The Steipler Gaon on Zionism and on the Neteurei Karta

“which is not the case with these licentious ones [הני הפשים]”

I don’t think that translation to “licentious” is accurate. פשים are those who transgress both willfully and, worse, “negligently”.

I would like to thank UJM for posting this. It is especially worthwhile to re-read the following:

וידע מע”כ שגם לצורך קנאות אסור לגלות פנים בתורה שלא כהלכה, ומה שאינו אמת אינו מצליח כלל.

גם לענ”ד אפי’ מי שהחשב שזו אתחלתא דגאולה אע”פ שבאמת אינו כן כי הוא שינוי מגלות לגלות מר יותר שחאומות בדורות האחרונים עכ”פ לא התערבו בענינים של שמירת הדת משא”כ הני הפשים ר”ל, מ”מ מי שסובר שהשינוי משלטון נכרים לשלטון חופשים ורשעים מזרע ישראל הוא אתחלתא דגאולה אינו אלא טועה אבל לא רשע ח”ו שיהא מותר לדבר עליו להר”ר ולבזותו ברבים]

if the steipler said not to publicize the letter, he probably had a good reason (or reasons) for saying so. Could it be that his high praise for NK was one of them? Was the praise only meant for the recipient’s eyes, and no one else’s? Please note, too, that he is unequivocal is his psak to vote in israeli elections – something his NK “friends” would disagree with, to say the least. Final point – is the NK he praises the same NK that exists today? Did NK, 40 years ago, also want Iran to attack Israel? Just asking …

@ujm

there is no connection whatsoever between the neturei karta the steipler is referring too

and the wicked friends of ahmedinejad who traveled to his holocaust denying conference and

who demonstrate in front of the cameras together with people whose hands are stained with innocent yehudi blood

if you think they are one and the same

then I have a bridge in Brooklyn for you to purchase
.
.
.

@Avi_K:
Rabbi Kook learned a lot in Europe but then was “omer al tamei tahor” as per the Gerrer Rebbe; Rav Elchonon Wasserman and the Satmar Rav among others were far, far, more condemnatory of Rabbi Kook. Rabbi Kook’s son, who was far more radical than even his father, was never taken seriously in the Torah world and obviously was not a gadol. The Satmar Rav discusses that chazal, if memory serves, and points out that this sign of the fruits would be when they are miraculous/super-sized, not when they are normal. It doesn’t matter that the land was much less developed in Twain’s time, of course.

Of course, even if those Rabbis Kook did believe that then, and even if either of their opinions did have any Torah authority, it’s been a century or so since that alleged “beginning”, and what we’ve instead seen is, as Rav Elchonon noted, “galus under the yevsektzia, which is the worst galus of all”.

The Zionist “State” was founded completely against the Torah and remains just as forbidden by the Torah; only an idolater (or a fool) would believe that this cataclysmic disaster of unprecedented shmad is the “beginning of the redemption”.

When did the Steipler Gaon approve of the Neturei Karta
attending the Iran-sponsored Holocaust Denial Conference?

@hakatan

have you read the titles rav mibrisk wrote to rav kook ?

have you read the titles the ba’al haleshem wrote to rav kook ?

both were written to rav kook in EY …
.

do you know that rav kook was the mesader kidushin of both rav elyashiv and rav shlomo zalman auerbach ?

do you know that the sefer me’orei ha’eish of rav shlomo zalman has a haskama from rav kook

positioned IN FRONT OF rav yosef hayim zonnefelds ?
.

do you know that rav shmuel auerbach refused the suggestion to omit rav kook’s haskama from the new edition of me’orei ha’eish ?
.

do you know all those details and choose to ignore them ?

or did you just not bother to do the necessary research ?
.
.

either way – it does not reflect very well ….
.
.
.

.
.

@yankel-berel:
As many gedolim wrote, Rabbi Kook wrote and spread heresy in Klal Yisrael, which continues to be spread today by his students and students of his students. Period. This is indisputable as it is simply the facts.

As to your questions, in general:
The Brisker Rav convened the B”D of Brisk for every one of those titles that he felt he needed to use when addressing Rabbi Kook.
Rabbi Kook was mesader kiddushin of the rather young then-bochur Rav Elyashiv, not the nonagenarian gadol Rav Elyashiv. Etc.

As shown above, you can’t bring raayos from stories and/or fairy tales. Stories are very specific in nature and, when quoted, like here, are very much lacking context and other pertinent details.

