AviraDeArah

Besalel, it is logically deficient, because where does it say that it’s a flaw? Also halevi never said that it’s an actual flaw, chas veshalom, but rather intentionally designed to mirror a flawed human condition – that Hashem made us with flaws is very obvious. That was on purpose, not because of, chas veshalom, any mistake of Hashem.

As to why we don’t make a bracha…my theory is that to make a bracha, there needs to be a חפצא, a tangible, physically reactive phenomenon. The eclipse is merely an alignment; nothing is משתנה in the moon or sun.

A rainbow, one could argue, is also not a cheftza, but the bracha isn’t because of the wondermen, it’s because it’s a reminder of Hashem’s promise to not destroy the world again. That’s why it is a bracha of zocher habris, not oseh maysoh bereshis.

Those aren’t the only two options.

I argue for the sake of, i hope, kovod shomayim. And i do learn some things along the way.

There are some things I’m not open to, such as the avodah zara of nationalism, feminism, god-in-a-body ideology, internet filters not being important, drafting bochurim, and other things that the gedolim said were off limits.

But other things I’ll consider if they’re not apikorsus according to gedolei yisroel.

Sechel, want to know what chasidim think of tznius? Ever walk around Williamsburg? Kiryas yoel? Skver? Tosh? Tznius is THE ikkar by them and they’re stricter than litvishe!

Smerel, that’s sherut leumi in its current form, but it is still obligatory for all citizens without religious exemption. And many sefardi girls have a hard time getting that exemption, especially if they don’t look charedi.

Forced work outside of the home is what the chazon ish was very worried about. And it wasn’t as if it was a machlokes; the gedolei yisroel all said it was yehereg velo yaavor.

Simcha – i agree that pure volunteering isn’t what the chazon ish was concerned with. But you’d need to make sure rhe environment was kosher, which often is not the case.

Bear in mind that compulsory sherut leumi was just the backup plan once the medina saw that the frum would never let their girls into the military. Mizrachi didn’t see that and supported it, which caused a lot of problems for the Torah world, because the frei went and said “why is it good enough for them and not you”

Simcha, the chazon ish and others explained that when a girl is forced – not voluntarily – to leave the reshus of her husband or father, that is “taking” our daughter away and it is in the category of laws which surround giluy arayos.

A father sending his daughter to seminary is voluntary.

edited

My rebbe Rav Belsky said that even Pesach minhagim which are tied to the metzius of pre war Europe, like some of those mentioned above, should be kept, as they are minhag yisroel Torah.

The chazon ish learned kol hatorah kulah, including kabalah, which is what chasidus aims to achieve.

He’s not jealous of a man who learned kabalah that was made accessible to a regular person, and certainly not of a child who mouths the words of ideas he has absolutely no shaychus with. For torah she baal peh, you need to understand what you’re learning for it to be a kiyum mitzvah.

Gadol, it’s in a letter the Gaon wrote to his daughter

“if you know aleph teach aleph”

Equals

A guy with a glow in the dark pen leading a group of people on a cliff in pitch dark.

Also, “classic” seforim that discuss the mussar elements of tznius as the mainstay of a woman include menoras hamaor, pele yoetz, and many others. Ths Gaon famously wrote that tznius is for women what Torah is for men.

I also never said that a sinner is an apikores. I said one who claims that a mitzvah isn’t important, or who dismisses chazal and says that what they say are ikkarim aren’t really that important – even if they themselves observe those laws – that’s apikorsus.

Christians say you can be a good jew without the mitzvos, because yushke “fulfilled” them.

Conservatives say you can be a good jew without most mitzvos, but you need to keep some.

Reform say you are a good jew no matter what you do as long as you pay your dues to Hadassah/JNF, vote Democrat and support LGBT.

Modern Orthodoz Jews say you’re a good jew as long as you do the above(without much LGBT, just a little bit) and you also need to keep shabbos and kashrus.

Chabad say you’re a good jew if you believe in their rebbe, and keep some mitzvos.

Torah Jews say you’re a good Jew if you keep ALL of the mitzvos to the best of your ability.

Here we go with the deflection again – the reason why it’s not apikorsus to teach that, for instance, keeping shabbos is a bigger deal than coming late to davening, is because it’s true! But if someone were to say that coming late to davening doesn’t matter, when chazal say it does, then yes, that would be apikorsus too.

My assertion that shluchim say tznius isn’t so important is based on this thread and your statements that it’s not an ikkar. That explains what we see in crown heights whenever outsiders, “snags” like me drive through it and have to keep our eyes open so as to drive safely.

Tznius is the lifestyle of a Jewish woman. An illiterate woman who can’t pronounce tzimtzum but dresses tznius and behaves modestly is infinitely greater than a woman who studies seforim not intended for her but does not commit to serving Hashem by performing her essential mitzvah. Her studies are, in fact, harmful to her.

Sechel, if a jew violates a prohibition of tznius, it’s not apikorsus.

If a chabad shliach does so in public and teaches that tznius isn’t very important, then it most certainly is apikorsus.

Tznius is not just a crowning midah.

Chazal say when Hashem made Chava, he made every limb of hers swear that it would be tzenuah.

When bilaam wanted to destroy klal yisroel, he knew the only way to overcome Hashems love of the yidden was through something he hated so much that the hatred was greater than this love, and that’s zimah. “The God of these people hates zimah,” he said. (This explanation comes from the chasam sofer)

The very essence of klal yisroel is tznius – this is what made bilaam turn his curse into a bracha, when he saw that the yidden had tents that were made to preserve the privacy of each family.

