Going OTD in the IDF

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Going OTD in the IDF

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 151 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #2457418
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @somejew

    I cannot understand why you keep on misquoting the steipler as if he said that atchalta d/g is kfira ???

    he NEVER said that .

    aderaba — he says that it is NOT kfira.

    honesty above all else ….
    .
    .
    .

    #2457840

    somejew > This is all the same for all types of heretical movements that we suffer from, such as Reform or Sha”tz or MO.

    I think you have a point that an individual might really not subscribe to the movement theology and be judged on their own. this still does not answer yankel’s questions that RL and MO witnesses and rabbis are usually treated with neemanut that reform does not.

    #2457870
    somejewiknow
    Participant

    here’s the original quote (an excerpt from a longer tshiva):
    the Steipler writes:
    […]
    בעיקר הדבר כך דעתי העניי נוטה שמצוה רבה להצביע לרשימה החרדית ושיש בזה ממש הצלת הדת לפי המצב כעת, כי בעניני שמירת התורה לא שייך בטחון בלא השתדלות והחובה לעשות כל הנראה באופן טבעי טוב ומועיל לקיום הדת.
    ומה ששמע מעלתו שיש איסורים בדבר, הרבה נתייעצתי אם כדאי להשיב כי באמת אין רצוני כלל שחברי נטורי קרתא שיחיו לאוי”ט ישנו את דעתם, אם כי איסור אין כאן, קנאות לשמו ית’ יש כאן, וגם זה נחוץ ומועיל לשמירת הדת בחוגים רבים, וכש”כ שכל מעשיהם לש”ש ובמס”נ והמה חביבים עלי עד לאחת.
    ומ”מ למע”כ בעצמו הסכמתי להשיב בפרטות אחרי שחושב אותי כמתעטע ח”ו, אבל נא שלא להראות מכתבי לאחרים כי אין שום תועלת בזה ולמה יתנו לשיחה בפי אנשים.
    כתב מע’ שיש איסור בהצבעה מצד מודה בע”ז, והוא דבר שאין לו שחר, הלא המציאות בעוה”ר הוא שהשלטון בידם לע”ע ומחמת מציאות זו מצביעים ושותפים שומרי תורה להתם ע”ם להציל כפי האפשרי, ואיזו הודאה יש כאן שמסכים ברשעת הרשעים ח”ו אם בדעות טמאים שלהם, וידע מע”כ שגם לצורך קנאות אסור לגלות פנים בתורה שלא כהלכה, ומה שאינו אמת אינו מצליח כלל.
    גם לענ”ד אפי’ מי שהחשב שזו אתחלתא דגאולה אע”פ שבאמת אינו כן כי הוא שינוי מגלות לגלות מר יותר שחאומות בדורות האחרונים עכ”פ לא התערבו בענינים של שמירת הדת משא”כ הני הפשים ר”ל, מ”מ מי שסובר שהשינוי משלטון נכרים לשלטון חופשים ורשעים מזרע ישראל הוא אתחלתא דגאולה אינו אלא טועה אבל לא רשע ח”ו שיהא מותר לדבר עליו להר”ר ולבזותו ברבים
    […]
    Translated:
    “Regarding the essence of the matter, this is how my humble opinion is inclined: it is a great mitzvah to vote for the Haredi list, and in the current situation, this constitutes a veritable rescue of religion [הצלת הדת]. This is because, in matters of Torah observance, the concept of trust in God without human effort [השתדלות] is inapplicable. The obligation is to do everything that appears, in the natural course of events, to be good and effective for the preservation of religion.
    As for what your honor has heard, that there are prohibitions involved in this matter—I have deliberated extensively whether it is worthwhile to respond. In truth, it is not my desire at all that my colleagues of Neturei Karta, may they live long and good days, Amen, should change their minds. Although there is no prohibition here, there is religious zealotry for the sake of His name, may it be blessed, and this too is necessary and beneficial for the preservation of religion in many circles. This is especially so given that all their actions are for the sake of Heaven and with self-sacrifice, and they are beloved to me, every single one.
    Nevertheless, to your esteemed honor himself, I have agreed to respond in detail, particularly since you consider me, Heaven forfend [ח”ו], to be a mocker. But I request that you not show my letter to others, as there is no benefit in it, and why should it be given over to public discussion?
    Your honor wrote that there is a prohibition in voting because it constitutes ‘acknowledging idolatry’ [מודה בע”ז]. This is a matter that has no basis. Is it not the reality, due to our many sins, that the government is currently in their hands? It is because of this reality that Torah observers vote and participate among them in order to save what is possible. What acknowledgment is there here that one agrees, Heaven forfend, with the wickedness of the wicked or with their impure ideologies? And your esteemed honor should know that even for the purpose of zealotry, it is forbidden to misinterpret the Torah contrary to Halakha [לגלות פנים בתורה שלא כהלכה], and that which is not true will not succeed at all.
    Also, in my humble opinion, even one who thinks that this is the beginning of the redemption [אתחלתא דגאולה]—even though in truth it is not so, for it is merely a change from one exile to a more bitter exile, as the nations in recent generations at least did not interfere in matters of religious observance, which is not the case with these licentious ones [הני הפשים], may God save us —nevertheless, one who holds that the change from the rule of gentiles to the rule of freethinkers and wicked people from zera Yisrael is the beginning of the redemption is nothing but mistaken. He is not, Heaven forfend, a wicked person, concerning whom it would be permissible to speak evil speech [לשון הרע] and to shame him publicly.”


    @yankel-berel

    I would note that
    1) He does NOT reject or in any way push back against the claim that zionism is “avoda zureh”, rather the Steipler argues that voting is NOT being modeh to that avoda zureh, rather trying to contain its damage.
    2) He is explicitly that claims of אתחלתא דגאולה are FALSE, they are not compatible with Torah. That means that the belief is kefira in the (Torah) Truth. Believe in anything false is by definition kefira in the truth. (He is also clear that someone who mistakenly believes that the Torah teaches this zionist lie is NOT a kofer, as you and I have discussed extensively)

    #2458125

    somejew, thanks for brining this interesting quote. I am confused how you are interpreting it:
    > He is explicitly that claims of אתחלתא דגאולה are FALSE, they are not compatible with Torah. That means that the belief is kefira in the (Torah) Truth.

    all these seem to be your words. Steipler says simply אינו אלא טועה – a mistake. Where is kefira comes from?

