Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
yankel on mitzrim – exactly, you can have hakarat hatov and still have other restrictions. You can have appreciation to what Zionists did without becoming a chosid of Ben Gurion.
But your underlying premise seems to be that zionists brought damage to yirat shamayim. I question that. I think most of early non-religious zionist followers were either non-religious already or on the way of becoming such. In other words, without zionists, most of those Jews would have been communists, culturalists, converts, bundists, etc. That was the reality of the times. And while zionist propaganda sounded awful to religious ears at the time, in political reality, they guided these multitudes to be savevd both physically and spiritually.
I appreciate if someone could find what Chofetz Chaim wrote about zionists and RZs.
yankel, a fair question on who is a talmid chochom. Your definition are the right ones. There are mentions of T’Ch that describe his behaviors, which can be considered definitions. For example, if you see a T’Ch going somewhere inappropriate at night, you don’t have to tell him in the morning because he surely did teshuva. So, this means, T’Ch may do an aveirah, but he reviews his actions daily.
The problem with these definitions is that they require close observation and our own judgment. Sometimes, you can make the judgment from the stories. for example, about spare time and priorities, there is a story about R Soloveitchik getting into analysis of a Rambam during a Thursday afternoon class when he was usually flying from YU home to Boston. When someone reminded him that it is time for him to fly home, he said – nobody is leaving this room until we understand this Rambam …
So, correlation between different chachomim seems like a reasonable method to me. There is nothing new here. This is how haskamos work!
This method relies on halochos – how one T’Ch should relate to another. And it is observable – there are witnesses that saw meetings and talks, and books where Rabbis mention or give haskama.you need to start with why you need internet.
If you don’t need it, don’t use it, with or without filters. This is like everything else in life. If you don’t need a boat, don’t buy it.
When you, or your family, need certain activities on internet, like learning Torah or umanut, focus on that task. I am sure if you are searching for laws of shehitah, the worst you are going to see is pictures of cut cows.
My observations are
– OOT move to in town or suburbs, wanting to be near shuls and schools
– in town moves to greater lakewood/monsey to get a bigger & cheaper apartment and get away from gangsters
– lakewood moves oot to get jobs in jewish schools
– some lakewoodians get richer and moves to Toms River and then correct you when you mention that they are from lakewoodyankel > who said that without the zionists the haredim coming after 1948 would not be able to enter EY ?
without zionists, EY would have been under an Arab rule, I think we agreed on that. Look at all neighbors and take your chances: Jordan, PLO, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Iraq. Which of these countries would invite any outsiders? Maybe UAE …
so, in 1948, all Jews from eastern europe would be sent back to Soviet area of occupation – poland, hungary, etc. Several millions of anti-soviet russians were sent from western occupation zone and went straight to Gulag.
then, all Sephardi Jews would have stayed under Saddam, Assad, Homeini.
yankel > the fault lies exclusively with the illegal judicial overreach …if parliament and the politicians would call the shots, as should be
and again:
> was the elected parliament who voted for the tal law … and it was the unelected clique which canceled it …I am trying to point out to you that this is how modern systems work (post-Athens) – not every element of the system is based on voting. There are various mechanism to limit direct vote because it is so unstable. Courts specifically are indirectly elected. To my uninformed eye, Israeli system seems too indirect – you have totally unelected organizations voting; and you have do not have a good constitutional system that can be used by judges to use. These flaws are good arguments for reform, but they are not good arguments to call current political situation “illegal”.
yankel > that clearly puts OTD in a whole new and different category to stam issurin
Well, you are comparing with physical danger at the same level (while gemora compares unlikely sakanah with unlikely issur). But again the worst attitude is to not do anything to deal with the danger.
yankel > for the simple reason that not less of a personage than the rambam is the one who advocated for relocating to the desert….
this is exactly the point of the discussion. Rambam offers midbar as an option when other options are not working out. Stands to reason that this is not the ideal lifestyle for generations. I wonder whether any commentaries on rambam discuss that.
