Going OTD in the IDF

@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 ….
.
.
.

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)

@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

.
.
.
.

@AAQ

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

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.

@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 …..

.
.
.

@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]

@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.

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 ….

.
.
.

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.

@aaq

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

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.

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

.
.
.

@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 ?

???

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 …

@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.

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.

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…

@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.

@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.

@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
.
.

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.

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…

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.

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

It happens.