Settlers are RODFIM

Here are the words of Shulchan Aruch YD 267 84: עבד שאמר לעלות לארץ ישראל כופין את רבו לעלות עמו או ימכור אותו למי שיעלהו שם רצה האדון לצאת לחוצה לארץ אינו יכול להוציא את עבדו עד שירצה ודין זה בכל זמן אפילו בזמן הזה שהארץ ביד עובדי כוכבים:
“When a slave asks his master to move to Eretz Yisrael, we compel his master to move there with him or to sell him to someone who is moving there. When a master living in Eretz Yisrael desires to move to the diaspora, he cannot compel the slave to move with him against his will. This law applies in all times, even in the present era, when the land is ruled by gentiles.” That does sound very straightforward. “In all times, even in the present era…” doesn’t seem to leave a lot of wiggle room.
The Avnei Nezer quotes this psak in his long teshuva about יישוב ארץ ישראל nowadays.
As to why the medinah came into being through secular Jews, I have heard two additional suggestions: 1) to avoid kitrugim, just like מלכות בית דוד came into being through Yehudah and Tamar, Rus, and all the rest of them 2) יכין רשע וילבש צדיק (ב”מ סא:)

To somejewiknow, I was once a tinok shenishba, but then I was fortunate to meet some nice frum people who decided “not to kill me quickly.” And they shared Shabbos and were kind. They taught me about Yiddishkeit. Then I became a “Baalat Teshuva. Not only me, but at least a million more. I then went on to influence others to do mitzvos and keep the Torah. You call this heresy?!
When I made the comment, Hashem does everything, You responded Hashem does everything, including the Holocaust and its partner the State of Israel. Why do you use the language of the extreme left who wants us destroyed?

@somejewionow

This is why learning Torah should be restricted to the top few. Having someone with a little knowledge spew kefira dressed as a frum Jew is more dangerous than a secular Jew.

Pirkei d’R’ Nusen is a Medrish, not halacha. We do not poskrn from a Medrish. It directly contradicts the genera “Yisrael af al pi shechata, Yisrael hu” A Jew remains a Jew even if they sin (Sanhedrin 44a).

As a Kofer, you deliberately left out the next Halacha of what the Rambam was saying אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשָּׁמַע אַחַר כָּךְ שֶׁהוּא יְהוּדִי
וְרָאָה הַיְּהוּדִים וְדַתָם — הֲרֵי הוּא כְּאַנּוּס,
שֶׁהֲרֵי גִּדְּלוּהוּ עַל טָעוּתָם.

So thank you for backing up my earlier statement that today’s Yeshiva Bochorim are the Rodfim. You classically have shown how someone turns the Torah into a weapon.

anon1m0us:
By your “logic”, the partisans fighting the Nazis were rodfim. Better they should have left occupied Poland than divert resources from the Nazis murdering Jews.

Riva:
The Holocaust, which Zionists worship, was also from Hashem. That was obviously din, not a good thing. Regarding the Zionist paradise, there’s no need for “perhaps” this or that, because all the Torah authorities have spoken about this already and, to anyone with half a brain, the cataclysmic disaster of Zionism is painfully obvious. As to what happened in 1948, the Zionist “State” coming into being was a result of prayers answered for that “State” even though that was horrifically bad for the Jews and prevented Mashiach from coming then according to both the Brisker Rav and Satmar Rav.

Nobody is speaking badly about Jews in the holy land who have become more religious, etc. Judgement is indeed for Hashem. But, no, it is not forbidden to speak about everyone. Hilchos L”H dictate about whom it is and is not permitted to speak.

We can bring Mashiach by changing our attitudes towards the idol and not perpetuating the same mistake made in 1948 of praying for that idol which literally stopped Mashiach from coming then according to both the Brisker Rav and Satmar Rav.

Thank you!!! Absolutely brilliant! Blessings from us in Israel, Betar Ilit, Riva

@ZSK:
Before calling names, you might want to learn the actual history, not nonsense propaganda (and just ignorance).
No, it is your so-called analysis which is totally ignorant. To your “points”:

1. The Chevron Massacre of course occurred AFTER the Zionists invaded and BECAUSE OF Zionism.
To clarify, though, the Jews who moved there non-politically, like the students of the GR”A and how Chovevei started, are obviously not “invaders”. Even the Mufti YM”S told Rav Yosef Chaim that he had no problem with Jews coming to live there, only if the Jews would try to rule over them which is what the Zionists did in the name of Jewry. But Jews, like anyone else, may choose to live anywhere in the world. So, “invasion” remains appropriate when describing the Zionists.