    Also, he is explicit that you cannot say lashon hara about them. I hope you kept this psak in mind in your last 1000 posts.

    #2458129
    yankel berel
    Participant


    @somejew

    מי שסובר שהשינוי משלטון נכרים לשלטון חופשים ורשעים מזרע ישראל הוא אתחלתא דגאולה אינו אלא טועה אבל לא רשע ח”ו שיהא
    מותר לדבר עליו להר”ר ולבזותו ברבים

    whoever thinks that this government is athaltah d/g is only “mistaken” , but not a rasha has veshalom ….
    its assur to speak lashon hara about him ….

    ad kan the staiplers words

    comes somejew and ADDS to the staipler —- if he is “mistaken” , that means , according to somejew , that this should be classified as kfira ….

    that’s quite a jump ….

    Mr somejew –

    a mistake is nothing more than a … mistake , but not kfira ….
    .
    .

    hatam soffer is reputed to have warned his talmidim : I do not care if you misappropriate and use my hidushim in your own name

    but I do warn you : I will never tolerate you saying your own hidushim in my name …

    that is , in essence , what somejew is doing here .

    he inserts his own opinions in to the staiplers words , even though the staipler never said them

    and then somejew turns around and ‘proves’ his own opinions are correct — you see , the staipler says the same ….
    .
    .

    bottom line, athalta d/g is not kfira , its a mistake

    the proponent of athalta d/g, while mistaken, is not a kofer , not a rasha

    he is kasher le’edut accepted by all rabanim and it is an issur hamur to speak ill of him

    unlike , lehavdil , a proponent of the kfira of reform or the kfira of trinity, who is a clear kofer and passul le’edut all over the globe in all batei din

    .
    .
    .
    .

    #2458476

    interesting in Steipler’s analysis is that being enthusiastic about medina is wrong because in recent generations goyim do not interfere with our observance.

    I am not sure when this was written, maybe in 1970s? “generations” would include at least two, that would be like 40 years. Surely, Steipler remembered WW2 …. even at that time, Israel just absorbed Sephardim coming from unfriendly goyim and Soviet Jews were still behind the iron curtain. I don’t think that it is feasible that Steipler considered Khomenii or Brezhnev better than Ben Gurion. Furthermore, at about that time or slightly later – Israel got Menachem Begin as PM, changing the calculus again. Surely, Steipler understood the political trends at his times!

    Maybe the way to explain these inconsistencies is to look at the purpose of the letter – he is writing to anti-Z kaonyim, trying to bring them to accept Israeli politics. Thus, he is going out of the way to flatter them, acknowledged their concerns, and provides just minimal support to the Zionists – just enough to accept elections. Prohibiting lashon hara against religious zionists really makes further anti-Z vile propaganda impossible. Of course, we see that not everyone accepts the words of the chacham.

    #2458591
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @AAQ

    not sure why you keep on [deliberately ?] ignoring the multitudes who were forced away from religion by the medina ?
    .
    .

    #2458705

    yankel, thanks for this hasam sofer! and right on point!

    #2458788

    yankel> not sure why you keep on [deliberately ?] ignoring the multitudes who were forced away from religion by the medina ?

    wrong thread? I am discussing Steipler’s letter and issues he is raising.

    #2458930
    somejewiknow
    Participant

    @yankel-berel and @always_ask_questions
    I’m at a bit of a loss of words because I can’t believe I have to spell this out. So maybe I’m the crazy person and you are welcome to correct me.

    “Kefira” literally means a rejection of something. The way we use the word “Kefira” usually rally means “kefira in Torah” that is to say “an idea that rejects (any) part of Torah”.

    Is this not obvious basic definition of the word? @yankel-berel you yourself referenced the true point that “any aveira is kefira”, so I am confused by your ramblings.

    ANYTHING that is not accurate to Torah is by definition kefira. Do I really need to spell this out like this?

    So, if the Steipler Geon writes that something is a mistake (in Torah), that is to say that the idea is “kefira”!

    Again, I am shocked that this even needs to be said!

    #2460066
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @somejew

    according to your own [faulty] reasoning , you should be ‘shocked’ whenever you look in the mirror …
    .
    .
    .

    steipler clearly writes that the neturei karta are mistaken

    according to your reasoning, where every mistake is considered ‘kefira’

    it follows from the steipler , that the neturei karta are kofrim

    so – simple logic – it follows then , that whenever you look in the mirror …. you are looking at a kofer …..

    .
    .
    .

    #2460190
    ujm
    Participant

    It’s more notable if there’s ever a case of someone r’l going into the IDF frum and coming out (even somewhat) frum.

    The other direction, as the title of this thread discusses, is r’l the expected and default.

    #2460191
    somejewiknow
    Participant

    @yankel-berel
    i didn’t see anywhere that the Steipler says that NK are mistaken. Nonetheless, if the Steipler DID claim that NK are mistaken he would INDEED be claiming that their approach is kefira in the the true Torah.

    [This is true of every machlokes and shikel daas as explained in Pikei Uvos about michlokes leshma and as Rashi ended his incredible commentary this week with “ashrei sh’hibarta” which later commentators explain that the breaking of the lichos by Moshe gave us our current status of Torah Shebaal Peh that leaves the 50th gate of understanding inaccessible until Moshaich comes, when the final right and wrong will be revealed]

    Once again, in your eagerness to mock Torah and our past Gedolim you confuse “kefira” and “kofer”. A “kofer” is someone who is taught that a certain idea is “kefira”, yet choosing to foolishly believe it.

    If the Steipler is correct, NK might be believing in kefira, but the Steipler is not claiming they are expected to understand that. So too the reverse, if NK is indeed correct it would seem the Steipler was believing in kefira.

    [This is all – perhaps foolishly – presuming a binary choice between the two]

    #2460204

    > ANYTHING that is not accurate to Torah is by definition kefira.

    So, masheches horayos talks about sanhedrin that did kefirah? News to me and presumably to the tannaim and amoraim also.

    #2460226
    somejewiknow
    Participant

    @always_ask_questions
    that is EXACTLY what the whole masechte is about! I’m not sure what point, if any, you are trying to make.

