Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Don’t tell it to me, apologize to Hakatan.
“The bark on the tree was as soft as the skies.”
While the wolf waits below, hungry and lonely,
Crying to the moo-oo-oon,
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/is-aliyah-a-wise-choice-in-the-nuclear-age
If anybody wants to cheat and copy comments/rants out of the last Zionism debate 🙂
DY nailed it. This shows that cross-contamination is not just a problem that affected ancient societies; it still happens today.
The reason I posted this now is because Cheerios posted it now. And also, this way it will be waiting here in five months when this topic comes up all over again.
#PreemptiveStrike
As the Gemara says countless times, may di’hava, hava; what has happened, already happened.
kj chusid, what bearing does all this have on what we should or should not do today?
Josh31:
Anti-zionism when taken to the extreme becomes a new religion in its own right.
Agreed (although we probably have different definitions of what is “extreme” in this context). But what do you think zionism becomes when taken to the extreme?
DY:
Didn’t the Satmar Rebbe zt”l also say that there’s no point in relaying his shittah to Zionists?
Elah may he’s talking who to us Agudahists, who aren’t beyond hope (yet).
Sam2:
Well, HaKatan’s taking an off the cuff humorous comment in the middle of a Shiur as a way to make R’ Schachter seem like a fool constitutes an ad hominem attack, and something the mods certainly shouldn’t have let through.
Listen, I by no means agree with everything HaKatan has said. But I think to label that comment “an ad hominem attack” is simply not true.
If anything, HaKatan has been on the receiving end of most of the attacks here.
OURtorah:
MY bubby and zadie didn’t survive to see people like YOU exist.
That is an absolutely horrible thing to say. I don’t care how right you think you are, nothing justifies a comment like that. And this coming in the middle of a comment preaching about “LOVE,. LOVE. LOVE”, no less.
“Your words are hateful, and if you don’t see it that way, I AM TELLING YOU THEY R HURTFUL.”
I have heard from a respected Sefardi Rav involved in Kashrus that the reason behind kitniyos are as relevant today as ever. He told me he has inspected a number of factories producing Pesach Soybean oil and found numerous grains of wheat in each facility. In his opinion even Sefardim may not use soy oil on Pesach.
From the back of a recently purchased box of Cheerios, reprinted without permission:
“SAME CHEERIOS, simply, GLUTEN FREE
The taste you love has always come with oats that are naturally gluten free. We’re simply making sure they stay that way.
IT STARTS with FAMILY
When Phil, a member of the Cheerios team for over 50 years, found out that his daughter-in-law couldn’t eat gluten, he knew his team had to find a way to make sure every family, including his, could share breakfast together. Since oats are naturally gluten free, the only problem was finding a way to make sure they didn’t get mixed up with anything else.
THE JOURNEY from FIELD to BOWL
Most of the farmers who grow oats for Cheerios also grow wheat and barley, which aren’t gluten free. Sometimes, those grains get mixed together in the fields or on the farm, so, to make Cheerios gluten free, we had to separate them. It took a lot of late nights and hard work, but we finally discovered a way to sort the other grains out of our oats.”
Complaining is even cheaper. And more fun. And doesn’t require having foam sticking out your ears.
ubiquitin:
What do you mean “regardless” Isnt that the exact point we are discussing? whether those who asscen har habayis are responsible (to whatever degree) to the current terror.
Not really. What we’re discussing is whether or not it is a good idea to ascend HHB. (Aside from the Halachic prohibition, which has been discussed at length).
What the geder of “responsibility” is is somewhat of a side point.
From the main page, by R’ Yair Hoffman:
This program would also implement both the carrot and the stick in the Palestinian territories. Support for terrorism and the hero worship for murderers must come to a complete end. The textbooks calling for the killing of Jews and the destruction of Israel must be eliminated. Payments by the government to families of a terrorist must stop. In short, anyone with a background of support for the killing of innocents or for other terrorist acts must be removed from any position of leadership.
They must be replaced with a new crop of leaders comprised of those untainted by terrorism.
And then comes the carrot. A new infrastructure could be built and new system of education would be developed. Medical schools, schools for emerging technologies and a Palestinian silicon valley.
But rebuilding Germany without the program of DeNazification would have been fruitless and indeed counter-productive.
