Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Stop hocking nonsensical lies about the Steipler.
Read it.
Black on white.
As clear as can be.
EXISTENCE of the State is not against the Torah..
The UN, which took over from the League of Nations ,ALSO voted for Partition and Establishment of a Jewish State.
So it was BOTH the League AND the UN who supported the Establishment of a Jewish State.
These are facts , as easily verifiable as a page in the Steiplers Karyane DeIgreta.I can see that the Kana’ut is really burning inside you as you are misrepresenting such easily verifiable facts.
EVEN LETSOREH KANA’UT IS IT PROHIBITED TO LIE! [Steipler in same letter where he permits EXISTENCE of the State] .
.This whole thread seems totally fruitless to me.
As long as the habad apologists will not agree about the basic facts, how can we try and argue about the merits or otherwise of those facts?Question to be asked is the following : Do we all agree that habad came up with new stuff in the last 60-70 years ?
Yes or no ?Did habad at anytime in its 250 years plus of existence at any time or location organize a gathering for hachtarat meleh hamashiach ?
Yes or no ?Did habad or any of its rebeim , including the other offshoots/branches [like niezin,liadi kapust etc] ever have their rabanim issue a public kol koreh for the public to accept their leader as mashiach ?
Yes or no?Those questions do not pertain to opinions.
They pertain to facts.
Facts are either true or untrue.So to all of you , honest people , out there – Can we first get an unqualified and simple one word response to those questions ?
.they AUTHORISED ???
They publicly stated their intention . On the basis of which they received their mandate.I will repeat.
Lord Robert Cecil , The Deputy Foreign Secretary representing the British Government on 2 December 1917 stated that the British Government fully intended that “Judea [was] for the Jews. Our wish is that Arabian countries shall be for the Arabs, Armenia for the Armenians and Judaea for the Jews”.
The San Remo Resolution adopted on 25 April 1920 incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917. It and Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations were the basic documents upon which the British Mandate for Palestine was constructed.
All AFTER they were in possession of the Land.
It is true that the British themselves backtracked afterwards. And that subsequently some Zionists fought against them.
But the League of Nations ,under whose mandate the British governed ,never backtracked.
You are LOSING YOUR HESKAT NE”EMANUT!
Steipler wrote that since the the State’s existence is not an issur, therefore he held that Israelis Have to vote in their elections.
Steipler Also writes there that it is forbidden to lie , even letsoreh kana’ut ….
.
The San Remo Resolution adopted on 25 April 1920 incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917. It and Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations were the basic documents upon which the British Mandate for Palestine was constructed.
That was a while AFTER the British controlled EY.
Lord Robert Cecil , The Deputy Foreign Secretary representing the British Government on 2 December 1917 stated that the British Government fully intended that “Judea [was] for the Jews. Our wish is that Arabian countries shall be for the Arabs, Armenia for the Armenians and Judaea for the Jews”.
This was AFTER the British were victorious in the Battle of Beersheba and already controlled a significant part of EY.
.@ujm
Yankel: The British proclaimed Balfour while the Ottomans controlled Eretz Yisroel. After the British took over they didn’t declare further support of that declaration.
—
Factually Wrong. Their Mandate, received from the League of Nations explicitly mentioned the Balfour Declaration.Following is an excerpt from Encyclopedia Britannica –
“In July 1922 the Council of the League of Nations approved the mandate instrument for Palestine, including its preamble incorporating the Balfour Declaration and stressing the Jewish historical connection with Palestine.
Article 2 made the mandatory power responsible for placing the country under such “political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish National Home…and the development of self-governing institutions.”
Article 4 allowed for the establishment of a Jewish Agency to advise and cooperate with the Palestine administration in matters affecting the Jewish national home.
Article 6 required that the Palestine administration, should facilitate Jewish immigration and close settlement of Jews on the land. Although Transjordan—i.e., the lands east of the Jordan River—constituted three-fourths of the British mandate of Palestine, it was, despite protests from the Zionists, excluded from the clauses covering the establishment of a Jewish national home.
On September 29, 1923, the mandate officially came into force.”
@CS
You and the other habad apologists just don’t get it.
They do not understand what is bothering the rest of us.
They seem to condescendingly portray it as some sort of mixture of hate/childish/ignorance, which when will be infused with the required love ,maturity and knowledge , will automatically disappear.But it obviously doesn’t disappear.
