August 5, 2010 2:00 pm at 2:00 pm #592097yosrMember
In “Part 1” I have included my first email to “Rabbi” Kraus of Neturei Karat and his response. There were 3 such back and forth. I shall post one series a day.
Letter 1: Me
Dear Rabbanim of Neturei Karta,
I come not to create conflict, but to rather create dialog. Our Rabbis teach us that conflict in Torah must be in way of peace. As a person who served in the Nachal Charedi battalion of the Israeli Defense Force, and who tries to lead an G-d fearing life, I cannot understand the strong condemnation from you camp.
I respectfully request that you address the points in my following letter so that I may come to better understand your position and opposition towards my service for the Jewish Nation in the Holy Land. I feel that even if you should disagree and refute every word I write, I did take the time to write to you so I humbly request an answer.
Ret. Sergeant Yosef Rabin
Netzach Yehuda – Nachal Charedi, 97th Fighting Battalion
The philosophy of Neturei Karta seems to be based on two main points. The first point is a passage from Gemara Kesubot,111a, God made the Jews take two oaths and the world take one. To the Jews “Not to ascend to the Holy Land as a group using force, not to rebel against the governments of countries in which we live,” and “Not to push the end away with our sins “, see Rashi for the last one. ForNeturei Karta this means that the State of Israel is a sin, we came back in force and rebelled against the nations.
This is easily answered; there was no rebellion against the nations. We were granted permission by Britain, League of Nations and the United Nations to recreate our homeland in the Land of Israel. Second the first two oaths might be contingent on the third, if the non-Jews treat us harshly, which they did, then we can rebel and go up to the land. Third even if the oaths are not connected, we saw clear signs of redemption, which nullified the oaths themselves. This is similar to the Halacha where one swears not to enter his house. If the walls of his house collapse, he is freed from his oath and may step on the remains of the house.
The second point is that redemption can not come about through non-believers, furthermore Netueri Karta believes that man can not play a role in bringing the Redemption and must completely rely on the Almighty to do all the work.
I will now come to show that we indeed did see the signs of Redemption and that we were certainly justified in taking an active role in the process of Redemption. Furthermore I intend to show that God cherished the Secular Jews who restored His land and why we should continue to respect the State of Israel even though it does not always go in the path of the Torah.
There is a Halacha that we only follow the majority opinion when it is coupled with clear reasoning; furthermore Tosfot in Yevamot explains that we follow the minority if the minority is sharper in Torah than the majority.
I would like to begin by discussing what constitutes the beginning of redemption. I would like to bring several gemara’s which expound on this very issue.
The first Gemara I would like to mention is a Gemara in Sanhedrin 98: a “Rabbi Abba said, ‘There is no greater sign of redemption than this, as it is written in Yechezkel, ‘You O mountains of Israel will give forth your branches and give forth your fruit for My People Israel will soon return’. ” (Yechezkel 36) One could argue that this Gemara is of an Aggadic nature and therefore cannot be used as a proof, but there are two other gemarot that bring this gemara into the realm of Halacha.
In Gemara Migilah 17: b, “Why do we recite the blessing of the re-gathering of the exiles after the blessing of the year, because it is written in Yechezkel, ‘You O mountains of Israel will give forth your branches and give forth your fruit for My People Israel will soon return ” (Yechezkel 36) This exact Gemara is also repeated in Gemara – Brachot Yerushalmi, I do not remember the exact page, but I remember that it is in the first perek. The copy that I saw was on my old army base in the Jordan valley, which I no longer have access to. The Tur and the Beit Yosef accept these gemara’s as halacha, see Orach Chaim 115-121.
It is clear that, not only do chazal agree that redemption will begin with the restoration of the Land, but they enshrined this concept by incorporating it into the Shmona Esrai, the Eighteen Benedictions. This could also be the reason why chazal used the phrase towards the end the of the second blessing “Makes salvation sprout”. The first sign of the redemption will be with the sprouting of the Land. So now that we understand how the redemption will begin, we must make the connection to the State of Israel.
It is clear that Hashem has kept his promise, up until the Jewish People decided to return to the Land of their forefather’s, the Land did not grow. It is interesting that he wrote this in 1867, just a few short years before the Children of Israel although mainly secular returned. Even though they were secular, did not keep Shabbat or Kashrut, the Land accepted them and she grew accordingly. The Land allowed them to drain her swamps, grow her fields, raise cattle and build beautiful towns and cities. This was all barely 30 years after Twain visited.
This is very much reminiscent of the day of Ezra and Nechemya, the vast majority who returned with them were not only unobservant, but immoral as well, as it says in Kiddushin 69-70, they were bastards, foundlings and committed sexual misconducts like the people of Sodom and Amora. And yet they were the tools, which Hashem used to bring about that Geulah. Certainly, the secular Jews who started returning in the late 1800s, and who remained the main builders of the land until the State was re-declared in 1948, could not have been much worse.
