ZSK

@AAQ – I have no idea, but I suspect not. Certainly there was nothing of the sort when I was in school in the 90s-2000s.

That’s an interesting statement by RJBS – and I agree with it. I’ve said before that there are far too many people with Semicha who shouldn’t be allowed within 10 feet of a Shulchan Aruch.

HaKatan

Hold up, boy-o.

You said:
“Every form of Zionism believes in at least two things:
1. Judaism is a Nationality, not (only) a religion, and Zionism is the current manifestation of that Nationality.
2. The Zionist “State” is the Nation-State of that religion.”

First of all, I am guessing your overly reduced point is: Zionism believes Judaism is a nationality only and the State is the Nation-State of that secularist entity. If that’s your point, you’ve stated it very poorly to say the least.

If that isn’t your point and that you think Judaism is not a nationality and is instead something else, please spell out exactly what sort of group you think Jews are, if we are not a nation and ergo by definition a nationality. Nations have a unique language, culture, religion, writing system, etc. We have these things. These are the things that separated us from the Egyptians, as pointed out by Rashi. Do you deny this?

If so, please confirm you believe that term “Am Yisrael” is a misnomer, and that the term “Am” – that appears hundreds of times within the Chumash alone, is incorrect. Please also confirm you believe the phrase in Parshas Yisro – “Mamleches Kohanim ve-Goy kadosh”, as well as the phrases in Ve’eschanan – “Am chacham venavon” and “Goy gadol”- are not true and that we’re followers of one religion like Islam, Hinduism, or the followers of the so-called carpenter, rather than what we are – a nation and a rather obvious ethnoreligious group.

@ujm –

There are at least 80 Hesder Yeshivot with permanent Kollelim. They are army yeshivot, and receive money from the IDF/Israeli government. So no, the IDF (and by extension the Israeli government) does not devalue Torah Study. Quite the opposite, actually.

To be sure, there are certainly things in the IDF that should be less priority (some of the things you mentioned) – but you have those things when there is an ideologically secularist upper echelon.

As for Charedim being the only ones significantly engaged in Torah Study in a permanent manner – again, you’re a pathetic liar. And I can easily argue that Charedim are not any more engaged in Torah Study than the RZ sector is (something that is blindingly obvious to anyone who has lived in or adjacent to Charedi enclaves for any extended period of time).

The excuses you’ve provided are pathetic. RZ soldiers are attending Shiurim in between rounds of fighting in Gaza and Lebanon. The photos of soldiers’ notebooks full of Torah have been shown all over the place in Jewish media, as have photos of those Shiurim.

You’re wrong, hopelessly ignorant and completely unlettered.

@AAQ – He wouldn’t accept a test to determine exemptions – because it would have been developed (and possibly administered) by Zionists, which by definition is a no-go in his book. Even if the Gedolim created such a test, he would reject it on the grounds that the Gedolim caved to the Zionists – and they are therefore not Geolim anymore. To ujm and his ilk, there is no situation where anyone may have anything to do with the State unless it is to take money.

@somejewiknow –

3 brief points (I’m done arguing with you):

1) It is patently false that you have not rejected one Sefer. You’ve rejected anything that is authored by an individual who supports Zionism, Chibat Tzion, Chovevei Tzion, Mizrachi, HaPoel Mizrachi, etc. That means you’ve rejected works by: 1) Rav Reines; 2) Rav Alkalai; 3) Rav Kalischer; 4) Rav Teichtal; 5) Rav Kook; 6) Rav Soloveitchik; 7) Rav Yeshayahu Shapira (Brother of the Piacezna Rebbe); 8) Rav Aviner – These are all Rabbonim who backed Zionism to varying degrees and/or have works supporting such (I’m not sure about Piacezna’s brother). The last one wrote a work that is a direct challenge to Vayoel Moshe.

2) You absolutely are using the no true scotsman fallacy. To you, no true Rav/Gadol could possibly be a Zionist, therefore any pro-Zionist work is heresy or a forgery and its author is a heretic. Which is why you reject all the Rabbonim above and their works (and in some cases, actions).