The same is true with De-Terrorization.
It is time, in light of these stabbings and car crashes, that we launched such a program. Now is the time to completely knock out Hamas and all organizations like it. It will be a politically difficult decision to make, but it is the only manner in which a lasting peace can be forged.
ADDRESSING CRITICISMS
Detractors will say that it is not possible, that both Europe and the United States will claim it is too heavy-handed and will prevent it. The response to this is to do our homework by showing the world what Israel is now facing and to honestly show them what we plan to do with the carrot.
After de-Terrorization is implemented, industry and education can be built up. Now, the misery of the Palestinians is such that they have nothing to lose by stabbing others. Their lives can be made better, but only after complete de-Terrorization is achieved.
To give some more exmples, since some people are having trouble with this. The Charlie Hebdo authors are not repsonsible for their own deaths. Zero Nada. They may not have been smart people or very nice ones for that matter. But “being provoked” is not an excuse.
Forget who is “responsible”. Can we agree that if the editors hadn’t published the cartoons, they would still be alive?
Translating this into our sugya, can we agree that there are people who have been killed that would still be alive if no Jews ascending HHB (again, regardless of who is actually “responsible” for those deaths)?
I would seal the west bank, closing down all the entry points into Israel. At the same time, I would bar any Israeli Jews from entering Har HaBayis. I would not remove either of these measures until calm returned.
son, teshuvah tefillah and tzedaka are not just for the PM; that is a job for all of us.
Listen, if you honestly believe that killing a terrorist can be compared to ascending HHB, this conversation may have hit a dead end.
From goeurope.about.com, brought to you via googling “halloween in Europe”:
Question: Do they celebrate Halloween in Europe?
Answer: Why yes, they do. In fact, the whole Halloween thing seems to have be the results of combining the ancient Roman Feralia, commemorating the passing of the dead, with the Celtic Samhain. It seems to have passed from Europe to the US with Irish immigrants…
Halloween didn’t take its present form until All Saints Day was declared by Pope Gregory IV to replace the pagan festival. The night before became All Hallows Eve and people went door to door begging for food (or soul cakes) to feed the poor. Of course, things were tweaked a bit during the time between then and now…
Now according to your (and Joseph’s, DY’s argument) if I do an act X and you say oh you did X I’m going to do Y. Even if youve done Y multiple times without my X, even if you had planned to do Y anyway, even if I have done X multiple times without you doing Y. I am responsible for any outcomes of Y. Again note: this doesnt automatically make X wrong. Please correct me if I’ve misstated your position.
You have slightly, although I’m sure unintentionally, distorted my opinion. I shall try, yet again, to clarify it.
The first step is try to take a more nuanced view. Every Arab doesn’t always attack every Jew they see. As a matter of fact, its a rather small percentage (considering that there are several million Arabs, and nowhere near that amount of terrorist attacks). But some do. And no doubt, some are on the fence; they are considering becoming terrorists, but not completely sure about it. There are various factors that can cause that on-the-fence Arab to go one way or the other. One such factor (although certainly not the only one) is if Jews provoke him/her. And if indeed Jewish provocation is what pushed this OTF Arab to become a terrorist, the Jews behind that provocation do bear some of the responsibility.
YITZCHOK2, a quick search of this thread reveals that the word “Europe” has been used exactly one time (aside from the eight times it appears in your comment).
Nobody here has advocated trying to recreate Europe. Relax.
PBA:
If this guy is committing suicide, I need to be mechalel Yom Kippur to save him? I don’t agree.
What if he doesn’t realize he’s committing suicide?
It seems to me that the nasty comments and bad blood here is uncalled for, especially considering that you’re all just arguing about hypotheticals.
chareidmolim:
I do not understand all this about “provoking” the Arabs. We are in the midst of a war with them. In a war does every bullet fired at the enemy constitute “provocation”; or must we wait until the enemy has their gun aimed at us before “provoking” him?
If we were in a full-fledged war with them, then your logic would be correct. But we are not.
Not every Arab is currently trying to kill every Jew in Israel. Abbas and his cronies are not calling for violence, much less declaring war. So provocations can still make things worse.