To better understand that the Mashiach does not need to come about through the most pleasant means we must look at the father of Mashiach, David Hamelech – King David. When we look at Davids ancestry one becomes quickly disturbed. On his fathers side came about through the illicit relations between Yehuda and Tamar. Does not sound like the proper Yichus for the Mashiach! Even though this was an abomination Chazal tell us, “Hashem was busy creating the light of the King Mashiach.” (Bareshit Rabba 85:1)
Now going from bad to worse, we look at Davids mother side. Davids grandmother Ruth came from the Nation of Moav. Number one it was the nation of Moav that seduced the men of Israel to sin in the Midbar bringing a great plague upon them. Second, Moav’s founding father was an illegitimate of the worst sort; he was from the illicit relations between Lot and his Daughter Habichira. Habachira called her son Moav, which means, from my father, she was not even embarrassed that she had relations with her father.
But even if one admits that Hashem began our Geulah through the secular Zionist can we continue to recognize the importance of such a state?
I would like to talk about Omri the King of Israel was more evil than any other king before him, read Malachim 16:25, but yet, he merited his kingship to last 3 generations.
Why? R Yochanan said, “Why did Omri deserve Kingship? He added one city to the Land of Israel. ” (Sanhdrin 102b)
Chazal tell us that he added that city to undermine the people loyalty to Jerusalem, and even so he merited 3 generations.
Omri’s successor, his son Achav was even worse than his father, he allowed his wife to murder all the Torah Scholars, but Hashem still allowed Achav to win wars for His people. Why because Achav and his generation was careful not to speak gossip and Achav fought with all his might for the Jewish People. Achav successor Yehoram, was also just as evil, but he shared the suffering of the Jewish People when Hashem punished them with a drought, by sitting in sackcloth.
We see that Hashem allowed these men to rule because of their love for the Jewish People and the Land of Israel.
Also Yeravam the son of Yoash was given great help by Hashem, even though it says, “He did evil in the eyes of Hashem.” Why? “He restored the boarder of Israel from Milvo Chamas until the sea of Arava like the word of Hashem, as he spoke unto the prophet Yona the son of Amitai.” (Malachim2: 14: 24-26)
The problems in the State of Israel cannot be compared to the evils perpetrated by the Kings of Israel. After all the State gives incredible amount of money to Yeshivot, builds mikvot and shuls for every community even ones that are dominantly secular, all marriages, divorces and funerals are conducted by the Orthodox State Rabbinate, Shabbat and Chagim are the official holidays of the State, No buses may run from an hour before Shabbat and Chagim until after the holy days, The Army and all official state institutions must keep Kosher by law, all places of public entertainment must be closed until half day on TishaBav.
Can you honestly tell me that I should give fewer honors to this State, than Eliyahu Hanavi gave to King Achav when he ran before his chariot after the incident at Mount Carmel. (Kings 1, 18:46) Chazal say, Achav took all the Torah Scrolls in the Land of Israel and erased the name of Hashem replacing it with the names of all the idols. But yet he was the King of Israel and thus the honor of the People of Israel was upon him.
One may ask that if Hashem has started the redemption than why all the suffering? Why is Lebanon and Gaza bombing us? Why can’t we fight back properly? Why is there still so much suffering? Isn’t the redemption supposed to stop this?
I saw a beautiful idea.
In Gemara Sanhedrin 98:b, Three scholars, Ullah, Rabbah and R. Yochanan prayed, “Let him come, but let me not see him “, they were afraid of the birth pangs of Mashiach and therefore did not want to be there. Only Rav Yosef disagreed and said, “Let him come and may I be privileged to sit in his donkeys feces”. Rav Kook tzl, gives a beautiful explanation, Ullah, Rabbah and R. Yochanan, its not they did not want to see Mashiach, but they would not be able to handle the spiritual downfall immediately before his coming, as it says in Gemara Sota 49:b, ” Youngsters will insult their elders, the kingdom will turn heretical”. According to Rav Kook, they did not say “let me not be there”, but rather, I do not want to see it, I will not be able to handle to great spiritual decline that will occur before Mashiachs arrival. Rav Kook says that Rav Yosef was different. Even if the time before redemption would smell like feces, he still wanted it. Rav Kook adds, the donkey is the only unclean animal that its first born is holy. That is why Rav Yosef used the Donkey, just like the impure donkey brings out something holy so too the geulah can come about from something non-holy, like the secular Zionists.
Ret. Sergeant Yosef Rabin,
Netzach Yehuda – Nachal Charedi, 97th Fighting Battalion
Letter 1: From Rabbi Kraus
Thank you for your well-written lengthy letter. We are encouraged to see that you are open-minded and interested in serious dialog.
YOU WROTE: We were granted permission by Britain, League of Nations and the United Nations to recreate our homeland in the Land of Israel.
The nations in the U.N. who voted in favor of a Jewish state did not include the nations ruling over the land, i.e. the Arabs who lived there and the British who ruled it until then (the British abstained in the vote and did nothing to help carry out the U.N. resolution). In the end, the Zionists did have to fight for their land, first against the local Arabs (Palestinians) and then against the surrounding nations. That is definitely “with a strong hand” and a rebellion against the nations. The fact that they had a recommendation to do so from other nations around the world who were not involved in the conflict means nothing halachically speaking. And the 1948 war was not a fight to defend a piece of land; it was a fight to get a piece of land.
Imagine that all the countries in the UN except America voted to give the Jews the state of New York for a country of their own. And the Jews held a meeting and declared independence in the state of New York. And then the U.S. army came to fight them. Would it then be self-defense to fight back against the U.S. army?
Furthermore, not everyone agrees that going up “as a wall” means by military means. The Avnei Nezer is the only one who says that. Others (Yefeh Kol, Ahavas Yonasan) understand it as any mass immigration.