3) I don’t think anyone here rejects the sources used by the SR, or the sources in general. It is a rejection of the methodology used – You cannot rule Halacha based on Aggada. Because R’ Teitelbaum founded his entire Magnum Opus upon Aggada, it contains a fundamental error impeaches its authority. Its conclusions can be questioned.

UJM: Joseph, you missed the point like usual.

The point was that the names of our illustrious Gedolim are too often plastered all over every Pashkevil and letter willy-nilly with no thought of the consequences or necessity – or even if the Pashkevil may in fact be based on nonsense (or worse, political machinations), which makes such letters hard to take seriously. Askanim are the ones responsible for this, because they don’t provide the whole story, and that is a known fact. All of this is known, and any Chaim Yankel who spends any amount of time in a Charedi enclave knows this. That is essentially “rubber stamping” (and rampant abuse of Rabbinic authority by Askanim), and it is beyond unfortunate that it occurs.

FWIW, there is also the fact that I’m not a fan of ranking Rabbonim and even considering some to be completely infallible, but that is a different conversation.

DaasYochid:
They may have legitimate reasons. But we don’t have to accept them, and indeed most outside the Charedi sector do not.

Ayin tovah? I’m not sure whether you’re addressing me or not, but regardless, give me a break. In other forums, I’m usually labeled a “RZ Charedi Apologist” or “Not truly RZ”. There is plenty of room to argue Charedim are selfish for not considering themselves part of the Kahal and constantly and consistency declare themselves exempt from any national obligation or responsibility toward others. I don’t see any selfless motives in that. I’m more than happy to hear what selfless motives you can ascribe to declaring oneself absolved of all national obligations and engaging in absolute austritt other than taking money from institutions such individuals essentially hate.

@Always_Ask_Questions –

1) HaKatan has unfortunately demonstrated time and again that he has no interest in views that aren’t his own (or even challenge them), and will just repeat the same arguments.

2) If you take a survey of what RJBS is known for, you’re going to overhwlemingly hear TuM and Modern Orthodoxy as opposed to Religious Zionism. As it happens, RJBS’s view is interesting – and I think is something Mizrachi should have considered.

3) I don’t really want to get into the politics surrounding Gush Katif. My use of such was merely to back what I said to HaKatan, nothing more. But the reality is that it completely changed the RZ community.

@Non Political –
I grew up in a mixed MO-Yeshivish “out of town” community and learned in a mixture of Charedi and RZ institutions, including a Charedi high school and a Yeshivat Hesder in the Jordan Valley. I’ve been in Israel for most of my adult life and lived in a wide range of places. I’m aware my POV is atypical, especially for this forum.

I can’t speak for what goes on in Bet El. I agree with the general statement regarding the rhetorical use of such derision, as opposed to actually believing it. To be sure there is derision and disrespect from both sides. My experience is more derision and negative treatment from Charedim
– Yated, Kikar Shabbat and B’Chadrei regularly post/distribute this type of content. Certainly American Charedi outlets and American Charedim themselves can’t seem to restrain themselves from doing such – prime examples are on this thread. I generally find it’s the RZ pundits who are most guilty of disrespecting Charedi Rabbonim (especially one particular staff writer for Matzav HaRuach (who deserves the flak he complains about receiving)), but even then it’s mostly due to the lack of IDF enlistment, the lack of recognition of the plainly obvious Yad Hashem in the State’s function (the State of Israel is a barely functional parliamentary democracy), and a lack of a sense of gratitude for anything provided to Charedim over the last 75-8p years or so. In fact, in this past week’s Matzav Ruach, the guilty party above tried to turn his article about the Rabbanut Tzva’it into a Charedi hit piece. The interviewees – who are in the Rabbanut Tzva’it – weren’t having it and told him to “keep the interview on the subject at hand and not move to irrelevant issues”. Which kind of makes my point.

@HaKatan – I am going to put this very politely: You are ignorant insofar as the RZ community is concerned. That is an understatement. You come on this forum and fire off accusations without substantiating them. You won’t substantiate them because you prefer to simply declare things what you think they are. When challenged, you ignore the challenge and try to change the terms of dicussion, declaring what you disagree with to be invalid proof. You tried that with me and I called you out on it. You are not arguing in good faith or engaging in an honest discussion. I’m calling you out on such again.

