Why was the National Anthem or G-D Bless Ameirica not sung by Siyum Hashas?

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Why was the National Anthem or G-D Bless Ameirica not sung by Siyum Hashas?

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 303 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #893711

    yichusdik
    Participant

    Health, it aint going to work. Beyond the mesorah, beyond the sources, I have seen nisim gluyim with my own eyes. Believe what you want. Don’t fool yourself into thinking other opinions are unwarranted. As I’ve said before, I’ll daven for you, and as you’ve said before you’ll daven for me. In the end we won’t know until the nistar is fully nigleh.

    #893712

    bklynmom
    Participant

    If you check Siyums that take place in other countries you will see that there are Nationalistic themes that are brought up. For instance in two Siyum Hashas that occured in Israel, a tefillah for Israeli soldiers, terror victims and those lost at sea (In the Dakar sub), these are Nationalistic concerns.

    An anthem should have been said just as a special tefillah for southern residents of Israel should have been said.

    #893713

    shlishi
    Member

    There was a tefila at the NY siyum for our brethren in prison in North Carolina, Iowa and Boliva. So that was in fact done. There was also Tefilos for the Kedoshim in Europe.

    All set. Everything perfecto.

    #893714

    Kozov
    Member

    Yichusdik, according to most anti-zionists there have ben nisim gluyim going on.

    #893715

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    Health- you named a long list of Gedolim and rabbonim- that you maintain -were against the medinah. Some are totally unknown (R”shaul broch?) and what you neglected to say is that the vast majority lived ,and died, a long time before the medinah was founded (Chofetz Chaim, Rogotshover(Rosen), R’Meir Simchah, R”chaim Soloveitchik, R.Chaim Ozer, Belzer rebbe, the Munkatcher-Shapiro) and we have no way of knowing what they would have said after the Holocaust and after the fact of the medinah. So, let us concentrate on those who lived when the actual medinah was founded. Many of those gedolim actually lived in Eretz ysroel (Chazon ish (karelitz) Rav Hutner, Rav Dushinsky) and others never came out against the medinah after the fact ( Rav Kotler, Rav Gifter, Rav Weismandel) so you are left with literally one person- R’joel teitelbaum, satmarer rebbe. He is the only one who, consistently, railed agaisnt the medinah. No one else did. Whether you think it is the geulah or not, the medinah is here and virtually everybody has accepted that. The old ideological battles are gone. The medinah is here, there are over six million jews living there, amongst them many chareidim, and our duty is to improve what we have. I could not care less whether you sing the Hatikvah-as long as you live in eretz yisroel and contribute to its welfare!

    #893716

    shlishi
    Member

    Saying a Tefila for our brethren is not a nationalistic theme. So just as in EY they davened for our brethren in trouble, so too we here in NY davened for our brethren in trouble. In addition to davening for our brethren languising in prison in NC, IA & Bolivia, there was a general Tefila at the Siyum for all our Yiddishe brethren in prison to be released.

    B”H for the organizers. It was perfect.

    #893718

    Englishman
    Member

    rob: Many of the gedolim opposed to the medina live and lived in Eretz Yisroel. That does not substract one iota their strident opposition to zionism and the medina. Many, in fact, lived there before the medina existed. Others after.

    And they all in fact DID rail againt the medina after it existed. Read the writings and speeches of Rav Hutner. They are readily available in the old issues of the Jewish Observer and other places. He was quite strident in his denunciations of the medina. So were the others (Rav Weissmandel, Chazon Ish, Rav Kotler, etc.)

    #893719

    Avi K
    Participant

    Englishman, many gedolim such as Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank, Rav Yitzchak Herzog, Rav Kahaneman, Rav Yechezkel Sarna, Rav Meshulam Rata, Rav Menachem Kasher, Rav Yosef B. Soloveichik and Rav Tzvi Yehuda Kook were in favor of the Medina. The Chairman of the Aguda in EY, Rav Yehuda Leib Levin signed the Declaration of Independence.

    #893720

    Curiosity
    Participant

    bklynmom, as shlishi said, davening for Jews in harms’ way, or even non-Jews who lemaysah protect Jews is not a nationalistic thing. You could have mentioned the fact that many shuls say a mi sheberach for the US president. That would have been a much stronger question, but the answer to that is that we are blessing him that he may do what’s favorable in Hashem’s eyes and be gracious to the Jews living in his country. We haven’t a care in the world if he gets impeached tomorrow, if somebody who is more moral & more pro-Torah takes his place.