Also, do not forget about the other oath, which prohibits forcing the end. Founding a state before the coming of moshiach certainly falls under that category. Even the Avnei Nezer only says that the oath against “going up as a wall” becomes permitted when the nations give it to us, which would mean that mass immigration is permitted according to him, but not founding a state.
Furthermore, the borders of the Jewish state proposed by the UN are a far cry from the borders actually conquered by the Zionists. The U.N.’s Jewish state was made up of a thin strip along the coast, the Negev desert, and a strip in the northeast. These three pieces are barely connected. And all of Jerusalem and its environs were to be deep within the Arab state.
YOU WROTE: Second the first two oaths might be contingent on the third, if the non-Jews treat us harshly, which they did, then we can rebel and go up to the land.
This is the well-known Zionist argument of the supposed interdependence of the oaths of the Jews and the nations. Let’s go back to the source of this concept.
For behold, you will conceive and bear a son, and a razor shall not go up on his head, for the child will be a nazirite of G-d from the womb, and he will begin to save Israel from the Philistines. (Shoftim 13:5)
One need not look far to see the fallacy of this argument. Avraham and Avimelech swore not to harm one another, so when one harmed the other the covenant was broken. But why does one nation harming the Jews in exile give the Jews the right to take Eretz Yisroel away from a different nation that occupies the land? Why should one nation suffer for the violation of another nation?
YOU WROTE: Third even if the oaths are not connected, we saw clear signs of redemption, which nullified the oaths themselves.
I am not a prophet and I have no clear answer to this, but I will give you a few quotations that I have come across, written by individuals who lived long before the time of Zionism, implying that such a thing could, or would, happen (and some of the quotations attempt to explain the meaning of it).
Rabbi Shimon said: “And it came to pass at the end of days [Kayin brought from the fruit of the ground an offering to Hashem]” (Bereishis 4:3). What is “mikeitz yamim”? This is the end of all flesh. And who is this? The angel of death. And Kayin brought his offering from that “keitz yamim”. There is a hint to this in the words, for it says, “mikeitz yamim” and not “mikeitz yamin”. And therefore it says regarding Daniel (Daniel 12:13): “And you, go to the End, and stand by your portion.” He said to him: To the keitz hayamim or to the keitz hayamin? He said to him: To the keitz hayamin. But Kayin brought from the keitz hayamim.
The Zohar seems to say that there are two Ends, one from the right, clean side and one from the unclean side. Daniel asked the angel which one he should go to, and the angel replied, to the one on the right.
2. The next quotation is from the Emes Leyaakov, a commentary on the Agados of the Talmud written by Rabbi Yaakov of Lissa (1770-1832), on Bava Basra 73b:
Rabbah bar bar Chanah said: One time we were traveling on a boat, and we saw a fish on whose back sand had settled, and a swamp of reeds had grown up on it. We thought it was dry land, so we went up and baked and cooked on it. And when its back got hot, it turned over, and if the boat had not been nearby, we would have drowned.
The Emes Leyaakov explains this as an allegory:
3. The Rambam at the end of Iggeres Teiman (in which he teaches the Jews of Yemen not to follow a certain false messiah) writes:
Actually, the entire existence of the sugya of the Three Oaths implies that there was a real possibility that such a forcing of the End would occur. I only quoted the Rambam because he spells it out more clearly.
4. Now, the story of Reb Shmelka of Selish:
Reb Shmelka of Selish was once traveling with his student Reb Moshe Jungreis. The town of Selish was at the base of the Carpathian Mountains, and they passed through a certain forest. Usually Reb Shmelka was careful never to whip his horses, because he held this to be a violation of the prohibition on causing pain to an animal. On the uphill sections of road, he would get off the wagon and walk to make it easier for the horses. But as they passed through this forest, he told the wagon driver to whip the horses and make them go as fast as possible, until they were out of the forest. Then he began breathing deeply and heavily. “Why is the Rebbe so out of breath?” asked Reb Moshe. “Don’t you know what was in that place we just passed?” said Reb Shmelka. “No,” replied the student, “I saw nothing more than mountains and hills.” Reb Shmelka then told him: “You must know that the forest through which we just passed was full of souls of the zealots from the time of the destruction of the Second Temple, who refused to listen to the Sages who told them to surrender to the Romans. They fought until the bitter end, thus causing the destruction of the Temple and the exile of Israel. To this very day, their souls have not been repaired. Therefore I told the wagon driver to drive fast, because it was a place of impurity and I could not stand the air there.
“And I heard the souls begging the Holy One, blessed is He, to let them come into the world again in order to rectify themselves. The reply was, ‘I know that you will not do any better the second time, but since everyone is given free will, I am giving you the opportunity.’ Reb Moshe, you must know that in forty years from now, they will come into the world again. You will be a rav then, and you must act wisely.”
