- This topic has 181 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I don’t understand how anyone, regardless of their opinions about Zionism, can not have hakaros hatov to soldiers in the IDF.
Sam2 and DaMoshe:
I don’t agree that my repeating a bifeirush Rav Elchonon in his name “makes it personal”, especially in an anonymous forum. I simply repeated what Rav Elchonon and others have stated and he states clearly that Zionism is A”Z.
So, according to Rav Elchonon, if you are a proud Zionist (which, according to their theology, includes “MO”) then that makes you a proud oveid A”Z. I fail to see the reason for anyone taking offense to this.
However, to clarify, I certainly never intended to personally malign anyone. So, if anyone feels personally offended by my repeating Rav Elchonon’s words or anything else I might have written or will write, I humbly ask your mechila.
vashti_schwartz:
Because this religion is not based on “feelings” but on what the Torah wants.
Please explain the halachic gedarim of hakaras haTov and how you feel every IDF soldier fits those gedarim.
Avram:
I disagree that the “behavior would be the same regardless of what the IDF does”.
The Jewish way in galus, which the Zionists flagrantly violate, is to “lay low” and be good citizens. Calling attention to one’s self in an unfriendly environment is simply foolish. We are in galus, etc.
Just Emes:
Based on your latest post, it is clear that you simply believe the standard Zionist propaganda about Zionism and Israel, and you are not aware of the various historical and halachic issues that pertain to Zionism and the State of Israel.
In my humble understanding, your views are definitely not “emes”.
For example, it is not emes that the State would be in any way acceptable if it were “religious”.
Before you claim to me that I “need to understand a few things”, you might want to learn “the sugya” first.
Regarding your point #2, it was not some innocuous survival idea. The Zionists wanted Jews to be accepted as goyim so after Jews turned down Herzl’s idea of baptism CH”V, they came up with the idea of converting Judaism itself into a goyish Nationalist faith instead.
Regarding the majority of (or even any) “Gedolim being for [the State]”, I have already (at least twice in this thread) explained how this is not the case.
As to Hashgacha post WW-II, even the Brisker Rav is quoted as saying that the Balfour Declaration (even before WW II) was a “smile” from heaven. Unfortunately, the Zionists (and, seemingly, the B”D of Klal Yisrael, as you keep mentioning) turned that smile into the disaster that was and is the State of Israel rather than the true geulah.
Regarding your “yes or no” questions, I already mentioned the Chazal about the Romans and the bathhouses they built and Hashem’s answer to their claim for reward.
Please answer yes or no if you feel that Hashem is, CH”V, kafui tov, for rejecting the Roman’s claim. (Of course, Hashem will have rewarded them in some other way because He doesn’t hold back reward from anyone.)
Once you’ve done that, please explain why Israel and the IDF should be any better.
ROB, no, the shalosh shavuos remains a machlokes.
Sam and DaMoshe, IIRC, Hakatan keeps the terminology hashkafic, not personal. You’ll have to link to an occasion in which he did otherwise.
And if you think a hashkafic disagreement is personal, then DaMoshe is guilty of this when he talks about Satmar.
If I had time, I would link to numerous times when Hakatan has clearly stated that it’s not personal. Plus, bimchilas k’vodo, DaMoshe’s rhetoric was far more personal, directed at a specific individual.
DY – yes, I think you missed something. Your constant vigilance in mediating all potential disagreements is highly commendable, but sometimes it seems you judge comments based on how you yourself perceived them. It seems there are others who perceive them differently.
I’ll make you a deal, Syag; from now on, you’ll judge comments based on how I perceive them, and I’ll judge comments based on how you perceive them.
lol, very cute!
but since my perceptions have already been deemed invalid how bout this, I won’t judge comments, and when people tell you how they perceive things, you’ll let them have their opinions. deal?
DY: Whatever terms it’s couched in, a comment like the following is a personal attack:
“So, according to Rav Elchonon, if you are a proud Zionist (which, according to their theology, includes “MO”) then that makes you a proud oveid A”Z. I fail to see the reason for anyone taking offense to this.”