I stand by what I said about working with the State to the degree possible. I have solid basis for such. You are clueless of the effect the Gush Katif and Northern Shomron evictions had upon the RZ community. That was a watershed moment. The RZ community nearly turned against the State in the wake of that abomination (and the overly violent eviction from Amona shortly thereafter) – and they would have actually done so had Ariel Sharon been so stupid as to carry that abomination out on Tisha B’Av itself (Tisha B’Av was the originally planned date until an advisor bascially said, “Hey, this is the worst date you could choose. You’re going to turn the RZ community Charedi”. So they delayed it). Everything changed with Gush Katif and there has been a marked shift in the RZ community’s treatment of the State since then (certainly those evicted themselves have a very complicated relationship with the State, to say the least). The RZ community may say Hallel on Yom Haatzmaut and Yom Yerushalayim and enlist in the IDF, but they are far more willing to openly criticise the state than in the past – and they do so regularly.

Those MiSheberachs are not heretical. Per Pirkei Avos and Halacha, you are required to pray for the government, even if it is “evil” (see the Czar and Nazi Germany). There is absolutely nothing wrong with Rav Kook’s prayer – there are so many qualifiers in such that it reflects what I’ve said (which was Der Ruv’s intent). There is nothing wrong with a prayer for what is essentially (for better or worse) a Jewish Army. There is nothing wrong with a prayer for the release and salvation of Jews living under oppressive regimes. If you want to prove otherwise, actually provide material responses beyond repeating the same quotes from the same Rabbonim. We have been waiting for you do so, but so far it’s just crickets from you.

As for RJBS’s writings about Zionism – I’m not interested in them. The RZ philosophy I read (should I bother) is from places such as Merkaz HaRav, The Eretz Chemda Institute and various Yeshivot Hesder. Figures such as Rav Zvi Hirsch Kalischer, both Rav Kooks, and those that followed them. Not RJBS. RJBS is known for TuM, not RZ, ergo I do not consider him to be a major player insofar as RZ is concerned. Other people may feel otherwise and that’s fine.

As for your statements about Zionism: Ideologically Secularist Zionism, yes (and notice that no one here has disagreed that ideologically secularist Zionism is absolutely a problem). Not RZ. For the millionth time. Also I will point out that your continued insistence that EY has no significance essentially makes you one of the Meraglim, and you should probably keep in mind what happened to them after they slandered EY.

@Always_Ask_Questions – Right. Don’t disagree. Also, I’m not going to claim to be an expert on RJBS. That being said, I’ve done enough reading on RJBS and his philosophy to know HaKatan is full of it.

@HaKatan

I asked you to define Mesorah as a term. Your answer is definitely *not* the definition of Mesorah. Try again.

@HaKatan – Please define Mesorah for all of us so-called “ignorant laymen”.

@ujm – Joseph, you really couldn’t just say what you meant, rather than framing it within a context rife with criticism? Hogwash. You needed to take your potshot at the MO community.

@somejewiknow – Go read some American Jewish History books to learn about the realities of being Jewish in the USA during the first half of the 20th century. Sarna comes to mind in particular. If you don’t want to do that, at least read R’ Berel Wein. Or even read R’ Rakeffet’s biography of the Rav Soloveitchik.

@HaKatan – Are you capable of not mentioning Zionism for more than 30 seconds? Also, there is a huge gulf between the philosophy of Rav Soloveitchik and that of the man you and somejewiknow have essentially dubbed Voldemort or Acher. Anyone familiar with either Rav’s writings knows as such.

@AAQ – I have it on good authority (first-hand knowledge and from a reliable source) that NCYI’s offical policy does not allow non-Orthodox Jews to be members – especially Mechalalei Shabbos BeFarhesiya such as those who drive to Shul. On the other hand, TTBOMK – and I haven’t heard anything to the contrary – the OU does allow such individuals to be members of Shuls part of the OU. The question is whether somejewiknow would prefer that non-Orthodox individuals go to Conservative or Reform institutions just so NCYI is “frum enough” (parenthetically, this goes for the OU as well).

