Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetsky and the modern State of Israel

Reminder

A] the following is somejew’s “psak” :

this is somejews language , copied and pasted :

In (very) short, that means that if goyim – chas v’shulem – threaten masses of jews, our kosher responses are: make peace, give gifts, run away, and pray to G-d. What we are not allowed to do is organize an army and physically fight the enemy.

[somejew]

——-

B] the following is maran habet yosefs psak in his halacha sefer the shulchan aruch :

halacha mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).

Will repeat again :

mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy.

—

This is the question mr somejew –

How do you fit A with B ?
.
.

ard> where jews fight back, WHEN directed by daas torah

Who directed Yiftach? People who rejected him earlier. The only daas Torah here seems to be in the midrash that when his dedicated object ended up being his daughter, Yiftach and Pinchas refused to go to each other, expecting the other to make the first move. Ben Gurion at least went to see Chazon Ish.

@ard
i brought my source (the Chofetz Chaim) in the thread here titled “Neturei Karta Condemned by Jews on Youtube”

AAQ:
You’re comparing Yiftach and Pinchas to the Chazon Ish and liHavdil elef alfai havdalos, the heretic David Green? Green went to him because he felt it would be politically beneficial to do so, of course, not because he was in the slightest interested in daas Torah.
Also, you’re stating that, by Yiftach, the only “daas Torah” was after the war, not on his appointment as leader and general before the war?

hakatan > you’re stating that, by Yiftach, the only “daas Torah” was after the war, not on his appointment as leader and general before the war?

interesting question. From peshat, it seems that same people who previously mistreated Yiftach, now called for his help. I don’t know whether that group consulted daas Torah. Do you have any meforshim on this topic?

@katan .

Thanks for this clarification.

This is very important.

here katan broke ranks with somejew.

if we are to take katan at face value [no reason not to]

katan agrees here that pikuach nefesh supersedes any understanding of the three oaths

so [even if] organizing an army to defend the yoshvei EY would contravene the oaths , nevertheless bimkom pikuach nefesh , this is mandated

katan argues that the IDF is not a good fit, because its involvement with the three hamurot.

meaning avoda zara giluy arayot and shfihut damim.

—

the Q is now . the mere fact that the IDF is osek in those three , is that enough to stop a frum jew’s involvement in the IDF

or do we need to consider the candidate, the frum jew’s own participation in the three hamurot ?
.

meaning : if the frum jew himself will not participate in the three hamurot , but other people within that army are,

is that ground to prohibit the frum jew’s participation in the IDF to save lives ?
.
.

Nu

waiting for katans real shitah ???
.

@katan .

This is very important.

here katan broke ranks with somejew.

if we are to take katan at face value [no reason not to]

katan agrees here that pikuach nefesh supersedes any understanding of the three oaths

so [even if] organizing an army to defend the yoshvei EY would contravene the oaths , nevertheless bimkom pikuach nefesh , this is mandated

katan argues that the IDF is not a good fit, because its involvement with the three hamurot.

meaning avoda zara giluy arayot and shfihut damim.

—

the Q is now . the mere fact that the IDF is osek in those three , is that enough to stop a frum jew’s involvement in the IDF

or do we need to consider the candidate, the frum jew’s own participation in the three hamurot ?
.

meaning : if the frum jew himself will not participate in the three hamurot , but other people within that army are,

is that ground to prohibit the frum jew’s participation in the IDF to save lives ?
.
.
.

@yankel-berel
I am not reconsidering anything nor does my allegiance mean only thing, rather the only thing that should matter is the Holy Torah we have from Sinai.

The reason I have stopped responding to you is because if well breached any norms of yiddishkeit and have full on entered kefira mode. Until now, I had given you the benefit of the doubt as you seemed to be sincere in your (aforementioned) allegiance to the Torah.