    #893721

    Curiosity
    Participant

    I don’t understand why this discussion has degraded into who is pro- or against the medina. It’s totally irrelevant! I am very pro the medina, but I hold it’s krum as a pretzel!

    It’s not a paradox to wish for the continued well being of the de-facto State of Israel, but at the same time to realize the establishment was against our promise to the nations (as is brought down in maseches Ksubos), and to admit that the current character of the country is a far cry away from Torah ideals. We don’t support the methods of the Israeli government, but we wish for their continued existence for the sake of the lives of all of the Jewish inhabitants there who are in a tremendous makom sakana 24/7.

    The national anthem is a man-made (not Torah based) song of praise to the democratic establishment of the state. The Torah does not believe in democracy, and therefore neither should we. When Mashiach comes and the gedolei hador write a national anthem in honor of the reestablishment of malchus Dovid, we can sing that song at the Siyum Hashas. Deal?

    #893722

    “You didn’t answer my question – why is “Hatikva” appropriate for Jewish events?!?!

    I don’t care how much you love the Israeli gov., but what does the Medina’s national anthem have to do with Judaism outside of Israel?!?!?”

    Hatikvah is appropriate for Jewish events bec as Jews we should recognize and be appreciative of the chayalim that are out there day and night risking their lives defending the country of Jews.

    The American NA should have been sung to recognize and be appreciative to America which is FILLED with Jews who are allowed to practice their religion freely and do not have to live in fear of persecution.

    #893723

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    englishman- I Knew Rav Hutner better than you ever will. I know his articles in the jewish Observer- yet he still lived in eretz yesroel and never,ever,ever asked for its dissolution!!!! Neither were any of the other Gedolim you name. The argument about a medinash is don and buried. All the gedolim you mentioend voted in elections and supported all the chareidi parties. The medina is here and now, it is our duty to make it better.

    to curiosity- please dont’ bring up the old chestnut about sholosh shevuos. Only The satmarer rebbe learns it that way. No one else did or does.

    #893724

    Curiosity
    Participant

    NOMTW, I think the point of misunderstanding between those pro and those against singing NA is the understanding for what NAs celebrate. You view singing the NA as recognition for the chayalim and America’s graciousness to the Jews. Those who oppose using the NA in Jewish events are of the opinion that an anthem celebrates the entire state, with all of its flaws, even those that the state itself doesn’t recognize as faults.

    The reason we oppose using anthems is not because we are Kofeh Tov to the soldiers or to America’s kindnesses. It’s because the anthems celebrate the ENTIRE structures that are the USA and Israel, two countries (among many others) whose governments pride themselves (no pun intended) in allowing freedoms for homosexuality, providing funds, support, and land trade agreements to terrorist sympathizers, having a pop culture that is dedicated to the corruption of tzniyus, and provides a haven for those who speak out against Hashem and against the Torah.

    If you sing the anthem you are praising an entire package, which includes things we are not allowed to condone. That’s why it’s far more appropriate to publicly state “thank you” or to say mi sheberachs which thank the governments in very specific terms, without condoning assur behavior and treif hashkafas.

    #893725

    Curiosity
    Participant

    rabbiofberlin – I disagree. I learned in a non Satmar, Litvish Yeshiva, and the way we were taught the mesorah is that it was against halacha to take the land away from the goyim to build a state on it. Especially a non Torah observant state in the name of Jews. But, since it de facto stands today as a country with many Jews living in it, we must do our hishtadlus to ensure their well being by supporting the security of the state. We also do everything we can to help Torah authorities take positions of power in its government. Lastly, I’ve heard a respected rav from the yeshiva call it “reishis tzmichas geulateinu” when saying mi sheberachs for Jewish soldiers, and I feel as though it is safe to assume he was acting in line with the Yeshiva mesorah. I’m not sure how other Yeshivas understand the Gemara.

    #893726

    Health
    Participant

    No One Mourns The Wicked -“Hatikvah is appropriate for Jewish events bec as Jews we should recognize and be appreciative of the chayalim that are out there day and night risking their lives defending the country of Jews.”

