- This topic has 88 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 7 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Apparently, the Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah rule that Benei Torah should go to the induction center but not to sign up for the army.
How come many posters on this site are inconsistent about their attitudes towards Rabbonim who disagree? If a Religious Zionist rabbi says that some Benei Torah should serve in the army, and it may even be a miztvah to serve in the army, many posters here are very critical of this opinon. They say this shitah goes against the Gedolim, they say this shitah is kefirah, and some even put their title rabbi in quotation marks, implying that since these Rabbis argue against the Gedolim, they have no right to be called rabbi anymore.
However, if a Charedi/Chassidish rabbi rules that no Ben Torah should report to the induction center, which is also against what the Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah rule, no one seems to be bothered that this opinion violates the Gedolim. No one questions their smichah. It’s as if these are also Gedolim and they have the right to argue on the Moetzes, but the Rabbonim of the Religious Zionists are not Gedolim and therefore have no right to their opinion.
You speak in generalities. Can you please cite some specific examples?
simcha: What’s so difficult? Everyone should follow their own rabbis. In your example, the zionists should follow the zionist rabbis and allow themselves to be drafted into the army. The followers of the rabbonim on the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah should report to the induction center and announce that they will not serve in the army. And the followers of the Chareidi/Chassidish rabbonim, you referred to, should not report to the induction center altogether.
Beautiful and perfect. Everyone following their own rabbi.
RE: “Apparently, the Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah rule that Benei Torah should go to the induction center but not to sign up for the army.” It refers to orders to come down and do pre-induction paperwork.
In the United States, this might be called “punting” (an American football term). It puts off the problem, and (excuse the mixed metaphor), put the ball in the other’s guy court.
The rabbanim referred to in the original posting are telling their talmidim to politely go to the army, tell them who you are, and politely refuse to do anything else. This for the time being is non-confrontational. It doesn’t settle anything, but postpones the confrontation. The big issue will be this summer when the army will be sending them orders to report for military service. At that point, refusal to comply will be considered criminal and they will be subject to arrest and imprisonment. However some arrangement might be worked out before hand (e.g the zionists will settle for cutting off funding for hareidim, but will respect their autonomy and exempt them from conscription).
Other, less moderate rabbanim, are urging total resistance. Of course the zionist rabbanim (who regard service in the army as a mitzva rather than bitual Torah, that is to say those who see the army as defending the Jews of Eretz Yisrael as opposed to those who see Limud ha-Torah as the key to Jewish survival) have been urging their talmidim to join the army for some time.
Simcha613: I think the answer to your question is that the disagreement with the Zionist rabbis is a fundamental idealogical one while the intra-Charedi argument is one of tactics.
simcha613 -“Some yes and some no. From the way I understand there are two Charedi positions about the existence of the medinah. Some would theoretically support a medinah, but are against the current one with its secular values. While others are against the concept of a medinah before Mashiach. They also view the army differently too. The first group may not see something inherently treif with the army, their position is that it doesn’t override Talmud Torah, and that the army needs to meet all the religious needs of its soliders. The other camp’s position is that one is not allowed to aid the medinah at all, as it is a ma’aseh Satan.”
Noone from the Frum community supported a Medina. This is the Mizrachi Shita. The question was what to do after it was created.
“Some would theoretically support a medinah, but are against the current one with its secular values.”
This statement which you ascribe to the Charedim is the Mizrachi Shitta, but this is what bothers me. The MO believe in all the Rabbonim that say we should have a Medina before Moshiach, but they believe in a Medina acc. to Halacha -so why do they support a Medina that is based on Kefira and all they believe in is secular values?????