Hakatan- seriously? Ovdei Avodah Zarah? Do we even poskin like that R’ Elchonon? Would you go so far to assur non-mevushal wine from a Zionist winery because of yayin nesech? Are all religious Zionists chayav misah for being oveid avodah zarah? You go too far and it’s shocking that you don’t even realize it. To claim that such a large portion of Klal Yisroel who are otherwise shomrei Torah and Mitzvos, among them are huge Rabbonim and Talmidei Chachamim, are ovdei avodah zarah? I guarantee most Charedi Rabbonim nowadays (at least outside of Satmar and Neturei Karta) would never label so many frum Jews as ovdei avodah zarah, so maybe you should follow in their lead and cool down your misplaced zealotry.
Sam2:
No, it’s very much not a personal attack.
Where is the “person” and, for that matter, where is the “attack”?
The “if you are…” was clearly a hypothetical “you”, and not referring to any particular person.
So I’ll avoid using the word “you” in this post, in case that helps.
Again, I don’t see why some here get all upset about my mentioning this Rav Elchonon. If the “MO” somehow feel they have a legitimate halachic way to hold differently than Rav Elchonon, then why would it even bother the “MO”?
Again, this is not personal, and I don’t understand how anyone can possibly construe it in that manner.
Regardless, once again, I humbly ask mechila from anyone who may have been offended by anything I have written or will write.
HaKatan – it’s nice to know that your harshness and hurtful words are not intended to be such, but asking mechila without changing your tune does not fulfill the halachik requirements for tshuva.
simcha613:
I’m sure Rav Elchonon was careful in the words he chose and that he meant exactly what he wrote.
First, I am not looking to judge anybody. I’m also not sure what zealotry has to do with this. I certainly agree that our MO and “Religious Zionist” brethren do not intend to CH”V worship idols.
I am merely pointing out what Rav Elchonon and others wrote. Rabbi JB Soloveichik, too, said that his father also held that Zionism is A”Z.
So this is not a radical idea, and that’s what great rabbanim paskened.
You have a kasha of what about most of the world that has been fooled by Zionism?
Ask your LOR how this is resolved. But Rav Elchonon’s psak that Zionism is A”Z does not change.
I suppose it wouldn’t help your incredulity to point out that a shockingly large part of Klal Yisrael during Eliyahu haNavi’s time worshipped the Baal. That’s with Eliyahu haNavi in their midst. Today, with the yeridas haDoros and no navi, why is it so shocking that so many people would fall prey to the lies of Zionism?
Syag:
I don’t understand.
Please explain where you feel there is a need to do teshuva.
DaasYochid:
Thank you.
HaKatan: I’m not really following the content, “tochen”, only the fun part. The wording, method and angle of attack,…
And I like your last line “…or will write” !!!
DaasYochid: well.,at least you admit it is a machlokes,so ,clearly HaKatan,s ravings are not universally accepted,.Phew! And I though Iwas one of these evil idol worshippers! On a serious note , the sholosh shevuos is part of aggadata, nowhere mentioned in halacha. As such ,why is it binding?
rob: Because you insist on repeating this near-Kefirah (at best).
Universally.
HaKatan, JE & DY:
Going back to the original discussion, there is no comparison between France and Israel (AKA the Zionist State). Al pi Halacha, we go after Rov for many things. For example, I have heard Rav Chaim holds it is Assur to give blood if Rov says it will go to an Aino Yehudi (due to the Issur of Oseh Chaburah), while in Israel it is a Mitzava of Hatzolas Nefashos. Agree or disagree, the parameters are still true. Someone who is a soldier in France (or the USA) Al Pi Rov is protecting Aino-Yehudim, vs. in Israel he is Al Pi Rov protecting Yidden. Somewone who is protecting Yidden deserves our Hakaras HaTov and our Tefilos. Of course, a specific person who protects Yidden (such as a policeman in front of a shul in London) also deserves our Hakaras Hatov & Tefilos. This is going on a non-specific soldier.
This conceptually would be true in any area of Rov Yidden where protection is offered without discrimination (such as Shomrim in Williamsburg), no matter what the government is.
Sam and ROB, I agree with Sam that challenging or disagreeing with Chazal on divrei aggadah is kefirah. The Chazon Ish says so explicitly. I’m not sure if ROB was saying that Chazal were wrong ch’v, though, maybe he just meant that Chazal themselves would not have insisted on the shavuos being kept under certain circumstances.
Gavra, I think you’re right; I was referring to a theoretical circumstance where specific attention was being given to us, e.g. there were soldiers or policemen guarding a shul. But the default is probably different.