    I’m a little confused, but where in Hatikva does it mention -thanks to the IDF?

    #893727

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    curiosity: I am burning the midnight oil after melava malka…

    First of all, you cannot- CANNOT- use the sholosh shevuos as “halacha”. It is not mentioned in ANY of the Poskim, so whoever tells you that it is “halacha’ is plain wrong. It is aprt of aggadah and hence, it has less authenticity. Secondly, it does not say anything about “taking the land away from to build a state on it”. All it mentions is that “shelo jaalu bechomo”-they should not go up (to israel) with violence . This clearly was not the case as far as the medinah- it was given back to us by the Balfour declaration and the United nations resolution .

    Lastly, the fact that it is “non-Torah observant’ (your words) is irrelevant- look at how the kingdoms of Jehuda and Yisroel were. Many of the kings were much worse than our present governemets in israel.

    But all of the above is just a debating point- the medinah exists, more than six million live there and we must support them.

    #893728

    vochindik
    Member

    The Oaths are quoted L’Halachah in numerous sources, including but not limited to: Piskei Riaz (Kesuvos 111), Responsa Rivash #110, Responsa Rashbash #2, Megilas Esther on Sefer HaMitzvos of Rambam Ramban (Maamar HaGeulah #1 regarding why all Jews outside of Bavel – the majority of Jews at the time – did not go to Eretz Yisroel at Coresh’s call), Rambam (Igeres Taimon – warning peple not to violate the Oaths or else face grave danger), Maharal (Netzach Yisroel 24) writes that even if the Goyim try to force us to take Eretz Yisroel for ourselves during Golus, we must allow ourselves to be killed rather than take violate the Oaths, as well as other places.

    Maharal in Netzach Yisrael:

    ?? ????? ‘????? ?? ???’ ????? ???? ???? ????? ?? ???, ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ???, ?????? ??? ????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?????. ?? ???? ?? ???, ?? ?? ?? ????? ??? ????? ?????, ?? ??? ?????. ???? ????? ‘????? ?? ???’, ???? ???? ?? ?? ???? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ???, ?? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ???. ??? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ????, ??? ????? ??

    The Maharal of Prague’s explains the oaths in his Netzach Yisrael, ch. 24. as saying that these oaths represent absolute prohibitions that one must sacrifice one’s life before violating. In technical terms, these oaths are yehareg ve’al ya’avor. It is better to be martyred than to violate these oaths.

    #893729

    Sam2
    Participant

    Vochindik: With all due respect to the Maharal, his works are Aggadic, not Halachic. Therefore, quoting him in a Halachic argument is not as powerful. Also, this position is seemingly against a Gemara. One Amora on Kesuvos 20a (if I recall correctly) tries to answer up an opinion by saying that R’ Meir must hold that lying on a Shtar is Yeihareg V’al Ya’avor for the Eidim. The Gemara rejects this opinion by saying that we know that only Shfichus Damim, Giluy Arayos, and Avodah Zarah are Yeihareg V’al Ya’avor, so it can’t be that even a Tanna (who we don’t hold by, in this case) holds that there is another one. Thus, it is very problematic for the Maharal here to be adding a fourth.

    #893730

    Curiosity
    Participant

    rabbiofberlin I disagree with everything you said except the last sentence, which I also said myself. Don’t turn me into Neturei Karta, I hate the Neturei Karta and hold they are chayav mita.

    #893731

    vochindik
    Member

    First, the Oaths are not Agada. By definition, Halachah means when the Gemora tells you it is forbidden to do something, which this does. In fact, it says You may not do this, and if you do, you will die. That makes it Halachah. Thats the definition of Halachah. (Similarly, the Oath of Naaseh V’Nishmah is also used by Chazal as Halachah, as in Shevuah chal al Sehvuah etc.) The poskim cite the oaths as halacha, as I cited above. The Oaths are brought down l’halachah in Rishonim and Achronim as viable and very real.

    And secondly, there is no such thing as “just” an aggadic passage. Aggadah informs our religious outlook and cannot be ignored. Rabbeinu Tam writes that you DO pasken from Agadita unless it is against Halachah. Third, even if it is not Halachah, it still represents the Ratzon Hashem, meaning, negation of Halachah would merely relinquish us of any obligations in regard to making a State. But the Gemora clearly says that doing so will cause the deaths of Jews, like animals in the field. Even if that does not create any Halachic obligations, it surely tells us that the State is against the will of Hashem and that its existence causes deaths of Jews.