I can’t point out every breach of yours, nor do I think you care. You’ve construed a false binary between a Zionist state and another Holocaust. You’ve rejected the axioms of schar vonesh on it’s face in thinking that the actions of the IDF exclusively decide life and death for the millions of people living within that evil state’s borders, and not their gzar din from Rosh Hashuneh.

You’re pushing the zionist propaganda that the Arab world want to mass murder all Jews while conveniently ignoring the clear truth that this fear is a direct explicit result of Zionist political activity in the region, turning our traditional friends and supporters in the Muslim world into our enemies. I can’t know what ‘s in the hearts of those non-Jewish nations, but the words they say align with historical precedence that they only have issue with zionists, not (per se) Jews. I am well aware of the Zionist agenda to blur that distinction and certainly the non-Jewish Arab world is vulnerable to that Zionist confusion. So, I am shocked that anyone who values Jewish life would reinforce the lie that all Jews must be targeted by those who want to stop zionism and dismantle the zionist state.

Of course, as mentioned. I’m not concerned about threats of violence from the Arab world, rather I am concerned about the sins of the ‘Sonei Yisroel’ who enable such attacks to, chv”sh, materialize. It is of specific concern for this conversation that the punishment for violating the Three Oaths, violations that the Zionist have achieved according to every known shita, is specifically the type of widespread mass death, chv”sh, as you speak about.

You can argue all you want about what the Avnei Nezer might mean about the shevious being halocho, regardless the Gemureh is clear that we shouldn’t breach them and warns us of the extreme and specific heavenly punishment that our own eye have seen to be the results of Zionism (and which the Avnei Nezer emphasizes!).

No Jewish person who cares about Jewish lives would ask for MORE zionism in response to the violence that zionism has caused!

In any case, the Ramban mentions that the only place where Jews are at risk of being, chas v’shulem, wiped out is in Eretz Yisroel, as that is the only place without the Divine promise to protect us. Yet he also teaches us that there will always be a land that Jews can escape to if our current location becomes too dangerous such that the whole nation will not be wiped out.

You imaginary binary seems to blatantly reject these many parts of Torah teachings, again, all based on our belief in Divine Providence, Schar v’Onesh, the guidelines of our Divinely decreed Gulis, and our specific reliance on Hashem Himself to redeem us from Gulis through the mechanism he taught us about called Moshiach.

So as not to avoid your absurd question: of course if the Divine will is that all the Jews in the world should (chv”sh) commit suicide, I would sign that Kol Koreh without hesitation. So too, any halocho that says “yaharog v’al yaavor”, I would not hesitate to follow. Not for myself and not for any Jews. However, this line of questioning is not sincere to the current situation, as no one except the Zionists is suggesting doing something that puts millions of lives at risk. Dismantling the Zionist state, may it happen soon, does not mean anything more that passing on control to any other self-identifying non-Jewish governance. This could be the USA, the UN, Jordan, or Hamas. I’m not intending to push my own opinions on what is preferred, I am only intending to point out the obvious reality that if the residents of Israel all wanted to give up their state, there are many relatively peaceful pathways to transition/evacuate to a more kusher path that aligns with the Torah.

Much more important than the practical political question about solving the problems created by Zionism is the requirement of every Jew to personally adamantly reject Zionism and the fake “Jewish” identity they claim to lead. There is nothing “Jewish” about that state and it does not represent Jews worldwide. We must reinforce dependence specifically on Hashem to redeem from the hands of non-Jews as He promised us.

@somejew

I just now read your post . Quickly.

I want to read it slowly. Od hazon lamo’ed.

In the meantime , the following is an old question I was not zocheh to hear an answer on :
—

Reminder

A] the following is somejew’s “psak” :

this is somejews language , copied and pasted :

In (very) short, that means that if goyim – chas v’shulem – threaten masses of jews, our kosher responses are: make peace, give gifts, run away, and pray to G-d. What we are not allowed to do is organize an army and physically fight the enemy.

[somejew]

——-

B] the following is maran habet yosefs psak in his halacha sefer the shulchan aruch :

halacha mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).

