Home › Forums › Eretz Yisroel › Eretz Yisroel › Reply To: Eretz Yisroel
I have been told by several people (one of them a close talmid of Rav Shach, zatzal, now a well known Rosh Yeshiva but I don’t want to mention his name without his permission) that Rav Shach, zatzal, said that l’shita he agreed with the Satmar Rav a hundred percent, just that he felt that l’maaseh it was impossible to follow it in the present time. The Brisker Rav and his children went further and opposed any form of participation in the Medina, including taking any kind of money for Torah education.
Concerning Rav Hutner, zatzal, in an article in the Jewish Observer of Oct 77 (written by Rabbi Yaakov Feitman based on talks by Rav Hutner) he placed a lot of blame for the Holocaust very directly on the Zionist movement. To say that quoting R’ Elchonon, zatzukel, is irrelevant because he was niftar before the Medina is to my mind questionable. R’ Elchonon writes in print (Kovetz Maamarim) that the leadership of the Zionist movement were Amalekim no less than the Yevsektsia in Stalinist Russia and that the Land will inevitably vomit them out. His son R’ Simcha, zatzal, refused to join calls to participate in elections in spite of great pressure that was put on him to do so (and himself always made a point of being abroad during elections). IMHO the burden of proof rests on someone who would claim that R’ Elchonon would have changed his opinion once the medina came into existence, would he have held that the spiritual forces of Amalek would have abandoned the movement once it became a medina? Concerning the Satmar Rav, even if he was a “solitary voice” (which is far from the case), he enjoyed enormous respect from all the gedolim for his unshakeable honesty, courage and kedusha, in spite of the ferocity with which he opposed them on many issues. One last point, even though for many people on both sides of these questions the questions have indeed become “stuck in concrete”, I don’t think that excuses reasonable people from attempting to carry on reasoned discussion of the issues in an attempt to ascertain the truth of the Torah as seen by gedolim.