As an aside: What I disagree with in this thread (and in the threads about Zionism, the IDF, etc.) is the blatant disrespect and character assassination the Chassidish and Yeshivish communities continue to engage in vis a vis MO and RZ communities and their Rabbonim. This thread is a prime example. Why is it that the MO and RZ communities are capable of showing respect to the Charedi community and their Rabbonim (depsite deeply disagreeing on a great number of issues), but the Charedi commnunity is completely and utterly incapable of showing that same respect in turn?

If you want to discuss criticise MO philosophy, there is a way to do that without having to engage in character assasination and disrespect.

@Non Political –

I don’t want derail this thread, so very briefly:

Yoma 9b has Reish Lakish stating that Aliyah BaChoma was an ideal to be done during the time of Ezra. Aliyah BaChoma banned by one of the 3 oaths. Thererefore, one of the oaths is in question by at least one Amora, with the source being in the same Sefer as the three oaths themselves. Yes, it’s admittedly not ideal because it’s Aggada sourced in Shir HaShirim and not Halachik in nature, but it does make the point that the oaths may not so cut and dry.

Avi K can step in if he wants to to clarify anything.

As for my statement about “Charedim not doing anything”:

It is unfair, but it happens to be true for the most part.

It is amazing that there were Charedim who did what they did on Oct. 7. HKB”H knows I could have never done that. Kol HaKavod and Yiyashar Kochacham for doing so. We are eternally in their debt. The same goes for those who flooded IDF bases with meals and other supplies. It is my hope that those first responders now understand exactly what the cost of war is and what the RZ community has sacrificed in this war, because it is that community that has suffered the most losses. Perhaps they will then be more willing to allow their children to serve in Charedi frameworks in the army (they already exist). I also hope they receive the mental health counseling they no doubt will need in order to process and move past what they saw.

But I lived next to Bnei Brak for 6 years and was there almost every day. Hatzola minded people are the minority and certainly those who serve in the IDF are an even smaller minority. In order to not speak Lashon Hara, I won’t detail what I saw while living there, but suffice it to say that after that, I have a hard time believing everyone is shteiging all day and not just wasting time that could be better spent working or serving in the IDF.

The Charedi commmunity also doesn’t know what it is to walk into Shul on Shabbos morning with half the people present carrying loaded rifles and phones because they’re all in Miluim and may be sent to Gaza or Lebanon at any moment, as well as having half of Shabbos Tefilllos moved to parks so people can take cover with their families quickly if need be. I have a neighbor who was injured (lightly, thank G-d) and two more that weren’t home for months. A Shul member lost his nephew in Gaza. I personally have had turn around halfway to Shul and sprint home as fast as possible because of rockets.

I’ve been impacted by this war in a very direct fashion. So please excuse me for being a more than a bit critical of our Charedi brethren for not doing more, and having absolutely no patience for HaKatan, somejewiknow, ujm and their ilk.

HaKatan

You wrote:
“Rav Shach would be one. He wrote that Rabbi Dr. Soloveitchik wrote “mamash divrei kefirah ad kidei hishtomemus liMareh haAyin”. He further stated that these were things typically forbidden to write, but that he (Rav Shach) was writing (i.e., repeating) them to show how terrible “chochmas chitzoniyus” causes “siluf viYerida biDaas Torah”. Rav Aharon Kotler stated that Rabbi Dr. Soloveitchik was responsible for “all the tuma in America”, while on that topic.”

You are aware of what an ideological dispute is? Rav Kotler also said the time he spent learning with Rav Solovitchik was “Kodesh Kodashim”.
This is same sort of thing when either Rav Shach or Rav Eliyashiv panned a Charedi Yeshiva in Moshav Matityahu, but when confronted about the condemnation said he was repesenting the mainstream Charedi approach, but that the Yeshiva should still continue to exist.

And this is irrelevant to the discussion, which is about RZ and your allegations that it is heresy. So try again.

@Non Political – I thought the person in question was more making a rhetorical point than anything else, and quite frankly those statements were not any worse than anything HaKatan and somejewiknow said about RZ Rabbonim, especially Rav Kook. And he did apologize for the disrespect in another thread, and explained why it occurred. But yes, disrespect towards Rabbonim is unacceptable across the board, from Charedi to RZ.