Will repeat again :

mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy.

—

This is the question mr somejew –

How do you fit A with B ?
.
.

@somejew

…. because (if well) you breached any norms of yiddishkeit and have full on entered kefira mode.
…. I can’t point out every breach of yours, nor do I think you care ….
[somejew to yb]

—

Grave accusations , my dear somejew.

Grave and unfounded accusations.

Will try to go thru them , one by one and none will be left standing b’ezrH.
.
.

@somejew

somejew to yb :

You push the zionist propaganda that the Arab world want to mass murder all Jews while conveniently ignoring the clear truth that this fear is a direct explicit result of Zionist political activity in the region, turning our traditional friends and supporters in the Muslim world into our enemies. I can’t know what ‘s in the hearts of those non-Jewish nations, but the words they say align with historical precedence that they only have issue with zionists, not (per se) Jews.

===

Your claims here seem to come from another planet.

Ask the Druze about the reliability of what comes out of Arab Leaders mouths.

Ask the Alawites .

Ask the Kurds.

Ask the Yazidi’s.

Ask the xtians .

The Hamas supporters in Europe claim that the jews will have to choose between the coffin and suitcase.

Thats what they say now.

And what will happen if there [for some silly technical reason] is no option of suitcase ?

And what will the average Arab do when his leader is overthrown and there is no obvious replacement ?

Who do you speak to then ?

===

The real reason you do not take any of this into account is like I wrote:

According to you the whole existence of IDF is yehareig ve’al yaavor, meaning that even if [chvsh] millions of innocents would be barbarically slaughtered , you still would close down the IDF .

So thats why you have the liberty to come up with total nonsensical non solutions .

You anyway ARE NOT CARRYING THE RESPONSIBILTY OF PIKUACH NEFESH on your shoulders .

This is crystal clear from your whole approach .

And on top of it, we heard it from your own mouth , claiming to rely on some [still] source less agadic maharal , contradicting clear poskim clearly traced back to gemara without holek , and poskim without any preconditions.

So this whole discussion , according to you, is anyway totally irrelevant !

—

Summary :

one side is attempting to have real responsible pikuach nefesh discussion based on cold reality as it is now

while

the other side has bekalut da’at dismissed the pikuach nefesh side of it and therefore comes up with clear flippant theories [supposedly based on long gone history] on which the originator himself would not dream to rely on if it would pertain to his very own little daughter’s health and wellbeing.
.
.

@somejew

for the sake of honesty , you and your compatriots ujm and katan should stop quoting a so called ” universal all poskim agreement that the shavu’ot are bnding lahalacha ” .

Dismissing AVNEI NEZER who is basing himself on omission of yad hachazaka, tur and shulhan aruch , is dishonest.

.

@somejew
…. Dismantling the Zionist state, may it happen soon, does not mean anything more that passing on control to any other self-identifying non-Jewish governance. This could be the USA, the UN, Jordan, or Hamas. I’m not intending to push my own opinions on what is preferred, I am only intending to point out the obvious reality that if the residents of Israel all wanted to give up their state, there are many relatively peaceful pathways to ….

—

Absolute hogwash .
I have not heard bigger shtuyot than this comment in a long time.

USA ?

How many soldiers are the US willing to sacrifice for the big ‘merit’ to govern one of the most volatile places on earth ?

I remember how one or two attacks by hezbollah got the mighty US soldiers packing from Lebanon in 1983.

—
The UN ?

they were meant to guarantee the demilitarisation of Sinai after 1956. Right ?

how much resistance did they put up when threatened by Nasser ?

they folded without a shot being fired .

—

Jordan ?

how many of the 37 shuls left in the jewish quarter of the old city in 1948 were still intact when the Jews returned after 1967 ?

how many jewish residents still lived in the old city during that period ?

do you really think Jordan would be able to suppress Hamas from their stated aim to drive out every Jew who cannot prove that his ancestors lived in Palestine before 1917 ?