Not because of hate , but because of the insufficiency of the given answers.
Hence the continuous questioning on habad.We cannot settle this issue , nor have a serious dialogue before the habad side will have a mature appreciation of the points put to them, and subsequently tries to deal with them begovah enayim [as they say in ivrit]
@hakatan
Apologise .
previous post was by UJM , not hakatan.
This is NOT proof of hakatans lack of reliability.
Thanks.@hakatan
By time the British took over Eretz Yisroel from the Ottomans, the British no longer supported establishing a Jewish homeland. So that also demonstrates no support from the Goyim for a Jewish state.
[katan]
——————
The League of Nations (LON) formally adopted a British mandate for Palestine in July 1922, which incorporated the principles of the Balfour Declaration in the mandate.
Note – Britain was ruling Palestine since October 1918 ,all the while supporting the Balfour Declaration.Proof that one Cannot rely on hakatans assertions.
@ujm
1. The Balfour Declaration was made by the British before they controlled Eretz Yisroel. The Ottomans were still in charge at the time. It would have been no different than if Russia had declared support for a homeland. The declaration doesn’t help regarding the Shavuous.2. By time the British took over Eretz Yisroel from the Ottomans, the British no longer supported establishing a Jewish homeland. So that also demonstrates no support from the Goyim for a Jewish state.
—————–
No 1 is irrelevant [because of/ and] No 2 is factually incorrect.@katan
Ma’ase Rav –
the shevet haleivi immigrated to EY then Palestine under the British – without permission of the British [the then rulers].Illegal immigration to EY is mutar al pi torah .
Proof.@katan
Regardless, pikuach nefesh goes only so far. The gimmel chamuros are yehareig viAl yaavor. Zionism is, according to all gedolim, A”Z, and their army serves up heapings of all three.
[katan]
—
Wrong . Zionism is Not a’z according to all gdolim . According to some gdolim only.Their army serves heapings of all three, you say .
One is not mehuyav to eat what is served.
But one IS mehuyav not to stand idly by their brothers blood.
.@katan
…. the Zionist State, (not E”Y, as the Zionist State is not E”Y even if it does cover part of that)? That’s essentially admitting that your concern is not just pikuach nefesh but rather Zionism.
[katan]
—-
Irrelevant . Totally irrelevant.
P/N is and remains P/N, whether it is in a Zionist state , in EY, in both or in none.Admitting that my concern is Zionism ??
No admission whatsoever.
Was this supposed admission of mine meant to be based on logic ? How so ?@katan
“It is a means to an end – of keeping Yehudim and their property in EY safe.”
[yb]So, in other words, it’s worth violating G-d’s word (the oaths and the entire Torah, according to the Brisker Rav) and sending His children to be shmaded in the Zionist army and all the rest just to protect Jewish “property” in the Zionist State
[katan]
————-
Thats no violation of Gods Word at all.Not aiding the State and the Army in case of P/N – THAT is a violation of Gods Word.
Who clearly commanded us not to stand by , when our brothers’ innocent blood is being spilt.
Re property – Yes , that is the clear and famous psak of Sh’A , to be mehalel shabat for property.
Re who should or should not serve in an army dominated by secular mesisim and madihim , and how to balance the problem of p/n versus the individual persons yahadut – that is a valid and necessary discussion for each individual to be had with a gadol batorah ve yirat shamayim , who knows him personally.
.Hi
What happened to my post ?
Did it get stuck somewhere ?no posts waiting here from you
@katan
If Jews for J or the Mormons were running the Zionist “State” and shmading Jews there, everyone would see this perspective plainly.
—–
Absolutely not.
Even if Jews for J would be the elected leaders there and the majority of Jews there ,would be Jews for J ,
I would NEVER [neither should you] abandon the innocent Jewish citizens there to a rerun of Oct 7th {chas veshalom] .I simply shudder at the thought of it !
@katan
Even if there is not a way al pi derech haTeva to actively shut it down without risking Jewish lives, that means only that it needs to be dealt with as such, but not at all that it needs to be actively supported, CH”V.
—–
Just the opposite .
It should be supported – if said yidden will be supported , their lives and their property will be supported .
Definitely.Lo Ta’amod Al dam Re’aha is a Lav De’oraytah.