@Avi K – Yes, he’s doing it again, this time going after Religious Zionism as opposed to Zionism in general. He’ll never stop.

@HaKatan – I fail to see humor in anything you say. The parody was to show you what you sound like. Apparently it wasn’t effective because you *still* don’t get it.

You’re never going to convince me of your position, just as I am never going to convince you of mine. Like Chaim, I will continue to answer you Rav for Rav, Midrash for Midrash, Gemara for Gemara, despite your pathetic one-line pronouncments delegitimizing anyone who doesn’t agree with you. And I will continue to point out the critical methodological error in the SR’s work – We do not issue Psak Halacha based on Aggada, which *is not* up for debate. What you and somejewiknow should do is quit slandering the Religious Zionist community once and for all and apologize.

@Always_Ask_Questions – The issue with threads concerning Zionism, the IDF, etc. is that backers of HaKatan’s position define Zionism as it was defined in the 1800-1900s within the realm of nationalism that was de rigueur at the time. They also (incorrectly) lump ideologically secularist Zionism together with Religious Zionism. To them, it is all black-and-white. That isn’t how things were and they are certainly not so today, which does in fact require HaKatan and his ilk to reexamine their position. The average Religious Zionist doesn’t define Zionism or Religious Zionism the way HaKatan and company do. Neither do ideologically secularist Zionists. And secularist Zionists don’t define Zionism in the manner of Religious Zionism or per HaKatan’s camp. There is a gulf between Rav Kook and Herzl/Ben Gurion, just like there is one between the SR and Rav Kook, but HaKatan and somejewiknow will not admit to such. Instead, it’s all the same because of “Zionism” (Nice Tzad HaShave on their part, but it’s quite erroneous). That makes any sort of discussion impossible.

It’s also impossible to have a discussion because HaKatan’s camp insists on preconditions for the discussion, which everyone has to accept. Those “facts” are: (1) Zionism in any form – even Religious Zionism – is heresy; (2) Rav Kook, Ein HaBanim Semeicha or any other source that supports our position (Orot, Avnei Nezer and Alo Na’aleh specifically come to mind, as do parts of Lev Avraham, even Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik) are all illegitimate sources; (3) Zionists are “kofrim” (an ad hominem attack against those who disagree, which is a logical fallacy); (4) Zionism is an aveira; and (5) the only unimpeachable sources are VaYoel Moshe and a few terse statements by several Litvish Rabbonim. That’s exactly what HaKatan and somejewiknow did, and the record on this form proves as such.

This sadly and unfortunately is like the Israeli government negotiating with the PA or Hamas, where Hamas sets preconditions that Israel has to accept before negotiations can even begin. Yes, I did just make that comparison – because it is true. No discussion can be had under such circumstances, because there isn’t anything to discuss.

@somejewiknow – I answered you in the other thread. Go read Rav Aviner’s work – it’s available on multiple websites. While you’re at it, also Avnei Nezer and Rav Drukman’s work about it. This really isn’t difficult.

@HaKatan

So I understand:

You’re challenging those of us who disagree with you to produce evidence for our position. But at the same time, you’re going to dictate what evidence is acceptable. And, any evidence we produce is automatically invalid from the start.

That’s arguing in bad faith, and I am not going to engage in that sort of debate with you, somejewiknow or any of the multiple aliases the two of you have created.

You can go look at the very legitimate sources I posted in the other thread. You’re certainly smart enough to do that much.

Really? You started a new thread because you didn’t like being challenged by several people? Pathetic.

I’m not going to repeat what I said in the other thread other than that I provided you with 2 sources that directly challenge the Satmar Rebbe’s magnum opus, as well at least once source that partially questioned Satmar, and that those are sources you will not seriously consider because of your specific, negative, deleterious, harmful and quite frankly revolting hangups regarding “Zionism” and the Dati Leumi community. You should be ashamed of yourself, but you and your ilk are too arrogant for such.

As for a discussion of Rabbinic authority, well, there’s no point in that discussion because your end position is: (1) the Satmar Rebbe was the absolute “Gadol HaDor” for all Jews (an absolutely preposterous position to take), and (2) it’s okay to slander the Religious Zionist community in any manner you possibly can, because they support a State you would like to see (G-d forbid) nuked off the face of the planet. You won’t have the conversation in good faith.