—
Last but least – the most spectacular of all of your stupid claims

Hamas ?

you are putting the fox literally in charge of the hen house.

any further comment is totally superfluous

—

schar va’onesh is only AFTER we do all possible to avert pikuach nefesh

never heard hatsalah saying anything like your krumme svarot.
.
.

@somejew

Looked in shulhan aruch and tur think YD siman 156

as clear as day

only 3 averot are yehareig ve’al yaavor

ALL OTHERS ARE YAAVOR VEAL YEHAREIG

including the so called oaths

I must say that you are getting me angry

you appear as someone who values torah above all

and when it comes to this extremely important halachic issue of pikuach nefesh

you suddenly depart in a very radical way from centuries established practice

of paskaning first and foremost with the established halacha sefarim like tur and shulhan aruch

and revert to agada sefarim AGAINST shulhan aruch !?!
.
.

@yankel-berel

as mentioned your unbridled kefira makes me reluctant to continue the conversation. i long ago lost belief that you are here in good faith, particularly because of your bullying style, spamming of multiple threads, and “forgetting” or “ignoring” already answered questions.

I answered your question about about the shulchan aruch in hilchos shabbos here: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/matzav-article-about-golus-and-eretz-yisrael/page/3#post-2423708

the maharal I have mentioned regularly is in netzach yisroel perek 24. he explains well the purpose and obligations of this gulis vis a vis the 3 shevios. if you are serious about understanding the Torah teachings and the gemara in kesibos, i would highly recommend learning the whole chapter. if you are instead just interested in winning an online argument, I would recommend you NOT learn that chapter.

regarding the Avnei Nezer and his point about “not haluche” is a language also used by Satmar Rebbe in Vayoel Moshe to describe the sugya. But, that doesn’t mean that those gedolimm where – chas v’shulem – kofer in Toras Moshe, rather it means something different than you think. As mentined the long Avnei Nezer itself leverages this designation to explain exactly why we SHOULD KEEP THE SHEVIOS! He doesn’t (of course and chas v’shulem) dismiss them. He explains that breaking them is worse than kureis!

I don’t know your chinich, but the concepts of “haluche” and “agudeteh” are well established and NONE of it means we can be kofer in even one word of the teachings of chazal. I don’t believe you care to learn anything from myself or anyone else around here if it pushes against your current comfort in dismissing whole sections of chazal saying to yourself “mutar li”. I can point you to the Ramchal’s “mamar agadtuh” that is available online and printed in many Ein Yaakov editions.

And, in closing, I would point you to learn Vayoel Moshe and realize that in the Torah world – meaning in accepted Torah publications – there is no one cholek on his explanations of the sources he brings there. There is some acute disagreement on psak regarding voting and money from the zionist state as well as some less halachically substantiated dilution of hischbris l’reshoyim as explained in the sefer Biyos Hazman.

Again, I’m not expecting you or anyone to agree with my assertations. But, I expect you to adopt the teachings of our universally accepted Gedolim like the Maharal and certainly the Talmud itself as pure unadulterated Toras Moshe m’Sinai. If you don’t understand something, come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped.

@somejew

….as mentioned your unbridled kefira makes me reluctant to continue the conversation. i long ago lost belief that you are here in good faith, particularly because of your bullying style, spamming of multiple threads, and “forgetting” or “ignoring” already answered questions …

—

its not kfira nor is it unbridled kfira.
I responded to all your charges that I am chv’sh writing kfira and
you did not bring any to the point response to my responses, so
you should not complain about any kfira

its not spamming of multiple threads
it is rather responses to what you ,katan and ujm wrote on multiple threads

btw. those opening new threads are doing a disservice because it is easier to concentrate on one thread

I am not bullying , I am just attempting to lay out the relevant arguments in an articulate manner
[btw that’s what satmar rave zatsal would probably say to those talimidei hahamim who felt bullied by his emotional approach to this matter and therefore kept quiet and did not want to argue with him]

re forgetting or ignoring your answers , it is clear to anyone going through the back and forth of our arguments , that you sidestepped most of my questions , while as far as I can see, I answered all of yours.