(Obviously, this not does not apply to measure taken in self-defense, or to eliminate a possible threat. But ascending HHB is neither of those.)
ubiquitin, I am disappointed. Until now, your comments have contained logical arguments. I believe that the logic was flawed, but it was still there. But your last two comment are nothing more than petty demagoguery. Of course we do not believe that shooting is terrorists is wrong. I find it difficult to believe that you would actually doubt that.
DaMoshe:
Can we at least agree that MO Rabbonim definitely are following/teaching a very valid derech?
As DY pointed out, that depends on the definition of “MO Rabbonim”. Bur if we are talking about R’ Hershel Shechter/R’ Aharon Lichtenstein/R’ Mordechai Willig/etc, then yes. It may not be a derech that I agree with, but I do believe that it is legitimate one.
zahavasdad:
According to people here, its proper to kick out people for not following your exact lifestyle
Who here said that??
Nah, I do agree that some people are missing the forest for the trees. I don’t believe its quite the issue that syag thinks it is, but I do think it exists.
Sam2:
I wasn’t saying that observant MO will eat in non-observant MO houses, or even count them for a minyan. I was saying that they will accept them as part of the community, despite the things they do that are contrary to halacha. Chareidim, for the most part, will not. I was not coming to judge what is the proper mehalech; that is a separate discussion. I was explaining why it is that non-observant MO are still MO while non-observant Chareidim are not Chareidim. One group is tolerated by the rest of their community, and one is not; so the former can still be considered a part of the community, and the latter can not be.
syag:
For the most part, I agree with your well-written piece. However, I take issue wih one line:
I know that nobody from the old school of thought wants to admit that things aren’t going well, but they aren’t.
I think that today, things are going very well. We are experiencing one of the greatest renaissances of Torah-observant Jewry in our history. A few generations ago, people thought (and not without reason) that all was lost. And yet here we are today, still as vibrant and committed as ever.
Sure, there are issues that we as a community face. But on the while, things are headed up, not down.
zogt_besser, the mods will not allow most links through. But if you tell us the name and and author of the article, we’ll probably be able to find it ourselves.
In an apparent nationalist motivated revenge attack, a Jewish Israeli with a history of mental illness stabbed four Arabs in the town of Dimona. The 17-year old man admitted to police that he stabbed the three Arabs and a Bedouin in two separate incidents on Friday morning because he believes all Arabs are terrorists. Two of the wounded were taken to hospital and their conditions listed as medium to serious.
Shall we blame your attitude for this recent event? Or for the Duma arson attack?
Nobody here has said a word about a situation where one is trying to protect themselves. I believe that that is blatantly obvious.
Peer pressure, or just want of an activity?
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/women-and-simchas-torah/page/2#post-583449
And why is it that some here find it so hard to believe that there are indeed women who enjoy watching the festivities?
…and nonsensical. The fact that danger exists is not a rational reason to disregard every and all other dangers.
#JewishLivesMatter
Sam2:
nisht and Joseph: Your argument is unfair and it doesn’t hold up. Why do I care if people incorrectly use being “Modern Orthodox” as an excuse. If I commit murder and say I did it because I’m a penguin, does that make me a penguin? Does that make all penguins murderers? It’s unfortunate that some people have confused the term “MO” with meaning “not actually Orthodox”. But that doesn’t make it true. I’m not a penguin, no matter how much I (or anyone else) claims I am.
But if you hang out with penguins all day, and you walk like a penguin, and you talk like a penguin, you probably are a penguin.
What I’m trying to convey with this increasingly convoluted moshol is that if self-identifying MO who are not Halachicly observant are excepted into MO society (shuls/schools specifically), and they conform to MO culture (dress/speech/etc), they are indeed MO. MO who do not live up to the MO ideals set out by the MO Rabbonim, but MO nonetheless.
Now this is in no way to indicate that all MO don’t keep Halacha; as I’ve said countless times, there are many MO who do. Both camps exist, both are MO, and yet they can’t be confused with one another.
Also, women who don’t support any men in learning Torah (like if they are single) probably aren’t “yotzei” by watching other men celebrate. It makes sense that they should have their own celebrations.