Later Reb Moshe Jungreis became rav of Kasho, and he told his congregation to notify him in advance when any public gathering was to take place. Once a group of Jews came to Kasho to raise money for a fund to buy land in Eretz Yisroel, which was then ruled by the Turks. The leaders of the congregation told them, “We cannot do anything without the rav’s approval.” They told the rav, and he immediately remembered what his rebbe had told him. He checked his records and found that it had been exactly forty years since that day. “No!” he said to the leaders of the congregation. “Heaven forbid to join them! We must keep the Rabbi Meir Baal Haness collection boxes and send our money to the kollelim of Jerusalem.” And with that, he expelled the new group from the city. (Mishkenos Haro’im p. 193)
5. The following story was told by Rabbi Yaakov Teitelbaum, a rav in Kew Gardens Hills, Queens, New York:
Last summer I visited the Skulener Rebbe to invite him to our camp, Camp Agudah. The Rebbe was one of the few who risked their lives to save Jewish souls in Romania, and under the Communist government he would support hundreds of children to save them. In the end, the Communists put him in jail, and since Reb Elimelech Tress had a major role in saving him, we came to invite the Rebbe to come and eulogize Mr. Tress.
When I came to the Skulener Rebbe, he asked me to repeat before him what I had heard in the name of Reb Yisroel of Rizhin (1797-1850) about what will be in the future. I told him that my father told me that he had heard from his grandfather, who heard the following words directly from the Rizhiner: “Before the coming of Moshiach a pillar of fire will come down from heaven, as came down for Eliyahu on Mount Carmel. Jews, know that it will not come down for the true prophets but for the false prophets. And one will have to crawl up smooth walls in order to continue having faith.”
The Rebbe asked me, “Did the Rizhiner say this would be in the Beis Hamikdash?” I replied that I do not know. Probably if he said “fire from heaven” it will be on the altar, just as that of Eliyahu Hanavi was on an altar. Then the Rebbe asked me to repeat the words again.
I asked, “Why are you interested in hearing these words so many times?” He replied that he heard from reliable witnesses that when the Slonimer Rebbe, the author of Divrei Shmuel, was sick, and the sickness was serious, the doctors advised him to travel to Berlin, for there was hope of doing an operation there. The next morning, he decided not to travel, but he dictated a testament for the Jewish people: “Jews, know that unworthy people will travel to Eretz Yisroel before the coming of Moshiach, and will succeed with great victories, and they will build the Beis Hamikdash, and fire will come down from heaven in the Beis Hamikdash, as it happened in the First Temple. Know that this fire will not be from the Side of Holiness, but from the Other Side.”
The Rebbe told me to publicize this testament in his name, and added, “If they ask me about the truth of this testament, I am ready to swear on it with a Torah oath.” (Kol Yaakov, p. 192)
6. Rabbi Tzadok Hakohein of Lublin, Tzidkas Hatzadik 46 (written 1848, first published in 1913):
[of Israel after the sin of the spies] was that they should not get it [Eretz Yisroel] [to Hashem] [In this case, it means]
7. I am including the following story because it mentions a foretelling of the state in the Prophets and Kabbalah (however, I do not know what source the speaker meant). It also explains what the proper attitude to such a prophecy should be:
When the Zionists campaigned in the United Nations for permission to establish their state, the Agudath Israel lay leaders worked alongside them. The Brisker Rav, fearing the great bloodshed the state would bring about, tried to dissuade them from these diplomatic missions. “But,” someone said to the Brisker Rav, “it says in the works of Kabbalah that before the coming of moshiach there will be a government in the hands of the eirev rav.” “I don’t believe that,” said the Brisker Rav. The man persisted, “The words of the prophets, too, contain a hint that the Land will be partitioned and governed by a Jewish government before the coming of moshiach.” The Brisker Rav replied, “The Gemora states explicitly that even when something is foretold by prophecy, it is forbidden to violate the law of the Torah. It says in Berachos 10a that Chizkiyahu foresaw that he would have wicked children, and because of this he refrained from having children. Why? If he saw prophetically that he would have children, it would happen no matter what, so why did he try to avoid it? The answer is, since – according to what Chizkiyahu held – it was forbidden to bring bad children into the world, he was obligated to make all efforts to avoid doing it, despite the knowledge that his efforts would fail and the children would be born anyway. So too here, it is forbidden to found a state, for it will cause bloodshed. Even if the prophets say it will happen anyway, it is forbidden for us to help.”
YOU WROTE: This is very much reminiscent of the day of Ezra and Nechemya, the vast majority who returned with them were not only unobservant, but immoral as well, as it says in Kiddushin 69-70, they were bastards, foundlings and committed sexual misconducts like the people of Sodom and Amora. And yet they were the tools, which Hashem used to bring about that Geulah.
First of all, who says these bastards and foundlings were unobservant or wicked? Their parents committed sins, not they! Their parents did what Sodom and Amorah did, not they! But the Zionists themselves were unbelievers and atheists. In past generations, before Darwinism and Haskalah, it was very rare even for a non-Jew not to believe in a Creator.
Nowadays, however, we have no prophet who can tell us that the Zionist return is the return foretold long ago in the Tanach. In view of the Three Oaths, which prohibit an unauthorized mass return to the Land of Israel, the long-awaited return MUST be sanctioned by prophecy or another unquestionably supernatural event, otherwise how will we know it is the right time and not a violation of the Oaths?
Of course the difference is that Achav was a real legitimate king, whose right to rule was given by Hashem through a prophet. But an illegitimate king deserves no respect, and certainly a government which the Torah says has no right at all to rule.