Let’s be blunt: You’re hoping that within the scope of this new thread you will get a storm of responses from Yeshivish and Chassidish minded people supporting you. We’ll see if that happens.

@somejewiknow

1) No, it is not a substantive argument. It would be – if you were not actually appealing to the authority of very specific Rabbonim that *you* approve of while rejecting the very clear authority of other legitimate Rabbonim who held differently, by way of accusations that those differring Rabbonim are guilty of the worst forms of אפיקורסות and therefore outside the מסורה. That *isn’t* a good faith argument.

Spell out the arguments you’ve heard that came from the 3-4 Rabbonim you constantly cite. I learned Vayoel Moshe and quite a few anti-Zionist seforim and am familiar with their positions vis a vis the state, the R”Z community, the IDF, etc. I’m not demanding you do so for me. I’m demanding it for everyone else.

2) I reject the premise that the Satmar Rebbe was a global authority. He was an authority for Satmar and those like them (i.e. Vizhnitz). He never was authoritative for the Litvish community, even though the Litvish community widely agreed with many of his views and showed him the necessary respect due to a Rav (because the SR’s views aligned with the views of REW, the Chazon Ish, Rav Schach, etc.). However, the Litvish community asks Litvish Rabbonim their questions, not Chassidishe Rebbes. He did not have שררה over them. He was never an authority for יהדות עדות המזרח, and certainly not for קהילות קודש דתי לאומי למיניהם. It is true that he wrote the most well known work about that אגדתא, but he was most definitely questioned. It is your own ignorance which had led you to believe otherwise. Which leads to my next point.

3) Re: works. Yes, I know you asked. However, when the starting premise is that anything that comes out of the R”Z community is טמא and full-on אפיקורסות from the start, there is no point. You wouldn’t seriously consider or engage with the sources even if I provide them. But anyway, here you go:

Sources that directly question the SR:
(1) Rav Aviner wrote עלה נעלה – מענה לספר ויואל משה and קונטרס שלא יעלו בחומה.
(2) Rav Chaim Drukman wrote a response in קמעא קמעא פרק ז.

Others:
(3) A quick Google search reveals Shiurim on VaYoel Moshe and responses thereto on websites belonging to ישיבות הסדר הר עציון וכרם ביבנה – at the minimum. I am sure a more detailed search (which I don’t realistically have time for until מוצאי שבת קודש) will show more.

Rabbonim who spoke positively of Zionism: Google the origins of the Mizrachi movement. There are far too many to mention, but many of them learned in the Volozhin Yeshiva and were part of Chibat Tzion. That speaks volumes inof itself.

By the way, there are also Charedi Rabbonim who wrote works that at least partially questioned the Satmar Rebbe while also pointing out the issues with ideologically Secularist Zionists, the IDF and the State itself, problems that R”Z public agree with (certainly חרדלי״ם agree, considering they only left the Charedi community because Rav Schach kicked them out). Lev Avraham comes to mind as one of such seforim.

4) I reject the premise that VaYoel Moshe is Halachik in nature. I refer you to my prior comments about such. Even if it is, it is not binding upon all of כלל ישראל, it is at most binding upon Satmar and those who accept the authority of the SR. As others have said, the SR was not a widely accepted Rav, neither were his פסקי הלכה nor his השקפת עולם. (Parenthetically, you have in the past devolved into actual slander of הרב קוק זצ״ל, I have refrained from doing the same about the SR- and there is plenty I could say about him. I have merely questioned the contents of his magnum opus – admittedly more disrespectfully than I should have.)

4) Jumping back to authority, as Chaim said, Ruzhin Chassidus stands in stark contrast to Satmar as a Charedi/Chassidish community that does not agree with the SR and views Zionism positively.

5) You said “I have seen poskin oser, at least lechatlchila, taking a R”Z as witnesses to a kesiba, may we Jews be saved from their wicked ways”. Name the Rav who said that. If you can’t, you made it up and it’s what *you* would do if *you* had the authority to do so.