    #2460229
    yankel berel
    Participant

    somejew is [again] distorting the issues….
    .
    .

    kfira means – kfira in the 13 yesodot of judaism

    for example trinity and reform
    .
    .

    mistake means wrongly interpreting the torah – which is a mistake but not kfira

    for example beit shammai’s opinion of beit hillel’s shitah and vice versa

    and all other machlokot within torah

    and other mistakes not regarding the ikarim even when the propagator of the mistake is not a chacham

    .
    .
    the above is pashut to any serious torah student

    ve’eino tsricha lifnim …
    .
    .

    #2460230
    yankel berel
    Participant

    somejew claims that he “didn’t see anywhere that the Steipler says that NK are mistaken” ….

    the Steipler writes:
    […]
    ……………בעיקר הדבר כך דעתי העניי נוטה שמצוה רבה להצביע לרשימה החרדית ושיש בזה ממש הצלת הדת לפי המצב כעת……
    ……..ומה ששמע מעלתו שיש איסורים בדבר…….
    כתב מע’ שיש איסור בהצבעה מצד מודה בע”ז, והוא דבר שאין לו שחר, הלא המציאות בעוה”ר הוא שהשלטון בידם לע”ע ומחמת מציאות זו מצביעים ושותפים שומרי תורה להתם ע”ם להציל כפי האפשרי, ואיזו הודאה יש כאן שמסכים ברשעת הרשעים ח”ו בדעות טמאים שלהם

    וידע מע”כ שגם לצורך קנאות אסור לגלות פנים בתורה שלא כהלכה, ומה שאינו אמת אינו מצליח כלל

    how can somejew not see which is obvious to all ???

    NK clearly hold that participating in elections is prohibited , as the questioner to the steipler held

    whereupon the steipler answers that this is a “davar she’ein lo shachar” ….

    and labels that view as “giluy panim batorah shelo kehalacha”

    and as “eino emet” and predicts that it therefore will be “eino matsliach klal”

    .
    .
    in other words – as clear as can be : that according to staipler the NK and somejew are mistaken !

    and hold opinions against the torah !

    which according to somejews own [convoluted and totally mistaken] reasoning is nothing less than kfira ?!

    on par with trinity and reform ???!!!

    .
    .
    nothing less than total absurdity ….

    .
    .
    .

    #2460396
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @somejew

    you are obfuscating …

    we were discussing : A] the kfira of trinity and reform

    not

    B] mistakes in interpretation of the tora

    or

    valid machlokot within torah

    the difference between A and B is of the magnitude as the difference between literally shamayim and arets

    steipler classifies athaltah d/g belief as a mere mistake , not as “kfira”

    whereas belief in trinity or reform is definitely full fledged “kfira”
    .
    .

    it is already high time to admit to the obvious , mr somejew …..

    your credibility will be enhanced [even at this late stage] if you could find the inner fortitude to be modeh al ha’emet

    whereas it will totally crash if you still cannot …..
    .
    .
    .

    #2460423

    There seems to be a difference of opinion on serious errors even in core beliefs. Rambam considering any such error fatal, while sefer haikkarim allowing for mistakes. Note that the latter lived at the time of mass confusion and conversion in Spain and tried to bring people back.

    #2460746
    somejewiknow
    Participant

    @yankel-berel

    Kefira and Kofrim

    “Kefira” is the idea. “Kofer” is the person. In verb form, “being kofer” is something a person does).

    A “Kofer” means someone who rejects something. A Yid who reject idolatry is “kofer” in that idolatry. In the context of our conversation, we are talking about being “kofer” in Torah.

    You are confusing being a “kofer” and being a “kofer b’ikar”.

    In Torah, anyone who disagrees with another teaching is “kofer” in their teaching. This is sometimes allowed and sometimes not allowed. Every posek who writes a tshiva rejecting another’s psak is “kofer” in that other psak. If someone rejects the psak of the Rambam, he is “kofer” in the Rambam. Beis Hillel was “kofer” in Beis Shamai and vice-versa.

    If someone rejects the established Torah, both written and oral, we have today he is being kofer in one of the 13 ikarim (“kofer b’ikar”). This is distinctly different than not having access to the Torah (such as any sufek that Eliyuhi Hanuvi will but has not answered). In other words, if someone “should know” that something is correct Torah yet he rejects it, he would be a “kofer b’ikar” in the ikar (I think #7?) that “the Torah we have today is the Torah given at Har Sinai” . If someone was never taught (or tried but was not able to learn) something and therefore believed something false, he would NOT be called a “kofer” since he didn’t have that Torah for him himself to reject. However, his mistaken belief is still objectively “kefira”.

    As has been mentioned repeatedly in these conversation, a person can believe “kefira” and still not be a “kofer”. He would only be a “kofer” if he knowing ignores or rejects Torah.

    Steipler and NK

    I misunderstood your claim when you wrote “the neturei karta are mistaken” as I thought you were claiming some criticisms by the Steipler specifically towards NK, as if the Steipler was calling them out on something specific to their movement. This letter (the one I translated a section of above) was not specifically about NK – although he mentions them by name for a tangential point of support – rather this letter is about the specific isser of voting in the Zionist government elections.

    First the Steipler says that he leans to say that voting is a “mitzvuh rabbuh” and not (technically) usser, yet nonetheless there is vald place for kanoyus like NK (and they should continue not voting and disregard his “mitzvuh rabbuh”).

    Second, the Steipler discusses the claim of voting being “modeh l’avoda zureh”, where he says that this is not a reasonable claim and would be “migaleh punim she’lo k’halachuh”. He emphasizes that even though he said above that he support the kanoyis to not vote as a needed stance in Klal Yisroel, to claim it (haluchikly) forbidden because of “modeh l’avoda zureh” would be false and lead to failure.

    [There are many reasons brought by poskim that forbid voting beyond the specific point the Steipler discusses of “modeh l’avoda zureh”]

    So, in summery, the Steipler is calling out all the many poskim who forbid voting as an isser because of “modeh l’avoda zureh” as being mistaken in their psak, and so you are correct that this would (as far as I know) include NK as being in the large camp of yidden who follow the psak that voting is “modeh l’avoda zureh”.