Theoritical question
What if your Rav Poskins its assur to support a treif Medina and pay taxes
Do you follow your Rav, or do you pay the taxes
zahavasdad: Your question isn’t theoretical. If a significant number of rabbanim decide on civil disobedience (i.e. peaceful refusal to obey Israel laws), you have a very serious crisis. Mass civil disobedience is serious business (consider the role it played in collapsing the British Empire in India, and in ending “Jim Crow” in the United States). One possibility is that the Israeli government will back down and simply say “okay, you can fully autonomous – no conscription – no welfare or subsidies or access to government benefits”. However one has to remember that any policy would end up applying to Arabs as well, could raise serious legal questions under Israeli law, and raise serious issues of discrimination under international human rights standards. The stakes are really quite high, and most of the rabbanim are trying to as unconfrontational as possible in order to leave open a door for working out a solution.
However mass refusal to obey Israeli law would be even more devasting than any intifada since it involves Jews (who want to be left alone in peace, rather than Arabs who want to run the country) and doesn’t involve violence. And in the internet era, “the whole world will be watching.”
A draft or Civil service IS a tax, however instead of paying money, you pay with your labor.
You live in a country you have to obey the laws of that country. If you dont like the laws get them changed or move to a place where you do like the laws.
I must be a masochist because i am going to respond to “health’ again-“no one from the frum community supported the Medinah”
Last time I looked, R”yitzhcok Meir Levin z’l-the gerrer rebbe’s brother-in’law- signed the Declaration of Independence…Last time I looked, they stilllfly the Israeli flag at Ponevezer yeshiva…
as far as your question about ‘a medinah based on kefirah’- not true, by the way- leanr some of Rav kook’s torah, the rambam, the Ramban and many others,maybe you’ll find some good reasons…
But chareidim want to live in eretz yisroel because of the kedushah- they just don’t want to live underJewish sovereignty with a state. Personally, I think the state is the package in which the gift of eretz yisroel has been given to us from Hashem. Many chareidim obviously disagree, and thus have no thankfulness or feel an obligation to the state.
It would be the same to them as in Russia, where Jews would trick the Czarist government by not paying taxes.
Simcha613, I don’t agree with putting “rav” in quotation marks. That said, there’s another fundamental difference (aside from what on the ball wrote).
R’ Aviner is making a statement about what Chareidim should do, and the Rebbe is telling his own talmidim what to do.
ZDad: the problem with that approach is that the IDF is a moral sinkhole and Zionist “acculturation” and “deJudaization” tool, and that the chareidim were in Eretz Yisrael long before Zionism got there.
So the Zionists have no business in making the Chareidim serve in their army (especially since their army is only “necessary” because the Zionists decided to pick a fight with the Arabs so they could have their State, against the explicit wishes of the chareidim already living there who lived peacefully with the Arabs).
zahavasdad: “You live in a country you have to obey the laws of that country. “
So you feel Israel should apologize to the Eichmann family?? He was following the laws of the country he lived in. There is a theory that “Dina Malchusa Dina” applies in Eretz Yisrael, but even if it does, its rather clear that the gezerah on conscription is motivated by a desire to uproot the Torah world which means that it is a law we can ignore , as any other of the zionist laws that are aimed to undermine the Am ha-Shem and their dedication to Torah and Mitsvos.
We live in Ha-Shem’s world, and follow his laws. Ha-Shem hoo Malkainu (or if you want to be more modern, our President, our Prime Minister, our CEO, etc.). This is especially true in Eretz Yisrael in which the Jews only claim to the land is that Ha-Shem gave us permission to live there on condition we used this extraordinary grant (no other people were given their country by Ha-Shem) to we follow his laws. Perhaps those persons in Eretz Yisrael who are of Jewish descent who don’t want to follow the laws of the country they live in should move.
ROB -“Last time I looked, R”yitzhcok Meir Levin z’l-the gerrer rebbe’s brother-in’law- signed the Declaration of Independence”
I never heard of him. Was he a leader in Ger? And even so I didn’t mean every single last one. For the same price you could have said R’ Kook – he definitely was Charedi.
“Last time I looked, they stilllfly the Israeli flag at Ponevezer yeshiva…”
Why do you zionists keep mentioning the flag? R’ Schach zt’l was very much against the Medina -the flag was only because of Hakoras Hatov.