2. Your question about the White Paper and the Brits “slamming shut” the doors in 1939 again totally missed the historical context. This was AFTER decades of Zionist agitation after the Zionists invaded DECADES before, including Zionist terror against both the local British and the Arabs. In other words, if not for the Zionists, not only would the Holocaust not have happened, but the British would have opened the doors of Palestine to Jews, not slammed them shut due to Zionist agitation in the holy land.

3. The British were perfectly capable of defending the Jews, but the Zionists agitated and terrorized both the Arabs and British leading up to 1948. The Zionist precursor-armies had been in action for decades before 1948. As well, the only reason the Arabs massed in 1948 was the impending Zionist declaration of their “State”. Regardless, even if that Arab massing had been totally unrelated, the Zionists could still have used their armies as they had but not taking that final inflammatory step of declaring a “State”.

4. This is the most obvious of all the points noted. The Brisker Rav criticized Agudah for even contemplating working with the Zionists prior to 1948 due to the tremendous rivers of Jewish blood that would be and were needed to establish that “State”. The Satmar Rav writes the same criticism about the Zionists’ war in 1967, that it, too, could have been avoided. Zionism also caused the Holocaust. That’s not very pro-Jewish life. In that Holocaust, the Zionists explicitly and repeatedly (and confirmed years later that they would not have done any differently) and proudly prioritized Zionism over saving Jewish lives. Zionism above all else, including Jewish lives. Ask any honest Zionist for the truth; it is that simple.

5. No, the forever wars were launched by the Zionists who should never have invaded in the first place and who agitated terror and wars in the decades prior to 1948.

@Hakatan,

Halevai the Satmar chassidim were partisans during WW2 and not listened to their Rebbe. Millions would still be alive today.
The fact you can even consider another Jew a Nazi brings doubt on your yichus. You definitely have a pagam since you sound like a Palistinian. It seems by the way you talk, Palistinian and Satmar have more in common than Satmar and Judaism.

zsk:
They very much do. It’s a big part of their religion. They have a “national” “holiday” dedicated to the Holocaust, and consider it a prime example of their fantastical reason for existing as a “nation” and the resultant need to sacrifice humans on the altar of Zionism. The Zionists constantly crank out propaganda that the Holocaust would have never happened had Zionism and its army been around then, conveniently not mentioning that Zionism was very much around then and the Zionists not only caused it but contributed to it by, for example, lobbying governments against allowing Jews to escape to their countries because that wouldn’t look good for Zionism (even though the British had closed the Holy Land due to Zionist agitation there).

anon1m0us:
Making assumptions about people isn’t very smart.
Also, as the whole world knows, had the Zionist Kastner not lied to all the Hungarian Jews, they all could have escaped a few miles away and the Nazis would not have been able to mass murder the million Jews of Hungary. And no Rav ever collaborated with the Nazis, unlike the evil Zionists.
Finally, a Jew could, according to the Torah, be worse than a Nazi. Gadol haMachtio min haHorgo, as noted, for example.
The fact that you cannot accept the Torah’s views means perhaps you are the one who should be concerned for a “pegam”.

Is laying down is middle of a highway to protest something being warped? yes
Is living in a caravan without running water surrounded by Arabs warped? Yes

You may not like the statement but it’s not loshen horah

@riva
i can’t begin to understand why you make fun of the words of the Rambam. The rest of what you wrote is equally nonsensical.

@anon1m0us
nothing I wrote was novel. they are all points made clearly and regularly by both contemporary and classic gadolim.
I don’t know what you mean to say in your criticism, as I referenced the sefer Chofetz Chaim which, in line with a long line of gadolim before him, brings my point l’halucheh.
The gemara “af al pi” means (over there) that one single aveira (the hava amina of the gemara) would sever a Jew from being Jewish, and the gemara says that is not the case. The way it is uses in poskim, like in baal ha tanya’s shulchan aruch, is that even a kofer is still obligated in the mitzvos despite not being part of klal yisroel.
see this usage from shulcha aruch harav, hilchos ribis:

עו מומר שיצא מן הכלל דינו כנכרי לענין רבית שמותר להלוותו ברבית
שכיון שעובד ע”ז מין הוא ומורידין אותו למיתה וכיון שגופו מופקר ומותר
לאבדו כ”ש ממונו ומותר לאבדו וה”ה ליטלו לעצמו באיזו תחבולה שאפשר
ואין לחוש שמא יצא ממנו זרע טוב כיון שנטמע בין הנכרים . וי”א שכל
שאינו אדוק בע”ז כגון כומר לע”ז אינו מין ואין מורידין גופו וה”ה שממונו
אינו מופקר וטוב לחוש לדבריהם אם אפשר להשמט ממנו שלא להלוותו :
עז אבל ללוות ממנו ברבית אסור לד”ה משום ולפני עור כו’ ומשום לא תשיך
לאחיך שאף שהמומר אינו נחשב אח אצלינו אנו נחשבים אחים אצלו
ומוזהר שלא ליקח ממנו נשך שאע”פ שחטא ישראל הוא והנותן לו נשך עובר
בבל תשיך שהיא אזהרה ללוה שלא לגרום למלוה לישוך כל שהמלוה
מוזהר עליו

here is an AI translation for am harutzim:

Seif 76
A Mumar (apostate) who has completely departed from the collective [of the Jewish people] has the status of a Gentile regarding Ribbis, such that it is permitted to lend to him with interest. Since he worships Avodah Zarah (idolatry), he is considered a Min (heretic) and [the law is that] we cast him down to death (moridin oso). Since his body is declared ownerless (hefker) and it is permitted to destroy him, how much more so is his money [ownerless] and permitted to be destroyed; and the same applies to seizing it for oneself by any stratagem possible.
One need not be concerned that perhaps “good seed” (righteous offspring) will issue from him, since he has intermingled (nitma) among the Gentiles.
However, there are those who say (Yeish Omrim) that as long as he is not devout (aduk) in Avodah Zarah—for example, a priest of Avodah Zarah—he is not considered a Min and we do not cast down his body; consequently, his money is not deemed hefker. It is proper to be concerned for their words, if it is possible to evade him so as not to lend to him.
Seif 77
However, to borrow from him with interest is forbidden according to all opinions, due to Lifnei Iver (“Do not place a stumbling block…”) and due to “Lo Sashich L’Achicha” (“You shall not cause your brother to take interest” – Deut 23:20). For even though the Mumar is not considered a “brother” to us, we are considered “brothers” to him, and he is warned not to take neshech (interest)—for even though an Israelite has sinned, he remains an Israelite.
The one giving him the neshech violates “Lo Sashich”, which is a warning to the borrower not to cause the lender to “bite” (take interest), [a prohibition applicable] as long as the lender is subject to the warning.

you asked me about a “next part” fo the rambam, but I quoted the end of that sugya. you seem to be refereing to a preceding statement. reveiw and get back to me and try to make a coherent point.

@always_ask_questions
the place where the chofetz chaim quotes that prikei d’r’nusen is in
chofetz chaim. section 8. halach 5:

ה. וכל זה האיסור של לשון הרע הוא דוקא על איש שעל פי דין תורה הוא עדיין בכלל “עמיתך”, דהיינו עם שאיתך בתורה ובמצות. אבל אותן האנשים שמכירם שיש בהם אפיקורסות, מצוה לגנותם ולבזותם, בין בפניהם ובין שלא בפניהם, בכל מה שהוא רואה עליהם או שומע עליהם. דכתיב: “לא תונו איש את עמיתו” ולא “תלך רכיל בעמיך”, והם אינם בכלל זה, שאינם עושים מעשה עמך. ונאמר: “משנאיך ה’ אשנא ובתקוממיך אתקוטט” וכו’.
ואפיקורוס נקרא הכופר בתורה ובנבואה מישראל, בין בתורה שבכתב ובין בתורה שבעל פה, ואפילו הוא אומר: כל התורה מן השמים, חוץ מפסוק אחד או קל וחומר אחד או גזירה שוה אחת או דקדוק אחד – גם הוא בכלל זה.

here is an AI translation for am harutzim:

This entire prohibition regarding Lashon Hara applies specifically to an individual who, according to Torah law, is still categorized as “your colleague” (amitecha)—meaning, a people who are with you in Torah and Mitzvos.
However, regarding those individuals whom one knows to possess Apikorsus (heresy), it is a Mitzvah to denigrate them and shame them, whether in their presence or not, regarding anything one sees or hears about them. For it is written: “Do not aggrieve, each man his colleague” (Leviticus 25:17) and “Do not go as a talebearer among your people” (Leviticus 19:16)—and these [heretics] are not included in this category, for they do not perform “the deeds of your people” (ma’aseh amcha). Furthermore, it is stated: “Those who hate You, Hashem, I shall hate, and with those who rise up against You, I shall contend,” etc. (Psalms 139:21).
An Apikores is defined as one who denies the Torah and prophecy from Israel, whether the Written Torah or the Oral Torah. Even if he states, “The entire Torah is from Heaven,” except for a single verse, or a single Kal Vachomer (a fortiori deduction), or a single Gezeirah Shavah (verbal analogy), or a single grammatical inference—he is also included in this category.