When the wicked King Herod came to power, he realized that he was descended from slaves, and that the Rabbis interpreted the Torah’s words “from among your brethren” to mean that a slave cannot be king. Fearing their opposition, he killed all the Rabbis, leaving only Bava ben Buta to be his advisor. He put out Bava ben Buta’s eyes, and then went to him, pretending to be someone else, and said, “Look what that wicked slave is doing!” “What should I do about it?” said Bava ben Buta. “Curse him,” said Herod. “One may not curse a king,” said Bava ben Buta. “But he is not a king,” said Herod. “But he is at least a rich man, and one may not curse a rich man. He is at least a leader, and one may not curse a leader in one’s people,” said Bava ben Buta. “That is only if he behaves like a member of one’s people,” said Herod, quoting the words of the Rabbis. “But I am afraid of him,” said Bava ben Buta. (Bava Basra 3b)
Here we see that Bava ben Buta agreed in principle that it would be a good idea to curse King Herod, except that he was afraid of him. But in Melachim I 18:46, it states that Eliyahu the prophet ran in front of the chariot of the wicked King Achav. Rashi says there that he did this not simply out of fear, but because it is the right thing to give honor to royalty.
The difference is that Achav was a real king, appointed by a prophet, whereas Herod was a slave and had no status of royalty at all. A real king must be honored even if he is wicked, but not someone who lacks the status of a king. (The Jerusalem Talmud, Horayos 3:2, states that all the kings of the Ten Tribes up till and including the dynasty of Yehu had the legal status of kings; those afterwards took power by force.) If this was true of Herod, in the time of the Second Temple when the Jewish people had the right to rule their own country, then certainly today when the entire state is forbidden by the Torah and its leaders have no status of leadership at all, there is no reason to give them honor.
YOU WROTE: According to Rav Kook, they did not say “let me not be there”, but rather, I do not want to see it, I will not be able to handle to great spiritual decline that will occur before Mashiachs arrival. Rav Kook says that Rav Yosef was different. Even if the time before redemption would smell like feces, he still wanted it.
Even according to this, it does not show that Zionism is correct. It shows that before the coming of moshiach there will be a kingdom of heresy, it will smell like feces, and yet Rav Yosef wanted to be there to see the coming of moshiach that would follow it. Not that moshiach will come through the efforts of the state, but rather that there will be such a heretical state before the coming of moshiach.
May all Jews repent of the sin of Zionism and be saved from all danger!
Rabbi A KrausAugust 8, 2010 11:21 am at 11:21 am #693670A600KiloBearParticipant
If R’ Krauss is from the Ku Klutz Karta faction which demonstrates with our enemies, as opposed to being one of the few, largely quiet ones who follows Reb Amram and Rav Katzenellenbogen, he is not worth debating with even though his response is 100% correct (if he is from any of the online NK websites then he is from this faction).
Nevertheless, this Rabin is very disingenuous. He served in Nachal Charedi, yet is blurting out R’ Kook as if he was in hesder.
Elu veelu divrei shtus meisim. Save it for Purim.August 8, 2010 3:44 pm at 3:44 pm #693671
600 kilo bear:
I originally decided not to respond to this thread hoping it would fade into obscurity.
I’m suspicious of the opening poster. He neglects the real arguments against these lunatics in favor of debating zionism itself. I almost wonder if his intention is to legitimize the neturei karta.
Let’s all let this thread disappear into the archive. Ignoring these people really is the best course.August 8, 2010 3:56 pm at 3:56 pm #693672yosrMember
To Papa: This is not at all my intention, I maintained a respectful tone throughout the emails because I wanted to keep it going. These people sadly have taken a opinion and have elevated it to the point that they put all of Torah above it. It is essentially Avoda Zarah.
I am not sure why it is a contradiction to serve in Nachal Charedi and maintain Rav Kooks world view, the main thing is to be connected to Am Yisrael and to elevate Medinat Yisrael to be mamlechet vkohanim vgoy kadosh! I feel nachal charedi is a more effective way to accomplish this. Although I might be wrong and we will have to wait and see how things pan out.
yosr – put your entire “series” in this thread, rather than seperate ones.August 8, 2010 5:20 pm at 5:20 pm #693673aries2756Participant
There is no point in discussing logic with people who befriend murderers of Jews. Standing with and approving Palestinians and Lunatic Iranians who deny the holocaust and who’s only purpose is to kill Jews is ludicrous and shows no ahavas Yisroel.
EDITEDAugust 8, 2010 9:46 pm at 9:46 pm #693674
The second someone stands with our sworn enemies and embraces them, he becomes my enemy. Period. I do not care one whit what his reasoning may be, if he is right or wrong, if he has a valid viewpoint or not. Let him present his view in a kosher way, NOT by hugging the people who blow up pregnant schoolteachers who just want to buy a slice of pizza, or a doctor (who might have previously even saved those monsters’ relatives’ lives) and his daughter on the day before her wedding. If you want to find a zechus for such sinas Yisroel on the part of another Yid,(in the guise of kana-us,yet!), find another forum.August 9, 2010 3:16 pm at 3:16 pm #693675
NK website is Neturei Karta. TorahTrueJews (Netruna) is Satmar – very sensible and informative and no connection to NK. Anyway, ??? ?? ???? ??? ??????.August 9, 2010 4:25 pm at 4:25 pm #693676A600KiloBearParticipant
Who did he write to? TorahTrueJews or NK? If TTJ still follows Reb Yoilish ZYA’s derech then they are 100% legit.