We should go through the whole conversation , gather all our respective claims and answers , and
you will see that yours are paruts merubeh al ha’omed ….
.

.

@somejew
…regarding the Avnei Nezer and his point about “not haluche” is a language also used by Satmar Rebbe in Vayoel Moshe to describe the sugya …

—

on which page ?
.

@somejew

[somejew to yb]
in closing, I would point you to learn Vayoel Moshe and realize that in the Torah world – meaning in accepted Torah publications – there is no one cholek on his explanations of the sources he brings there

—

this argument you mentioned already – or someone else of your allies like katan or ujm.

apparently , it goes as follows : because there supposedly are no refutations published to vayoel moshe, the halacha stays like him.

this is, however, a total fallacy .

you for sure know and heard about the radziner rebbi , the ba’al hatchelet , who claimed he rediscovered the original hilazon .

he wrote about it, publicized his findings and promoted the use of this techelet dye.

he was known as a formidable talmid haham and tsadiq

no publication was to my knowledge ever published refuting his claims

according to your reasoning , his discovery remains halacha psuka for klal yisrael.

is anyone accepting such a claim ???

the fact is and remains that klal yisrael ,without publicizing refutations , rejected his shita.

he was and remains a formidable t’ch and tsadiq

but his shita was and still is rejected

satmar rave is no different

the whole world read his vayoel moshe

all talmidei hahamim and rabanim read it

and did not accept his claims

so is this considered as ‘accepted halacha’ ?

definitely not.
.
.

Again, I’m not expecting you or anyone to agree with my assertations. But, I expect you to adopt the teachings of our universally accepted Gedolim like the Maharal and certainly the Talmud itself as pure unadulterated Toras Moshe m’Sinai. If you don’t understand something, come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped.

===

you seem to get mixed up here

what was my claim ?

that many gdolim and talmidei hahamim disagree with your assertions and that therefore your assertions that “oaths are undisputed halacha” are plain incorrect.

no one ever said that chazal chvsh is not ‘pure unadulterated Toras Moshe m’Sinai’.

why do you have this ga’ava dik approach of “If you don’t understand something, come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped.”

maybe it is you who has not grasped what rov talmidei hahamim grasped already ?

maybe it is YOU who should come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped ?

—
we are arguing about the proper pshat and how to apply it to one of the biggest problems of our time

why all those condescending remarks ?

why insinuate that your debater is a kofer ?

is it because you are running out of “on topic real arguments” directly relating to the subject at hand ?

—

you should know – I may write in strong terms , but always aim at the subject at hand

I may employ rhetoric , but always highlighting the subject which at the center of the debate.

and not baseless insinuations that you are a kofer ….
.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

No, it says plainly – do it. Fight . Save the people .
I there would be a caveat , SHULHAN ARUCH or one of the other commentators would have said : STOP , only if this is bir’shut hamelech

why did not anyone say one word ????

no, it says plainly that carrying weapons is not chilil shabbos. at no point does SA tell Jews to fight.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

Al korchach that p/n is doche anything which is not part of the hamurot.

no, there is no hechrach here. if there is please spell it out.
you seem to be blissfully ignorant that the shalosh shavios are all specifically limits to Jewish action in the face of dinei nafashos. i.e. they all specifically tell us what we are NOT allowed to do to save Jewish lives from the difficulty of gulis.

this is besides the explicit torah taught by the maharal that the dinim of shallsh shevios is “yaharog v’al y’avor”, which specifically means they are not pushed off for pikiach nefesh.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

not haluche” is a language also used by Satmar Rebbe

siman 80 of the first maamar

@yankel-berel you wrote:

who mentions bichlal ‘kofer betorat moshe here ?

