- This topic has 36 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 5 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I am not an expert in Nach, in fact there are many parts I have never learnt, so I don’t really know the attitude the Tanach takes towards Malchus Yisro’el. Out of curiosity, is there a difference between the way we relate to Malchus Beis Yisro’el and the Zionist government? Both began in a rebellious and non-halachik way, both were/are run not according to the guidelines of halachah, and both had resha’im (or at least non-religious tinokos shenishbu) leading the government (whether it was a king or prime minister) (I am not talking about Malchus Yehudah because one can argue that even though there were times they did have resha’im as kings, at least it began with tzadikim, and it is the way the Torah tells us to run E”Y). Did Nach recognize Malchus Yisro’el in a way that’s different from the way we are supposed to (or not supposed to) recognize Zionism? Why should Malchus Yisro’el be any different than the State of Israel?
Malchus Yisroel actually was divinely given to Yerovom. Hashem came to him and told him that Hashem would split the nation in 2 with Malchus Bais Dovid keeping Yehuda and Binyomin and Yerovom receiving the other 10. Yerovom at that point was a tzadik. In fact there’s a medrash that says that Hashem said to Yerovom, let’s go for a walk, you, me and ben yishai, meaning Dovid. Yerovom asked who’s walking up front and Hashem answered, Dovid and Yerovom said no I am not interested. He felt greater than Dovid which wasn’t true and led to his downfall. When Yerovom was successfull in becoming the new king of Malchus Yisroel, he realized that all of his kingdom would be going to the Bais Hamikdosh which was in Yehuda-Binyomin. And since the halocho is that ein yeshiva babayis chutz mi’malchei yehuda, that the kings of yehuda could sit but that he couldn’t sit, he was afraid that his people would return to Malchus Bais Dovid. So he then made his own religion, obviously against Hashem and thus became a rosho.
Great question,
I would recomend you learn the holy sefer V’yoel Moshe, written by the holy Satmar Rov Ztl.
you will find all you need to answer this question.
Simcha613: I’m not well versed in Na”ch either, so I can’t say if the Kingdom of Malchus Yisroel was sanctioned by Hashem or not. However, definitely later during Bais Sheini in the times of the King Hurdus, Chaz”al were in alliance with the King and prayed for his welfare, even though his rule was not sanctioned by Hashem; as stated in the Gemara with the story of Buva Ben Buta who refused to curse the king even after he had killed many sages (a far cry from the democratic state of Israel!), and then the Chachamim advised him to rebuild the Bais Hamikdash.
Also during the times of Bar Kochba’s revolt, although the majority of the army and Bar Kochba himself were not religious, still the sages aligned themselves with them and prayed for their success, as mentioned in the Gemara about Rabbi Akiva and in the Midrash about Rabbi Eliezer Ben ? who actually was together with Bar Kochba during the siege, and prayed each day for the survival of the army and the Jews.
Excellent question! What theprof1 said is true. On the other hand, we find that malchus of Ahav was started improperly(his father usurped the throne), and Ahav was a rasha, and Eliyahu spoke sharply to him. However on a different occasion, Eliyahu displayed kovod ha’malchus towards Ahav(end of Zevochim). Ahav is also praised for his heroism in the battlefield on behalf of Klal Yisroel(end of Moed Koton).
As far as the Satmar Rebbe’s seforim go, he held that Zionism is a pirtsa and he is allowed to say not-emese pshatim to fight it.
mdd, your insinuation about the Divrei Yoel, aside from being sheker, is outrageous against a godol yesod haolam.
