Another new minhag which is close to becoming an old part of mesora is singing Im Eshkochaich at the Chupa.

I have a source for (at least something very similar to) this one:

The Taz in Orach Chaim 560:4 writes:

??? ????? ?? ??????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ???’. ?????? ???? ?????

????? ???’ ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ???

Joseph:

I brought in R’ Kook and R’ Soloveitchik, not to divert the discussion from its topic, but to address a specific point that you made. You found it “funny” that someone would entertain the notion of not respecting the Satmar Rav. To which I asked you if you would find disrespecting R’ Kook or R’ Soloveitchik “funny” as well. Whatever reason you have for thinking that it’s okay to not respect them (e.g. they did terrible things, they were krum, they destroyed Torah, etc.), someone else might have a similar reason for not respecting the Satmar Rav (as I alluded to earlier). My point is not about whether it is actually correct to not respect the Satmar Rav; my point is that if you find it acceptable to not respect the other side’s gadol, you shouldn’t find it funny if they don’t respect your gadol. (Obviously, the two sides can argue that the other one wasn’t a gadol, etc. ad infinitum.)

The problem with quoting the like of “Rabbi X said…” is that you are anonymous and for all I know might be quoting the story tenth hand. Over ten repetitions a story can change drastically, and certainly lose the nuances that were contained therein. One need only look at how the same person tells a story slightly differently each time, to realize that changes can easily creep in. Thus, I have a healthy sense of cynicism whet it comes to such stories in general, and all the more so over here where it flies directly in the face of the letter written by the Chofetz Chaim’s son in law. Additionally, you didn’t provide that much context to the story. There was surely more to the story (if it ever happened) than the Chofetz Chaim just saying “Kook Shmook”. There was probably an entire conversation which we know nothing of. It is hard to assign much value to a two-word statement the Chofetz Chaim said, without knowing these details, especially – as I have already pointed out – that it is against the Chofetz Chaim’s son in law’s letter which is documented in full. Furthermore, you quote two separate incidents in which the Chofetz Chaim said “Kook shmook”. If I had to guess, I would say that this is an example of a legend being told over several times to the point where different versions emerge. First of all, in the second story, you said that R’ Berel used to tell it over. But did R’ Berel witness it? So where did he get it from? Second of all, R’ Kook never said that Hebrew University is a fulfillment of “Ki Mitzion”. His speech is printed in several seforim and was even translated into English by Dr. Shnayer Leiman in Tradion 29:1. What R’ Kook actually said was:

????? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ??????? ???????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?’ ???????? ???

As you can see, it was a prayer, not a statement of fulfillment, and it was not even said about the university. So either the story with the Chofetz Chaim never happened, or it happened and was based on distortions of R’ Kooks words, which would then call into question many of the statements against R’ Kook.

Speaking of context, the “rasha gamur” quote from R’ Elchanan is also out of context. He didn’t simply say “R’ Kook is a rasha gamur” as one would think based on your post. What he wrote was:

?????? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ??? ????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ???? ???

Incidentally, this would render all those rabbis who praised R’ Kook reshaim.

Getting back to the kol korei, I am not asking you to do my research; I am asking you to do your research. You claim that R’ Kasher’s kol korei was disproved by Zvi Weinman. Now you either read what Weinman wrote or you didn’t. If you did read it then please tell us exactly how he disproved it – for instance if he claims to have found different kol koreis, tell us what they said, who signed them, and what the evidence is that they were more authentic than R’ Kasher’s. If he called the signatories and asked them if they signed R’ Kasher’s version, we have my follow up question which I think, based on your response, you misunderstood. You say that it is not their responsibility to keep abreast of everything signed in their name, and the kol korei was only published in a Mizrachi publication. Your point seems to be that they didn’t know that they were signed on to R’ Kasher’s version. But if Zvi Weinman told them about this kol korei and asked them if they signed it, they certainly knew about it. So why, out of some 200 signatories, did we not hear anything from them about how they were misrepresented in the most heinous way as if to make it seem that the State of Israel is the ?????? ??????, when in fact such a position is assur gamur and against all the gedolim? (Again, if there was a public retraction, feel free to document it.)