The response looks very well thought out and perhaps our hesder Nachal Charedi sergeant baited the wrong man. (Kraus is too common a surname to ring a bell; all I know is that no one of that surname went to Iran.)
The NK website is Ku Klutz Karta and not Neturei Karta. It seems to be run by Yisroel Dovid Weiss. They even translate it into Farsi for their buddies in Iran, or at least they did a few days before Purim which is the only time I bother looking at that site.
The real NK of Rav Katzenellenbogen probably do not go online.
The only sane representation of the three oaths based opposition to tzioinus online is indeed TTJ.August 10, 2010 3:34 am at 3:34 am #693677apushatayidParticipant
Why debate at all? You won’t convince him that you are correct and he won’t convince you that he is correct.August 10, 2010 3:57 am at 3:57 am #693678
By discussing zionism with him, you seem to agree that if zionism and the creation and maintenance of the state is wrong, then the NK are correct.
Even if the state is wrong, there is no excuse for the practices of the NK.August 10, 2010 4:52 pm at 4:52 pm #693679
yosr – As has been said before by popa_bar_abba, don’t just debate him on zionism, debate him on the practices of the Neturei Karta.August 10, 2010 5:24 pm at 5:24 pm #693680
Right. BION, NK is very reasonable and articulate in regard to Zionism, not less than Satmar. It’s their actions legabei the Arabs which need a big tikun. Moshiach’s tzeiten.August 10, 2010 7:40 pm at 7:40 pm #693681
My question which I have raised before on YW is that the Shalosh Shevuos seem to be Agadeta, and therefore not binding in any way. (See Mevo Hatalmud about the status of Agadeta.)
I believe it is Agadeta because the Maharsha brings it in the Chiddushei Agados (small font), not the Chiddushei Halachos (large font).
Furthermore, not a single one of the codifiers brings it down l’halacha. You will not find it in the Rif, Rosh, Ran, Mordechai, Rambam, Tur or Shulchan Oruch.
Therefore, why is it any more binding than the concept of Zugos (not to drink even numbers of cups of diet coke).
Nobody has been able to answer me. If you have an answer, please give it directly, and not refer me to any sefarim which I may not have available.
Many thanks.August 10, 2010 10:32 pm at 10:32 pm #693682
I’m not a T”CH but the Holocaust on the heels of Zionism so clearly demonstates the curse foretold for desecrating these oaths, ???? ???? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ????, that one has to be blind not to realize their severity.August 10, 2010 10:44 pm at 10:44 pm #693683mexipalParticipant
msseeker im not either a T’CH and i dont know if gedolim felt that the holocaust had anything to do with the shvuos but i know that we can’t claim to “read the RBSHO mind” (CHAS VSHALOM kvyachol). there could be many reasons for the holocaust we shouldnt point at something specific and claim this is the one reason. we dont knowAugust 10, 2010 11:33 pm at 11:33 pm #693684
mexipal – The Gedolim CAN tell us what the RBS”O wants and why he did what he did.
PY – I know you said you don’t want to read a sefer, but nevertheless read V’Yoel Moshe. Your questions are addressed and answered in great detail.August 11, 2010 12:19 am at 12:19 am #693685Josh31Participant
This is a subject of great debate, but my own take on the subject is that they were are formula for survival thru most of the long Galus. We would be good citizens and the nations would not oppress us excessively. There was no formal oath as there was only the formal acceptance of the Torah at Sinai. In eastern Europe since the 1800’s the oppression became excessive. All 4 of my grandparents fled Europe which had become a burning house as far as Jews were concerned and came to US & Canada.
There are those who argue that the Shalosh Shevuos are binding upon us even when the nations violate them. If so, they become effectively a suicide pact for us, not a tool of survival.
We are now at year 5770 – 2010 CE and the Jewish State is a Fait Accompli.
The American Jewish community is also an important part of our survival and we are obligated to be good citizens.August 11, 2010 1:36 am at 1:36 am #693686
Maxwell, why don’t you succinctly summarize and share with us.
MSseeker, wouldn’t you think that if Zionism were the cause, it would have affected the Zionists, i.e., in Eretz Yisroel. Yet, EY was spared the Holocaust, while many anti-zionists were murdered. Even all the wars and terrorist attacks together in EY for the last 150 years did not claim as many victims as were lost in many periods and various places of our bitter galus. So let us not play Navi.August 11, 2010 2:10 am at 2:10 am #693687
PY: I would be reluctant because perhaps I would not correctly transmit his holy words. And for that reason I am not interested in a back and forth, when you can read it directly. Nevertheless I’ll briefly say the following, without further comment or follow up:
These three oaths are a prohibition against the Jewish people returning as a group to the land of Israel. While we may return as individuals, mass immigrations, and certainly the erection of a Jewish state, violate the oath.
Furthermore, the poskim cite the oaths as halacha. And secondly, there is no such thing as “just” an aggadic passage. Aggadah informs our religious outlook and cannot be ignored.
But even more significantly, the Maharal of Prague’s explains the oaths in his Netzah Yisrael, ch. 24. as saying that these oaths represent absolute prohibitions that one must sacrifice one’s life before violating. In technical terms, these oaths are yehareg ve’al ya’avor. It is better to be martyred than to violate these oaths.August 11, 2010 2:16 am at 2:16 am #693688
?????? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???? ????