The Satmar Rebbe held it was mutar and even a mitsva.
mdd
Did you ever even peruse the Satmar Rov’s seforim to write such a chutzpadige statement?
every single aspect of the Satmar Rov’s pshatim (as you call it) is based on rock solid proofs & quotes from the entire length and breadth of the Torah, starting from T’nach all the way down to the holy Chofetz Chaim.
why is it that after 50 years since the V’yoel Moshe was published NO ONE refuted it? I understand that on certain points or proofs you can argue or even refute, I mean to say that the essence of his holy Shita which is laid out brilliantly was never refuted.
come on be a man and show us 1 not emese pshat…
I should note that even Gil Student, a fierce zionist who publishes many stuff supporting it, wrote the following:
“The Satmar Rav’s treatment of this subject is lengthy, erudite and simply brilliant. One can only be amazed by the breadth and depth of his thinking.”
Really? Malchu Yisroel was approved by Hashem? I always thought it was created as a punishment to Malchus Yehuda for not following Dovid HaMelech’s ways…
mdd:
“As far as the Satmar Rebbe’s seforim go, he held that Zionism is a pirtsa and he is allowed to say not-emese pshatim to fight it… The Satmar Rebbe held it was mutar and even a mitsva.”
Do you have a source to back up this incredibly bold claim?
mdd that is bizayon talmidei chachamim mamesh, shem reshoim yirkov!
Anyways, the Rambam paskens that it is a mitzvah deoraysa for us to have a king as the verse says, “Som tasim alecha melech” but the problem was that we wanted a king just to fit in with the other goyim, so Shmuel Hanavi was to appoint Shaul, who was a benjaminite not from Yehuda, because it wasn’t asked for properly. Then Shaul lost the throne, and Malchus was made proper to Dovid Hamelech. Zionism does not classify as monarchy, sorry. I am not chassidish, btw, but a modernish litvak w/ bren. BUt anyways, it is not halachically or loshen bnei odom monarchy.
MoGold: With all due respect to the heiliga Satmar Rav Zt”l; we must take into perspective what was going on 50 years ago in the times of the Rav zt”l. The secular Zionists were then trying their utmost to uproot the practice of Yiddishkeit in the state, since they didn’t want the chareidim to become a conflict to the interests of the state. Since the religious life of the Chareidim was B’sakana, the Satmar rav and other Gedolim saw it their duty to fight the secular Zionists using all their means. Many things the Satmar Rav Zt”l may have then said or done were in the category of “Sinah mekalkeles es hashura”, given the atmosphere of distrust and caution that existed between the chareidim and the secular establishment.
However, now 60 years later, the Israeli government has come to a realization that the Charidi population and way of life are here to stay permanently. Therefore, we cannot compare times, and what is needed now is to strike a conciliatory note, and accept our irreligious brethren in Israel for what they are, and be appreciative of their contribution to the physical aspect of Chareidi life in Israel.
rabbiof berlin dude, how dare u speak chutzpah of the Satmar Rebbe? I see in Berlin they’re not caught up with American or Israeli Gedolei Yisroel because I have been meshamesh many of them and their talmidim and they have quoted many vayoel moshes and knew it. And so what if you learned it? Many krum ppl read gemora and even goyim! I hold bizayon talmidei chachamim should be moniterd by ywn!!!
We try.
Mogold, at your service. Yes, I did peruse his writings. As fa as NO ONE refuted them goes, did you notice that all the other Gedolim did not hold like that?
As far as examples go, he wrote that Chazal held that it is better to cause the death of hundred of thousands of frume Yidden but not to have even a frum medina before bias ha’Goel. His proof for that is a gemora in Sanhedrin, which says that when Chachomim saw that Bar Kochba was a false Messia, they killed him. And that’s why the Naturei Karta went to Iran to mechazek Achmenajad. Obviously, it is not a raya to justify such a p’sak, and the Satmar Rebbe must have khown it himself.
LmKA, Bar Kochba and his soldiers were frum.
Other gedolim i’ve been zocheh to meshamesh didn’t hold like him, but they still held his sefer was a kosher and emes view, it was shitas Beis Shamai. some gedolim held to a certain degree of some stuff he said. But to say it’s not emes is rishus and bizayon!
Thank you, mod.