The pro-midbar position seem to be that the problem is still out there, so we need to stay sheltered. True, modernity created this new spiritually unsafe environment that does not go away. So, is the answer to stay in midbar until Moschiach comes or humanity rejects modernity and goes back to a manageable state? As Einstein predicted that WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones … This position seems to originated pre-Chazon Ish, when Alter Rebbe took a pro-Czar anti-Napoleon position contrary to most other leaders: danger of modernity v. old-style oppression. (He had a reason though – his hassidim were further east than most others, so the chances that they’ll stay under the Czar were higher). Did he expect that modernity will go away under Czar’s rule?
So, if we accept that it is not ideal to stay sheltered for hundreds of years, then the question is – when and what exit strategy. Hope I explained this better now.
google and AI are trainable. If you don’t look for inappropriate material, then when you do search for appropriate material, inappropriate stuff will not come up (especially, if you have filter on in google search – put that on if you did not do it yet).
> Anyone who came pre-48 generally did so without their emigration being facilitated by the Zionists.
it was not separate also. Growth of the community, increase in money and jobs, and security allowed more people to come even if they were not party members.
cheifsmerel, I think you are right – everyone who came after 1880 was in some sort of cooperation with Zionists. Maybe not direct. Sochnut took over donor funds somewhere in 1920s – and redirected them to kibutzim from Tel Aviv area manufacturing (this is where Zionists indirectly contributed to loss of life in Europe – manufacturing allowed for more jobs, more jobs would invite more German and other Jews to come). But even those who came with the help of non-political money (from Montefiore to simple people like my great-grandfather who were funding through funds) – those people were sending money to settling EY even when they were not so political. And yo can argue that Montefiore trying to create jobs in old yishuv contributed to those charedim who joined there. So, maybe confusion is that there was no such demarcation between political zionists and other Yidden as we view it now.
The captcha thing is discriminating against illiterates.
Dovid > How is Chabad different from other Chasiduses? Is it their acceptance of different levels of observance?
But being actively involved in teaching those people. This was already a thing under the previous, Fridriker, Rebbe who was sending his students to small communities for several years only before the current system when shluchim settle in one place.
> that Lakewood has been draining the frum populations of most out of town communities
I think proud Tom’s River residents are mostly refugees from in-town or around-town communities. I did not see a big aliya from Topeka to Jackson.
I wonder what would R Kotler do now? Probably move the yeshiva to Topeka.
late 19th century movement was usually supported by Zionists and general Jewish public, not just the several rich people who usually get credit.
I found a somewhat-modernishe (but not socialist or zionist) newspaper from those times, where my great-grandfather is on the list of people at a wedding who contributed to a fund supporting Jews in EY.
political events that affect multitudes and, in this case, public opinion in US deserve attention.
> A] Non haredi rabbis have no business at all stepping into haredi institutions , let alone administering tests …
This is another feature that I see throughout charedi culture – resistance to any kind of transparency. I understand that it worked 300 years ago and we had shtadlanim who quietly pressed our case. But in our days, resisting any kind of objective measures creates an impression that there is also lack of honesty.
Again, bringing a US example so that we can see that this is not Israel specific – NY yeshovos are accused of subpar teaching of general studies and the response is – look at these ones with good studies and look at Mr X who is an accountant. I am yet to see someone showing here are Regents exams and here is percentage of our students that pass comparing with others. Would have been a simple argument to make.
yankel > The Israeli SC on the other hand, sees itself as its own source of power.
As all SCs do everywhere. US system is a little better defined than Israeli, but issues are the same. For example, US SC early on created a “judicial review” that is not in the constitution and it is now an established minhag. Lots courts and individual judges tried and often succeeded in going over their boundaries. Bottom line is – if you build a a strong political opposition (stronger than 51%,) than you’ll win the argument eventually,
> your suggestion re building ‘big coalitions’ is as naive as your other suggestions and not based on hard reality at all
I fully understand that this is not Israeli thinking, but this does not change the fact that this is the way to solving political crisis. The alternative is what you demonstrate here – stand your narrow position and shout that it is not fair.
xCTL > I consider a shul a place of peace where guns don’t belong.
that is what I thought. As I said before, this shitah definitely has basis in how Beis Hamkdash was built. Still, we have brochos in the Torah that say that say that large enemy forces will be running away from our forces. I dare to venture that our forces there are armed. So, maybe the right arrangement would be for the packing person to stay outside while others are davening and then switch with someone else. So, you can pack while he is davening.
in regards to your question, I explain that I am not a follower of Greek avodah zora that believed in fate. So, if there is an issue at hand, you need to
(1) provide valid data – I don’t think you asked your rosh yeshiva yet about numbers from your yeshiva, or at least you didnt tell us, maybe you can do it over yomtov
(2) think about counter-measures, again I’d like to hear what your teachers are doing about thatyankel > You are not addressing my point .