how does that come in to the picture at all

if someone rejects any of the torah sh’bksav or torah sh’baal peh, they are kofe in Toras Moshe. Every pasuk and ever word in the Torah is specifically meant to teach us how to think, speak, and act. Every paskuk and every word in the Torah is a Jewish persons inheritance that we have been promised access to “as much as our hand can reach”, each person according to their level. If a part of Torah is only understood by Gadolim, we accept it as students. Veering from any of this is rejection of Toras Moshe.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

chazal say a person should not get angry
chazal also say one should not 4 amot in reshut harabim

both are chazal

one is halacha
one is not

big difference between the two

taking your frame at face value without per se agreeing to it,
they would BOTH still be obligatory.
One must accept both statements of Chazal as both true and completely applicable to one’s life.

One should not carry things in reshis harabim on Shabbos.
One should not get angry.
One who, chas v”shulem, does any of these things will be punished.
One who refrains from doing these things will be rewarded.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

no publication was to my knowledge ever published refuting his claims

according to your reasoning , his discovery remains halacha psuka for klal yisrael.

this is pure am harutzes. There were many many consistent published rejections of wearing the Radziner techeles. The Rebbe of Jerusalem shlit”a explains this in the first chelek of his Tshivos v”Hanhugos , siman 26.

Of course, if there was no psak against his very well known and clearly reasoned psak, it would indeed be binding.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

all talmidei hahamim and rabanim read it

and did not accept his claims

except they all did accept his “claims”.
First, the sefer Vayoel Moshe wasn’t groundbreaking in Torah claims, rather it was a reinforcement of teachings of both many contemporaries of the Satmar Rebbe and a reinforcement of the many primary authorities he quotes in the sefer Vayoel Moshe. It is similar to the sefer Chofetz Chaim that did not innovate, rather it simply reinforced and clarified. (with the aforementioned caveats of specific halachik applications in VM that were indeed argued and rejected by some contemporaries. from this you also see what they DIDN’T argue with).

As such, up to me writing this today, you will NOT FIND ONE accepted authority who has published an argument against Vayoel Moshe.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

you [plural] convince yourselves of your shita kdosha ‘s infallibility

you elevate your shita kdosha into the league of the 13 ani ma’amins

you sidestep any challenge to your understanding

and then you label anyone who disagrees as a kofer

I have not and continue to not be speaking about any “shita kdosha”.
A “shita” implies there are two sides. The rejection of Zionism and the
obligation to daven for the dismantling of their evil state is an direct expression
of the 13 ikarim.

This is the same for every moshiach sheker: the notzri, sha”tz, etc. Rejecting yashke is not
“a shita”, it’s directly tied to fundamentals of Judaism, such that if anyone would claim that you can
me a Jew for J (or Jew for Z), that person would necessarily be a kofer. (if they themselves were a Jew for J,
they would be a min, etc).
So too, if you start quoting english Artscroll biographies to try to claim that R’ Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg ztz”l supported
(chas v’shulem) Jews for J, I would say you are a crazy masis imasiach and you should be mevazeh talmideh chahumim with such nonsense. If you doubled down, and said “No, here’s a letter he wrote to a priest” and “here is a quote from a ben bayis who became a known notzri”, and “read what he wrote on parshas Behaloscha!” I would say, “all you might accomplish is convince people that R’ Pinchas was (chalila v’chas) a secret notzri, but you will never convince a Jew with yirash shomayim that this avoida zureh is kosher!”

@yankel-berel you wrote:

and to top it off when people are too intimidated to argue

you proclaim victory as if this shita kdosha is undisputed and accepted halacha

with as ironclad proof , obviously no one is arguing ….

again, I am a believer in the Torah, and the Torah is well known and published.
I will not accept another “Torah” based on am harutes speculation about current events, rather I will look
to accepted Torah sources for how to understand the world.
As such, I don’t “claim victory”, only because there is not debate to begin with.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

why do you have this ga’ava dik approach of “If you don’t understand something, come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped.”

