Home › Forums › Decaffeinated Coffee › What's the argument against having a Madina? › Reply To: What's the argument against having a Madina?
ymb,
avi k:1. It’s a sevara. The three shevuot are a package deal. If they do not persecute us “too much” we will not rebel. The Maharsha alludes to this. He also says that not making aliya “like a wall” refers to making aliya by force and building walled cities like Nehemia. The Maharal says (Chiddushei Aggadot) that the three together allow the Galut to exist. Thus, if one falls they all fall.
In yeshivish this is called a boych sevara..the maharsha says absolutely nothing about that.he does mention nechemiah’s building which was darius’s full permission.he never rebelled against darius,and the 2nd beis hamikdash was build under his kingdom.he does not mention at all your sevara.btw the maharal which you mention says that the shvouos apply and they are even yehareg veal yaavor!!!! so dont tell me that deal is over if they persecute us..
2. Your quote was obviously either written before the Balfour Declaration and San Remo conference or was simply a commentary on the pasuk. After these events he said that the walll had been broken down (“HaTekufa HaGedola” pg. 175 quoted in “Torat Eretz Yisrael” pg.289 footnote 28 and “HaTor” second publishing year, third edition quoted there pg. 234).
the meshech chochma was published in 1927 that is 10 years after the balfour declaration….
and you dont get it ,he says that the issur to go up is till a navi comes and says we must go ,if you call balfour a navi then im sorry but there must be something im missing