R’ Elchonon Wasserman further addresses your questions in his ?????? ??????.
All: you can research these issues in TorahTrueJews, an excellent website.August 11, 2010 3:27 am at 3:27 am #693689Josh31Participant
I just Googled “TorahTrueJews” and brought up a bunch of web sites that made my blood boil.August 11, 2010 5:09 am at 5:09 am #693690
I just Googled “TorahTrueJews” and brought up a bunch of web sites that made my blood boil.
Sometimes the YWN coffee room makes my blood boil. Like the potching thread.August 11, 2010 2:04 pm at 2:04 pm #693691chasuvayidMember
if the 3 oaths are halacha why are they not mentioned in the mishna torah, tur ,shulchan aruch, chayei adam or any other major poskimAugust 11, 2010 3:02 pm at 3:02 pm #693693
Oh, I understand. I just opened it and the words of “Rabbi” Stephen Wise made my blood boil indeed.
Forget about their protests for now. Read their articles and Q&A with an open mind and then you’ll understand their protests.
BTW The full name is “True Torah Jews Against Zionism”. I hope this is what you got. Sorry I didn’t get it right.August 11, 2010 3:10 pm at 3:10 pm #693694
Sometimes the YWN coffee room makes my blood boil. Like the potching thread.
May I suggest yoga?August 11, 2010 3:33 pm at 3:33 pm #693695
Max well, The Maharal in Netzach Yisroel is not a halachic work. In addition, how could he possibly be paskening yehareg v’al yaavor for something which is not one of the big 3. Obviously he does not mean this halachically.
In addition, the Shalosh Shevuos come from a pasuk in Shir Hashirim, and divrei torah midivrei kabalah lo yalfinan. Any halacha from nach can’t be more than drabanan, at best, even if it was halachic and not aggadic.
Finally, the fact that aggada informs our out look is fine. It means the Shalosh Shevuos are there to teach us hakaras hatov for our host countries and to be good citizens. Yet, I doubt that nice idea applied to the Nazis, yemach shemam. If there was a way to rebel and defeat them, we would have been obligated to fight them tooth and nail. It is all a matter of seichel. When people treated us well, we treat them well. But we have seen plenty of wicked and evil rulers in our history, and in those cases, haba lhargecha hashkem lhorgo applies.
Finally, after the Holocaust, where were the refugees supposed to go? Every country had kicked us out. Do you seriously think G-d is angry that these broken people took the remnants of their torn lives and decided to start over again and rebuild in Israel? It was pikuach nefesh.
I have heard from a gadol (in other circumstances) that one can make an avodah zara out of a mitzvah. It seems to apply here. Everything must be balanced with seichel. To think the RBSH would be happier if Arafat were in charge of Israel, or that Jews must now go back to Poland or Germany where we were treated so royally, is just totally insane. No religious obligation can be insane. If it is insane, it is not the will of the RBSH.August 11, 2010 4:23 pm at 4:23 pm #693696
There is no such thing as Torah True Jews Against Zionism. The entire name is contradictory. There might be TTJ against rebuilding the Medinah (though I personally fail to see that as being a Torah concept), but Zionism, which has come to reflect a political ideology, IS a Torahdig concept – that of yearning for Tzion. When we sing Im Eshkacheich Yerushalayim, or Al Naharos Bavel, we are expressing our Zionism. The NK and their ilk are a disgrace to Klal Yisroel. And I would not feel that way, were they to keep their beliefs to themselves instead of holding Am Yisroel up to public ridicule by embracing our enemies.August 11, 2010 4:33 pm at 4:33 pm #693697
Au contraire. There is no such thing as Torah True Jews for Zionism. Zionism, the political philosophy, is an anti-Torah concept.August 11, 2010 4:36 pm at 4:36 pm #693698says whoMember
OF course I’m not siding with NK, but the name True Jews Against Zionism makes sense to me. The “Zionist movement” IMO doesn’t reflect yearning for tzion, Im Eshkacheich Yerushalyim and Al Naharos Bavel.August 11, 2010 5:02 pm at 5:02 pm #693699
“I have heard from a gadol (in other circumstances) that one can make an avodah zara out of a mitzvah. It seems to apply here.”
Indeed. You probably mean RZ who made an A”Z of the “mitzva” of Zionism.August 11, 2010 5:03 pm at 5:03 pm #693700
During WW2 boats full of Jewish refugees were turned back to Europe. Even not overtly anti semetic goverments (such as the U.S.A. which for some reason so many of us have this great love for) either didnt allow, or only allowed a very limited amount of Jewish people to escape to their control.
Thanks to there being a state of Israel if C”V such an event ever happened again (and unfortunatly if history is any indication its not at all an impossibility) there would now be a country for Jews to flee too that would guarantee us shelter, as well as defend us to the best of its ability.
Just a thought…. I dont think it really proves anything. Do with it what you want.August 11, 2010 5:19 pm at 5:19 pm #693701Baruch-1Participant
There’s a not so famous story of the alter Satmar Rebbe zt”l: he was asked who to vote for in a certain election and he responded by advising to vote for the candidate who is more pro-Israel. The person asking the question was surprised by the response as he thought it to be contrary to his usual anti-Zionist position. The rebbe explained that while he (the rebbe) may not like the medinah, it is because of a reading of the gemara in kesuvos but the candidate who doesn’t like Israel, it is because he’s an anti semite.
