Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetsky and the modern State of Israel

@aaq

why are you sidestepping ?

I asked you a simple question …

if a navi told you that 3 of your kids will …. no matter what you advise them

what would you do ?

what’s so hard ?
.

I was totally wrong saying “I would ask Navi what to do”. R Shimshon Hirsh on Shoftim says that Navi’s job is to transmit a message from Hashem to us – not necessarily answer our own shailos. So, if a navi makes a bad projection, I think we can follow what we learned, for example, in Yonah – doing teshuva may overturn the gezerah raah. So, in this case, I’ll immediately turn to repeat the mussar that I already taught my kids, maybe get someone married earlier. Maybe I would call my friends in the army to make sure my kids are doing something safe, both physically and spiritually (they are already qualified because I taught them, just making sure they are not sent somewhere else).

yankel> it is impossible to rectify it, this is a fixed result , no matter what advice you give the kids,

this is kefirah, greek tragedy where whatever a person gets a “prophecy”, does everything to avoid it, but ends up with inevitable results predicted by “gods”.

and while you are at that, please give us something to work with. As I suggested, go to your Rosh Yeshiva and ask him for numbers and also for a permission to contact graduates and see what happens with them. I’ll be interested to hear this.

@aaq

unfortunately, @somejew is desperate to always misinterpret yankels comments , making believe that

yankel said his own histadlis are what saves lives and that ultimately he is in control of his own destiny.

somejew does not [want to] understand the oft repeated axiom from kadmonenu that in saving or helping others ,

there is no inyan of bitachon . one is mehuyav to approach that inyan of helping others as

if there is no inyan of bitachon on the RBSH”O , and has to be done ‘all out’.

that was all yankel said .

he merely quoted from kadmonenu

so- what follows is that , when considering helping and saving your neighbor[s] , the hiyuv hishtadlut has to be “all out ”

as the everyday example of the tsadiqim of hatsala amply demonstrate

they do not wait and shmooze , they run as fast as they can ,

even if it is a safek , even it is a sfek sfeika , even if it is a sfek sfek sfeika , even if it is a sfek sfek sfek sfek sfeika,

even on shabbat , even on yom tov , even on yom kippur

and they do not say , the result is anyway bashert , I have bitachon,

I can walk the same pace I walk to shul , or to do any other mitsva , whatever happens will happen anyway …

no hatsala member , anywhere in the world, has that approach

because of that axiom in yahadut – when you have to help or save someone else

the hiyuv is to act as if the outcome depends only on your actions

that is not kfira chv’sh , that is the proper approach al pi torah

thats all yankel has been saying from the start, and that is all yankel continues to say in to the future

somejew is ignoring that , at his own peril

.

@aaq

??
.

I am still [patiently…] waiting for AAQ’s wisdom ….
.

Consider this: if I flip a coin 10 times it is possible, though very unlikely, that I will get 10 heads in a row. If I flip the same coin 100,000 time the deviation from 50% will be quite small. The above 2 statements are true in spite of the fact that a coin has no memory and each flip of an honest coin has a 50% chance of coming up heads. So, it does not follow that what happens to 30% of a large population will necessarily happen to an particular subgroup of 3 out of 10 people.

nothing is random other than a voice that has no direction

yankel > because he knows that any honest answer will include a negative – no , he will not send any of his sons

I guess you did not understand my answer, so I say it again – I can easily say that I will send, but my answer is not worth anything given that I am not inthe parsha. So, I am not going to take a cheap shot. And the fact that you are interested in this question and not in the ways to reduce the risk is unfortunate.

This is very typical in many areas of human endeavors. In business, for example, a silly businessman is “brave” to risk his money on a venture and hope to become rich. I saw (and participated in) briefs by shrewed salesmen – their pitch to the customer, while selling an expensive product/service – “can you afford the rosk of using other [cheaper, but not so assured] products? The goal is to try to achieve the goal while minimizing the risk.

I understand (but do not agree with) those who do not work with medinah. But if you understand the value of defending the country but simply refuse to “take the risk”, your first focus would be to evaluate the risk, then analyze sources and minimize them.

AAQ is insinuating in his latest post that he would send all ten even when having clear foreknowledge that three will come back OTD …

I don’t have a problem at all with his strategy of minimizing risk

but sometimes reality is such that losses will for sure occur

and AAQ has let us know that even in a case of a certain loss of three of his children’s religion , he would still send all ten
.

here is the crux of the issue , here is THE point where AAQ deviates from the unanimous haredi sages’ position.

AAQ is willing to sacrifice three of his sons’ religion

on the altar of ‘sharing burdens’ and on the altar

of the false hope of finding favor in eyes of those who disdain us

while the haredi consensus is

that our children’s religion is one of the most precious things one can have, not to be bartered for anything in the universe
—

By the way , AAQ has not insinuated at all , about what he would do if he had foreknowledge that 3 of his sons would come back as cripples chv’sh , not as result of combat , but as result of internal army policy ?