    As such, I stand by what I wrote before, that if the Steipler is indeed correct and the sevureh of “modeh l’avoda zureh” is a distortion of Torah, the sevureh would of course be (by definition) kefira in Torah. If a person would somehow know that this sevureh is kefira (for example, after Eliyuhi Hanuvi is mitaretz all the kishiyos) and would chv”sh still claim it as true, they would be a kofer b’ikar. So too the reverse, if it is revealed by a nuvi that the Steipler is specifically wrong, anyone foolish enough to still reject the Truth and hold on to his mistaken psak would be a kofer.(Again, as mentioned above, there is no reason to think that this is binary right/wrong where either the Steipler or the Eida must be exclusively correct)

    #2460828
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @aaq

    where is sefer ikarim ‘lenient’ about mistakes in core beliefs ?
    .
    .

    #2460829
    yankel berel
    Participant

    bottom line

    wrong pshat in gemara

    an everyday occurrence by many people … is definitely NOT kfira ……
    .
    .

    #2461705

    somejew > The Steipler says that he leans to say that voting is a “mitzvuh rabbuh” and not (technically) usser, yet nonetheless there is vald place for kanoyus like NK (and they should continue not voting and disregard his “mitzvuh rabbuh”).

    I was reading the letter slightly different. Not sure, whether one – or both – of us is trying to put our own meaning into subtle words of Steipler. Presumably, the recipient of the letter knew how to understand these words. But my reading is that Steipler is not “leaning” but rather strongly says that it is the right thing to do and opposition is mistaken, even if well meaning. Yes, he sort of says, I do not want you to change your position, but he does not say explicitly – “I am ok with you not voting”. I am reading this as a subtle tochacha (we should all learn!) – yes, I respect your position, but if you respect my arguments, you will have to go and vote. The last paragraph might be the minimal ask – even if you will not be able to vote yourself, at least stop spreading loshon horoh that might prevent others from voting. Again, said subtly, but pretty direct if translated from loshon Steipler into loshon CR.

    #2461706

    yankel> where is sefer ikarim ‘lenient’ about mistakes in core beliefs ?

    as I said, I saw it in a secondary source. It has something to do with how to relate to people who stumbled in some major philosophical issues – as was typical at his times. To illustrate the times: R Albo participated in an official debate with a converted Jew … that convert used to be a rav and his teacher before he converted … and who previously participated on the Jewish side in a similar debate against a previous convert …

    #2461720
    yankel berel
    Participant

    Ok –I read somejews last post now , will redefine my post now and use his terminology

    to summarize the above conversation , according to the staipler :

    belief in trinity is —kfira be’ikar

    belief in reform is —kfira be’ikar
    .
    .

    shitat beit shmai according to beit hillel is —a mistake
    but not kfira be’ikar

    when I learn a gemara and learn the wrong peshat it is —a mistake
    but not kfira be’ikar

    belief in athaltah di geoula is —a mistake
    but not kfira be’ikar

    .
    .
    .

    #2461834
    somejewiknow
    Participant

    @yankel-berel

    are you being intentional dense? there is a no such thing as “kfira be’ikar”!

    EVERY kefira in Torah that is “mazid” is kefira in the ikar that demands we except the (written and oral) Torah. If it’s kefira, it COULD make a person a “kofer b’ikar”

    #2462291
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @somejew

    so am trying again :

    my mistake of peshat in my learning is kefira be’ikar ?

    beit shamai according to beit hillel is kefira be’ikar ?

    ???

    #2462794
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @AAQ

    your naivete is shining through again …

    to quote such a groundbreaking sefer ha ikarim from a ‘secondary source’ without verifying that it actually does say such a huge hidush in an unambiguous way , is plain naive ….

    this is not meant as a mean comment …

    .

    #2462808

    AAQ > Rambam considering any such error fatal, while sefer haikkarim allowing for mistakes.
    yankel> where is sefer ikarim ‘lenient’ about mistakes in core beliefs ?

    Contrast:
    Rambam MT Hilkhos Teshuvah 6:3 – Hashem hardens heart of Pharaoh as the result of his previous sins and he has no free will any more
    v.
    Sefer Ha-Ikkarim 4:25 where R Albo goes at length describing how Hashem is always open to teshuva, and even with Pharaoh, he “hardens his heart” in the sense of adjusting his values so that he still has a free choice.

    Gil Student quotes R Soloveichik The Lord is Righteous in All His Ways, p. 274 – whether Nazis can repent like Nevuzaradan did (Gittin 57), even as they were clearly worse than that. He quotes same Rambam 3:14 that teshuva is all powerful …

    #2462867
    yankel berel
    Participant

    as an aside –

    on the domestic scene —

    the religious in Israel are innocent victims of … prejudiced lawfare by biased crooks masquerading as judges and legal experts

    and ironically …. on the international scene —-

    exactly the same :

    Israel is the innocent victim of …. prejudiced lawfare by biased crooks masquerading as judges and legal experts

    midah keneged midah , hashgacha peratit ……
    .
    .

    #2462941
    somejewiknow
    Participant

    @yankel-berel

    to be a “kofer” means to reject something. So, one needs to have access to the thing as a perquisite to accepting or rejecting it. In our conversation about being kofer in Torah, that would mean that one would need access to that part of Torah. Rejection (and so too acceptance) can happen either generally or specifically, explicitly or implicitly. So, one can be mekabel on himself the complete Torah despite not knowing or having access to the whole body of Torah, and so too rejecting the Torah.

    This is also true for any details. If one DOES have access to them, he can accept or reject those details in kind. In Torah, the 13 ikarim include accepting the complete written and oral Torah, such that claiming that even one word was taught by Moshe – chalila – alone and not Hashem would be literally kofer (v.) in that Torah.

    There is a very interesting deep dive into the minutiae of debate amongst Rishonim about what the guidelines of “access to” are in “edge cases”. In other words, what is the expectation for a person to accept the 13 ikarim generally or specific details if they don’t have formal access to the information. This touches on the sugya of tinuk shenishbu as well as the Brisker Rav’s statement that “nebuch an apikorusis still an apikorus”.