Yotzei what? There is no chiyuv to celebrate Simchas Torah by dancing. Dancing is just a minhag, and a relatively recent minhag at that. A beautiful minhag, to be sure, but still one that is only a couple of hundred years old. In the not too distant past, Simchos Torah was primarily celebrated by a festive meal, as recorded in the Shulchan Aruch.
Those women who do enjoy watching the men celebrate, and do feel part of the celebration, (much like what happened in the Bais HaMikdosh by the Simchos Bais HaShoaivah) will continue to celebrate Simchos Torah in the traditional way. And as DY pointed out, from the high attendance rate of women in Shul on Simchos Torah it appears that many, if not most, women do indeed fall into this category.
For those who have no interest in watching the men, there are many other ways for them to celebrate; by partaking in the celebratory meal, as mentioned in the Shulchan Aruch, or by attending a shiur as some here have mentioned. I don’t see any reason to suggest any drastic departures from tradition.
Although I will admit it’s kinda egomaniac-ish, I quote what I wrote earlier in this thread:
Many here are making what I believe to be an important distinction between two very different groups within MO. There are MO who live up to MO ideals, and embody the concept of Torah u’Maddah, whether you hate it or love it. Then there the self-identifying MO who would probably be more accurately classified as Orthodox-lite: those would like to get away with as much as they can while (in their own minds) staying just within the confides of authentic Judaism. The differences between these groups is most obvious when one compares their fealty to Halacha; the first group will usually keep it scrupulously (although not most of the stringencies that those on the right keep), while the second will often times just ignore it.
So while there are indeed some who use the “modern” label to explain why they are not shomer negaih, dress modestly, etc, the self-identifying MO who actually live up to MO ideals would never dream of doing such a thing.
yekke2:
This is a far cry from simply “integrating” with the goyim. What I’d really like to know is whether the allowing TVs, Movies, unfiltered internet etc. is something they feel is right, or if it is a sad repercussion of their lifestyle?
Yesh vi’yesh. But I think it’s fair to say that there are these who do keep halacha, and yet do believe that there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of this stuff.
I really don’t like writing against Gedoilei Yisroel, so before I say something stupid can somebody please show me a Mareh Mokom of any of the Rabbis who support learning ????? ???????? without necessity?
I quote from the aforementioned essay of R’ Aharon Lichtenstein:
Seems kinda strange to me, and I don’t believe that there are too many Rabbonim who hold like this, but he certainly did say it.
#PehKaddoshEichYomarDavarZeh
(BTW, there is a summary of that essay written by the CR’s very own PBA: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/rav-lichtensteins-centrist-orthodoxy-by-gaw)
“However, there is another distinction as well (besides attitudes towards chumros, which I mentioned above): The question of balancing one’s obligation to support one’s family and one’s obligation to learn Torah. Chareidim will usually try to stay in learning for as long as possible, even if that means supported by their parents/parents-in-laws, wife, or government programs. MO tend to focus on earning a livelihood starting from shortly after high school.”
Again – is this the hashkafah or it’s unpleasant manifestation? In the Chareidi world, great value is put on Torah. Could it be that less people stay in learning and go to work before they need to because there is less appreciation of Torah in those circles? Perhaps because too much emphasis is placed on things that contradict Torah lifestyle?
Again, yesh vi’yesh. But here I think the split is clearer; the MO who believe in and live up to the MO ideals learn less only because they believe in working more. The MO who are just looking for an easier life learn less because they are just less interested.
ubiquitin:
You missed my point with “Is that true? There was no har habayis excuse in the 50’s yet fedayeen attacks became a routine occurance.” Terrosim was more prevelant then than today. Ditto for the hijackings in the 70’s, first intifada, second. NOne of these (with the possible exception of the second intifada) can in any way be blamed on har habayis. There isnt even an uptick in violence that can be linked to har ahbayis.
Again, nobody is arguing that conflict over HHB is the sole reason for Arab-Israeli tensions. Of course there are (and always have been) many different factors contributing to this mess. But none of that means that HHB isn’t one of those factors. And we have explained ad nauseam, there is every reason to believe that it is.
Btw, I’m not sure why you don’t think the current spate of attacks isn’t “an uptick in violence that can be linked to har ahbayis”.
I was arguing a different albeit related point. Namely if smacking a thug who routinely kills poeple wether they smack him or not can be considered to have incited his killing when smacked.
i’m not saying it is a good idea to smack him.