    The Rambam in Igeres Taimon warns the Jews not to violate the Oaths, or else. He writes there that the Jews are suffering an evil, persecuting government that commits atrocities and wars against the Jews, and therefore the Jews should watch out not to violate the Oath by rebelling against them. It’s clear that even though the Goyim violate their Oath we cannot violate ours. The Medrash Aichah says clearly that the Romans violated their Oath, yet the generation of Bar Kochba was punished Chazal say because they violated the Oaths. The Maharal writes that even if the Goyim force us with torturous death to violate the Oath, we should rather submit to torturous death than violate them. The Oath that G-d gave us not to rebel against the Goyim was NOT for the sake of the Goyim, but for our OWN sake, that we dont end Golus early. It says this in every single interpretation in the commentaries about the Oath. It was not for the sake of the Goyim but for us. So just because the Goyim violated their Oath and hurt us does nto mean we can violate another one and hurt ourselves more! Shevet Efraim left Egypt in violation of the Oaths. Egypt surely violated their Oath when they tortured Jews for centuries. Yet Ephrain, Chazal say, were all hunted donw and killed in the deset for violating their Oath by leaving Egypt early. The Oaths are brought down l’halachah in Rishonim and Achronim as viable and very real. This, despite the fact that the Goyim have been violating their Oath for thousands of years. And besides all this, the second Oath, nshelo yaalu b’chomah has nothing to do with the Goyim, and woud not be dependent on the Goyim’s Oath.

    The Maharal and R. Yonason Eyebushitz write that even if the Goyim give us permission to take Eretz Yisroel we are not allowed to do it. Better we should die than take Eretz Yisroel, the Maharal says. And the Gemora itself disproves the idea, since the Gemora says that the reason Chazal commanded us not to go from Bavel to Eretz Yisroel is due to the Oaths, even though Bavel violated their Oath for sure with the atrocities they committed during the Churban (The Shulchan Aruch writes that the Brachah of Vlamalshinim was enacted to praise Hashem for destroying the evil kingdom of Bavel). The Gemora then asks on R. Zaira who says that the Oaths only include not taking Eretz Yisroel forcefully, but the Oath not to rebel against the nations is not included. The Gemora could easily have answered that Bavel violated their Oath and therefore our Oath of rebelling against them is null. But the Gemora says no such thing. R. Avrohom Galanti (Zechus Avos) brings a story of the people of Portugal who wanted to defend themselves against the government by making a rebellion. The government then was making forced SHmad and all sorts of persecutions. They asked the “shem hameforash” and were told not to do it because it would violate the Oaths.

    #893732

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    Just turned the computer on to find “vochindik”‘s long essay on the sholosh shevuos. He tries very valiantly to describe the “sholosh shevuos’ as halacha, from out-of-context excerpts of Igeres Teiman and the Maharal and others. All I know is that halacha is codified in the Rif, Mishnei Torah, the Tur, the Shulchan Aruch and nowhere,absolutely nowhere, is there even mention of the sholosh shevuos as being normative halacha. So, you ‘ll just have to forgive me if I take your sources very skeptically and will not take an aggadah as indicative how to interpret halacha.

    Additonally, plenty of Poskim have demonstrated pretty conclusively that the sholosh shevuos have lapsed, for many reasons.

    Lastly, and this brings the argument full circle, if it was such a big sin, why were the great bulk of jews who perished in the Holocaust just those jews who espoused the sholosh shevuos and those that ignored them (by moving to Eretz ysroel) were saved?

    #893733

    Health
    Participant

    vochindik – Thank you for explaining the Halacha so people won’t be manipulated by the Zionist lies!

    #893734

    Englishman
    Member

    berlin: Living or moving to EY is not a violation of the shavuos, and no one ever indicated it is. It is the formation of a State that is the violation.

    #893735

    Curiosity
    Participant

    Englishman is correct. Living in the land is undisputedly a big mitzva.

    #893736

    Feif Un
    Participant

    So choppy gets officially recognized as another Joseph alt, and a few days later, this new guy vochindik starts quoting from largely the same sources, saying the same thing. Coincidence? I think not!