A message that many so called “neturei karta” fail to understand. Anyone who could befriend the Palestinians, regardless of any halachic reasoning, should be totally excommunicated from the rest of the frum community. period.August 11, 2010 5:26 pm at 5:26 pm #693702YW Moderator-80Member
very good point BaruchAugust 11, 2010 8:11 pm at 8:11 pm #693703
Again, TTJ is against befriending the Palestinians.August 11, 2010 8:16 pm at 8:16 pm #693704
May I suggest yoga?
For me or for the potching parents?August 11, 2010 8:22 pm at 8:22 pm #693705
Maybe neither. Maybe I meant the parents should force the misbehaving kids to take up yoga as a punishment.August 11, 2010 8:26 pm at 8:26 pm #693706
Yoga is not tznius.
(Because it’s something I’m unfamiliar with.)August 11, 2010 8:37 pm at 8:37 pm #693707mexipalParticipant
max well did gedolim say the holocaust was a result of the gimel shvuosAugust 11, 2010 9:27 pm at 9:27 pm #693708
What you should have said is Yoga is ‘a goy’, backwards.
(And at advanced levels of yoga it is upside-down, bent sideways, and indescribably contorted too)August 11, 2010 11:17 pm at 11:17 pm #693709
Since when did Hashem start telling Gedolim why he does things? Gedolim can tell us what they reccomend we work on. But since when did Hashem start talking to them, and telling them the reasons things happen?
It is called Ruach Hakodesh.August 12, 2010 3:35 am at 3:35 am #693710
Do you have any mekor that says that “Ruach Hakodesh” means that Hashem speaks to them and tells them why he does things?August 12, 2010 4:41 am at 4:41 am #693711
Mexipal, it actually was told to me that something very significant related to the Holocaust, did in fact happen at the start of the three weeks or the nine days (not sure which, but I believe it was 17 Tammuz). Help me out, historians.August 12, 2010 2:44 pm at 2:44 pm #693712
Well, I read recently that July 4, 1776 was shiva asar b’tamuzAugust 12, 2010 2:45 pm at 2:45 pm #693713
Oomis, World War I broke out on Tisha B’av. Although the holocaust happened in WW II, they say that aschuli dpuranus adif. (A phrase which means the beginning of the tragedy is the main day. This is why we observe Tisha B’av on the ninth, and not the tenth. On the ninth at the end of the day, the fire was lit, but the actually destruction occurred on the tenth. This is also why we do not shave or eat meat until noon on the tenth.)
WW1 set the stage for WW2, because the Germans were embarassingly defeated, and forced to disarm and abide by various humiliating sanctions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles. This caused Hitler to steam and stew, and he looked for a scapegoat. He invented the concept that it was not the Germans that lost, but rather that the Jews in Germany had betrayed Germany and stabbed them in the back. It was an internal collapse. WW2 was to get “revenge” on the Jews for this defeat.August 12, 2010 7:40 pm at 7:40 pm #693714
“WW1 set the stage for WW2, because the Germans were embarassingly defeated, and forced to disarm and abide by various humiliating sanctions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles. This caused Hitler to steam and stew, and he looked for a scapegoat. He invented the concept that it was not the Germans that lost, but rather that the Jews in Germany had betrayed Germany and stabbed them in the back. It was an internal collapse. WW2 was to get “revenge” on the Jews for this defeat. “
Thanks Pashuteh, this is what my Rov told us, and I was confused on the date, but you are correct, WWI broke out on 9 Av. THAT is no coincidence. And it certainly is part of the Three Weeks.August 13, 2010 2:55 am at 2:55 am #693715
000646 – “Since when did Hashem start telling Gedolim why he does things? Gedolim can tell us what they reccomend we work on. But since when did Hashem start talking to them, and telling them the reasons things happen?”
The Gedolim are, by definition, the most spiritually developed individuals of their day. Therefore, they have amassed far more knowledge about A) what Hashem wants from us and B) why He wants it than we have. With their superior knowledge of the ratzon Hashem, they can figure out what He wants us to do in any situation.August 13, 2010 3:17 am at 3:17 am #693716
Even with what you said being the case, how could they possibly know why Hashem does things?August 13, 2010 4:01 am at 4:01 am #693717
000646 – Again, besides for the rauch hakodesh aspect, the Gedolim are much more educated in spiritual matters than we are and if they say something we should take their word for it. Lehavdil, when you go to the doctor and the doctor proscribes a certain pill, you question the decision. You know that the doctor has spent years in school being educating about this, and that he is basing his decision on his years of schooling and years of experience. Same with the Gedolim: they know much, much more about ruchniyus than we do, so questioning their decisions is like an patient uneducated in medicine questioning the doctors prescription.August 13, 2010 4:30 am at 4:30 am #693718
MW13, Doctors make horrific mistakes ALL the time (they usually bury them), so I think this analogy is not the best one to use. I would never take a doctor’s word for anything that sounded “wrong” to me. I would check it out, do my hishtadlus, and see what OTHER doctors are saying about the same issue.August 13, 2010 5:41 am at 5:41 am #693720hello99Participant
We are still waiting for part two. I have to say that I would score part 1 as a victory for NK, his arguments were much more convincing. Of course there are many stronger arguments against their shita, I hope to see them raised in the later parts.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.