HaKatan: You call that an apology? That is a sorry excuse for one. No, I do not forgive you.
I’m finished with this thread. As I posted before, arguing with HaKatan is pointless. I’m not going to bother. I’ll leave this in God’s hands. I told HaKatan where he erred and he chose to ignore me. He has no excuses to give.
edited
Sam2: SO, what is it? kefira? (to claim that agaddata is not binding) or is it not kefira? One cannot be ‘a little bit Be’hirayon”. And you may repeat your view ad nauseum, the fact is that aggaddata is not binding and the sholosh shevuos were never included in halacha.
Just emes: I fully sympathize with your approach and am familiar with your valid arguments. However, your opponents will quote some selected words from past gedolim (like the Satmarer rebbe and some others) and you will never win your battle anyway. The opponents will never acknowledge that the Holocaust changed everything and whatever may have been correct in the early part of the 20th century is not applicable anymore.
I will leave it to history and right now, Eretz Yisroel is grwoing and growing- with no thanks to its opponents.
DY – Thanks.
DaasYochid: When I say that aggadata is not binding, I do not dispute the chazal or its veracity. I do say that, unless it is codified in halacha, one is not bound by its conclusions. I fail to see where that is “kefirah”.
DaasYochid: And you are actually fully correct in saying that my view corresponds to many roshonim and acharonim that the “sholosh shevuos” are correct in certain cirucmstances and not in others. (the gemoro itself says that implicitly)
rob: Who determines what is Halachah and what is Aggadah then? And if it has a clear (stress the word clear) conclusion, why would that not be binding on us? Maybe it’s not a formal Chiyuv/Issur, but it’s certainly not something that can be flippantly ignored.
DaMoshe (and others):
For the third time, I humbly ask mechila from you and anyone else who may have been hurt by anything I have written or will write.
Just Emes:
If you really have studied the sugya then, for starters, your history must be different than what actually happened.
Again, you refuse to accept that your “B”D of Klal Yisrael” understanding is simply wrong, as I have written at least twice. If you read the HaPardes and the Brisker Rav’s words, this is quite clear.
You claim the State was declared in peace? This, too, is not emes. There were months of fighting before that formal declaration, including, famously, the bombing of a British government building in Yerushalayim. And the Zionists went on the offensive, not defensive, after the declaration to take Yerushalayim, which nobody gave them permission to do.
Just Emes (cont.):
The Zionist claim from the Or Sameach, who never permitted sovereignty, which is assur regardless of peaceful ascent, has already been debunked numerous times. He only addressed peaceful ascent, based on the League of Nations, not sovereignty.
The oaths certainly do apply to Zionism, and it is simply not possible to claim otherwise.
In addition, the pikuach nefesh problem alone, when the Zionists knew they had AT BEST a 50/50 chance of them succeeding (with, CH”V, many losses of Jewish life regardless), is enough to have forbidden founding the state.
The Zionists have no answers.
HaKatan: I said I was done in this thread, and indeed, I won’t argue anymore. I just wanted to respond to your 3rd request for “forgiveness”.
The Rambam, describes the act of forgiveness as follows: “Once the attacker has asked forgiveness once, and then a second time, and we know that he has repented for his sin and he has abandoned the evil that he has done, then one must forgive him.”
In this thread, in the very post you asked for forgiveness, you claimed that I am oved avodah zarah. You clearly did not repent for your sin and you definitely did not abandon the evil you have done. Therefore, even after 3 requests, I still do not forgive you. First show true remorse for what you have done, accept that there are legitimate shitos which differ from yours, and then we can discuss forgiveness.
Sam2: First, no one “flippantly”‘ ignores anything. Seforim have been written about the sholosh shevuos and whether they are applicable today (see R”Zvi Hirsch Kalisher, amongst others).
As far as what is or is not halacha- we have a shulchan aruch for contemporary issues and, if you ask, we have a Rambam who deals with all halochos. Nowhere in this vast halachic output are the “sholosh shevuos’ mentioned. Even the gemoro has numerous quotations that contradict the “sholosh shevuos” (you cannot sell land to a non-jew.etc…)
In a lengthy “Igeres Teiman”, the Rambam does mention them- yet, when you look at his codification of halacha in Mishneh Torah and,even more explicitly in Pirush Hamishnoayos on Chelek, he describes what Moshiach may and will do and waging war against our oppressors is paramount. Wouldn’t that be against the sholosh shevuos? I think it is pretty conclusive from the Rambam that the shlosh shevuos were, either unapplicable or only valid for a certain time.