Btw mdd, your facts are all wrong. Reb Amram Bla zt”l was a big tzadik, starter of NetureiKarta. And no, I do not have his hashkafos. But the Chazon Ish and the BRisker Rov, who argued with him, wer machshiv him very much and were very metztae’r when he was jailed. Anyways, he did not support violence, just protests. There were a couple of meshugaim (the jewish world is also allowed to have meshugayim, no? we’re only human?) who met with the talis-maker ahmadinejad and do all kind of crazy things like throw stones and burn garbage cans. It is not supported by any gadol biyisroel including Neturei Karta. And ps I was disgusted by the person who desecrated the holocaust memorial and the yucky stuff they said that they were happy about the holocaust that was not Rabbi Blau’s hashkafa at all. So you can stop blaming the klal because of this (admittingly rather large but not more than 7 or 8%) percentage of meshugayim.
Tam, since some people quote the Rebbe so strongly, we have TO KNOW THE EMES.
Reb Blau never went to Iran, but the guys who did consider themselves talmidim of the Satmar Rebbe. And what I quoted from him seems to support them. Tam, face up to the facts.
mdd, according to you we cant hold of MOIshe Rabbeinu because the Christians also believe in him! Eizeh shtuyot! just because some radicals fanatics twisted rabbi blau and the satmar rebbe tzadikim vgeoiney oilam, doesn’t mean we don’t hold of them! Otherwise dump gantz Tanach since christians!
Guys you can all argue about satmar all day. fact is that malchus yisroel was not only sanctioned by Hashem but told Yerovom specifically by a navi that he would be the new king. why don’t you all just open a tanach. In Malochim Alef perek yud alef posuk yud Hashem tells Shlomo that he’s tearing away malchus yisroel from him and leaving only 1 shevet, yehuda. And in posuk lamed alef the novi achya tears yerovoms cloak into 12 pieces and gives him 10 pieces and says,Hashem Elokiei Yisroel is tearing the kingdom from shlomo and giving it to you. I think that the tanach is quite clear about this and that’s exactly what i said. Malchus Bais Yisroel was made by Hashem. Yerovom corrupted it after that.
To those who argue that the satmar rebbe was holy. he was a lot holier than all of you think he was. he was a malach hashem mamish. but still he wasn’t any holier than doeg ho’adomi who was av beis din of sanhedrin for Shaul Ha melech and yet cursed Dovid and Dovid said on him in tehilim b’dor acher yimach shemom. When he put his nose into politics and called it religion it wasn’t good. The Satmar Rebbe ztzl had an issue with medinas yisroel and being brilliant was able to write very well about it. The gedolim who didn’t agree with him didn’t refute it because they weren’t interested in an argument.
the prof 1 what shtusim you say! Who do you think gedolim are, political figures that avoid arguing? Stop being mevazeh talmidei chachomim! Doeg was a rasha had no chelek in olam habo. He did many aveiros. was not holy but very tamei. and learning torah just made him more tamei! He corrupted it. BUt the Satmar Rebbe was very holy, manhig hador, other gedolim loved him!!
I never said I did not hold of the Rebbe or Reb Blau. And the Rebbe did be’emes hold that creating the state was against the Torah. I was just talking about some of the supportive arguments he makes in his seforim.
mdd, i see where youre coming from, not mamesh krum like prof or berly but you should be careful when making statements about gedoilim. hatzlocho and please just be careful mevazeh talmid chacham ei lo chelek. And even if s/o makes a light comment the gemora says one can lose his c in ohb. But i see where youre coming from. consider it like shitas beis shammai.
Theprof1: I wouldn’t either dare compare the Satmar rav zechuso yugain aleinu, to l’havdil Doeg Hadomi Harasha. The Rav was an “ish kodosh” who reestablished yiddishkeit amongst Hungarian Jewry in America. I just think that since in the Rav’s time there was real spiritual danger to Chareidi Jewry, therefore the Rav had to go to extremes, and his kanaus’dika shiddos were a natural outcome of the war he needed to wage against the Zionists in order to preserve Yiddishkeit. Anyways, yosher koach to Tam mahu omer for his unshakable emunas chachamim.