From his lack of answer we could safely assume that he would not send any of his ten sons ….

.

and here comes the million dollar question –

MA NISHTANA between 3 sons without religion and 3 sons without their health [both chv’sh] ???

I suspect that AAQ considers – like all other critics on this page , and all around the world for that matter …-

loss of religion, a relatively minor problem , while a lack of health a major one ….

.
.
The difference between the Sages and their critics is this following point :
how tragic and how major is the issue of decline in yirat shamayim or the issue of OTD ?

Is it a calamity ?

or an inconvenience ?
.

if you support forced haredi draft, it is an inconvenience .

if you resist haredi draft, it is a calamity.
.
.

quite simple…..
.

@AAQ

They will not transform the army .

The army will transform them .
.

And that’s exactly their objective !

thousands of our forefathers lived with mesirut nefesh mamash in order to transmit the mesorah to us

its much too precious to squander it on some irresponsible ‘temporary feel and look good’ venture ….
.
.

sechor sechor amrinan lenezirah lekarma lo tikrav …

al tevi’enu lyedie nisayon

Besides , once they go , the dam has burst and all will go ….

its time you should be mitchazek a bit more in your emunat chachamim ….

.
.

.

yankel > They will not transform the army. The army will transform them .

This is yeridas hadaros.

R Chaim Brisker was told about a (anti-religious) Yiddish theatre making a show of forming a Jewish army where future soldiers are being asked – did you build a new house, etc. When asked – are you afraid, everyone leaves and only R Chaim and R Spector left in the army… R Chaim remarked that this was all right, they just did not play the finale – they won the war …

So, you are saying, that out of, bli ayn hara, thousands of students you can not find a hundred that will withstand the view of ladies in the Jewish army? This is beyond pathetic. And, again, this is childish talk about someone owing you something. If there is a need to go to the army, you deal with that and Hashem will help you.

AAQ

your approach stems from your lax attitude towards yahadut

you have not internalized the calamity of OTD , nor the calamity of OTD lemechtsa , lishlish ulerevi’a

in your eyes its not more than an inconvenience.

rav zilberstain is on record permitting hilul shabat !! mamash to avoid the draft, if the draft risks the yahadut of the draftee

thats only because halacha considers the calamity of OTD for what it really is …
.

you have not yet responded to the q about the three sons returning as a cripple as result internal army policy

whether you would send all 10 of your sons
.
.

learning horayot reminds us how pervasive mistakes are

so – why do you consider AAQ as more immune to mistakes than the collective of our chachamim ??

without getting personal – isn’t that a sign of hubris ??
.
.

yankel > learning horayot reminds us how pervasive mistakes are.
> so – why do you consider AAQ as more immune to mistakes than the collective of our chachamim ??

We are bringing here different perspectives exactly to examine them. I enjoy listening to people with different views.

You also reflectively fall into “no true scotsman” pitfall that you usually avoid. My positions have support in some chachamim. I am most fond of R Soloveitchik’s approach. I did not start out as his talmid, but I found enough common points between my own thought process and his writings that I am paying attention to the other things he is teaching.

@Always_Ask_Questions:
Rav Shach wrote that Rabbi Dr. Soloveichik wrote “mamash divrei kefirah ad kidei hishtomemus liMareh ayin” and things that were “assur liOmram viKol sheKein sheAssur liKosvam liDoros”, which he Rav Shach was repeating to show just how far “external wisdom” takes away one’s “daas Torah”.

Rav Aharon Kotler stated that Rabbi Dr. Soloveichik was responsible for “all the tumah in America”.
Rabbi Dr. Soloveichik was the head of none other than Mizrachi, which is idolatry and heresy (and foolishness), of course.

So, people should seek Torah guidance from only people who maintained full fidelity to the Torah.
And if your own thought processes are in common with his, then you might want to consider how your thought processes might perhaps also be influenced by non-Torah influences and change them to be influenced by only Torah sources.

@Square_Root:
The gedolim did not agree, of course. Rav Chaim Brisker said that the founder of Zionism SR”Y must have known what he was doing, because no tinok sheNishba could come up with a seemingly “kosher” sin like Zionism other than one who does know. His son, the Brisker Rav, specifically applied to them the pasuk of “Halo misanecha Hashem esna…” He obviously would not have done so if they were tinokos sheNishbu. When the insolent Zionist David Green came to meet with, liHavdil, the Chazon Ish, the latter took off his glasses so as not to see the wicked Zionist because, of course, it is forbidden to look at the face of a rasha. If the Zionists were all simply tinokos sheNishbu, then the holy Chazon Ish shouldn’t have needed to remove his glasses.