Now you said:

None of the rabbonim who supported a State where anywhere near the stature of the Chofetz Chaim, Rav Elchonon, the Chazon Ish, Rav Chaim Ozer, the Brisker Rav or Rav Ahron Kotler. Nor were any of the zionist rabbis who signed the KK or referred to a ?????? ?????? anywhere near that stature; and stature matters.

First of all, you are combining three different positions into one. Someone can support the State without holding that it’s ?????? ??????, and someone can hold that it’s not assur to have a state, without supporting the formation of a state. Either which way, as I already noted, the Yeshuos Malko wrote that the ???? is ?????? ??????. Now if you want to compare rabbis that is fine. But you have to have a valid methodology for doing so. That means that someone who was intimately familiar with both rabbis (or if they were prolific authors then someone who is intimately familiar with their works) judged between them. So for example, you would have to explain who was intimately familiar with both R’ Kook and R’ Elchanan and said that R’ Elchanan was greater, or who was intimately familiar with both the Chazon Ish and the Yeshuos Malko and said that the Chazon Ish was greater, or who was intimately familiar with both R’ Aharon Kotler and R’ Soloveitchik and said that R’ Aharon was greater.

Once we’re at it I might as well add that R’ did not agree with R’ Elchanan, the Brisker Rav, and the Satmar Rav. See Mesoras Moshe page ????:

?????? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ?????? ??????? ????? ???”? ????????? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ??’ ?????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ??????? ??? ??????? ?”? ????? ??? ?? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????? ?? ???? ?????? ??????? ????? ??? ??? ????? ?? ???? ????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ???”? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ???????? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??????? ????? ??

??? ?? ?????? ??? ??????? ??? ????????? ?”? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?????? ?”? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ?????? ?? ????”? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??

And R’ Ovadia Yosef had his own view on the State; see for example Yabia Omer Orach Chaim 6:41.

Regarding your quote from Simcha Raz, I’m not entirely sure what you are trying to show from it.

In sum, I think we can see that there were differing opinions among the great rabbis. Some were radically different, while others were only different in regards to a few nuances.

Joseph:

I’m not sure why you changed the topic into a discussion about what various rabbis thought about R’ Kook. Theoretically, someone could hold that R’ Kook was the biggest rasha who ever lived while simultaneously not holding that a State is against the Torah. Be that as it may, I will point out that you give a whole list of quotes yet you only document two of them, neither of which are on hebrewbooks, and one of which simply asserts that the Chofetz Chaim was not a Zionist.

Even though, R’ Kook’s status is not particularly relevant to the discussion (as all it does is determine whether there is one more or one less great rabbi who held that a state is not against the Torah) I will still address your claims. I will preface my remarks by stating that I have no idea if the quotes you provide are true or not. If you provide a source which I have access to (including hebrewbooks) or post an exact quote in the original Hebrew, I will gladly admit that you have a source. Now, regarding the Chofetz Chaim, there is a sefer called ?? ??? ????? ?????? which discusses the Chofetz Chaim and R’ Kook. Unfortunately, the sefer is not on hebrewbooks, but (among other things) it has a letter written by the Chofetz Chaim’s son in law, which I took the time to type up word for word:

??? ???? ????

??”? ????? ???????

??? ????”? ???? ????”? ??”? ??? ???? ????? ?????

?? ???? ?”? ??? ?????

?”? ??? ???”? ???? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??? ????? ??? ???”? ??”?