ROB:
Are you seriously asking a question on the oaths from what Mashiach will do? I don’t want anyone to take anything “personally”, so I’ll stop there.
And even the Rav Meir Simcha that Zionists love to distort clearly claims the oaths are applicable to Zionism.
DaMoshe:
I’m sorry you disagree with Rav Elchonon. I am also sorry you somehow feel that this is my problem because I quoted his holy words. I did not call you personally an oveid A”Z, and I simply repeated Rav Elchonon’s holy words.
I also apologized three times if my words hurt anyone, regardless.
hakatan – here’s a baby step forward for you. ‘zionists’ are people, ‘zionism’ is an ideology. try choosing your words with more thought and less saliva.
Syag:
Thank you for the suggestion.
Out of curiosity, since your subtitle asks, is it Lashon HaRa to write, as you did to me, “try choosing your words with more thought and less saliva.”?
why dont you check with the mod who gave it?
Syag:
Oh, I thought it was your idea, not whichever mod.
No need to answer the question, then, I suppose.
Just Emes:
I have asked multiple times (and you still haven’t answered) why the Zionists should be any more worthy of hakaras haTov than the Romans biYimos haMashiach.
At least the Romans were goyim, and Esav sonei liYaakov. Same with Mitzrayim: they were goyim who did host us in their land. You make a kal sheKein from them to Zionist “Jews” (who made a deal back in Ben Gurion’s days, as I also wrote)?
(You also conveniently ignore that the Zionists and Israel have shmaded our brethren and continue to do so, which is an historically unparalleled tragedy.)
Your reasoning doesn’t make sense to me.
Just Emes:
As to the rest of your post:
Your point 1 is irrelevant; the indisputable fact is that Israel was not founded biShalom.
Your point 2 is simply a fantasy and propaganda, as I explained numerous times. The Zionists themselves admit they took a foolish and tremendous gamble with Jewish lives, and (in 1948 alone) did sacrifice thousands of Jewish lives, for this idol.
Regarding your alleged Halacha, just because you make up a story about Rav Moshe, that doesn’t change the halacha berura. Pikuach nefesh is not nidche for Zionist idolatry. Founding the State of Israel undeniably and needlessly cost Jewish lives. (The oaths also apply.)
Case definitely closed, as you write.
As written above, Zionism was and is A”Z according to multiple gedolim, and founding the State was also clearly assur for additional reasons as described above.
Again, the Zionists have no answers.
HaKatan- I decided long ago not to answer your lunatic comments but ,as you seemingly addressed a point I made, I will address it too.
I do suggest that you learn the Mishne Torah first and also the Pirush Hamisnayos, and you may see (not that I expect you to admit it)that,indeed, whatever would be applicable today is applicable with Melech Hamoshiach. Not my words- just Shmuel in the gemoro and the Rambam in his halacha sefer! (including his pirush on mishneh). So, it is absolutely legitimate to contrast your understanding of the sholosh shevuos with the Rambam’s words.
ROB:
Thank you for the personal attack. I would think that kol haPosel biMumo posel might be relevant here.
The oaths apply “ad sheTechpatz”. Once we have been redeemed, BB”A, then there are no oaths. The gemara in Shabbos states that the difference between galus and afterwards is shibud malchiyus. We will not be ruled by the nations any more so there will be no possibility of rebellion. You can’t rebel against someone who doesn’t rule over you.
Please tell us where in the Rambam’s Mishneh Torah and in his peirush haMishnayos he says differently than the clear meaning of the midrash and, indeed, simple logic.
HaKatan: accusing me of personal attacks is quite rich coming from someone who has consistently accused hundreds of thousands of jew (including many gedolim)of being “ovdei avodah zoroh” but I digress.
Answering your other part- the Rambam explicitly talks about Melech Hamoshaich waging war and delivering the Jewish people from the yoke of our enemies. This will not be done by planting flowers or smoking all day. It will be done by acts of war. what happened to the sholosh shevuos?
Who cares if the oaths were violated? Does it make any practical difference whether the State was founded in violation of these oaths or not?
- The topic ‘Hakaras Hatov for Israeli Soldiers (IDF)’ is closed to new replies.