You are mehuyav to give away ALL your property not to be over a Lav Min HaTorah..
@hakatan
Even if [this is debatable] the creation of the medina was against the torah, the EXISTENCE of the medina is not. [lehol hadeyot]”That makes no sense and is also a lie. It’s actually the opposite. LiChol haDeios, the State remains just as forbidden to have as it was to create it. But since it exists, there is a need to “deal” with it like one would with any type of thugs.
The Steipler rules that way, in karyana diIgrasa, for example.
————-
You are losing your heskat ne’emanut here.Steipler writes CLEARLY that the issur was only in the establishment , not in its existence.
Please don’t misquote sfarim to jibe your narrative.Where is this maharal that 3 shavuot are even against pikuach nefesh ?
thanksEven if [this is debatable] the creation of the medina was against the torah,
the EXISTENCE of the medina is not. [lehol hadeyot]Dismantlement of the medina is a clear invitation to the direct …… of all the Jews in EY [chvs’h].
The only al pi derech hateva’dike force standing between the immediate mass pikuach nefesh of the yidden on one side and the murderous intentions and plans of the barbarians surrounding us , is the IDF, the extention of the medina.You can say WHAT YOU WANT about who brought us to this situation , it will not make one iota of a difference.
Pikuach Nefesh is Pikuach Nefesh is Pikuach Nefesh.Irrespective of it source.
We [and all yidden] are enjoined to do whatever possible in regard to p/n.Is the medina an end of itself? NO , chas veshalom
Is the medina a means to an end? YESIt is a means to an end – of keeping Yehudim and their property in EY safe.
For the time being , the only means to that end.where is the hafla’a ?
thanksAbout RAMBAN’s writing re someone’s Mashiach claim where he did not fulfill the nevi’ims promises during his lifetime.
It is in Kitvei HaRamaban , under Sefer Havikuach [milhamot hashem].
Ramban writes in a very clear fashion.
This is proof that he is not Mashiach.
End of story.@hakatan
pl learn avnei nezer inside
satmar rav does not explain avnei nezer
he argues with himWhats with the avnei nezer s explanation for the fact of omission of the poskim ?
@CS
“ You are the only group who imposes YOUR leader as navi, HALACHICALLY OBLIGATING , US [on the pain of mita byedei shamayim] to obey his directives.”
[yb]
——————————Never heard of this. To the best of my limited knowledge this would only be applicable if a big body of rabbis (Sanhedrin?) would pasken that this is the case. There’s no threat here, only positive motivation.
[CS]
————————————————————
To the best of my limited knowledge, there is no need for a Sanhedrin or any other big body of rabbis to pasken that
1] going against a navi is mitah biyedei shamayim.
2] that this person is a navi if he indeed is a navi.So , habads claim that their leader is a navi.
No , have to correct myself here – habads leaders claim that habads leader is a navi , does not need sanhedrin nor any other body to pasken it is so.If it is true , and it obviously is, according to habad, the obligation to listen takes effect immediately.
On all of us.
Immediately.So the question is now,
Are [new]habad imposing their navi on all the rest of us ????@CS
“ THIS WHOLE IDEA IS TOTALLY ABSENT IN KLAL YISRAEL > SAVE FOR ONE GROUP…….”
[yb]
—-
I hear your point. Like I said, looking for a candidate I think only comes from enhanced awareness and thirsting for geula.
[CS]
—–
If it “only comes from enhanced awareness and thirsting for geula”. like you claim , then why did no group in Jewish history ever adopt a ‘lets look for mashiach policy ?Was there no group of people thirsting for geula like you, in the whole 1900 plus years since the Hurban ?
Would you feel comfortable to answer ‘yes’ to the above question ?
@menachem
Not wearing a yehi yarmulke does not mean ‘not obsessed’.
If you believe – as any rank-and-file L does – that their rebbi is M, then they SHOULD be obsessed by it.Maybe in a quieter way.
Maybe they balance their ‘obsession’ with the so called ‘realities’ perceived by the non habad people around them.
That might be a reason not to wear yehi apparel.But deep down, on the inside, are they not obsessed?
Think about it. This not just some argument about whose rebbi is bigger compared to someone else’s.
This is literally earth-shattering news.M started the ge’oula.
We are on a cosmic intersection.
If you really believe it, it would be extremely hard NOT to be obsessed.