Then we do not disagree on too much.
Did Hershel Grynszpan cause kristalnacht?
“Cause” is too simplistic a term. Events have many contributing factors, and some have more influence than others. The Nazis and their collaborators are the ones responsible for kristalnacht. But Hershel Grynszpan was the spark that set it off, so yes, he was a part of the cause. A small part, to be sure, but still a part nonetheless.
Moshol, li’mah ha’davar domeh – if a small spark causes a barrel of gas to explode, who caused the explosion, the gas or the spark?
This is not (or at least, should not be) a black and white subject. There is a grey area between complete responsibility and no influence whatsoever.
Avi K:
Lishitascha, I still don’t get why you aren’t waging a one man war to reclaim every inch of EY.
Many here are making what I believe to be an important distinction between two very different groups within MO. There are MO who live up to MO ideals, and embody the concept of Torah u’Maddah, whether you hate it or love it. Then there the self-identifying MO who would probably be more accurately classified as Orthodox-lite: those would like to get away with as much as they can while (in their own minds) staying just within the confides of authentic Judaism. The differences between these groups is most obvious when one compares their fealty to Halacha; the first group will usually keep it scrupulously (although not most of the stringencies that those on the right keep), while the second will often times just ignore it.
The difference between the “ideal MO” and the average “baalabos” are indeed not too great. For the most part I agree with the differences listed by DaMoshe (if not the slant that he put on them):
Chareidim tend to believe that it is best to try to remain as unaffected as possible by the permissive culture that surrounds us. MO tend to believe that there is nothing wrong with immersion in that said culture (or that the benefits outweigh the risks). This difference manifests itself in watching TV/movies, listening to non-Jewish music, reading non-Jewish books, and limiting internet access.
Secondly, as indicated in the YU slogan Torah u’Madda, MO tend to believe that any knowledge is inherently important and worth pursuing. Chareidim tend to view secular knowledge as nothing more than a means to an ends.
Then there’s Zionism, which is technically a separate discussion (it is possible to be Zionist and Chareidi, as well as anti-Zionist and Modern) but one who’s fault line on these shores are often drawn between the Chareidim and the MO.
However, there is another distinction as well (besides attitudes towards chumros, which I mentioned above): The question of balancing one’s obligation to support one’s family and one’s obligation to learn Torah. Chareidim will usually try to stay in learning for as long as possible, even if that means supported by their parents/parents-in-laws, wife, or government programs. MO tend to focus on earning a livelihood starting from shortly after high school.
If one is looking for extensive review of the ideals and current state of MO, I would advise reading R’ Aharon Lichtenstein Ztz”l’s essay “Centrist Orthodoxy: A Spiritual Accounting”
Avi K:
Ramban says it (Sefer HaMitzvot, Mitzvot that Rambam “forgot”). According to the Or HaChaim HaKadosh (Devarim 30,20) and the Avnei Nezer (Yoreh Deah 454,6) Rambam actually agrees that it is a mitzva in our time but did not list it as one of the Taryag because of his technical rules for counting mitzvot. Rav Avraham Shapira and Rav Shaul Yisraeli thus ruled that it is prohibited to give land even for peace.
Again, name me the Poskim of today who hold that there is chiyuv to conquer all of EY.
BTW, if you really do think that there is a chiyuv to conquer all of EY today, and that this is a milchemes mitzva which one must put his life at risk for, what on earth are you doing here? Put your money where your mouth is, get a gun, and go conquer Ramallah or die trying!
Syag Lchochma:
See the second part of my last response to Sam2 for an explanation of what I was trying to accomplish with those quotes from the Jerusalem Post.
Sam2:
First of all, how many people do you know who go up? I know a lot.
90% of them?
People here have openly said the reason that they support ascending HHB is to preserve/extend Jewish sovereignty over the site. I’ve seen this sentiment echoed in much of the circles where this position is popular. And I hear it much, much more often than I hear anything about spiritual inspiration.
Secondly, are you reading what you’re quoting?
Just because I quoted it doesn’t mean that I agree with it. Although this may be shocking to some, just because I’n not Zionist doesn’t mean I’m an Arab sympathizer.
