August 4, 2013 8:32 am at 8:32 am #970457
rob- ok, great, im just telling you what he held.August 4, 2013 7:18 pm at 7:18 pm #970458
Toi- thank you for your input. You have to explain to me,however, how RSR HIrsch zz’l could have made input in this, as he died in 1888, many years before the Zionist idea was even conceived. The only alyah that happened in RSR Hirsch’s time was in 1881- (called “bilu”), and that was mainly frum jews!August 4, 2013 8:02 pm at 8:02 pm #970459
zionism existed before aliyah began. herzl was born in the mid 1800s and lived into the early 1900s.August 4, 2013 8:34 pm at 8:34 pm #970460About TimeParticipant
“Toi- thank you for your input. You have to explain to me,however, how RSR HIrsch zz’l could have made input in this, as he died in 1888, many years before the Zionist idea was even conceived. The only alyah that happened in RSR Hirsch’s time was in 1881- (called “bilu”), and that was mainly frum jews!”
Revisionism at it’s best.
So how was he criticized ‘from all over the map’ for being “anti nationalist”?
or that he was more suspicious of the nascent “Lovers of Zion” than almost any one of his colleagues?
Or that to this day articles come out calling choosing to call him too “German”
Or that his successor and son in law was one of R’Sonnenfeld’s biggest supporters on the continent,(who referred to him as the “Kosel Hama’aravi” )?August 4, 2013 8:40 pm at 8:40 pm #970461About TimeParticipant
Ponevezher Rav was asked how is it someone like himself who served in the Sejm of Lithuania refrains from serving serving in the Knesset?
His Response:It is unaffordable.It is too expensive.
In the Knesset,there would be a need to tear his garments regularly over the heresy that is said.
It is unaffordableAugust 4, 2013 9:24 pm at 9:24 pm #970462
Toi and “About Time” :
Herzl was born in 1860 (died in 1904) and had barely any connection with Judaism until the Dreyfus affair in 1894. His book “der Judenstaat’ was written in 1895/96. (all from wikipedia). So, the idea of political zionism was not on anyone’s agenda until those years. I truly don’t know how RSR Hirsch could be against political Judaism- a movement that did not exist until well after his death.
So, please provide examples of RSR Hirsch being anti-Zionist. You surely cannot imply that he was against any “alyah’ to Eretz Yisorel, something jews had been doing for centuries , including the perushim and talmidei HaBesht. There clearly was am movement of “Chovevei Zion’ (led by great rabbonim,including the Netziv, I think) before Herzl but it also started in RSR Hirsch’s later years (1880’s). Please provide any cogent writings from RHR HIRSCH that support your comments.August 4, 2013 9:57 pm at 9:57 pm #970463
ROB- when i have time, ill try.August 4, 2013 10:06 pm at 10:06 pm #970464
k i cheated. did a quick google search. found an anti-zionist website.thewre are several quotes from different works of R Hirsch. you can check them out.
torah true jews dot org slash rav hirschAugust 4, 2013 10:51 pm at 10:51 pm #970465
Toi-Thank you and I looked it up. Firstly, please remember that this site is anti-zionist and may distort quotations or ignore anything that is not in line with their thoughts. That said, even what they bring down from Rav Hirsch’s writings do not square at all with the anti-zionist screech of today. Firstly, it is clear that Rav Hirsch is not talking about political Zionism. He is talking about making alyah to Eretz Yisroel,as you will see from the quotations culled from “Shemesh marpeh” . He argues with R’Zvi Hirsch Kalisher and it is absolutely about making alyah- not political Zionism. With the greatest respect to RSR Hirsch- to argue,as he does, that we should remain loyal to the countries we live in and not move to Eretz Yisroel (which is what he advocates) came to a bitter end- as he lived in Germany! (even as thousands of jews fought in WW1) so I would decline ,with respect, to follow his path on this. (BTW- chareidim do not follow his other path- secualr education!)
He seems to mention the ‘sholosh shevuos” but he says that we should ask the gentile nations how they accepted the third shevuo! (not to enslave the jews too much).A bitter joke, knowing what happened in his beloved Germany 45 years after his passing!
anyway- to quote Rav Hirsch is not the most relailbe source tob rely upon.August 4, 2013 11:05 pm at 11:05 pm #970466rebdonielMember
For Haredim to quote Rav Hirsch as a rayah against Zionism is ridiculous, because Rav Hirsch dealt with a different worldview and approach to Judaism than do the Haredim.