    #893737

    Avi K
    Participant

    1.See Mishna Berura 561:1 that being that in his time we did not have independence the cities of Yehuda were considered desolate even though Jews were living in them.

    2. Common sense states that if the Jews were able to make the deset bloom the Land was waiting for its People and we are now in the beginning of the Geula.

    3. The Three Shevuot are aggadata and are not paskened in any code. Even if they did have some halachic standing that was obviated by the Goyim violating their end of the bargain (several times) and then giving permission in the San Remo Conference (Rav Meir Simcha, who was an ardent supporter of the JNF, said this explicitly).

    #893738

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    englishman : did you know that the satmarer rebbe zz’l told his chassidim to move out of eretz yisroel ,so as not to live under the evil “zionim”?

    health; you must be mistaken- “vochindik’ did not show any halacha on this matter.

    #893739

    Curiosity
    Participant

    There’s a valid reason why nobody except the Satmarer Chassidim hold of the Satmarer Rebbe’s sheeta. Besides, the zionists of then are not around anymore. I think all that psak does for us today is lead to derision, machlokes, and sinas chinom, and it causes non frum Jews to hate chareidim and feel alienated from traditional Judaism. It makes it very hard for non frum Jews to associate with frum Jews and prevents their tshuva. It’s a very destructive and irrelevant sheeta all around.

    #893740

    Health
    Participant

    ROB -“health; you must be mistaken- “vochindik’ did not show any halacha on this matter.”

    Well, who should I trust what the Halacha is? The Satmar Rebbe zt’l or some so-called Rabbi from Berlin, Germany – the town where the Maschilim (Reform) started and/or flourished.

    This is a translation of the Satmar Rebbe’s zt’l words found on the web:

    “Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, Al Ha-Geulah ve-al Ha-Temurah, pp. 85-86”

    “The very act of engaging in this war [the Six Day War] was forbidden according to Jewish law, including the coercion of the Jewish People to engage in war with other nations and thereby placing the Jewish People in danger, which is a violation of the Torah. Anyone who violates the Torah and coerces the Jewish People to engage in war and cheapens the blood of thousands upon thousands of Jews by endangering their lives in a forbidden manner and in opposition to the Torah is considered a murderer and sheds innocent blood. Such people are held liable for the blood they cause to be shed. I heard that there were announcements during the war that stated that it was a necessary and positive war according to the Torah!

    However, it is clear as day to anyone who can perceive truth that the source of all suffering, including the dangers of war, is the outcome of the existence of that Zionist state, that is of no value or benefit either to G-d or to the Jewish People. On the contrary, that State is the cause of all suffering and destruction, uprooting of religion and the Torah. The Zionist government is the one who ignited the anger of the Arabs by provoking them in various ways, and were it not for the stubbornness of these wicked rulers there would not be the danger of war. Even now, if they were to give up their State and government, they would doubtless remove the anger of G-d from the Jewish People, and these dangers and deaths would not befall the Jewish People.

    Every single moment that they hold on to their State and government they are reviling G-d in their violation of the Three Oaths through their provocation and rebellion against the Nations, which is prohibited by the Torah, and which brings about the severe punishment for violating the Oaths, as it is written in the Talmud in the tractate Ketuboth, p. 111: … All the more by virtue of this wicked heretical regime that is bringing down the immeasurable anger of G-d against the Jewish People.

    Even according to the natural order, were they to yield their government and Zionist State, there is no doubt that the United Nations could make arrangements to prevent war and bloodshed. How could anyone think that our holy Torah approves of shedding the blood of Jews because of this impure State? There is no doubt whatsoever that it is absolutely forbidden to shed the blood of a single Jewish soul to maintain the entire Zionist State.

    However, most people err, and carry the vain belief and wanting to retain the State that is destroying the nature of the Jewish People. Thus, most Jews have fallen into heresy thereby. The view of our Torah has never changed, however, and rejects their State and government. Anyone who as much as believes that the State is necessary is accepting idolatry without a doubt, and such person considers Jewish blood to be valueless. This is totally in opposition to the teachings of our Torah that seeks to preserve life.”

    #893741

    Health
    Participant

    Curiosity -“There’s a valid reason why nobody except the Satmarer Chassidim hold of the Satmarer Rebbe’s sheeta.”