    It is well established to the point of being obvious that there are parts of Torah that are unknown to our generation, haluchas that have been lost as well as new questions that haven’t been resolved through the tools we have at hand (mishna and shikil daas). The ultimate answer to these unknowns will be revealed by Eliyahi Hanuvi in the future. In the meantime there is no expectation for us to somehow be certain in knowing the answers to these parts of Torah that we can’t possibly have access to.

    Nonetheless, we are obligated to be certain (not have any even fleeting doubt – as is true for all 13 ikarim) that the Torah that we DO have today is exactly the true Torah that was given by Hashem at Sinai. The parts that we don’t know, we are obligated to accept and look forward to the time when we will be able to learn those parts.

    If a person knowingly rejects, either by way of a general or a specific, any part of the Torah, that person would be a kofer (n.). If he acknowleges that he doesn’t (yet) know some detail, but accepts it as much as possible, he is not a kofer.

    Mistakes
    Mistakes are easy to understand in the same manner. If a person is intentionally making a mistake – such as rejecting accepted mesora of what was taught at Sinai or not learning that mesorah to his ability – he would be guilty of rejecting the true Torah. On the other hand, if he has no access to the true Torah, he would not be guilty of rejecting anything.

    To summerize: a “mistake” in Torah is by definition a false “non-Torah” idea and that would make it by definition “kefira”(n.) vis-a-vis the true Torah. If someone would adopt that mistake he would be “kofer”(v.) in the Torah. And if he did this purposfully, he would be a “kofer”(n.). (and someone who themselves is a “kofer” in the Torah, would be a “kofer b’ikar” of the “ikar” relevant to believing the Torah we have today is from Sinai)

    Machlokes Hillel Shamai
    In order to delve into kefira vis-a-vis Hillel and Shamai, you would need lengthy introductions about other core concepts of “lo bashomayim hee” and “klalei psak and horaah”. If that is interesting, we can get into it, lmk.

    For the sake of this conversation, it is enough to know that debates between Gedolim on the level of Hillel and Shamai were ones of “shikil daas” not mistakes in of forgeting – chalila – mishne. The process of oral Torah is designed to enable a process of new situations to establish longstanding right and wrong of “shikil daas”. Once that process of establishment happens, that “shikil daas” enters the body of oral Torah that must be excepted by future generations.

    Before (or during) that “shikil daas”. a person who is “roy l’horaah” could argue on either side bettween those competing “deyas” and he would not be kofer in Torah.

    In conclusion, on the level of Hillel and Shamai, since the debate was specifically only in terms of undecided “shilik daas”, there would be no grounds for accusations of kefira towards either side.

    #2463002
    Chaim87
    Participant

    @somejewiknow
    well said and zionism is a shiul hadas issue where both sides have a valid torah view. Sorry but I have no patience do get deep and philospohiical with chazal and midrash,. People like you will always find a gotcha vort bec torah is a mayn shein lahm sof and there is anything you want out there. We do with simple jews who all held of R Kook as holy. The Rizyna rebas and many of R Kook supporters including r chaim ozer and the chaftez chaim and R iseer zalman. Even r Herzog if you ever meet or heard him you’d see how chashiv and real he was aside for the unbelivable hatzalah work he did before and after the war. Many holy rabbinim said its hachlata degula. On the other side yes you have people like the holy stmar reba zya who in his zest to withhold yidishkiet was a bully who silenced anyone who disputed him Including the Klausnberger (I know someone who wrote a seferrefuting al hgeula va atemurah and his warehouse was burned down the next day). And yes you have briska rav (today birsk is mainstream but they do and did very odd things borderline OCD) and R elchanon zl. At the end of the day yes its a shikul hadas thing. Mnay have the mesora that its a haschlata degulah. You can bully us and yell kofer all day long. But its nonsense and a lie

    #2463020
    SQUARE_ROOT
    Participant

    Fanatical anti-Zionists like UJM and HaKatan win debates,
    not because they have better facts, and not because
    they have better logic, but because they endlessly repeat
    the same completely-refuted claims,
    until their opponents quit from overwhelming exhaustion.

    It is emotionally exhausting to debate with people like
    UJM and HaKatan, who refuse to admit when their opponents
    make a valid point, and endlessly repeat the same claims,
    even after those claims have been refuted multiple times
    in multiple ways by multiple people.

    This is what their internal code looks like:

    10 Publicly attack Zionists and Zionism at all times.
    20 Ignore all statements from non-Charedi Rabbis.
    30 Ignore all statements from non-anti-Zionist Rabbis.
    40 Ignore all refutations from opponents.
    50 Ignore the devastating impact of their own advice.
    60 GOTO line 10.

    Notice that this code repeats endlessly, and very few people
    have the time or the patience to deal with endless repetition,
    nor are most people able to cope with having their
    perfectly valid facts and logic repeatedly ignored.

    And that is how people UJM and HaKatan win debates:
    not with facts, not with logic, but with never-ending
    repetition and closed-minded fanaticism.

    __________________________________________

    I have been watching UJM and HaKatan for approximately 2 or 3 years.
    During that time, I cannot remember even *** ONE *** time
    when they ever criticized Arabs or Muslims or The United Nations
    or The New York Times. They criticize Israel *** ONLY ***.

    Can you understand why I suspect them of being
    paid agents of Hamas or Hezbollah or Iran?

    And I am not joking when I say that.

    __________________________________________

    Another tactic that UJM and HaKatan use to win debates is
    constantly attacking their opponents
    by accusing them if being heretics and idol-worshipers.

    Very few people can tolerate that kind of abuse
    for a long time, and they know that.

    And that is how UJM and HaKatan win debates:
    not with facts, not with logic, but with never-ending
    personal attacks against people who disagree with them.

    #2463032
    Yaakov Yosef A
    Participant

    Yankel Berel said:

    as an aside – on the domestic scene — the religious in Israel are innocent victims of … prejudiced lawfare by biased crooks masquerading as judges and legal experts
    and ironically …. on the international scene —- exactly the same: Israel is the innocent victim of …. prejudiced lawfare by biased crooks masquerading as judges and legal experts.
    midah keneged midah , hashgacha peratit ……

    Exactly true. Happens again and again and again, and the Erev Rav don’t get the idea. The Chareidim are the Zhid of Israel, and Israel is the Zhid of the world.