For Rav Hirsch, Zionism was ill-fitted not merely because of the reasons he gives in his siddur (i.e. that he believes only G-d can restore us to the land), but also due to his universalism and humanism. He saw Jewish nationalism as being in direct conflict to his own sense of loyalty to the Fatherland.August 4, 2013 11:15 pm at 11:15 pm #970467
rebdoniel: this is exactly what I meant! Hirsch is not the right person uopn whom to build an anti-zionist creed.August 5, 2013 7:35 am at 7:35 am #970468
ROB- i specifically wrote they are anti zionist for the sake of clarity. ironically, zionists also distort and misquote gedolim of yesteryear to shtim with their shittos. just like ive seen them on this site bring down R kalisher as a proponent of zionism because he liked aliyah. so we have to decide which approach is valid. either we apply both of them to the political movements and extrapolate what they would hold, or we leave both names out. the fact that loyalty to germany blew up in our faces doesnt mean he would have changed his attitude and hashkafa as to what we’re expected to do in galus, it just means that in this instance it ended badly. i would disagre and say he is a reliable source, and the irony is that for some reason alot of MO try to attach R hirsch to political zioninsm.August 5, 2013 11:48 am at 11:48 am #970469NaftushMember
RSR Hirsch repeatedly stressed our “light unto the Gentile” mission in exile and did not smile on those who would disavow the mission by jumping the Mashiach’s gun. He firmly rejected the proto-Zionism that he lived to encounter. That he would have forsworn subsequent phases on Zionism, a fortiori the state once it was established, cannot be determined. Either way, his spiritual successors were and remain prominent in the religious Zionist movement, so they at least do not see him as a Brisker-style, let alone a Satmar-style, anti-Zionist.August 5, 2013 2:36 pm at 2:36 pm #970470
Toi- you may be right in some ways ,that both sides tend to skew comments to their advantage. R” Zvi Hirsch Kalisher,the Netziv and many others did not plan or know political Zionism and it would be pure conjecture to speculate what they would have done. I am not even sure whether Rav Kook wrote about political Zionism,although he clearly gave the land of Israel much more prominence than other Gedolim of his era. However, accepting all that, there is little to show that political Zionism is “shmad” or whatever evil the anti-Zionists claim. I have made enough search now to see that the basis of all anti-Zionism derives from the gemoro in Kesubos (sholsh shevuos) and that it has no applicability today, based on many meforshim, rishonim and acharonim.August 5, 2013 11:55 pm at 11:55 pm #970471
ROB continues manufacturing his lies and propaganda, presumably because he is infatuated with his idol of Zionism and he admitted on these boards that even if he saw Rav Elchonon’s words black-and-white that he would still be a Zionist.
The halachic applicability of the three oaths, and Zionism’s violation of both, are not in any real dispute, as has been posted here throughout many threads.
Zionism, itself, is shmad, and its shmad is also ongoing, as has also been posted on these boards.
Which of Rav Hirsch’s “spiritual successors” are prominent in the “Religious Zionist” movement?
Zionist evil propaganda to the contrary, loyalty to Germany did not “blow up in our faces”. According to the gedolim, it was various forms of nihye kiChal haAmim, including Zionism, that “blew up in” their faces. Rav Elconon wrote that two idols served by Jews at the time were Nationalism (Zionism) and Socialism. In heaven, an unholy merger of the two (Nazism, of course) was sent to chastise for those beliefs.
Even in Mitzrayim, it was only when the Jews there tried to “assimilate” (liSheim Shamayim, to avoid the galus that they knew was coming) that Hashem caused the Melech Chadash to rise and the “good life” to switch to hate and enslavement. See the Medrash and Beis HaLeivi there.
Why not take the Torah’s viewpoint over the Zionist lies?August 5, 2013 11:58 pm at 11:58 pm #970472
rebdoniel, there is nothing wrong with quoting Rav Hirsch as a raaya against Zionism or for any other reason, even if TIDE is a different valid derech. So what?August 6, 2013 2:45 am at 2:45 am #970473
HaKatan: Why must I follow the path of one particular Possek? Or can I follow a different Possek? Why are the words of R’Elchonon Wasserman zz’l (even if he said it) more authoritative that Rav Kook ? Or Rav Teichtal zz’l ,for that matter? You are entitled to follow your Poskim and I am certainly allowed to follow my Poskim, especially as this a not a halachic matter.August 6, 2013 3:31 am at 3:31 am #970474rebdonielMember
Hirschian anti-Zionism isn’t the same as Haredi anti-Zionism, because Haredim reject universalism. They don’t care about the Fatherland or its inhabitants. They care about themselves. That’s not Hirsch’s derech at all. Rav Hirsch saw Jewish nationalism as an obstacle to the type of unity he sought with all people.