I only addressed the point of difference between physical and halachik sakanah. Did not try to argue anything more than that.
> Would katan use the services of any atheist/zionist/reform top surgeons
This is not a astrng kasha. According to R Soloveitchik, even the most observant communities in Lita usually had a non-observant doctor and pharmacist – because their services were needed (Rav used this to explain that YU medical school will produce doctors who are familiar and hopefully sympathetic to halakha, even if not fully observant themselves).
katan > If not for the wicked Zionists, those “survivors” would not have gone through the Holocaust in the first place. And the sephardim would have remained living peacefully AS JEWS in their home countries rather than being shmaded (at least three generations now) by the Zionists. And on and on.
I don’t think this has historical basis (other than saying without a proof that Hashem made it a punishment for XYZ):
– Nazis and Commies achieved their power without any connection to Zs (arguably, assimilated Jews played role in both countries, but this relates more to Reform and socialists, not Zionists)
– So when so many Jews perished after following advice from their Rabbis to stay in Europe, it is quite a hutzpah to blame other movements for what happened. Those rabbis should have clarified: you are all tzadikkim and if you stay you will perish because of the zionists who urge you to leave.
– we discussed sephardim already when we discussed arab countries. Yes, at the time, one could hold a view that it would be possible to live peacefully under Hashimites and similar kings. History showed that most of these countries went through periods of socialist and islamist brutality. So, syrian and Iraqi Jews would have gone through the prison in Damascus (when that prison was opened this year, there were people searching for hidden rooms, refusing to believe that all those who were not yet found there are not alive …) and ISIS (look what happened with yazidis, for example). So, all those sephardim were destined to live through this horror. So, maybe Moroccans did not benefit.
– Polish Jews after WW2, if they were not to find a place to go, would have been sent back to Communist Poland
– Soviet Jews who were already prosecuted by the time Israel was created, so not Israel’s fault, would have been fighting now in Russia-Ukraine war, walking on the battlefield hunted by drones.> “You cannot find even one charedi Gadol
This is a more accurate statement than ““You cannot find even one Gadol”. So, you gained in your growth in honesty, I give you a brocha for the next year to grow in shalom and kavod so that you stop dividing chachamim by their political affiliation or by the presumptions thought that only talmidei chachamim that agree with you are the right ones. I suggest first look at who is a talmid chacham by an objective criterion – level of learning, respect from other talmidei chachamim (that includes those who disagree with each other, or those who are respected by only some of the other talmidei chachamim), and then take in all the opinions of the selected group. Shana Tova.
somejew, all I asked was for you to ask a current-day legit rav about how we see those choices in 1920s from the point of our knowledge of history – from holocaust to middle east politics to the fate of Sephardim and Rusim, and how this reflects the shevuos.
you are entirely focusing on what they said then. This is like we were to evaluate success of Moshe’s mission in Mitzrayim after the first 3 makkos. No, we are looking at the whle yetziyas mitzrayim and even on the centuries after that to see the full impact. Same here – let’s look at those events and see it as much as we can through our knowledge. So far, we have a couple of suggestions from the posters here – Brits could hold it; Hashem would have figured it out… I am wondering what the rabbis of our generation say, especially those whom you are learning from.
katan > It’s not that the gedolim argued; they did not argue. No gedolim agreed with the heresy and idolatry of “Religious Zionism”.
You are bumping into our conversation. I was clearly talking to someone who recognizes gedolim when he sees them. You are free to stay with your presumptions.