Obviously, there could be some Zionists who really do not know, though, especially the ones who went through the standard Zionist school system and never met a real Jew (chareidi). But that’s besides the point.

Katan,
there is nothing surprising that some gedolim disagreed. This was always the case, and especially in our times, when world changes so fast that nobody really knows what is the right direction. R Yohanan b Zakkai did not know till the end of his life whether he was right in his meeting w/ Vespasian or maybe he could have asked for more. And that was dealing with one general and a ragtag of Jewish rebels. Do you think he would be more confident if he was surrounded by Communists, Nazis. Arabs, and a bunch of Jewish ideologies. The sad fact is that you surely read our previous discussions and you know, for example, that R Feinstein had better relationship w/ R Soloveitchik. and that R Kotler respected him and partnered and respectfully argued in person. The fact that you bother bringing one-sided arguments (aka lies) to the group that knows better, is very strange.

Note that R Soloveitchik was not the head of Mizrachi. He supported and partnered with them, gave speeches at their conventions, but he is writing on multiple occasions that he is not a member, he has his own views, and especially protests any attempts by the political organization to make pronouncements on religious matters.

@AAQ

yankel> don’t see any connection to ‘no true scotsman’ in any of my writings …

aaq > I meant that – in this case – you seem to only consider chachamim those who agree with your opinion.

—

Incorrect.

I treat both SR and r YB soloveitchik with reverence.

Both were chachamim .

Both were outliers and clearly a minority amongst the chachamim in their views.

—
What I am saying , and you did not address , is the current draft .

All chachamim seeing the current draft problem with all its current realities and all its repercussions , agree not to enlist ..

aaq disagrees ….
..
.

yankel > I treat both SR and r YB soloveitchik with reverence.
> Both were outliers and clearly a minority amongst the chachamim in their views.
…
> All chachamim seeing the current draft problem with all its current realities and all its repercussions , agree not to enlist ..

I believe most MO and RZ Rabbis, including many students of R Soloveitchik, disagree. I am not bringing names as it is usually not leading to a discussion on merits.

@Square R

Sq> Concerning those who abandoned the Derech HaTorah and became Secular Zionists,
almost all of them would have abandoned the Derech HaTorah even without Secular Zionism.

And almost all Jews who abandoned the Derech HaTorah during their time in the IDF,
they would have abandoned the Derech HaTorah, even without the IDF.
—

Incorrect.

Against reality .

Against the torah itself.

cf Rambam hilchot dei’ot, think chapter 6 : derech ha’adam ubryato lihyot nimshach achar sevivato , lefikach …..

.

.

katan > It’s not that the gedolim argued; they did not argue. No gedolim agreed with the heresy and idolatry of “Religious Zionism”.

You are bumping into our conversation. I was clearly talking to someone who recognizes gedolim when he sees them. You are free to stay with your presumptions.

@AAQ

yankel > I treat both SR and r YB soloveitchik with reverence.
> Both were outliers and clearly a minority amongst the chachamim in their views.
> All chachamim seeing the current draft problem with all its current realities and all its repercussions , agree not to
enlist …

aaq > I believe most MO and RZ Rabbis, including many students of R Soloveitchik, disagree. I am not bringing names as it is usually not leading to a discussion on merits.

—

Rama hilchot talmud torah in YD clearly paskins that a knowledgeable person lacking in yir’at shamayim is disqualified of the title talmid haham ….
.
.
.

yankel > You are not addressing my point .

I only addressed the point of difference between physical and halachik sakanah. Did not try to argue anything more than that.

AAQ > what is the “exit strategy” from the desert?

overlooked that comment of yours , will react to it now …
—

am absolutely not looking for any exit strategy from the so called ‘desert’ ….

for the simple reason that not less of a personage than the rambam is the one who advocated for relocating to the desert….

those within the desert are fortunate and should stay there …
.
.

yankel > for the simple reason that not less of a personage than the rambam is the one who advocated for relocating to the desert….

this is exactly the point of the discussion. Rambam offers midbar as an option when other options are not working out. Stands to reason that this is not the ideal lifestyle for generations. I wonder whether any commentaries on rambam discuss that.

The pro-midbar position seem to be that the problem is still out there, so we need to stay sheltered. True, modernity created this new spiritually unsafe environment that does not go away. So, is the answer to stay in midbar until Moschiach comes or humanity rejects modernity and goes back to a manageable state? As Einstein predicted that WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones … This position seems to originated pre-Chazon Ish, when Alter Rebbe took a pro-Czar anti-Napoleon position contrary to most other leaders: danger of modernity v. old-style oppression. (He had a reason though – his hassidim were further east than most others, so the chances that they’ll stay under the Czar were higher). Did he expect that modernity will go away under Czar’s rule?

So, if we accept that it is not ideal to stay sheltered for hundreds of years, then the question is – when and what exit strategy. Hope I explained this better now.