5) As for your last two responses, you’ve finally answered, albeit in a roundabout manner. You believe the R”Z community is heretical, and you will answer HKB”H after 120 for the slander. You believe anyone who disagrees with Satmar is a heretic. You’re just unwilling to say it outright. There’s no other explanation for the condemnatory side comments in the following:

– “I have seen poskin oser, at least lechatlchila, taking a R”Z as witnesses to a kesiba, may we Jews be saved from their wicked ways”.

– “I suppose, I could compile an incredible pro-heresy (zionist) “sefer” by just compiling all of the Satmar Rebbe’s kashas, and not include his answers, but that would be very dishonest and hollow.”

– “While I don’t learn Torah from kofrim, I am still bound by – lehavdil – the shulchan aruch even if they quote it. So too, if a kofer (chalila they should learn) mentions a Torah source that informs something about the status of zionism or out relationship to it, I would of course be obligated to those Torah sources as per the Jewish mesorah.”

@Chaim87

Somejewiknow and HaKatan are likely different people. HaKatan is most likely the reincarnation of a user who used to post here called Joseph. He and that prior user both have/had Neturei Karta/Satmar leanings, if not being outright supporters of such. His arguments tend to be the same statements we’ve heard on this forum before (quoting REW, SR, GR, Brisk, etc.) and from every other Charedi organization. Most unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be any substance to those arguments, because there is no elaboration thereupon (by the way, the Aguda engages in the same tactics). That was the reason why I wrote those long winded posts – to attempt to force a substantive, material response. As of yet, neither one has answered substantively and I suspect they won’t. “מסית ומדיח” and weak arguments from authority is probably all we’ll get from them.

Somejewiknow, based on his responses, is most lkely a knee-jerk reactionist Satmar Chossid (his constant use of “מסית ומדיח” makes this fairly clear). FWIW, I suspect he posts on Reddit under a similar sounding name (with the same writing style).

I don’t think either one of them are using bullying tactics. Their tactic seems to be continuing to repeat variations on the same thing until you lose your patience, at which point they look sane and you look loopy for losing your patience.

On a different note:

@somejewiknow – If the statement “any masis imadiach can say “well, rabbi, that’s what YOU say! haw haw haw!” is directed at me (and I suspect that is the case), well, a few things: (1) That’s an ad hominem attack – now try arguing substantively (you have not done so yet); (2) what I said about you and HaKatan answering to הקב״ה after 120 stands; (3) again, you’ve demonstrated an inability to deal with the various challenges raised against Satmar and those like them in this forum.

The R”Z community has provided lengthy תשובות, שיעורי תורה וכו׳ regarding Zionism. They provide all the reasons for “deviating” (as you would call it) from the “established” precedent and norms, even though they don’t have reason to do so. You just ignore such because you don’t like it – and because your Rebbe’s שיטה insists that such opinions are heresy.

Answer Non Political’s question about רב שלמה אבנר or רב אליעזר מלמד. Let’s add רב רימון and the ראשי ישיבה of ישיבת מרכז הרב. I suspect you would question the Torah they teach, as well as their legitimate authority.

To be even more blunt (and keep in mind the internet doesn’t forget): Would you consider wine I’ve touched, or wine that others who are R”Z have touched, or wine that those who have disagreed with you here, to be יין נסך? Answer the question. Yes or no will do. That will tell us everything we need to know. Keep in mind that such a thing has never happened.

Just to clarify:

Any perceived disrespect in my last two posts is directed at the two-three individuals in this forum who show disrespect to R”Z Rabbonim and anyone who leans R”Z every chance they get. They know who they are.

In no way was I referring to the Satmar Rebbe himself, despite the fact that I do question the entire Satmar mehalech.

A response about the 3 שבועות:

If our disputants look at כתובות 110-111, the entire subject is derived from שיר השירים. We do not derive Halacha from נ״ך, also known as דברי תורה מדברי קבלה לא ילפינן. If our disputants learned any גמרא, they know this. I will be דן לכף זכות that they aren’t so mindnumbingly stupid as to argue otherwise. Our disputants therefore need to find another source for banning moving to Israel before Moshaich’s arrival that is sourced in הלכה, תושב״ע, הלכה למשה מסיני, מפי מסורת or the תורה itself, not נביאים or כתובים. Their only resort is to insist on a divine decree akin to that in ירמיהו 27:22, which also happens to be in the relevant section of the בבלי. But that isn’t a strong enough argument considering the source being נ״ך.