“as far as your question about ‘a medinah based on kefirah’- not true,”
I’m just curious – why do you say Not true? Are you now going to tell me communism also wasn’t based on Kefira?
To Health – I am sure that Rav Kook would have signed on but unfortunately he was niftar in 1935.Today, 25% of first graders are in Charedi mosdos, and of course there is a rather significant number of others registered in non chareidi yeshivos. In a matter of short order the frum will constitute a majority of this country in which time it will be possible to have a government that runs khalachah but only if all of the frum would actually vote.
rkefrat -“In a matter of short order the frum will constitute a majority of this country in which time it will be possible to have a government that runs khalachah but only if all of the frum would actually vote.”
This is one of the reasons that the Gov. is doing a Charedi draft – to Shmad them in order to keep their pop. low.
Even if they ever become a Majority -it won’t make a difference in the make up of the Gov. -they will just deny Charedim their civil rights.
Ever hear of Apartheid?!?!?
“What if your Rav Poskins its assur to support a treif Medina and pay taxes
Do you follow your Rav, or do you pay the taxes”
Not even a shilah. If you can’t follow a country’s laws, you go somewhere else!
Of course, they said a century ago that America was the treif Medina.
Not even a shilah. If you can’t follow a country’s laws, you go somewhere else!
You are in effect saying that secular law supercedes halachah.
Efshir and DY, then you would support a prosecutor and judge whose rav tells them that draft-dodgers should be jailed imprisoning someone whose rav told him to dodge the draft? Civil disobedience also implies the willingness to go to jail for one’s beliefs as did Gandhi and Martin Luther King (King wrote in “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”: “In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty”). It then becomes a question of who is justified by the courts of public opinion and history. In some cases they won but in others they were crushed and forgotten (e.g. anti-WW1 protesters).
Note that in our legal tradition, not only is it acceptable to break the nation’s laws when they conflict with halachah (“dina malachus dina” has only limited applicability in Eretz Yisrael, probably no applicability if you hold Israel is a Jewish state, and would never apply to laws designed to hurt or prevent doing mitsvos or learning Torah) — but wo reject the doctine of “superior orders” meaning that if you violate halacha because you were ordered to, it is no defense thaqt you were following lawful orders. From a Torah perspective, the Israeli soldiers and police who will enforce conscription would be as fully and criminally liable as the kenesset members and generals (the only “defense” would be that they were threatened with death, and that’s not even a full defense in all situations).
Not even a shilah. If you can’t follow a country’s laws, you go somewhere else!
You are in effect saying that secular law supercedes halachah.
So what would you do if your rav poskined it was Assur to pay taxes to a treif anti-torah Medina
In theory, I wouldn’t pay, although at best it might not be a chiyuv to pay, it would never be assur to pay even at the cost of being jailed.
And Avi K., last I checked, My rav’s last name isn’t King or Ghandi.
I ask Charlie, zd, and Avi: If you lived where it was illegal to do bris milah, and you had a son, would you do it, and if so, open or clandestinely?
I ask Charlie, zd, and Avi: If you lived where it was illegal to do bris milah, and you had a son, would you do it, and if so, open or clandestinely?
You can easily go to another juristiction temporarily and have it done where its not illegal. IE its illegal in NY, just go to NJ or CT and have it done.
In theory, I wouldn’t pay, although at best it might not be a chiyuv to pay, it would never be assur to pay even at the cost of being jailed.
If your Rav says its Assur to pay, its Assur
I don’t hold by “rabbi” martin luther king (sorry if someone dislikes the quotes) and halacha allows us various recourses when we are allowed (sometimes obligated) to follow Torah and disregard the law of the land. We sure don’t have to “willingly” and “lovingly” turn the other cheek, as MLK’s religion is suggesting. By the way, a law which, if obeyed to the letter, violates the beliefs of a minority has a name: “religious discrimination”.