    #2463033
    Yaakov Yosef A
    Participant

    For all the armchair Kanoyim in the room trying to find sources to expand the ranks of “Kofrim B’Ikkar”:

    Are you doing this in order to strengthen your own Emunah, or someone else’s Emunah, or just to indulge in ‘kosher’ lashon hara (because you hold that the ‘bad guys’ are יצאו מכלל עמיתך)?

    There is a famous vort from R’ Chaim Brisker. Women hate mice and try to kill them. Cats also hate mice and try to kill them. The difference is, women would rather that mice cease to exist altogether. Cats want mice to continue to exist, so they can enjoy chasing and killing them… The same goes for Gedolei Yisroel as opposed to askanim/politicians/balaganistim. Gedolei Yisroel truly want all of Klal Yisroel to be zocheh to real Emunah and kiyum haTorah, without any Kefirah or Krumkeit, mistaken or otherwise. Sometimes that means they have to fight reshaim, but they hate every minute of it because they would rather that everyone do Teshuvah and there be more Kvod Shomayim. The other guys also fight reshaim (for fun and profit), but they enjoy the fact that reshaim still exist, because it gives them something to fight against and show that they’re worth something…

    #2463578
    somejewiknow
    Participant

    @chaim87
    why the hateful words? why the personal attack? I get that you wish I would, chsv”sh, follow your false religion instead of Judaism, but this is a Jewish website that should be a “safe space” to discuss Torah. If you have a Torah point to make about what I wrote, go for it. Otherwise, the barbs just continue to highlight the empty vessel that is “Religious Zionism”.

    If you think there is a “shikil daas” to make, make your stance. But, I’ll warn you that there is no such thing as “shikil daas” about the 13 ikkarim (by definition, that’s the point!). My claim – as has been the consistent claim of Torah leaders – is the heresy called “Religious Zionism” rejects a number of the 13 ikarim. This thread here is where I am in the process of explaining that claim for those who are afraid to open a Rambam or Vayoel Moshe or Shulchan Aruch.

    #2463588
    ZSK
    Participant

    @YYA:

    “The Chareidim are the Zhid of Israel, and Israel is the Zhid of the world.”

    I don’t agree with the first part of this unless this is from the perspective of Chilonim, but the second part is definitely true.

    “For all the armchair Kanoyim in the room trying to find sources to expand the ranks of “Kofrim B’Ikkar”

    That describes somejew and HaKatan perfectly.

    #2463780
    Yaakov Yosef A
    Participant

    ZSK – I don’t agree with the first part of this unless this is from the perspective of Chilonim.

    So from who’s perspective are we talking about… The ‘world’ who use Israel as their Zhid also feel they have the moral upper hand, and that we are guilty of bringing their hate upon ourselves etc. yadda yadda… There is an exact, precise, 1-for-1, midda-k’neged-midda relationship between the two.

    #2463799
    ZSK
    Participant

    @somejew

    I don’t believe Chaim is part of the RZ Tzibbur. I think he has RZ leanings.

    You speak of fear about opening certain sefarim. I have learned VaYoel Moshe, Rambam and Shulchan Aruch, as well as Rav Kook. There is nothing in RZ that violates anything within any form of Orthodox Judaism. Period. You don’t know anything about RZ because you won’t study anything by Rav Kook, Rav Reines, Rav Alkalai, Rav Mohliver, etc. You instead project from ideologically secularist Zionism onto RZ, when they are categorically different. The practical Halachik differences, as I have said, are a couple of Mi-Sheberachs (which per Halacha must be said in Israel by all shuls, including Charedi) and Hallel on two days a year. The philosophical difference is how to deal with the State and its modern institutions. Anything else that differs is cultural. But I’ve said this all before; you just don’t want to accept any of it due to intransigence.

    On the other hand, I can point out a great many number of things that Chassidim do that are flagrant violations of Halacha and/or are are almost forms of idol worship or shittuf, if not being polytheistic in nature and straight idol worship.

    You’re getting hit with personal attacks because quite frankly, you’re what we would call – for lack of a better term – a grade-a <expletive>, and an intentionally ignorant one at that. You’re divisive, you drive Sinas Chinam, you try to make up Halachik excuses for your behavior. You are being called out for that, as well as the following:

    1) You are a Chassid (I suspect Satmar, Vitznitz or Munkacz, since those three groups are the most vitriolic in their hatred of anything supporting the State of Israel, or even Zionism in any form) who cannot get it through his head that other valid Orthodox derachim do not and will not take a Chassidish Rebbe’s word to be immutable law from Har Sinai. We’ll ask our Rabbonim about these questions, thank you very much. Which also leads to a point I made a few months ago: The Satmar Rebbe did not have any authority outside his community, especially over the great number of Jews who have consistently rejected his authority and his sefer. You also refuse to address the fundamental questions I’ve raised against Vayoel Moshe. You just respond that I’m a heretic, despite the legitimacy of the questions being raised.

    2) You are completely ignorant regarding RZ. I explained why above.

    3) You are incredibly disrespectful when it comes to RZ Rabbonim, with you using epithets that should only be used for actual Resha’im and not even using terms of respect and authority that were earned. Rav Kook is not one of them, and you are grade-a schmuck (and I mean the Yiddish definition) for continuing to use those epithets. (The next time you refuse to call Rav Kook with his title, I will ask the moderators to delete your disrespectful posts like I’ve done in the past.)

    There’s a reason why I’ve been telling you for at least two years to give it a rest and get a clue. Think about it. Read an actual history of RZ and and accrate biography of Rav Kook.

    I’ll stop there.

    #2463907
    somejewiknow
    Participant

    @zsk
    You’re a fool who follows fools and it shows because your many words contain nothingness. The meaningful conversations here in CR on the subject of heresies like zionism in light of – lehavdil – Torah are conversations about Torah and what it teaches.

    You offer nothing.
    No Torah, no integrity.
    For example, you either never learned Vayoel Moshe or your are intentionally lying when you make the absurd claim there are no meaningful (haluchik?) differences. The arguments that dismantle RELIGOUS zionism are well laid out in that sefer. If you have a counterargument in Torah, go ahead and state it. But, you can’t pretend that the rejection of zionism is only “secularist Zionism”. Most of the sefer is bemoaning the crooked evil of “Religious” Zionism, as the Satmar Rebbe said: “Kook, yimach shemo”

    The Satmar Rebbe was not (only) upset by Kook’s secularism, rather he cred about how he distorted and abused the Holy Torah for his false messiah.