    You’re in a dream world. Many Frum Yidden hold this way, not just Satmar. I’m not Satmar and I agree with them about the Medina.

    Go to the website called – Jews against Zionism and there they have a list of Gedolim/Rabbonim against the Medina. They have three lists -one around the First WW, another around WW2, and the third later on.

    #893742

    Avi K
    Participant

    RabbiofBerlin, even the Satmar Rebbe himself admitted that he was a daat yachid. Just out of curiosity, was this pesak given before or after he was stoned in Meah Shearim for riding in a car after what we hold to be shekiah (and before Rabbenu Tam time) on Leil Shabbat

    #893743

    shlishi
    Member

    There was never such an incident in Meah Shearim with the Rebbe.

    #893744

    Curiosity
    Participant

    Health that website is frighteningly similar to Neturei Karta’s website, and in the same manner as NK they refer to themselves as “True Torah Jews”; as if anyone who holds of a different sheeta is an imposter. Krum krum krum.

    #893745

    Health
    Participant

    Curiosity -“Health that website is frighteningly similar to Neturei Karta’s website, and in the same manner as NK they refer to themselves as “True Torah Jews”; as if anyone who holds of a different sheeta is an imposter. Krum krum krum.”

    What you’re saying that it’s NK in order to Passel them. Kol Hapoisel B’momo Poisel. You just can’t admit that there are real Gedolim who are against the Medina.

    I looked into the website and even though I can’t say for sure that it isn’t NK, because I don’t know who are the members of NK, all I can say is they have Haskomos from across the board. The Karlsburg Rebbe is one. Harav Hagons Reb Dovid & Reb Mayer Soloveitchiks are others and there are many more.

    Stop trying to marginalize this Shitta by calling it NK. Lots of big Gedolim hold like the Satmar Rebbe Zt’l.

    How about you listing some of your Gedolim who hold of the Medina? And I’m talking about the here and now within the last 40 years.

    #893746

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    health- your long excerpt from the satmarer rebbe’s sefer proves my point. At no time does he mention even one psak halacha. It is not halacha. Incidentally, what do you think would have happened if the jews did not defend themselves in the Six Day war??(mentioned in the excerpt).

    shlishi- no one has ever denied the Torah greatness of the satmarer rebbe zz’l. (I wish that the chareidi world would show the same respect to rav kook zz’l but I am digressing). But so was Shammai and his talmidim, so was Rav Eliezer Hagodol, so was the Rambam, so was the Gro and thousands of other great Rabbonim and Poskim. This does not mean that we always listen to them in matters of halacha and conduct. Quite the contrary- see the chassidim in recent years, see the chachomin versus rav Eliezer in talmudic times and in many other instances.

    The fact is irrefutable: the vast majority of Gedolim (even the ones mentioned) did not accept the extreme view of the Satmarer rebbe zz’l.

    #893747

    Feif Un
    Participant

    health: You say someone can’t admit that there are big gedolim who were against the medinah. Yet you can’t admit that there were/are big gedolim who are very in favor of the medinah!

    #893748

    Curiosity
    Participant

    Health – I never said anything about “holding of the Medina.” You don’t need to believe that the Knesset’s authority is Torah leMoshe miSinai to hold that the State of Israel shouldn’t be abolished. Some recent gedolim who hold that the state should continue to exist and be supported are Rav Kook. Rav Pam. Rav Hanoch Leibovitch of Chofetz Chaim and his father R’ Dovid Leibovitch. Rav Sheinberg. Rav Kaduri and the Baba Sali along with a long list of Rabbis from the Abuchatzera family. Rav Ovadia Yosef lehavdil lechayim. Just to name a few recognized Rabbis with a large following in a broad sample of different sects.

    #893749

    shmoel
    Member

    No gedolim were in favor of Jewish sovereignty prior to ’48.

    #893750

    yichusdik
    Participant

    If you think that attitudes on Jewish sovereignty among everyone – gedolim and non gedolim alike – was not impacted by the Shoah, you are being foolish.

    The destruction of 2/3 of the Jewish people in Europe was ample reason for anyone to take a second look at their rationales. Any one who didn’t consider the change in circumstances post war would be like someone who stubbornly determined to continue walking as if he had two legs when one had been amputated.