But the Satmar Rav and Rav Elchonon and others all applied titles to him specifically, titles including “mechabel biKerem Hashem”, “Rasha gamur” and more. Rav Yosef Yedid mockingly called him a Navi (and titled that piece “Regarding an apikoros against whom we must protest”). And that’s besides the others who condemned his Torah, like the Gerrer Rebbe who ruled that Rabbi Kook was “omer al tamei tahor” (and that was after Rabbi Kook supposedly retracted his “controversial” positions – but afterwards essentially rescinded that retraction), etc.

Those are not stories about things that happened, which could have all sorts of reasons that make them irrelevant to anything, like what you quoted; rather, the above are criticisms of Rabbi Kook himself. Just open up a Kovetz Maamarim, for example.

HaKatan, do you know that the Netziv said that the yeshiva in Volozhin was worthwhile if it produced only Rav Kook ztl. Rav Kook was the only student in Volozhin the Netziv allowed to wear teffilin all day. Rav Reuvain Bengis ztl, would not accept the position as head of Eidah HaChareida until after Rav Kook was niftar, given they were both students of the Netziv in Volozhin, he did not want to be in a p[ostion to oppose Rav Kook. Perhaps that is why Rav Bengis was zocheh to have 2 great-granmdchildrem who ate RY in Hesder yeshivot today.

When you argue how NK behaved during “Steipler lifetime”, you need to see – what year was the letter written? Steipler was writing about elections early on – I see one in 1955.

Seemingly Steipler wrote way more about elections than just this one letter. Maybe someone could look up more on his thinking?
here is what I see in secondary sources:
Kreinah D’Igresa letter 739: “I don’t understand the position of the Satmar Rebbe, though I agree with all that was written in his book…nonetheless the people have returned, it is a fact that the people have come back, it is now a reality and therefore whether it was done correctly doesn’t matter, thus now one must vote in order to ensure the safety of Klal Yisrael.
…
all throughout Jewish history Jews were part of the Gentile governments in Europe and of course if one could be in a goyish government he can be in the Jewish government, but nonetheless says the Steipler that one must be very careful that being part of parliament or government is not about getting money, even for the Jews, rather it is about upholding Jewish law.

@hakatan

re rav kook— its not rav elyashiv the young bachur who is taken as proof

although rav elyashiv as chatan not a young bachur , probably could put many, many elderly people to shame …

it is rather his father and mechutan rav avrham elyashiv and rav aryeh levin the tsadiq of yerushalayim and the leshem his grandfather

who were ok with rav kook as mesader kidushin

and rav elyashiv himself as nonagerian who protested at any slight bichvodo shel rav kook

—

the difference between you and other commenters is that you cannot acknowledge any type of nuance

while reality and the whole world is full of nuances
.
.

rav kook was controversial – yes

many disagreed with him – yes

many criticized him – yes

but at the same time – many held of him

and that is the meaning of the word ‘controversial’

why cant you acknowledge that ?
.

rav shlomo zalman took his haskama for his ma’adanei erets and for his me’orei haeish

his son rav shmuel did not let the printers omit his haskama

these are facts and should be acknowledged

like the clear praise the emrei emet lavished on him – even while criticizing him in the same breath
.

why do you insist on communist style censoring ?
.
.

for your knowledge a picture of the leshem adorned the hafets hayims home …
.
.

@ZSK:
Rabbi Kook was indeed very learned and had certain standards that were extremely high, like tznius, for example. He also held that their “State” may not come about through violence and war, which is exactly how it did end up being founded. But all of that doesn’t change what the gedolim held of him, as mentioned above. The Chazon Ish also banned the sale of Rabbi Kook’s books, which included at least Rabbi Kook’s “hashkafa” books, if not also the others. So, no, that would not fit into the rubric of “hardline chareidi”.

The NK back then (in the day of Rav Amram Blau zt”l) was a completely different organization (which started out as a branch of Agudah… you can’t make this stuff up…) They didn’t register their name and logo (if they had one) with the Zionist copyright authorities, so there is no way to legally prevent the psychotic freak show from using their name. The Steipler zt”l was referring to the former NK, not the latter…

One of us has it backwards, and it isnt me. Your commitment to the words of your rabanim is inspiring, but your unwillingness to acknowledge that there are other opinions is shameful.