    #2464051
    yankel berel
    Participant

    @somejew

    zionism is not necessarily a heresy

    but that is subject of another conversation we are having on another thread

    where you are still waiting for my response
    .
    .

    #2464058
    ZSK
    Participant

    @somejew

    Very briefly because I don’t have a lot of time for this (I could write far more but will not be doing so), and I will not be responding to you until I have time, which could be in a few months from now:

    1) All I was doing was explaining Chaim’s broadside against you, why it most unfortunately was justified and why you are so difficult to have a conversation with. It’s a חבל that you couldn’t figure that out and resorted to accusations that are not true in the slightest.

    2) I can say the same about you and your lack of understanding of how Batei Din, Serara, Pesak Halacha, Hora’ah, Takanos, etc. work.

    3) The conversations about RZ are most definitely not meaningful and they do not do anything other than reveal reciprocal sinas chinam.

    Actual heresies would be: (1) Chabad’s quasi-deificiation of their long-deceased Rebbe; (2) the tendency to regard Roshei Yeshiva and Chassidish Rebbes as pope-like figures who can perform miracles, if not outright deification of those Rabbonim; (3) praying to ספירות, which is minimally שיתוף if not outright polytheism and idol worship; (4) תפילות like מכניסי רחמים which pray to Angels, not HKB”H; (5) the Zohar implying that HKB”H has a wife and children. You could possibly also include the Zohar issuing Halachik rulings clearly in violation of regular Halacha. Shall I continue?

    4) If you bothered to learn the Sefarim written by RZ Rabbonim, you would realize that you’re wrong. ויואל משה is one of the best polemics ever written against secularism and indeed it is food for thought on ideological terms, but it is not a halachik work, it should not be considered such and it does not argue effectively against RZ.

    5) Those arguments that supposedly dismantle RZ are weak, especially when the underpinnings of the entire book rest on Aggada – which is not used to issue Halachik rulings and is not to be interpreted, but taken at face value, something you should know.

    6) You want Torah arguments? Fine. Here we go:

    a) Aggada. Read what I said above. That is a powerful Halachik argument, if not a Torah argument altogether. The entirety of ויואל משה is based on something that לפי הלכה is not to be used for exactly what the Satmar Rebbe uses it for. From that it is absolutely possible to argue that ויואל משה in fact teaches Torah in violation of Halacha. Unless you want to tell me that ויואל משה is in fact an ideological argument, in which case RZ argues against it. But it that case, ויואל משה is not Halachik in any sense of the word. Perhaps an Asmachta, but probably not even that.

    b) You clearly do not understand Rambam’s use of the three oaths, its context and why it was stated in Risaala Al-Yemeniyya, just like HaKatan doesn’t get it either (and never responded to me about it). Read Mori Qafih’s (R. Yosef Kapach) edition of Iggeros HaRambam. There is nothing halachik about their mention, it is rhetoric. Reading the original in Arabic makes that patently obvious. The only halacha in that letter is in fact guidelines for dealing with a false messiah – in Yemen, not elsewhere. Those were specific circumstances. It cannot be extrapolated to today in reference to RZ.

    b) Our מסורת – וזה נכתב בתורתינו הקדושה בעצמה: Any הוצאת דיבה about ארץ ישראל, which today means the State of Israel, and definition does include Zionism, leads to severe punishment. It happened when Berlin was declared ירושלים, it happened when other cities were declared ירושלים as well. Unlike the Satmar Rebbe’s hatred and short temper, this is an actual part of our מסורה. That is also a Torah argument and one that in our most sacred book meant the death of an entire generation and HKB”H killing 12 leaders immediately. By arguing against RZ and Z in general, ויואל משה is in fact an argument against ארץ ישראל in the modern era. There’s a reason why Satmar is often to referred to acting like the Meraglim.

    c) The Satmar Rebbe only had authority over his commnunity. He did not have any authority over anyone outside, certainly not over the thousands who rejected his Shita outright. This is an actual הוראה issue and it most definitely applies. The RZ community has never accepted his authority. On top of that, his בית דין is not the only one in New York or in Israel. It therefore cannot claim sole abiltiy to issue תקנות of any kind because that requires the presence of one בית דין in a city. Thus, ויואל משה cannot be binding לפי הלכה.

    d) Religious Zionism does not consider Moshiach to have come. Certainly this is the case post-expulsion from Gaza. You do not see anyone RZ not fasting on Tisha B’av or any of the other fast days. You do not see them erasing Selichos, Avinu Malkeinu or any other part of the traditional Tefillos said in mourning for the Beis HaMikdash and Yerushalayim.

    e) Religious Zionism does not worship Herzl, Ben Gurion, Netanyahu or the State. They never have.

    f) The prayer for the State does not say the Geulah has arrived. It says the extreme very possible beginning. Those qualifiers of ראשית צמיחת actually mean something.

    7) That is Rav Kook to you. I will insist and demand that you show Der Rav the same respect you show the Satmar Rebbe.

    8) The Satmar Rebbe was in fact wrong about Rav Kook. Your blind hatred and refusal to do any sort of serious research about the issue demonstrates your ignorance.

    Be well.

    #2464076
    Yaakov Yosef A
    Participant

    ZSK – How did you get to Vizhnitz being anti-Zionist (more than regular Chareidim)? They have a representative in the Knesset! Historically, the relationship between Chassidus and Zionism has varied greatly from one Chassidus to another. There are also many (and growing) RZ who embrace Chassidus in different ways. Overall, I would say that RZ have a better relationship with Chassidus than with the “Lithuanian” Yeshiva World.

    #2464442
    Yaakov Yosef A
    Participant

    ZSK – Going off topic here, but necessary to mention:

    Nobody “prays to Sefiros” ח״ו and no sane person who isn’t a Shabbetai Tzvi cultist perverts the words of the Zohar the way you did. Seeing as you repeatedly reference Rav Kook זצ״ל, you probably know that in his time there was a Yemeni Rav who convinced himself that he knew better than all of Klal Yisroel and was חולק on the Zohar, mainly using your purported arguments, and a Sefer was written to counter his arguments with a lengthy Haskamah and introduction by – Rav Kook בכבודו ובעצמו – explaining why that Rav (and you) are wrong. You claim to have read Rav Kook, and I have no reason to doubt that, so you probably are aware of his fondness for Zohar and Kabbalah. What the Zohar really means is way beyond the scope of “The Coffee Room”, but if you want you can learn the following Sefarim:

    ספר אילימה רבתי and שיעור קומה of the Ramak.