You can easily go to another juristiction temporarily and have it done where its not illegal. IE its illegal in NY, just go to NJ or CT and have it done.
You’re avoiding the question. Let’s say it became federal law, or illegal in every state.
ZD obviously one in such a situation would have first to hire someone and study the laws, in order to see if it is possible to set up a non-taxable business or enterprise, second look into evading taxes if there is a good chance this is possible without being caught (we are not allowed to help authorities with their job and cause heartache to our families, different from what “rabbi” martin luther king was quoted above), third see if it is for us possible to live in poverty so that there is nothing to be taxed, fourth, leave.
See, we have been running since many generations, we know the drill.
Also No Rav says its permitted not to get a Bris if its forbidden.
The Psak about not paying taxes is only an opionion . Others hold its permitted to pay the taxes (Or a Service tax – otherwise known as a draft)
ZD,
Are you avoiding the question again, or asserting that if something is illegal, it’s time to go shopping ’til you find a Rabbi who agrees with the law?
ZD I have hardly noticed rabbis stating it is forbidden to pay taxes to the State of Israel or to other ordinary countries, perhaps you would like to quote them to us? Even in cases it was permissible to evade such taxes if possible (USSR is an example) I do not recall it being declared forbidden to pay taxes, of course, as long as we perceive that paying taxes to the evil govt is for us advantageous. Again can you please quote if someone stated differently?
I am not sure what compulsory draft has to do with the above, though.
I think several commenters on this thread have carried their displeasure with Israel’s old-new draft induction into forbidden territory. Their comments resemble those of Gentile antisemites on Huffpost and Jewish antisemites on Mondoweiss. They speak of an imaginary demonic Israel-of-the-mind that conspires against Hashem and His people and is at fault for everything done to it and much else. Like the BDSers, they propose organizing to bring the country to its knees if not to its death. But there’s one difference: unlike the antisemites, these commenters of ours induct Hashem, the Torah, the rabbanim, and the halakha in support of their views, taking lashon hara to a new and ominous level. Please back down and back off, fast.
Zdad and others who maintain the stance that “you live in a country, you have to abide by its laws”:
You are forgetting one crucial thing:
The original law of the State of Israel, the one signed by its founding father David Ben Gurion, states among other things that those who are in full-time learning are entitled to a deferment (if not an exemption, I don’t remember which) from army service. This “Status Quo Agreement” was signed on and agreed to by Ben Gurion and Agudas Yisroel, and it was against the backdrop of this document that the Declaration of Independence was drafted and signed 11 months later.
In the current brouhaha over “sharing the burden”, it is the secular – not the chareidim – who have shown disregard for the laws of the State of Israel by declaring “unconstitutional” the only document Israel ever had that remotely resembled a constitution.
If there is anyone showing unwillingness to abide by the laws of the country they live in, it is those who are demanding that yeshiva students be drafted, not those who are demanding that they be granted deferments.
Zdad and others who maintain the stance that “you live in a country, you have to abide by its laws”:
You are forgetting one crucial thing:
The original law of the State of Israel, the one signed by its founding father David Ben Gurion, states among other things that those who are in full-time learning are entitled to a deferment (if not an exemption, I don’t remember which) from army service. This “Status Quo Agreement” was signed on and agreed to by Ben Gurion and Agudas Yisroel, and it was against the backdrop of this document that the Declaration of Independence was drafted and signed 11 months later.
In the current brouhaha over “sharing the burden”, it is the secular – not the chareidim – who have shown disregard for the laws of the State of Israel by declaring “unconstitutional” the only document Israel ever had that remotely resembled a constitution.
If there is anyone showing unwillingness to abide by the laws of the country they live in, it is those who are demanding that yeshiva students be drafted, not those who are demanding that they be granted deferments.
well, shabbos and the hadlokoh of lag baomer clearly take precedence over reading/commenting on TWN, and so, today, I finally can read and comment some of the posters comments.