The Chazon Ish described Neturei Karta as:
“Jews from before Matan Torah,“
by which he meant that their zeal was NOT shaped by the ways of the Torah.

SOURCE: Torah Tavlin, 2009 July 11, Parshat Pinchas

HaKatan:

Let’s pull this apart:

“Rabbi Kook was indeed very learned and had certain standards that were extremely high, like tznius, for example”.

First of all, that is Rav Kook to you. We’ll start there. Show the required respect. And yes, Rav Kook followed halacha meticulously, as is well documented.

“He also held that their “State” may not come about through violence and war, which is exactly how it did end up being founded.”

A defensive war. An actual second attempt at full Shmad after the Churban a few years before. Pikuach Nefesh in the most literal form possible. Does Halacha address that? Yes, you kill a rodef, which is exactly what the Arabs were.

“But all of that doesn’t change what the gedolim held of him, as mentioned above. The Chazon Ish also banned the sale of Rabbi Kook’s books, which included at least Rabbi Kook’s “hashkafa” books, if not also the others. So, no, that would not fit into the rubric of “hardline chareidi”.”

Works being banned by Rabbonim does not make one not Charedi. You clearly don’t know what Charedi means beyond the cultural trappings of such. If Rav Kook were alive today, he’d be voting for UTJ.

ujm > In 1970, the NK held a public protest alongside the PLO outside the United Nations. And this was the NK that the Steipler issued extremely high praise, referring to the Neteurei Karta as his friends and colleagues and wishing them long lives and good days; and saying that he loves every single one of them.

what is the year of the letter? From a quick look, it is one of the earlier elections, maybe 1950s.

@ujm

read the steiplers letter in its entirety and tell me, honestly :

the words ‘neturei karta’ , refer to the edah people or the ones who demonstrated together with the PLO ?
.
.

Fanatical anti-Zionists like UJM and HaKatan win debates,
not because they have better facts, and not because
they have better logic, but because they endlessly repeat
the same completely-refuted claims,
until their opponents quit from overwhelming exhaustion.

It is emotionally exhausting to debate with people like
UJM and HaKatan, who refuse to admit when their opponents
make a valid point, and endlessly repeat the same claims,
even after those claims have been refuted multiple times
in multiple ways by multiple people.

This is what their internal code looks like:

10 Publicly attack Zionists and Zionism at all times.
20 Ignore all statements from non-Charedi Rabbis.
30 Ignore all statements from non-anti-Zionist Rabbis.
40 Ignore all refutations from opponents.
50 Ignore the devastating impact of their own advice.
60 GOTO line 10.

Notice that this code repeats endlessly, and very few people
have the time or the patience to deal with endless repetition,
nor are most people able to cope with having their
perfectly valid facts and logic repeatedly ignored.

And that is how people UJM and HaKatan win debates:
not with facts, not with logic, but with never-ending
repetition and closed-minded fanaticism.

__________________________________________
I have been watching UJM and HaKatan for approximately 2 or 3 years.
During that time, I cannot remember even *** ONE *** time
when they ever criticized Arabs or Muslims or The United Nations
or The New York Times. They criticize Israel *** ONLY ***.

Can you understand why I suspect them of being
paid agents of Hamas or Hezbollah or Iran?

And I am not joking when I say that.

__________________________________________
Another tactic that UJM and HaKatan use to win debates is
constantly attacking their opponents
by accusing them if being heretics and idol-worshipers.

Very few people can tolerate that kind of abuse
for a long time, and they know that.

And that is how UJM and HaKatan win debates:
not with facts, not with logic, but with never-ending
personal attacks against people who disagree with them.

@somejew

I was referring to actions – not to ideology

the actions of demonstrating together with people stained by Jewish blood is UNSAVORY .

Yes .

Definitely .

whether they are of the same ideology or not, is totally immaterial .
.
.

@somejew

your last post got me to laugh

the unsavory tactics of demonstrating together with people whose hands are stained with Jewish blood

and participating in Iranian holocaust denying conferences

are considered unsavory by 99.9 % of orthodox jews

ranging across the whole spectrum , from satmar to mizrachi

from talmidei hahamim gedolim umuflagim to amharatsim gemurim

this [by the way correct] view is held by all of the above , long before my words were posted

and will stay the same after your defense of their underhanded tactics will be long forgotten already

it is not motsi shem ra , nor is it lashon hara

this is pashut to anyone who is part of the 99.9 %
.
.
.
.