The reason I brought down those quotes was to show that much of the anger that the Arabs currently (unjustly) feel is centered around a perceived Jewish takeover of HHB. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that if we banned Jews from ascending HHB (for the umpteenth time, in accordance with the psak of the overwhelming majority of the Gedolei HaPoskim) much (although obviously not all) of the anger would abate, and the attacks that are a direct result of this anger would decrease (although not disappear).
A couple of excerpts from a recent Jerusalem Post story:
The clashes in Jerusalem seemed closer than ever to Tel Avivians on Wednesday morning, at least according to the headlines. The night before a motorcycle procession and rally in solidarity with protests over al-Aksa Mosque spun out of control, bringing the recent turmoil to the Tel Aviv area for the first time in months…
[Jewish]
ubiquitin:
“Remember, the spark that set off the second intifada was Sharon’s visit to HHB. If he hadn’t made that visit, things may have ended very differently.”
No that was the excuse used. The intifada was planned for months beforhand if sharon hadnt gone up then there would have been another excuse
Source?
Clarification: I am in no way saying that that Sharon’s visit was responsible for the second intifada, just as I assume nobody will claim the Oslo Accords were responsible. The despicable terrorists who perpetrated it are the one who are responsible.
But both of these events did influence the beginning of the intifada. Without them, it probably would not have been as severe, and it may never even have started.
“ROB, for the umpteenth time, yes, they hate us, yes, sometimes they kill us. With more provocation, though, they do it more.”
Is that true? There was no har habayis excuse in the 50’s yet fedayeen attacks became a routine occurance.
“Does one need a scientific, statistical study to determine that walking up to an armed, anti-Semitic thug and slapping him across the face is more dangerous than just walking by him? Can anybody here honestly tell me that they’d say “hey, walking by him is dangerous anyways, so what’s the difference”?”
YES! If Reuvein walkds by the thug and gets killed, Shimon walks by and gets killed. LEvi doesnt get killed, Yehuda does, Yissachor smacks him and gets killed. I think its hard to argue Yissachar got killed becasue he smacked the thug
True, if this theoretical thug has so far killed 100% of the Jews he’s bumped into. Therefore, things can indeed get no worse.
However, nowhere near 100% of Arabs kill 100% of Jews they bump into. Therefore, practically speaking, things can get much, much worse. So unnecessary provocations are a bad idea.
(Applying this our theoretical thug, if the thug killed only Shimon and Yehuda, and let Reuven, Levi, and Yissachar go, would you advise Zevulen to smack him in the face?)
Avi K:
1. There is no halachic requirement to go without a smoke detector. There is a halachic requirement to assert our sovereignty over all parts of EY.
Name me the Poskim who hold there is chiyuv to conquer all of EY today.
2. Those who blame the architects of Oslo for the second intifada are making the opposite argument. They are saying that appeasement always has the opposite effect. This is not only true regarding Jewish=gentile relations. Neville Chamberlain’s “peace in our time” is the classic example.
So let me get this straight: You do believe that Arab violence can influenced by actions of the Jews. But you think they are only influenced by appeasement, and totally unaffected by provocation?
Once again, I did not write that piece. YWN did. Any issues you have with it must be taken up with them.
Sam2:
DY: That’s because the people in this thread are stupid internet commenters. For 90%+ of the Jews who go up, it’s either for inspiration or an expression of Hoda’ah to HKBH at the ability to be able to go up.
Says you. I think 90% of them are going up to make a political statement and/or to “show sovereignty”, as people here have put it. I doubt more than 10% are going up for purely spiritual reasons.
rabbiofberlin:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/har-habayis-revisited/page/2#post-582938
Does one need a scientific, statistical study to determine that walking up to an armed, anti-Semitic thug and slapping him across the face is more dangerous than just walking by him?
Can anybody here honestly tell me that they’d say “hey, walking by him is dangerous anyways, so what’s the difference”?
(ubiquitin, I saw your post, but don’t have time for a detailed response right now. Hopefully later.)
ROB:
mw13: Some of your statements are factually incorrect but this is not what I want to discuss.
If you believe anything I said to be “factually incorrect”, feel free to show your proof of the true facts. But kindly do not cast aspersions if you cannot back them up.