    All of the כתבי האריז״ל. (Read carefully the Hakdamah of R’ Chaim Vital.)

    The works of Ramchal, especially קל״ח פתחי חכמה. He also wrote an entire Sefer called קנאת ה׳ צבאות specifically debunking the kefirah of Shabbetai Tzvi ימ״ש and explaining correct pshat in the Zohar in many of the places they distorted.

    Sephardic: דעת ותבונה of the Ben Ish Chai, especially his long Hakdamah, is an excellent source. There is also a lesser known Sefer called אמונת חכמים written in Italy about 300 years ago by R’ Aviad Sar Shalom Basila, which deals entirely with the issues you raised.

    Litvish: Biur HaGra on ספרא דצניעותא, as well as נפש החיים of R’ Chaim of Volozhin. פתחי שערים of R’ Yitzchok Isaac Chaver, talmid of R’ Chaim Volozhiner.

    Chassidish: שערי היחוד והאמונה by R’ Aharon of Shtrasheleh, יסוד האמונה by R’ Boruch Kossover, and of course the many works of the בעל התניא. Try also נתיב מצוותיך of R’ Isaac of Komarno. The works of Rebbe Nachman of Breslev, and especially ליקוטי הלכות of his talmid R’ Nosson, are very helpful.

    There are even explicitly RZ sefarim by contemporary authors written on this subject too, if you want…

    If you think that ONLY you are the REAL מאמין, and ALL of these גדולי עולם were even POSSIBLY kofrim ח״ו, then you have a bigger problem than I can help you with.

    #2464579
    Yaakov Yosef A
    Participant

    ZSK – (2) the tendency to regard Roshei Yeshiva and Chassidish Rebbes as pope-like figures who can perform miracles, if not outright deification of those Rabbonim.

    The idea of Emunas Chachamim goes way back before there was a ‘pope’, and doesn’t involve ‘deification’. I didn’t know that popes are believed to work miracles, but you may know more about Christianity than I do. I’m not interested in debating someone convinced he is smarter than the vast majority of Frum Jews, who do believe in some form of Emunas Chachamim, and certainly in the Zohar, but suffice it to say that even actually believing in Roshei Yeshivos as miracle workers doesn’t violate any of the Ikkarim, or any issur of any kind TTBOMK. By the way, why are you so protective of the honor of Rav Kook זצ״ל, but permit yourself to use grossly disrespectful language (hate, short temper, etc.) with regard to the Satmar Rebbe זצ״ל? How much do you really know about the life, actions, and Middos of the Divrei Yoel? Or Rav Kook himself for that matter, who would never use such language. Because two or three mentchlichkeit-challenged commenters constantly hang themselves on their erroneous understanding of the Satmar Rebbe’s shittah doesn’t give anyone a hetter to be מבזה תלמידי חכמים.

    בקיצור נמרץ, the most basic meaning of Emunas Chachamim is that there is a special Siyata Dishmayah bestowed upon the Torah leaders of every generation, above and beyond their intellectual greatness, to help them teach us Ratzon Hashem. What that includes, and who that includes, is subject to debate, but denying that such a thing exists altogether may very well be ‘heretical’. קסם על שפתי מלך במשפט לא ימעל פיו משלי טז, י. See what Rashi says there. משפט and דין also include (at least) paskening shailos in issur v’hatter, and according to most any guidance in how we are to behave as Yidden. It is also possible that due to lack of zchus or a גזרה משמים that can’t be overturned, that there can sometimes be a lack of siyata dishmayah. (So don’t start about the Holocaust yaddah yaddah.) But in general, there is such a thing. It is NOT ‘infallibility’. There is a whole מסכת הוריות about that. But ‘failure’ in this context means lack of סייעתא דשמיא, to be remedied by Teshuvah, (and Korbanos in the time of the Beis Hamikdash when applicable), not that the system isn’t real.

    By the way, according to the above, calling out as ‘heretical’ something accepted by the overwhelming majority of Gedolei Yisroel (including RZ!), such as some of the things on your list, may itself be heretical…

    #2464657

    YYA> What that includes, and who that includes, is subject to debate, but denying that such a thing exists altogether may very well be ‘heretical’.

    You both do not necessarily disagree here. As much as you admit that Emunas Chachamim can be defined differently – heretical or not, or better correct or not depends on the definition you are choosing. Arguing about the issue without defining it is not very productive.

    #2465431
    Yaakov Yosef A
    Participant

    AAQ – There are different shittos WRT what is covered by Emunas Chachamim, and which Chochom to follow. But to call out as “heretical” some of the things on ZSK’s list means that you don’t accept the authority of ANY Gedolei Yisroel, even some who ZSK himself ostensibly respects (such as Rav Kook), and even on core issues of Emunah. So basically that is equivalent to saying איש הישר בעיניו יעשה. There are Halachos in Shulchan Aruch taken directly from the Zohar. There are even Halachos in the Rambam for which no other extant primary source has yet been found other than the Zohar.

    #2465575
    mdd1
    Participant

    Ujm, I personally know an Israeli who went to the army frei and came out a Ba’al Teshuva in a black yarmulke. Etc.

    #2465598
    ujm
    Participant

    mdd1, I personally know a man who bit a dog.

    It happens.

    #2465620
    Yaakov Yosef A
    Participant

    mdd1 – Ujm, I personally know an Israeli who went to the army frei and came out a Ba’al Teshuva in a black yarmulke. Etc.

    And I know of a bochur who was trafficked as a slave to an Egyptian house of depravity, eventually was framed and sent to jail for 12 years, and emerged as one of the greatest tzaddikim of all time… I don’t know what color Yarmulke he wore. What is your point? There is at least one documented case of a woman who fell more than 10,000 feet from a plane that broke apart and lived to tell about it. Do you want to try that too?

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 151 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.