There is a difference between not recognizing something as legitime Judaism and excluding from amitecha. R Soloveitchik was once invited to an opening of a synagogue where his personal friend was a Rabbi. He wrote a respectful letter back that he would be happy to attend a dinner in the honr of the Rabbi and that those who made effort to build the synagogue should proud of his achievements, but that he is not able to associate with the place that does not have a mehitzah, etc and why exactly he disagrees with that.
katan > therefore, there obviously must be a better alternative. Decades ago, the Satmar Rav noted that if the Zionists wanted, that they could approach the nations to have them figure it out. Only a Zionist idolater would definitively state that it is impossible to have anything other than Zionist rule.
So, you conclude, as we do, that there was no logical alternative for a goyishe government in EY, only smuchim alhanes. Again, this is in retrospective, SR did not know that. But if you are willing to rely on the nes, you should not limit yourself to Zionist restrictions. Maybe organize your own state in the area – PA, Gaz, East bank? Maybe a realistic approach right now would be a buffer state between Israel and Lebanon or Syria? Syrians are very eager to show their tolerance, so a mixed Druze/Satmar state could work.
While looking for Chofetz chaim quotes disapproving RZ, I found this in his speech @ Agudah convention in 1930 – someone recommended a village to install water filter because there was sediment visible in the tea they offered. Next time he came there, the city was burned down. He inquired what happened. They said – the filter was not producing enough water to put down the fires! The nimshal is that when the fire is burning, you shold not be a purist but use all means you have.
Rav Elchonon was student of the Chofetz Chaim. So far, I was not able to find in Chofetz Chaim expressions similar to R Elchonon. In many articles and letters, he is using clear language of disapproval of various groups, but I did not see RZ among those groups. Did you see any?
yankel >my great grandparents immigrated from Russia in the 1800’s
yasher koach to them, so not really “old yishuv” but still. 1800s is a long time period – were they students of Gra or part of one of the Zionist waves at the end of the century?
yankel > This BG-Agudah agreement is nothing like a treaty between nations
right, as I showed ^, (1) that pre-medinah agreement did not even talk about the army, other issues, and (2) it explicitly says that this agreement is not binding on the future state – (3) even at that time, not 80 years later. So, with these 3-strong argument, I am sure the poster will change his mind.
Rocky > You can not apply the words of R Avigdor Miller, which were said probably 40-50 years ago, to today
I agree with you. At some point, it was a problem that Jews settled in multitudes of small towns with almost no Jewish infrastructure. This was part of normal American path: there are probably 100 mln of people who arrived into NYC and 80% left for the rest of USA when they could afford to pay toll over the bridge!
There were several ways to address it: R Miller, L Rebbe wanted their followers to stay “in town”. R Soloveitchik had a plan to raise many rabbis at YU who would be good enough to run these small communities. R Kotler specifically created a yeshiva-centric community far away from NYC.
Nowadays, there are multitudes of either medium sized cities and NYC suburbs that offer Jewish environment and medical system better than NYC.
yankel, I agree with you that SC moved into an ill-defined area. I also agree that Iranian regime claims to be a democracy with restrictions.
So, there are levels here. So, lets compare: Economist has a democracy index out of 10 in 2024: Sweden 9.9, USA 7.8 (was 8.3 20 years ago). Israel 7.9 (was 7.3). Iran 2 (was 3) – same as Russia (was 5) and China and Saudi Arabia. I am sure this is not a pro-Israel organization. So, Israeli democracy is doing OK – despite all the problems.
But again to your particular beef with SC: your attitude is legit, but it is simply that Israeli law had areas that were not defined well and it is natural for one of the competing branches of government to move in when others are not able to. It is problematic, without being “illegitimate”. For comparison, US congress is often unable to make important decisions, such as declare wars, sign treaties, and make major economic policies. Presidents end up making temporary decisions that they should not be doing according to constitutional design. So, some of those decisions are challenged in courts; others expire when government changes, etc.. Sometimes, public outcry – and a threat of the next elections – is such that presidents rescind their policies. It is a mess, but it is a legitimate democratic mess.
Same thing in Israel – your plan should be to build a bigger coalition that will enact new laws changing the system. This bigger coalition HAS TO include people with whom you don’t fully agree. Last I read was that proponents of judicial reform are now considering compromise measures that will bring more people onboard.