And there have been TIDE Zionists, such as Poalei Agudat Yisrael, which was under the leadership of Rabbi Isaac Breuer, and was also part of the Histadrut, Israel’s socialist trade union umbrella. An analysis shows that this TIDE-oriented party had little problem with neither Zionism nor socialism.August 6, 2013 7:02 am at 7:02 am #970475
rebd- its rav hirsch to you.August 6, 2013 8:41 am at 8:41 am #970476
hakatan- i happen to hold like you. but you argue like a blithering idiot.
rebd- its a little dumb to argue a man’s shittos based on organizations and scenarios that usurp his name many years later. shall we conclude that JB would be maskim to all the current evils of modern orthodoxy?August 6, 2013 11:02 pm at 11:02 pm #970477
Please, by all means, argue better than I did so I don’t have to demean myself by arguing in that fashion. I would much prefer a talmid chacham set the record straight rather than my own paltry posts.
ROB, it certainly is an halachic matter, as you continue to refuse to believe.
As I wrote earlier, Rav Aharon Lichtenstein wrote that “One can view nineteenth-century European Nationalism as an appropriate matrix for Rav Kook’s thought, and there is no dearth of analogues to Hegel, Bergson and others in his writings”.
As well, gedolim said Rav Kook was misguided and some went so far as to decry him in addition to his works, while others forbade learning from at least some of his seforim.
It is said that a famous talmid of Rav Kook’s and a R”Y in his own right, publicly took down the picture of his Rebbi, Rav Kook.
So you can either get your hashkafos and halachos from the Torah world, or you can choose to get yours from “nineteenth-century European Nationalism” by a great Rav who, unfortunately, was misguided or worse according to the gedolim.
But a Rabbi of Berlin surely knows better than everyone else. It’s quite obvious what you choose, of course.August 7, 2013 3:09 am at 3:09 am #970478
“RSR Hirsch repeatedly stressed our “light unto the Gentile” mission in exile and did not smile on those who would disavow the mission by jumping the Mashiach’s gun.”
What about light unto the non frum yidden? If E”Y is really such a bastion of secularism, why don’t we all make aliyah and set a good example?August 7, 2013 3:17 am at 3:17 am #970479
HaKatan; yup ,it is quite obvious what I choose!August 7, 2013 2:26 pm at 2:26 pm #970480
In part, because you can’t sacrifice your own service of G-d to do so. Being shmaded in Israel in not an acceptable down-side to being “a light unto” the non-religious there.August 7, 2013 9:41 pm at 9:41 pm #970481
HaKatan, I think the Gemara would disagree with you there. It is better to live in E”Y even among idol worshipers (and you yourself described Zionists as idol worshipers) than to live outside of E”Y among frum yidden.August 8, 2013 2:43 pm at 2:43 pm #970482
“Living among idol worshippers” does not mean shmaded by them.
The Zionists do try to make yishuv haAretz more important than living as a Jew.
Do you really think G-d allows you to live as an idol worshipper just so you live in E”Y?
And, if you really think so, why does the Torah say “ki es mizbichosam tototzu”, to destroy their idolatry, etc. lest the land kick you out?August 9, 2013 2:22 pm at 2:22 pm #970483truthsharerMember
Has the land kicked them out? Or has the land turned into an oasis?August 11, 2013 3:20 am at 3:20 am #970484
What does the “oasis” have to do with Zionism? Sedom and Amorah were “kiGan Hashem”, back in the day. Do you condone their deeds, too?
Eventually, Hashem did destroy those cities, incidentally. But do you know Hashem’s plans that He plans on never kicking out the Zionists? Are you also not aware that Hashem is “erech apayim”?
Besides, are you not grateful that Hashem has rachmanus on His people in Eretz Yisrael, regardless of merit level?August 12, 2013 8:36 pm at 8:36 pm #970485
‘Living among idol worshippers’ does not mean shmaded by them.”
In that case, please explain what “shmaded by them” means. Preferably without use of the word “shmad” or any of its forms.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.