    #893751

    Health:

    “I’m a little confused, but where in Hatikva does it mention -thanks to the IDF?”

    The predominant theme in the stanzas is the establishment of a sovereign and free nation in the Land of Israel. This is a freedom that the IDF works every day to protect.

    #893752

    Health
    Participant

    No One Mourns The Wicked- “The predominant theme in the stanzas is the establishment of a sovereign and free nation in the Land of Israel. This is a freedom that the IDF works every day to protect.”

    Now you’re saying something else. The IDF is not thanked in Hatikva, but we have to thank the Zionists for making a state.

    So why did you mention the IDF? Sounds like you’re trying to play on people’s emotions.

    And no, some of us believe it wasn’t a good thing to have a “Jewish” state!

    #893753

    Health
    Participant

    rabbiofberlin -“health- your long excerpt from the satmarer rebbe’s sefer proves my point. At no time does he mention even one psak halacha. It is not halacha. Incidentally, what do you think would have happened if the jews did not defend themselves in the Six Day war??”

    You obviously didn’t read it! He doesn’t say a Jew can’t defend himself. He says it’s Ossur to have wars with the Goyim, even the 6 day war – where Israel won – if they could avoid them. He says these wars in Israel can be avoided if they give up the State!

    And what do you think this quote is, if not Halacha?

    “Every single moment that they hold on to their State and government they are reviling G-d in their violation of the Three Oaths through their provocation and rebellion against the Nations, which is prohibited by the Torah, and which brings about the severe punishment for violating the Oaths, as it is written in the Talmud in the tractate Ketuboth, p. 111:”

    #893754

    Curiosity
    Participant

    With all due respect to the Satmarer Rebbe, his psak regarding eretz Yisrael is about as relevant today as a daas yochid yesh omrim regarding what bracha to make on the Mannah. It’s completely irrelevant to our times, and even if it was relevant most people don’t hold from it. There’s no way to abandon the state without leaving millions of Jews dead. So can we just stop bringing up his extreme sheeta?

    #893755

    Englishman
    Member

    The only primarily difference between the Satmar Rebbe and the Litvish gedolim is regarding taking, where possible ex post facto control of things in Israel from a governmental direction. Rav Aharon Kotler and those who followed him held being a member of the Knesset, voting for the most Torah-dik parties, and things like that are a Mitzvah, because they constitute damage control. The Satmar Rav held they are an aveirah because they make you an accessory to the crime after the fact. The Gedolei Yisroel who disagreed with the Satmar Rav held that fighting the Zionists is better done not by open confrontation but by doing, say, what Reuven did when he wanted to save Yosef, or what Aharon HaKohen did when he tried to stop the Egel from being made: Deal with them on their turf – use the State of Israel, and manipulate the political process to make it as frum as possible, thereby accomplishing hatzolah purtah.

    There were disagreements between Satmar and Rav Aharon (and other gedolim), but none of those invovled whether Israel was a good or bad thing. On that, there was no disagreement. On that they all agreed it was bad. But the Satmar Rav himself said that handing Eretz Yisroel back to the Palestinians is not a good idea – halvai it would be! The Satmar Rebbe says that there is no other solution for the undoing of the State except our prayers, or, in the case of Vayoel Moshe, the State should only be undone via G-d’s power from above. He says the ONLY solution is prayer, not giving the State to the Arabs; Not negotiation, not fighting, not anything except prayer – except G-d intervening from On High. Of course Satmar would like to see the State abolished – so would the other Gedolim – Rav Shach ZTL used to pray every day for the peaceful disappearance of the State of Israel. And above all, the Satmar Rav never, ever joined with Arabs in any of his anti-Zionist activites, nor were Arab interests invited to his anti-Zionist rally in Washington, or any of his anti-Zionist activities.

    At Rav Aharon Kotler’s funeral in Lakewood, the Satmar Rav gave the most amazing hesped, and when the Satmar Rav was offered the job of Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (after the petirah of Rav Yosef Chaim Zonenfeld), he declined, and when they asked him for a recommendation, he told them to ask the Brisker Rav. They surely disagreed – very strongly sometimes – but they did agree that they are all authentic Gedolei Yisroel.