?? ?? ???? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ????? ??? ?’ ????? ???? ???? ??? ????”? ??”? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ????? ?????”? ???? ???? ????”? ?????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????”? ???? ????”? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ??”? ?? ??? ????? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ????? ?????? ????? ???? (?? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ????? ??? ????”? ???? ????”? ?? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ???? ???? ??????) ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ??? ????? (????? ???? ???) ????? ??? ???? ?????? – ??? ??? ??? ?????? – ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ????”? ???? ????”? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ????? (?????? ????”? ????? ?”? ?”? ??’ ?”? ?”?) ?????? ?”? ??? ?? ??? ????”? ???? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?’ ??? ???????? ?????? ????? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ??????? ?????? ?????????? ?????? ?? ???? ?????? ??”? ?????? ?? ???? ????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?”? ????”? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ???”? ???? ???? ????? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ????? ??’ ?????? ?????

???? ????

??? ??? ????? ????? ????”? ??? ???? ????”?

Regarding the Chazon Ish, in ??? ???? on page ??, the following is told (again, it’s not on hebrewbooks but I typed out the quote):

????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ???? ??? ???????? ???? ??? ???????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ????? ???? ?????

See also, this letter from R’ Tzvi Pesach Frank to R’ Chaim Hirschenson, starting from the bottom pargraph: http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1544&st=&pgnum=237

There are plenty more stories/quotes about great rabbis who held highly of R’ Kook, but I’m not going to sit here all day typing them up, especially considering that it is tangential to the original discussion. If you want to see them, you can easily google various phrases that include R’ Kook’s name and the word “gedolim” or “Chofetz Chaim”.

Regarding the kol korei, I am just repeating what you told me. I have never seen Zvi Weinman’s writings and they don’t seem to be available online. You said that he found the original kol korei and it said ????? ????? in place of ?????? ??????. You tell me who signed which kol

korei – the only version I have ever seen is in Hatekufa Hagedola. If you have seen Weinman’s version then please tell us who signed and precisely what it said. If you have not actually seen Weinman’s claim then I take your point a lot less seriously. Also, as I mentioned before, I would like to know why none of the signatories publicly declared that they never signed, or that they signed something else (or if they did come out, please document it).

Regarding Hapardes, as I’m sure you know, the discussion about the meeting of the Moetzes spans some 30 pages, starting at http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=12084&st=&pgnum=4&hilite= . You quoted one paragraph out of all that, and even the paragraph you quoted is not against a state per se, but against a state that is not run according to the Torah. There was clearly a raging machlokes about having a state, as can be seen from reading the entire discussion, and as we saw in the other Hapardes which I linked in my previous post. Considering that all I ever claimed was that there was no unanimous, monolithic position amongst the great rabbis, I think I have supported my case. Especially considering that I cited R’ Moshe Shternbuch, who is quite the anti-zionist, as saying that rov of the gedolei hador were present and they agreed about the establishment of the state.

Regarding comparing great rabbis, I certainly agree that it can be done. If you are judging between two people and you know them both personally, you might be able judge which one is greater. If you don’t know them personally, you can read their seforim and you might be able to judge which one is greater. But I don’t think you utilized either of these two methods. I think you just assumed that the more famous/respected one was greater.

Again, I am not arguing in favor of Zionism or anti-Zionism, but that there was a difference of opinion amongst great rabbis.

Disclaimer:

Please do not impute any negativity into my tone. The nature of the written word is such that in a debate the tone may seem strident even when it is not.

Joseph:

Your accusation that the source of the quote I posted is R’ Kasher is correct – I explicitly wrote in my post “R’ Menachem Kasher wrote” and “He also writes”.

So after reading your first response to me, I decided to look into the issue and see if you were correct. Regarding the 1937 meeting (which I did not mention in my post), I found the original article which you accuse R’ Kasher of forging and doctoring. Indeed you are correct that R’ Kasher left out R’ Wasserman, R’ Kotler, and R’ Rottenberg; however it cannot be called “forging” or “doctoring” considering that he used an ellipsis to note that he was leaving something out. (I am not condoning what he did – I think it gives a false impression of the facts – but it is not quite the same thing as forging or doctoring a document. On that note, technically you actually did forge/doctor it since you wrote that those voting against the medina held that “it would be “Kefirah b’emunas bias hamoshiach…”” when in fact what it says in the article is “???? ????? ?????? ???? ?????”. The article can be seen at http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=12085&st=&pgnum=10 particularly the left column starting from the third paragraph.