In addition, that section of כתובות is clearly אגדתא or מדרש אגדה. We do not rule הלכה based on אגדתא or מדרש אגדה per the above maxim.

So the premise has major problems to begin with.

Rambam doesn’t mention the 3 שבועות anywhere in his writings other than in אגרת תימן, where they are referred to as being metaphorical, not actually binding. In fact, a simple reading of the relevant הלכות in משנה תורה does not line up with our disputants’ position. To get to our disputants’ position, we would have to intentionally misread the הלכות and אגרת תימן to reflect positions that are simply put, not there.

We can also argue that even if the 3 שבועות were in fact binding throughout most of Jewish history – and it indeed appears to have been the case, considering the long, bitter גלות since חורבן בית שני – they are now null and void due to the Holocaust. That horrific treatment by nations of the world was an absolute violation of the oaths on their part; per the Shulchan Aruch, we no longer need to maintain our part. The Maharal’s commentary on כתובות also applies here.

Those are strong arguments in our favor.

I will also point out – and this is after learning ויואל משה, that the author himself says the שבועות are metaphorical and not actual oaths, yet he still argues it is essentially heresy to leave גלות before Moshiach’s arrival.

Sorry, that’s a really weak argument, בלשון המעטה ביותר.

Our disputants’ primary source admits the שבועות are metaphorical and not actual oaths. Ergo, if the oaths are indeed metaphorical and not actual oaths, then they don’t apply, and at most constitute a stern warning or food for thought. Certainly that is the case if they are אגדתא or מדרש אגדה. If they aren’t and are instead binding Halacha, then the only questions to be discussed are whether they are currently void or not, and how to act based on such. Our disputants argue the שבועות are not void. We argue otherwise or lean in the opposite direction. But even that argument is moot because the State exists. Both positions are valid, but the trajectory of history is בלי עין הרע tending to show that our disputants’ position is increasingly untenable. אי״ה ובלי עין הרע that shall continue, and our disputants will eventually repent.

Second, essentially being heresy is not actual heresy. Leaving גלות before Moshiach’s arrival is not heresy, especially if you consider Rambam’s position in משנה תורה. It doesn’t violate any עיקרי אמונה despite the insistence that such does. I’d like our disputants to prove such, something they have avoided doing up until now. Quotes from REW, Brisk or Satmar without any explanation or expansion thereupon are inadequate, and may be considered simple hyperbole to keep students in line.

To those who consider this heresy and will invariably call me a heretic: You can answer הקב״ה for that accusation after 120. “כל הפוסל במומו פוסל” applies to you.

That’s all I have time for at the moment.

@somejewiknow and @HaKatan

Again, both of you are utterly clueless. For the millionth time, Zionism today is not ZIonism from almost 100 years ago. It is certainly not the same as RZ. It’s a real חבל the two of you can’t seem to grasp these two very simple facts.

Also, do you believe in שיבת ציון? Oh, you do? Then guess what? You’re a Zionist. End of discussion.

@somejewiknow

No, you most certainly are not my “brother in Torah”. Quite the opposite, most unfortunately. As far as I’m concerned, you’re מחוץ למחנה and a שונא ישראל.

@somejewiknow

You’re dodging the question. Do you consider the Rabbonim that Chaim listed to be Gedolim or not. It’s a yes or no question. We’re waiting for an answer. Your avoidance is quite telling.

@somejewiknow

Again with the refusal to address Rav Kook by his title. It’s very clear that hominem attacks and throwing out names of Rabbonim are the best you can do. Note that I gave you a mild rebuke (far less than you actually deserve, בלשון המעטה ביותר) and asked a question.

I’ll ask again:
1) Please define the terms you use.
2) Apply them to Rav Kook.
3) You claim there are Seforim that criticize Rav Kook other than that of the Satmarer. Name them – then I’ll verify what was actually said. In addition, statements from various Rabbonim don’t count unless you can give a date and name the individual who heard the statement made.

You made the claim, you back it up

If you need it and have done the relevant medical and psychological exams proving such, then obviously yes. This is kind of a no-brainer.