    One of the things all the gedolim agreed on was that there should not have been be a State of Israel altogether. No Godol ever said that if we give Israel back to the Arabs the problem will be solved. On the contrary, the Satmar Rebbe ZTL made it clear in writing that we dare not , in the current situation encourage any political dismantling of Israel, because it will lead to a bloodbath r”l. Only Mochiach, he says will have the ability to get us out of the mess that the Zionists made. And he says the reason that politics and peaceful dismantling will not work is – Divrei Yoel Parshas Bo p.250 – because the Arabs do not distinguish between one type of Jew and another, unfortunately.

    #893756

    zahavasdad
    Participant

    No Gedolim were in favor of mass emigration to the US prior to around 1939 either

    #893757

    shlishi
    Member

    A) Prior to 1939 there was no reason to think of mass emigration.

    and besides

    B) The U.S. wasn’t accepting mass Jewish immigration from Europe. (And the British weren’t accepting mass immigration to Palestine.)

    And come to think of it, Chazal weren’t advocating mass emigration prior to the massacre by the Romans.

    #893758

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    englishman-health and all the others: you keep on fighting very old battles and have added little of substance. The facts on the ground are concrete- there is a medinah today- its dismantling would cause the death and exile of millions of jews and-unless we have chas vecholilo a third churban- is totally delusionary. To say-as you said- that the satmarer rebbe prayed for its “peaceful’ dissolution is a delusion and, to boot, a dangerous delusion. As far as R’Aaron zz’l and rav Shach zz’l ,I don’t believe for one moment that they prayed for the destruction of the medinah. Did they have major differences with the zionists? Of course, but this is why there are religious parties in the Knesset. Lastly, I still have not seen one mention of a “Psak halacha” by the Satmarer rebbe. The sholosh shevuos are not halacha.

    #893759

    zahavasdad
    Participant

    There WAS mass emigration prior to 1923 when quotas were placed and it was Assur to emigrate to the US

    #893760

    Health
    Participant

    rabbiofberlin -“englishman-health and all the others: you keep on fighting very old battles and have added little of substance. The facts on the ground are concrete- there is a medinah today- its dismantling would cause the death and exile of millions of jews and-unless we have chas vecholilo a third churban- is totally delusionary. To say-as you said- that the satmarer rebbe prayed for its “peaceful’ dissolution is a delusion and, to boot, a dangerous delusion.”

    You and all the other Zionists are in a delusional state. And you keep repeating the same old – same old. You think by repeating it umpteen times that it becomes true?!?! And stop with if we give away the Medina it will cause bloodshed. I posted about this before in the topic of “Argument against the Madina”:

    “Hakatan- I agree with everything you say , but this:

    “Regarding the latter, there is no question that the State of Israel exists and that since they have (foolishly) assumed responsibility (sad as that has been) for so many of our brethren, they cannot simply pack their bags.”

    Who says? Maybe the Turks will take it, if offered?

    They never hated Jews and until recently they even liked the State of Israel.”

    “Lastly, I still have not seen one mention of a “Psak halacha” by the Satmarer rebbe. The sholosh shevuos are not halacha.”

    Edited: Saying something is Ossur -means that’s the Halacha! Here is the quote again:

    “Three Oaths through their provocation and rebellion against the Nations, which is prohibited by the Torah,”

    #893761

    yichusdik
    Participant

    Shlishi – Prior to 1939, Hitler (Y’S)was in power FOR SIX YEARS. He had written Mein Kampf in 1925 and 1926, so it was 14 years since his hatred and his plans were public.

    Winston Churchill started to warn about a resurgent Germany in the early 1930’s.

    Ze’ev Jabotinsky was talking about this to everyone he could reach in the mid 1930s and by 1936 he was bringing his “Evacuation Plan” to the public.

    It is 100% accurate to say that the Western nations clsoed their doors. At the Evian conference in 1938, they made it very clear that they wouldn’t even try. The Immigration minister in my own country, to its shame, said of Jewish immigration from Europe “None is too many.”

    However, it is completely inaccurate to say that no one saw it coming. If Ze’ev Jabotinsky could, so could the gedolim of the time. They didn’t.

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 303 total)
  • The topic ‘Why was the National Anthem or G-D Bless Ameirica not sung by Siyum Hashas?’ is closed to new replies.


Trending