To “health”: Without sounding disrespectful to you, saying “I never heard of him” [R”Itche meir Levin z’l]only shows up your total misunderstanding (I was going to say ignorance but refrain “le’maan hasholom”)of history and what really motivates people in Eretz Yisroel. SO, let me enlighten you. R”Itche Meir Levin was a brother-in-law of the “Bais Ysroel”,having married the daughter of the “Imrei Emes’ (enough yichus for you?) and he made alyah in 1940- and signed the Declaration of Independenceof Israel ,as leader of the Agudah. He served as MK and minister in the government for years.
So, I would say that having one of the most important gerrer chassidim being intimately involved with the medinah kind of gives the medinah a “hechsher”. Don’t you think so?
And to “health” again: You have to support your contention that Rav Shach z’l was ‘against the medinah”. What is the evidence? And, aggreing that there is “hakoros hatov’ to the medinah is a stunning reversal from your positions that the medinah is all evil.
Lastly, where do find that the medinah is based on kefirah? Can you find one allusion to that? The Declaration of Independence ends with the quotation “with the belief in the Rock of Israel”.
Please show me where the medinah is based on kefirah.
Akuperma: Of course Dina D’Malchusa Dina applies in Eretz Yisrael. There is a common (potentially intentional) misinterpretation of a Ran that says otherwise. But it applies to the Medinah just as much as to any other modern country.
sam: why do you think the interpretation of that ran is incorrect? It seems the straightforward reading to me.
rabbiofberlin:
1. “Rock of Israel” was a compromise. Ben Gurion et al rejected the idea that the zionist claim was based on Torah (remember they were planning a very secular, socialist state – and a large faction wanted to ally with the Soviet Union), and this was the closest to referring to Torah they would allow.
2. During the 1948 (post agreement on yeshiva exemptions) to 2013 (yeshiva conscription) many rabbanim were quite willing to work with the state. They accepted the money and were content with the yeshiva exemptions (even if it came with a big price – most hareidim were legally banned from accepting jobs outside the hareidi community). That period is over, and it is clear that if conscription of yeshiva students is introduced, many rabbanim who were happy to “collaborate” with the zionists, will reconsider the 1948 to support the medinah (an alternative at the time was to have Palestine become an American colony) and perhaps go back to the positions that led to Dr. De Haan being murdered (and the groups that are now the Edis Hareidis being intimidatged into staying out of politics), names support for a single-state solution including both banks of the Jordan with an autonomous hareidi community under a majority-Islamic government (note that even the worst of the terrorists have rarely targeted hareidim and have never attacked an anti-zionist yeshiva – since 1929 which is well before the medinah and involved some dubious behavior by the British and perhaps the zionists both of whom clearly knew about the attack before hand).
Popa: Because of the context and the reason. I haven’t seen it inside in years, but this is what I thought and Rav Schachter says it very strongly quite often. The Ran is talking about the Din that a government/king has a right to charge taxes to give people the R’shus to live in their land. Since HKBH, and no human king or government, is the Ba’alim on Eretz Yisrael, they have no right to charge for living privileges in Israel. Not that no Dina D’malchusa applies there. Just this one specific instance of it.
I suppose if Rav Schachter says that, he must think that.
But the most natural reading is that he is talking about dina dmalchusa in general–otherwise, does he think there is one reason that applies only to taxes, and one reason that applies to everything else but does not apply to taxes? (because if there is a reason that applies to everything else, he’d need to distinguish why it also doesn’t apply to taxes or doesn’t also apply to eretz yisroel).
also: http://www.hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=16&daf=28&format=pdf
ROB -“And to “health” again: You have to support your contention that Rav Shach z’l was ‘against the medinah”. What is the evidence?”
This was posted a year ago about the Flag there:
“And, aggreing that there is “hakoros hatov’ to the medinah is a stunning reversal from your positions that the medinah is all evil.”