It isn’t just a nice thing. And I don’t care what the Lubavitcher rebbe said about it – if he erred in it, then i can tell you exactly why he did according to reports that are known in the Yeshiva world, but i will not write about it on here because it’s extremely offensive.

Satmar isn’t responsible for every idiot who quotes them wrongfully. Acknowledging it itself is an issue; they’re not a PR firm. Agudah doesn’t speak out when it’s cast wrongfully in the media either, and neither does mizrachi or zionist organizations. Your request of them is petty.

Also, while they don’t agree with nadler and his people, they also don’t think it’s pikuach nefesh for the US to send arms to Israel. You decided that. They basically believe in shev v’al taaseh; they don’t support the war nor do they support those who are opposed to it.

That’s not only satmar. The rabbonim who backed away from the major israel rally a few months ago also said that demanding things from America is not the way we behave in galus.

There definitely are gemaros about tznius details – Brachos 24a, kesuvos 72b, many other places.

The details of lashon hora are far lesa discussed, which precipitated the need for the chofetz chaim to delineate them

Yankel, the “who started it” is just as childish as when kids get into a fight. Both sides can point to an earlier point where there were attacks or aggression; it’s not clear at all who started it, but the zionists had a bloodlust, personified by their leaders writing “רק בדם תהיה לנו הארץ”

You’re right that the arabs expelled the sefardim, which is often ignored by leftists – no one’s saying the arabs were “right.” My point was that it’s a myth that the zionists merely bought up all of or most of the land – it wasn’t even close.

We’ll get what’s owed to us in the geulah shlaima, including the heavy losses of the sefardims money, and the revenge of the 6 million kedoshin in Europe. Hashem will avenge all of it.

From an objective point of view, I don’t care that they kicked out Arabs; same way the arabs kicked out the ottomans, who kicked out the Byzantines, then the romans, then the jews – we know the story.

Sharing the burden of the Torah community is a Jewish value. Sharing an imposed burden by enemies of Torah who want you to not keep the Torah is not a Jewish value

Of note is that before zionism, Jews were able to go to the kosel freely. The Arabs stopped it because they had this paranoia about al aqsa mosque which to this day makes them go rabid whenever a Jew goes near it. This is by design – there’s a serious issur in going on har habayis.

So when zionists use the kosel as a trophy of victory and pride, it’s really just undoing the damage they inflicted.

I heard from a talmid that Rav Hutner didn’t visit the kosel because he agreed with the satmar rov on it being a problem of not being mechazek the reshoim.

I’ve been busy the past few days – just wanted to note that nowhere does the Satmar Rav say that the soton has any independent power, chas veshalom. He brings many examples of maysoh soton, such as the image of Moshe dying on har sinai, which is in medrash rabbah, as times when the soton was tasked with making signs to test klal yisroel.

The state is no different; its success, the satmar rov says, is a test for our emunah – will we use it as a proof that something against the Torah (a secular state calling itself Jewish with apikorsus definitions of a jew, non Torah law being practiced, pride parades, mixed army, etc…) is good and that we should celebrate it, and think that it represents us as Jews, or will we see that such things are a test….בפרוח רשעים כמו עשו, when the wicked prosper…. that’s already in pesukim.

Others say that the state’s success was because of the frum people there. The chazon ish said after the Holocaust there was a tremendous ais ratzon, and if the yidden wanted moshiach, he would have come… instead they wanted the state, so they got it in ways that require siyata dishmaya. But that doesn’t make it a good thing.

Tha main difference between satmar and the majority was how distant we ought to be from the government; can we ignore our obligation to defend not only our rights but influence people, especially sefardim, who we might lose to the zionists if we don’t join the government? Satmar says what can we do? We are anusim mipnei hadin. Agudah says the din is that we can, and that such a thing isn’t hischabrus.

No malaach, weak or strong, does anything besides what Hashem tells is to do; that’s its nature.

Mdd – the kings of malchus beis dovid were all from the command of Hashem that kings should come from him. In malchus yisroel, yeravam was made king by a navi, but only some wrested power through takeovers; they all had the din of a melech nevertheless.

Where did you get that all food was under the “hashgocha” of ovadia?

Smerel, it’s the simple chain of events. They only assembled an army after haman was defeated and mordechai was made viceroy. It was clear that the gezerah was batul and the king expressly told them to be omed al nafsham. In such a case, when we have Hashems favor we are assured victory, and not one Jew died.

Aaq, gedolim have cheshbonos for things – we know from people who were there at the time how the chofetz chaim felt about rabbi kook, going so far as to nock his name upon hearing that the latter had praised the mechalelei Shabbos soccer players.

It could be the chofetz chaim did address zionists at some point in writing; I’m not familiar.

Smerel – that was AFTER the gezerah min hashomayim was batul and they were given permission to fight. If such a thing had happened during the Holocaust – great, but it didn’t.

Yankel, on an individual basis, there’s nothing wrong with fighting, but as you can see clearly from the megillah, organizing an army for defense was NOT the method the Jews took nor would it have worked. Lobbying the US to bomb the tracks to Auschwitz was perfectly within the parameters of hishtadlus, and was done by gedolim who were anti zionist too.