That’s only natural.And in my humble view , having read and followed their rebbi’s pronouncements and sichot on these issues, that was indeed the clear goal of their rebbi.
In my opinion, there is nothing to be embarrassed of.
Isn’t it natural for hasidim to embody their leaders’ goals ?
There is no reason to deny it.So , I would venture to say
– the MAJORITY OF HABAD DEFINITELY IS OBSESSED THAT THEIR REBBI IS M.@CS
@arso
Any discussion re the merit of habad in underground learning in Russia and all other good things they do or did , are irrelevant , at least in my opinion.
The discussion to be had , is about habad introduced novelties.Even if ,in the past all yiddishkeit would be due to habad, nevertheless the habad novelties should be dispassionately discussed and carefully analyzed.
Habad of the past should have no bearing whatsoever on habad in the present/future.
The same , regarding any habad positives . They should have no bearing on the habad novelties.Remember – we are NOT in the business of JUDGING the invidual habad people , nor the total balance of the habad movement as a whole.
We are not – Simply because we are not qualified.What we should be doing, is to investigate those specific issues within habad which have crept up in the last 60 – 70 years.
Investigate them thoroughly, without fear or favor.
An Evidence based investigation ,conducted with common sense, against the backdrop of klal yisraels timeless and collective mesorah.
That , in my mind at least , is the real purpose of this thread.Which, again, has NO CONNECTION WHATSOEVER with what is sometimes [defensively] called “hate”.
Hello everyone
Shtika kehoda’a ?Avnei Nezer also asks why rambam in yad and Sh’A omit the 3 oaths and he says that this is proof that in their opinion it is not applicable to us nowadays. Only as a sign to improve our general avodat hashem.
It is in his tshuvot at the end of Helek YD.@sechel
rambam does not write the opposite.@hakatan
gimmel shevuos are OMITTED from rambams halaha sefer YAD HAHAZAKAH and from SHULHAN ARUCH.
That is a clear indication that they are NOT lehalaha.
The above is the opinion of Avnei Nezer , a gaon olam and Posek halaha lema’aseh.
One of the greatest Meshivim in Poland in his time.It’s eerily quiet ….
@sechel
HKBH ‘promoted’ Moshe R .
Through the nissim He made thru Moshe.
Not the yidden promoted him.
It took time , but it succeeded – the yidden left mitsrayim in his lifetime.Your leader had his time.
He used it, but he did NOT succeed .
We are still here – in Galut.
It’s pure folly to fight against reality.@sechel
What’s not logical about mentioning notsrims use of habad activities ?
What’s not logical about saying that habads ‘coca cola promotion of’ and ‘looking for candidates’ for M, is totally new and has no precedent anywhere in Jewish history?
What’s not logical about saying that the more you need to promote something , the more obvious its weakness is ?We never claimed all you do is promotion of your rebbe.
We know you generally aim to keep sh’o.
That was never the issue.The issue is what you BELIEVE IN , and what you PROMOTE.
Notsrim USE habad’s meshigaas for their own purposes.
They claim
1] If you believe your leader is M , why cant you believe ours is
2] If your leader is atsmut melubash beguf, then why cant you believe the same for ours
3] if your leader doesn’t have to implement the promises of the nevi’im to be counted as M , then why do you expect it from our leader
4] If your leader is afforded the privilege of a second coming, then why s our leader not privileged of the sameWhat are you going to answer ?
That their leader forsook the the torah ?
Not true. All available evidence says that he kept the torah.
it was his talmidim who forsook the torahAnd when the REAL Mashiach will come there will be NO NEED of promotion.
He will be accepted by Klal Yisrael.
HKBH will affect any promotion needed.
It says nowhere, and is against our mesorah , for us to have to ‘promote’ Mashiach.
His actions and his essence will be so convincing, that NO promotion will be needed.Promotion is sign of weakness, not of strength …..
@ sechel
For many decades habad itself was DENYING that they secretly want to promote their leader as M .Why were they not saying what you are so confidently proclaiming on these pages ?
This nothing new . Rizhin . Tshernobil. Habad themselves .The Gra. etc. etc
Why not ?
The simple answer – they knew that these type of arguments are only going to provoke ridicule and laughter.
No Hug, hasidut , yeshiva / community EVER , promoted a M like habad does now.