The simple fact is that unless you keep on showing that you are the “baalbos”, you lose your rights. If we forbid jews to go into he Har Habayis, our rights to that piece of land will be lost
We have already lost our right to ascend HHB. This right was not taken away by the Arabs, it was taken away by Hashem and His Torah. And nothing short of the geulah shelaima will change that.
and, soon our right to any piece of land in Israel will be lost.
Nonsense. Barring Jews from ascending HHB (in accordance with the opinions of the overwhelming majority of the Gedolai HaPoskim), except for Israeli police acting in security interests, will have no discernible affect on the Jewish hold on the rest of the country.
Principles are important.
True. And one of the most important principles in Judaism is the value of life, and the lengths we go to protect it. There are very few principles that override this one – namely avodah zara, giluy arayos, shvichas dumim, and certain forms of chillul Hashem. But asserting Jewish sovereignty is simply not one of them. We do not, and we may not, risk lives for this principle.
We do not put our lives and the lives of our fellows on the line just to prove that we own a piece of land. We know it is ours,and when Moshiach comes, the rest of the world will know it too.
I do believe that there is indeed somewhat of a problematic attitude in the frum world towards accommodations for our particular needs. As yekke2 put it, The feeling of entitlement – that they are ?????? to give you special treatment – is an attitude that brings the most negative attention. Often, with just an apologetic smile and kind request, you can get your way without making the Chillul Hashem.
That said, I do not believe that either of the examples cited in the OP are displays of such a negative attitude. As akuperma pointed out, if the gym was only concerned about safety/insurance they could have had the lady wearing a skirt sign a waiver, or they could have banned her from certain machines.
As for the Rabbi getting the bowling alley’s TVs turned off, while I do not agree to the underlying attitude of making the whole place change to fit one’s own standards, I do not believe that going over the managers head is the chillul Hashem its being made out to be. (And apparently, the corporate office sided with the Rabbi.)
Syag Lchochma:
First, an important preemptive clarification; I do not in any way condone behavior by frum people that is condensing, nasty, disrespectful, overly demanding, etc. It is wrong, it is a chillul Hashem, and it must stop.
However, I do not believe that your comparison was an accurate one. I believe that there is a world of a difference between provoking those who hate us into actually attacking us, and engendering feeling of dislike from people who otherwise seem to have no problem at all with us. Both of them are clearly wrong, but only one of them is actually dangerous.
A quick clarification on a point which is consistently being glossed over by the advocates of ascending HHB:
Nobody is suggesting that the sole reason Arabs attack us is due to Jewish provocations. That is quite obviously just not true. However, it should be equally obvious that Jewish provocations will lead to an increase in Arab attacks.
So all these stories of unprovoked Arab attacks do not disprove that more Jewish provocations will bring about still more Arab violence, and increase the danger to Jewish safety and Jewish lives.
But really, I think bja613 made a point worth reiterating: Why WOULD somebody go up on HHB? Even if one would not be dissuaded by the overwhelming majority of the Gedolei HaPoskim that this is an issur kurrais, and even if one somehow does not think that Jewish provocations will lead to an increase in Arab attacks against us; what exactly is this person gaining?
Is it really worth all those risks for no discernible reward?
It never ceases to amaze me how the same people who will go on a crusade for safety in so many places (smoke detectors, vaccines, and metzitza bi’peh all come to mind) will endanger themselves and others with such completely disregard for safety and human life whenever Zionism is introduced into the equation.
To all those who insist “they hate us anyway, it can’t make the situation any worse”:
Of course they hate us. And of course they wish us harm. But this hatred, along with the actions that unfortunately stem from it, is not static; it has peaks and ebbs. The security situation was worse during the second intifada than it is now now, and it was better three years ago than it is today.
These ebbs and peaks are caused by many different factors, many of which are beyond our control. But one of these factors is the actions of the Jews. Remember, the spark that set off the second intifada was Sharon’s visit to HHB. If he hadn’t made that visit, things may have ended very differently.
Of course, the terrorists are the one who bear responsibility of terrorism; but those who enable or provoke them are not entirely blameless.
AviK:
MW13, please post the exact quote in Hebrew where Rav Nevantzahl says that non-Jews “own” the site.
All I did was copy and paste a story from the News section of this website; if you would like a clarification or proof of authenticity, you’re gonna have to take it up with them.