And to history of that – my humble understanding is that Tal’ laws was an attempt of such compromise – and there was no progress in bringing charedim into the army, community simply used this as an opportunity to continue previous arrangement. So, it may be that other groups are fed up with this behavior. You have to accept that and see whether you can restore trust.
yankel > where the haredim overall are prepared to work together with the majority to hammer out a compromise but in reality [!], which is the only factor which really counts …
so, maybe you can clarify what are your suggestions for the compromise? And presume that it has to be a verifiable compromise. That is, if, say compromise is that those who learn f/t are exempt and others are not, then there will be checks like fingerprinting at the yeshiva entrances, random attendance checks, learning tests by non-charedi rabbis, restrictions on travel to Uman, etc.
Ms Kamala says in her new book that her perfect VP match was a man married to another man (and seemingly no other redeeming qualities), but she has rejected him that this was too much for Americans to buy on top of asking to elect .. a black woman (that she is not) and … having a Jewish husband.
So, apparently a Jewish husband is a hesaron in the eyes of some as much as having a male wife.
yankel > because …. returning as cripples – is a clear calamity ….
> whereas returning OTD … in your opinion …. is obviously not .by the way, your analogy is not necessarily correct. See Avoda Zorah that shows that sakanah has to be treated stricter than a spiritual matter.
That is, if you follow halachik methodology and arrive to a conclusion according to majority, you are sort of covered even if you made a mistake.
If you drink water that was not poisoned according to majority opinion, but actually was – the poison will work.yankel > I treat both SR and r YB soloveitchik with reverence.
> Both were outliers and clearly a minority amongst the chachamim in their views.
…
> All chachamim seeing the current draft problem with all its current realities and all its repercussions , agree not to enlist ..I believe most MO and RZ Rabbis, including many students of R Soloveitchik, disagree. I am not bringing names as it is usually not leading to a discussion on merits.
xCTL, thanks for the examples. But I hear that your position is still more emotional than rational: you admit that you 5Towns friend uses the gun right, but you still were not comfortable davening near him. This idea is not without a source – David did not build Beis Hamikdash and iron was not used there.
But rationally, I do not understand. I may also be not fully rational – for me, pacifism is a movement that objectively was used by communists to keep opposition divided. Maybe I do not fully understand what you are saying – what exactly makes you “uncomfortable” when someone was davening with a gun? That Hashem is not accepting prayers of violent people? That he can shoot accidently in the middle of the amidah? a gunfight for a shishi?
I davened in shuls with armed guards, and nobody seemed uncomfortable. Would armed congregants be worse?
yankel, again, a modern democratic system is not a (discredited, unstable) Athenian version where everyone votes on everything. It might consist of multiple centers of power, some elected, some appointed. These centers can, and are expected to, compete for power between each other. Look up literature on American theories of “separation of power”. Israeli system is probably less thought through than others as the founders had a lot of things on their hands; and it is also under stress all the time. So, there is no surprise that there is a stand-off based on unclearly defined rules (and lack of constitution).
The best way out of this situation is to formulate a solution that will be supported by a super-majority of population. Then, the politicians will find a way to change situation, whether legally or politically. Such a solution necessarily has to be a compromise, not necessarily giving you everything you want.
> This was not “private positions of politicians”.
Separately, there is October 1948 defence ministry regulation that exempted (400) full-time learners from service [Torato_Umanuto]. This is not a part of the pre-state agreement (see previous post). Ben Gurion was both prime minister and defence minister.
katan > . Agudah predicated their “acceptance” of that “State” on the guarantee that this be the established and unchanging rule of their “State”.
Let’s clarify confusion here: 1947 letter
1) clearly says that this is not a legal commitment as Sochnut can’t obligate the future state (something we are arguing here)
2) does not even talk about military service.Here it is, quoting from the June 1947 letter:
From: The Jewish Agency for Palestine, etc.
To: The World Organization of Agudath Israel, etc., Jerusalem
… We were satisfied to hear that you understand that there is no body authorized to determine in advance the constitution of the state, and that the state will be, in some spheres, free to determine its constitution and regime according to its citizens’ wishes.Still, the Executive appreciates your demands, and is aware that these are matters that worry not only the members of Agudath Israel, but also many of the religious faithful in all Zionist parties or in no party, and it is sympathetic to your demands that the Agency’s Executive inform you of its position regarding the issues you have brought up, and what it is willing to do, as far as its influence and directives reach, in order to fulfill your wishes regarding the said issues.