Getting back to the point of my original post, we can see clearly from the original article that it was not simply “all the gedolim were against the founding of a state”. The article describes how the meeting to discuss this issue lasted seven hours and was stormy. Already we see that the opinion of the Rabbis was hardly monolithic. After delineating the two sides, the article says “????? ????? ??”.

Regarding the point about the Chofetz Chaim, let us, for the sake of argument, grant that R’ Kasher was a complete fraud. That doesn’t preclude his point from being true. So do you know of anywhere in the Chofetz Chaim’s writings where the three oaths are discussed? If you do, I will happily retract this point. Once we’re discussing the Chofetz Chaim, here is a quote from Kisvei R’ Chaim Eliezer Bichovski which I have quoted here previously:

??? ?? ??? ???? ??’ ???? ????? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???”? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ???”? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ???? ?’ ????? ???? ????? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ????? ??”? ??????? ??? ??? ?? ?’ ????? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ???????? ????? ?”? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ??? ??? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ????? ????? ????? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ???”? ???? ??”?

Regarding the kol korei about aschalta d’geula, I don’t have access to Zvi Weinman’s writings, so the only evidence I have, is you saying that Weinman claims that the original document said “kibutz galiyos” in place of “aschalta d’geula”. So let’s say I grant that you are correct on this. You agree, though, that these rabbis signed a kol korei which declared the State of Israel to be the ?????? ???????? ?? ????? ?????. The Yeshuos Malko (Yoreh Deiah 66) wrote:

???? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ?????? ??????

So while R’ Kasher may have been dishonest, the actual kol korei still says a lot.

Regarding R’ Yehuda Herzl Henken, I’m not sure why his halachic positions would affect whether he is trustworthy to quote his grandfather’s position. But regarding his halachic positions themselves, feel free to cogently dispute the teshuva about dancing:

http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20021&st=&pgnum=119

Also read the two pages of haskamos:

http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20021&st=&pgnum=3

Regarding the “funniest teshuva” ( http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20022&st=&pgnum=127 ), first of all, the first half of the teshuva is only about whether there is a chiyuv to say “zatzal”. Then he writes:

????? ?? ????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ????

So he reluctantly addressed this issue. Also, if you have a problem with not calling the Satmar Rebbe “zatzal”, do you also have a problem with not calling R’ Soloveitchik “zatzal” (Jewish Observer), and do you have a problem with calling R’ Kook:

??? ?? ????? ??? ??????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??? ????? ?????? ????”? ???? ?????? ?”? ( http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20339&st=&pgnum=99 )

I’m not saying I agree with R’ Henken on this, but I don’t think having “a lengthy discussion about this” is so far-fetched. He writes in the teshuva that his grandfather said:

????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???? ???? ??”?

Zaken mamrei and mevazeh talmid chacham are no joking matters, so it makes sense that these issues need to be clarified.

Again, I am not promoting Zionism or anti-zionism. I am just pointing out that there are more nuances than you made there out to be.

scared driver delight:

I misread wisey’s post. I thought he was talking about kohanim so I pointed out that R’ Hirschenson used that sevara as part of a heter for kohanim to go to medical school:

http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1544&st=&pgnum=194&hilite=

Since I thought we were discussing kohanim, I noted that R’ Moshe was vehemently opposed to kohanim going to medical school. In that teshuva he says that pikuach nefesh is not a sevara. So I then quoted R’ Uziel who seems to disagree on that point.

http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=920&st=&pgnum=426

Correct me if you know of a different Teshuva that speaks about this.

Perhaps, Sam, you were thinking of Orach Chaim 3:7

http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=919&st=&pgnum=301