidious than many people likely realize. If there were no such theology as MO and a “non-ideological” girl were, for example, to wear a shirt which does not conform to the absolute and indisputable requirements of tznius, then, if not for MO theology, at least she could understand that she is doing something wrong and then hopefully choose to do the right thing. Same for married women keeping their hair uncovered, et al.
But to give her an institutional/theological justification for doing so, that “MO does this” so therefore it’s okay and just as frum as anyone who does conform to tznius requirements, is unprecedented, and can prevent her ch”V from correcting her behavior, because “MO does it”.
This can then continue on in their families for generations and is also obviously a disaster from a chinuch perspective, Hashem Yishmor.
MO is the first known movement in Jewish history to both claim orthodoxy and at the same time to permit that which is impermissible.
There is also the very real problem of incorporating the heresy and idolatry of Zionism into their faith, which is also alluded to in that post.
akuperma (and others):
As I wrote in the other thread, permitting childless couples to marry does NOT therefore logically permit same-gender “couples” to marry.
The key difference is that children do best in a household with one father and one mother. So if a childless couple were to adopt, the child would still have one father and one mother. Whereas, with this legislation, the same-gender “couple” would be given the same preference as the normal couple, and the child would be told that his/her legal parents are both male or both female.
This is sick, and a shame.