.
Which warrants investigation.@sechel
NO ONE .
Not now AND not then ,
had a well organized propaganda machine, brainwashing naive people i.e. baalei tshuva and the innocent little kids born to habad parents and the rest of klal yisrael that one should “look for mashiach candidates’ and then ,’promote him’, Coca-Cola like.NO ONE>
This a total new thing . A first.
.
I [and neither do you, nor anyone else alive now] don’t know in what context and when R’N miTzernobel said what he said as a onetime utterance [if he said it at all].
I am not convinced that he said it.
Be that as it may, the FACT IS , and remains , that neither in Tshernobil now , nor in Tshernobil at any time , nor in any of the Courts who are mityahes to R’N, is/was there anything even remotely resembling the stupid M frenzy prevalent in habad nowadays.THIS IS A DEFINITE NEW PHENOMENON.
Which warrants investigation. Which is duly happening on these pages – and elsewhere.
And which is legitimate and even called for.
And which is definitely not a sign of ‘hate’.We SHOULD investigate anything against the Mesorah.
Any movement and new idea.
Investigate its claims , its origins , its repercussions and its aims.The Real Mashiach is obviously part of the Mesorah.
But habads new hidushim are not.@sechel
by chassidim it was done for many generations, in ruzin, tzenabel habad etc…
[sechel]
—————-
Absolutely not.
There was no ‘lets look for M candidate policy’ nor was there a ‘Lets promote the best candidate’ policy in any of these places.
Nowadays there is no zeher of such a policy in ANY of the many rizhine hasiduyot.
Not a zeher.Nor is there any zeher of this in Tsjernobil.
Nor in any of the other Tsj. offshoots like rachmestrivk or skver etcIn habad of yore , in Russia were they busy with any of these meshigas ?
I am not talking about what a few hasidim might have said between themselves after they had one vodka too much.
I am talking about a hasidut wide obsession. Which they are mehaneh their offspring with.New generations who never saw their leader as a human being.
They only hear about him as some sort of God clothed in human form.Who knows where this going to lead in another few generations ….
@CS
I think when the term hater is used, is when The person isn’t actually interested in an answer, and any answer you give will not be satisfactory.
[CS]
———–
What happens when there is no satisfactory answer ?
Should we accept an unsatisfactory answer, just out of fear not to be labeled ‘hater’ ?
Or do we have the right to insist on proper answers ?@sechel
You bring proof to habad innovations for the last 50 years from ….. a habad propaganda sefer printed in the last 50 years.
Arvach arva tsarich ……@sechel
We all claim what we do is the mesorah.
—
there is no mesorah anywhere for ‘looking for candidates for M’ .
Nowhere, not in habad . Not in mainstream Judaism.@sechel
There are many things that litvaks do that i think is not mesorah …
—-
there you go again.
I am reminded of a seventh grader protesting to his teacher – but he also did it ….There no comparison whatsoever between the issues.
So clearly this is not a new thing, (maybe by the litvaks is wasn’t done for many generations, so the question is on them not us,
—
Not ‘by the litvaks’ it was not done.
Rather ‘by the Jews’ it was not done.
Not in Sefarad lands.
No record of talmidei harif or harambam.
not in Askenaz lands .
Not Rashi, not Tosfot, not the Rosh.
Not in Bavel by the Ge’onim.
Not in Russia ,Poland or Hungary.
Not the Magen Avraham. Not the Bach.
Not the Haftez Haim . Not the Hatam Sofer. not r Haim mibrisk.@CS
please show me your examples of the Rebbe starting on another Gadol BYisrael
[CS]
—
What did your rebbi say on purim 1956 [or another one of those years] about the hazon ish ?
The exact words , please ?
and what was the insinuation, please ?
Thanks in advance for your honesty .@ujm
I wrote this post TO cs.
Not the other way around.@CS
This would seem to be the natural Torah position (in addition to what’s already posted regarding the Rambam being a Halacha lmaase sefer).
—-
You keep on repeating the Rambam fallacy again and again.
Cannot understand how you see any proof in the Rambam’s words re the advisability for ‘looking for the most suitable candidate in each generation’.This is against our Mesorah and the Rambam’s words prove absolutely nothing.
Again- in no other group in klal Yisrael is there any ‘looking for candidates’ going on.
Yours is the only one ….