I was not referring to myself (obviously?) as the teacher. I was referring to your rejection of the gemureh in ksivos, rejection of the maharal as mentioned, and really the blithe rejection of the dozens and dozens of makoros in referenced in Vayoel Moshe (many ma’marei chazal and psukim of tanach!) WITHOUT ANY COUNTER except your own claims of “not MY shita”. [and, when I say “no counter”, I mean published teachings of accepted Gadolim, as well expressed in my other post here in CR if anyone knows any published counter to VM]

@yankel-berel you wrote:

maybe it is you who has not grasped what rov talmidei hahamim grasped already ?

maybe it is YOU who should come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped ?

If you have a kosher well known teacher to learn Torah from, I will be happy to learn. I have searched “high and low” and have not foud anyone (as mentioned above and through these forums ad nauseum)

@yankel-berel you wrote:

we are arguing about the proper pshat and how to apply it to one of the biggest problems of our time

why all those condescending remarks ?

why insinuate that your debater is a kofer ?

is it because you are running out of “on topic real arguments” directly relating to the subject at hand ?

—

you should know – I may write in strong terms , but always aim at the subject at hand

I may employ rhetoric , but always highlighting the subject which at the center of the debate.

and not baseless insinuations that you are a kofer ….

I really don’t understand the disconnect ,and it seems to me that you are completely missing the
kefira intrinsic in zionisim and intrinsic in the “state of israel”.
and, I’m not using those word beyond their normal understood usage: real hardcore no-olam-habu 100% kefira.

Explaining it is not hard to do, but the resistance (because of propaganda and yetzer hureh and shoyched) makes
people cry out nonsense like “you want all the jew in israel to (chsv”sh) die??!!”.

I don’t know if this is understood without my saying it, but the sefer Vayoel Moshe spend a lot of ink answering up
the many pseudo-lumdishe questions people like yourself might have. If you are indeed approaching this sigya to understand the Torah behind it, learn the sefer! It’s crazy to me that you would be offended and angry at my accusation that you are a kofer without learning the actual Torah behind my claim to clarify if perhaps I am correct! Putting internet argument aside, do you want to live your life a kofer because you were afraid or didn’t have time to learn the sefer about the thing you emotionally care about? Do you really want to go to bais din shel malah and be thrown in the pit with all the galochs and murderers because you refused to take the Torah seriously?

If you would do any of that, well first thing is you would join my team. But besides that, you would be able to formulate real questions and hopefully learn real answers. But, instead you are currently an am huuretz who says “when I meet talmidei chachumim I want to bite them!”.

I honestly wish there was a platform to take this conversation private and in real time, instead of this discombobulated delayed public comment board that causes any conversation to become quickly derailed.

@ somejew

according to somejew the refutation of the baal hatchelet came in the form of the recent tshuvot vahanhagot by r moshe sternbuch shlita

the baal hatchelet lived 150 [about ?] years ago, so

according to somejew , until RM’S recent writing, the tchelet dye was binding halacha on everyone in klal yisrael ….

in one word … absurd.
.
.

klal yisrael , mainly its talmidei hahamim , read the claims of the baal hatchelet AND REJECTED THEM

without any explicit refutational written work.

that is pashut kebeya bekutcha.

.

.
exactly the same with satmar rav’s writings

anyone with a tiny drop of sechel and common sense knows that

extreme writings like katan and somejew’s ARE NOT ACCEPTED, AND REJECTED by the overwhelming majority of talmidei hahamim
.

somejew is entitled to rant as much as he wants about the supposed kfira of anyone opposed to his views

and some supposed similarity of association with Zionism to association with xtianity

which is blatantly mezuyaf mitocho wherever you go in orthodox judaism , but

his rants will not change the torah ,

not change reality

and not change the judicious application of the torah to said reality in this specific case, as

it was done through centuries of halachik practise , in

numerous other issues and topics

.