The Agency’s Executive has authorized the undersigned to formulate its position regarding the issues you have mentioned at the meeting. The position of the Agency’s Executive is as follows: shabbat … kashrut … marital law … education
> Like the Indians in America, the Chareidim predate, by far, the Zionists in living in Eretz Yisroel.
Position of Indians is defined in treaties and laws. What is the document behind the charedi claim, let’s analyze that?
> Like the Indians in America, the Chareidim predate, by far, the Zionists in living in Eretz Yisroel.
An interesting claim. Maybe Israel should let charedim have casinos. Indians though have strict lineage rules. You can’t just dress up in feathers, pick up a tomahawk and join. So, those Indian rights should be assigned to those whose relatives were part of the old yishuv. The rest are in EY _thanks_ to Zionists and should show hakarat hatov.
Show of hands – who is here a descendant of the old yishuv?
Katan,
there is nothing surprising that some gedolim disagreed. This was always the case, and especially in our times, when world changes so fast that nobody really knows what is the right direction. R Yohanan b Zakkai did not know till the end of his life whether he was right in his meeting w/ Vespasian or maybe he could have asked for more. And that was dealing with one general and a ragtag of Jewish rebels. Do you think he would be more confident if he was surrounded by Communists, Nazis. Arabs, and a bunch of Jewish ideologies. The sad fact is that you surely read our previous discussions and you know, for example, that R Feinstein had better relationship w/ R Soloveitchik. and that R Kotler respected him and partnered and respectfully argued in person. The fact that you bother bringing one-sided arguments (aka lies) to the group that knows better, is very strange.Note that R Soloveitchik was not the head of Mizrachi. He supported and partnered with them, gave speeches at their conventions, but he is writing on multiple occasions that he is not a member, he has his own views, and especially protests any attempts by the political organization to make pronouncements on religious matters.
yankel> don’t see any connection to ‘no true scotsman’ in any of my writings …
I meant that – in this case – you seem to only consider chachamim those who agree with your opinion.
Katan, you are using circular logic – everyone related to zionism is a heretic. Therefore, all the people saved by Zionists and who are observant today are heretics and their lives do not matter. This is against anything I ever heard from gedolim of any direction. R Schach, for example, writes that Hashem caused Arabs to hate early Zionists to prevent them from assimilation into local culture. Clearly, Rav thought that Hashem cares. Even if taking your position, Israelis stayed Jewish, while similar Jews in other countries intermarried or were killed.
> President Trump
We don’t know what will happen in the future. We were discussing definite events in the past – none of the middle eastern countries stayed under Esav, they went thru communist and islamic phases. Your “solution” would have condemned all Jews of EY, Europe, Sefarad, USSR to either assimilation or physical suffering. Again, if you have a Rov to ask – I’ll be interested to hear his opinion on this hypothetical future.
GH, it is not assur. It may be saving his life and lives of others. My kid was once in an accident caused by a “frum” person (who did not even show any remorse or concern after it happened). I asked the rav whether I could sue him to maybe cause him re-think and maybe others around. Rav said that not only I could, but I should. I did not pursue though.
somejew > I don’t remember that ever being request or the subject of debate around here.
First, I’d like to know whether your rabonim hold by the shevuos as halakha.
If they do, what would be their preferred position say in 1920s. One of your haverim suggested to keep EY in the hands of Esav. Several of us objected based on historical evidence that Esav retreated from the colonies and most of Middle East went through a lot of savagery in the last 80 years. There is also a question what would have happened with European survivors; Sephardim; Soviet Jews. At best, they would have gotten to the safe shores of democracies where they would have suffered same rates of assimilation as other Jew there. Again, this is not a shailah on the rabbonim who were against Zionsts at the time, those views had good sevorahs behind them. It is a question for rabbonim who already know what happened after.
common > On a related story, my Irish neighbor wishing me a gut yom
A sephardi friend of mine always wished me “gut shabbos”, while I reply “shabbat shalom”. Less refined people look at us, confused.