DY, our very existence “provokes” terror. You have joined the ranks of our enemies by blaming us for anti-Semitism.
Just out of curiosity, what about those who blame the architects of the Oslo accords for the second intifada? Would you similarly accuse them of “joining our enemies by blaming Jews for anti-Semitism”?
Some criticism is constructive; don’t just reflexively bury it by labeling it “joining the enemy”.
Rav Baruch Ashlag (son of the Sulam) says that bitachon also means that one must have faith in himself
Foolishly endangering oneself and others must never, ever be confused with bravery. It is nothing more than stupidity, stupidity of the worst and most dangerous kind.
I haven’t seen this R’ Moshe inside. Does he actually delineate where one may go, or is he just saying that since in theory there are areas that one may walk on it is not reasonable to assume that this is why the Tor/Shulchan Aruch would omit the issur.
It is possible to hold that there are parts of HH”B that one may walk on in theory, but if we aren’t sure precisely where they are it would remain assur in practice (safek issur di’Oraysa li’chumrah).
zogt_besser
Americans don’t allows automatically follow R’ Moshe, especially when he is a daas yochid. (For example, almost all Americans use shabbos clocks and listen to music.)
The fact that we do not have any written teshuvos from R’ Elyashiv or R’ Chaim that forbid ascending Har HaBayis should come as no surprise; neither one of these Gedolim published shailos vi’teshuvos. But there has never been any doubt as to their positions on this issue.
Are there any teshuvos that explicitly allow ascending HHB?
What did the Chazon Ish, R’ Kook, R’ Shlomo Zalman, R’ Ovadya Yosef, etc. have to say on this matter?
chareidimolim:
would advise an ill person to follow the instructions found in a medical book written 50 years ago?
I hope I do not need to point out the obvious differences between the way we regard yesterdays scientists opinions and the way we regard yesterdays halachic opinions. The scientific opinions of Aristotle and his like are are laughably obsolete (flat world, any one?) while the opinions of the Tannaim and Amoraim of thousands of years ago continue to form the basis of Halacha today. One would have to be an idiot to agree to Aristotle, and an idiot to argue with Rav Ashi.
Do we agree on this?
The situation has changed. The Rabbanim today know that it is permitted to ascend. The matter is all political.
How, precisely, has the situation changed in the few years since we lost R’ Elyashiv?
And why are you so convinced that only the actors on one side of this debate are politically motivated?
For a more in-depth look at apikorsos in Open-Orthodox theology, I suggest reading an excellent article titled “Open Orthodoxy: Outright Heresy and the Orthodox Rebirth of the Conservative Movement” by Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer.
oomis:
this topic is engendering a LOT of L”H, and somehow, especially after Tisha B’Av, this is especially inappropriate IMO
I remember once reading a letter to the editor of The Jewish Observer complaining about the magazine’s negative coverage of the positions of the Conservative movement. The letter similarly asked, “isn’t this lashon hara?” Although I don’t remember the exact wording of the response, the gist of it was that if there is a deviant movement seeking to undermine the observance of Torah and Mitzvos, it is not only permissible to speak up against it, it is obligatory. (As Edward Burke famously said, “In order for evil to flourish, all that is required is for good men to do nothing.”) And it is certainly li’toeles.
This applies even if Weiss and his cronies are indeed not apkorsim, which is its own issue. See the next part of this comment.
Sam2:
From R’ Willig’s article linked to above (thanks, DaMoshe):
“Rav Moshe continued to say that no battle, even one supported by the entire world, can succeed in changing the Torah, and women who fight to change the Torah’s eternal and immutable laws are heretics. If a woman wears talis or tefillin as a complaint against Hashem and His Torah it is prohibited as heresy since she thinks that it is possible to change Torah law… The movement to which Rav Moshe refers, now known as feminism or egalitarianism, continues to infiltrate Orthodox Judaism. The recent ordination of women is but one example. Unfortunately this practice is viewed by at least one of its proponents as part of an attempt to change Torah laws and ideas (see Crosscurrents July 29, 2015), precisely the heresy that Rav Moshe warned against.”
zogt_besser, i think mik5’s question was in regards to hotzah, not muktza.
Do you know where that Chazon Ish is?