That’s Not what I hold -it’s what some say R’ Kahanemin held to put up the flag -others say he was forced to because of money.
apukerma- I always avoid reading your posts and (of course)responding to them, as they are infused with fantasmagoric inventions and conspiracy theories that are only found in the darkest recesses of your mind. However, as you addressed me, I feel the duty to answer you.
You are correct in saying that the expression “Rock of Israel” was a compromise between some extreme secular parties (led by Mapam, the marxist followers) and the religious parties (led by Mizrachi, by the way) but this is exactly my point. Nowhere do you find that the medinah is based expressly on “kefirah'(as the original poster asserts)and, on the contrary, you se that the wishes of the religious Jews were actually respected,rather than rebuffed.
As per your second point- I am not going to respond to your wild conspiracy theories and your snide accusations that the “rabbonim’ were “collaborating”- an obvious attempt at insulting them, except to say that ‘we shall see” what the future brings.
ROB -“Lastly, where do find that the medinah is based on kefirah? Can you find one allusion to that? The Declaration of Independence ends with the quotation “with the belief in the Rock of Israel”.
Please show me where the medinah is based on kefirah.”
The Status Quo from Wikipedia:
“It was considered that the letter would satisfy the concerns of religious parties. The letter stipulated policy principles in four main areas that were considered fundamental to Orthodox Judaism:
Shabbat – shabbat shall be the day of rest in Israel.
Kashrut – kashrut shall be observed in the kitchens of official institutions of the Jewish state; but privately each individual may choose to observe or not, or how, and to what extent.
Family laws (marriage etc.) – preserving a single judicial system for the purpose of marriage and divorce; with marriage and divorce being conducted in rabbinical courts for Jews and by the relevant religious authorities for people of other faiths, as was already the case before; there shall be no civil marriage.”
Now the question is what were the Frum parties/groups afraid of? Simple they knew the State was being started by a bunch of Kofrim -so if they didn’t guarantee some basic Halacha in the New Medina -there would be absolutely Nothing. The Medina would have nothing to do with real Judaism!
ROB -“So, I would say that having one of the most important gerrer chassidim being intimately involved with the medinah kind of gives the medinah a “hechsher”. Don’t you think so?”
They only agreed to the Medina because of the “Status Quo” which I just quoted. They didn’t want a Medina in the first place, but they agreed B’dieved. I just didn’t know the name of the Agudah’s leader. So the Medina is Treif and nowadays even those who agreed B’dieved to it – would say even B’dieved it’s Treif. Why? Because they are breaking the Status Quo and forcing the draft on the Charedim.
Sam, we pasken like Rambam and the Rashbam that there is dina d’malchuta in EY (Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 369:6). According to the Chatam Sofer (Responsa Choshen Mishpat 44) even the Ran and the Rashba would agree regarding public safety and welfare laws.According to Rav Ovadia (Yechaveh Deah 5:4) and Rav Elaishiv (piskei Din Rabani’im v. 6 p. 376-381)there is dina d’malchuta dina regarding Medinat Yisrael.This is because the source is the agreement of the populace (Rambam Hilchot Gezeila v’Aveida 5:18 and Rashbam Baba Batra 54b d”h v’amar Shmuel dina d’malchuta dina).
Naftush -“I think several commenters on this thread have carried their displeasure with Israel’s old-new draft induction into forbidden territory. Their comments resemble those of Gentile antisemites on Huffpost and Jewish antisemites on Mondoweiss. They speak of an imaginary demonic Israel-of-the-mind that conspires against Hashem and His people and is at fault for everything done to it and much else. Please back down and back off, fast.”
Actually the fact that the Medina is Now reneging on their basic agreements in the Status Quo, which is a mere pittance of observance of the Torah, shows their hatred to Torah and the Charedim who want to keep the Torah. They are the true Antisemites because a Jew is s/o who keeps the Torah and an Antisemite is s/o who hates such real Jews.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.