The only thing some of the other gedolim may have not agreed with the Satmar Rebbe was how to treat the zionist state ex post facto once it existed. i.e. the Satmar Rebbe instructed people not to vote in Israeli elections, not take a penny from the zionist government (he put his money where his mouth was!), etc. Some other gedolim felt even though the Zionist State is evil, they needed to do what was best for Chareidim under the circumstances i.e. vote and accept funding (since they were forced to pay taxes.)
Shavua Tov. ROB, the Eim Habanim Smecha was abused in the Tefilah for Tzahal thread, with nary a whisper of protest. As the Mod above says, WE TRY, not WE DO.
twisted: Are you so afraid of the truth that a factual refutation of Eim Habanim gets you all upended? You had a chance to protest with a response indicating what you felt was mistaken. The fact that you and others did not, clearly indicated you have no response to the factual assertions, other than crying not nice.
(Thank you mods for removing the drivel a second time, by the same poster, from this thread.)
theprof1: I’m sorry, did you just compare the Satmar Rebbe to Doeg HaAdomai? The one who doesn’t have a share in olam haba?
rabbiofberlin:
“great advert for freedom of thought and press !”
Umm… Seeing as this is a privately owned website, I can’t imagine there are any legal issues in censoring comments. Unless your referring to freedom of speech/press as an ideal, not a legal issue, in which case my response is that in Judaism, there is no such ideal… Judaism is not based upon individual freedom (as western society is) but on individual and community responsibilities.
We are a nation of shared national experiences starting with the Exodus, not based upon a single prophet or philosopher. I am sure that shortly after the Exodus and the Giving of the Torah someone could have written a brilliant work showing how everything that happened was the work of the “Dark Side”.
Ok, JOsh, I challenge you to the task!
are you smoking something stale, myfreind? Upended? lost chance? clearly indicated? drivel? You seem to read a lot into plain Q&A. Were you the class bully as a child?
Twisted, My Friend: Why must Yidden fight with each other? This is the last thing what Hashem wants.
I think the Baal Eim Habanim Simacha was a very sincere/emesdika person; it was out of his genuine love for Erez Yisroel [and also his true love for other Yidden to give them new hope after the Holocaust], which might have caused him to err somewhat when searching for leniencies in halacha to allow Yidden to establish a state. Like it says in Pirkei Avos “Ahava Mekalkeles Hashura”.
Likewise, the Satmar Rav Zt”l, out of his real/deep concern to reestabish authentic Yiddishkeit after the War, he might have gone to extremes, (like with his verbal attacks on the State well after its establishment, such as stating that the victory of the six day war was the act of the “Sitra Achra”!) I think if the Rav Zt”l would see today how the Chareidim have reestablished themselves so successfully and securely in Israel; he would probably feel that now the time might be ripe to strike a conciliatory note to the secular establishment in Israel, that we are accepting of them (since dissolving the State is not an option anymore)and we are willing to live together in harmony.
I would also not be surprised if the Satmar Rav Zt”l and the Baal Eim Habanim Simacha are presently studying together Torah (hilchos EY) in Shamayim! Like the Gemara says “Es Vahav Bisofa”.
Anyone who wants to open their eyes and is unafraid of the unencumbered truth on this issue, should start by learning Vayoel Moshe.
Helpful, see my my comments above.
“the Rambam paskens that it is a mitzvah deoraysa for us to have a king”
And as you certainly know, other rishonim argued strongly against that Rambam, in particular Abarbanel who had horrible things to say about monarchies.
“some of the other gedolim may have not agreed with the Satmar Rebbe was how to treat the zionist state ex post facto once it existed”
And some of the other gedolim were actually religious Zionists themselves! Read for example Rov Soloveitchik’s Kol Dodi Dofeik.
“I can’t imagine there are any legal issues in censoring comments”
Correct! If I don’t like the site’s policies I am perfectly free to start a competing site.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.