HaKatan

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 1,133 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Shmad in Israel? #2271587
    HaKatan
    Participant

    simcha613:
    Zionism was, is and always will be idolatry. The Torah’s definition of idolatry doesn’t change.

    Regarding the Chareidim in the Zionist parliament, that is halachically almost-impossible (read Rav Reuven Grozovsky’s biayos haZman). And according to the Satmar Rav and others, it’s severely prohibited.

    Whatever illusory benefits you fantasize that the Zionist State provides (there would not have been the need for any army, and Mashiach would have been here had it not been for the State, according to both the Brisker Rav and the Satmar Rav) does not kasher the enormous pig and idol that is Zionism and its State.

    in reply to: Shmad in Israel? #2271365
    HaKatan
    Participant

    simcha613:
    If your local Catholic Church would have a cultural program and have minyanim and kosher food, the entire program would still be totally treif.

    Zionism is idolatry. Period. The Zionist State uses its army to indoctrinate/shmad its inductees with the Zionist redefinition of Judaism. That’s exactly what it is. That is obviously totally treif, as all the gedolim said going all the way back, and no amount of Zionist apologetics and nonsense can possibly kosher that enormous pig.

    Jews do not belong in the Zionist army, no matter how much Torah they learn or don’t learn. Period. The Zionist army is spiritually extremely damaging, and it is plainly forbidden to enlist. Period.

    As well, the Zionist army is known to make OTD a large percentage of its inductees, those who were somewhat religious before entering that shmad. It’s not just theoretical, though it would be just as forbidden even if it were only theoretical.

    It’s astonishing that people even bother trying to deny any of this when it’s plain as day.

    in reply to: Shmad in Israel? #2271148
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Such Zionist nonsense. Gosh.


    @yankel
    berel:
    No, the Zionists started the war against the Arabs (and British) long before 1947. The “Partition Plan” came much later after the Zionists invaded against the wishes of the Jews and also the lihavdil the British and Arabs.


    @simcha613

    “nowadays the State of Israel is not an enemy of Torah nor does the government or army want anyone to not keep Torah.”
    This is one of the biggest and most absurd untruths I can recall seeing on these boards. Wow.
    In addition to the facts about Zionism and its “State” and army/shmad indoctrination force, you can also observe that if 30% of the already idolatrous “National Religious” are going further OTD in the Zionist army, then that army very obviously is not friendly to Torah.

    Zionists: Give it up. The Zionist idol is exactly that: an idol. edited 

    in reply to: Shmad in Israel? #2270778
    HaKatan
    Participant

    simcha613:
    It’s such a shame that Zionists and their idolatrous supporters need to resort to lies to support their position. Zionism is shmad, as are its platforms and protocols, and the State of Israel is the Zionist State that puts Zionist shmad into action. It’s really not complicated and it’s also no secret if you just read their platforms and witness the evil they do in the portions of E”Y they control.

    They want chareidim for exactly one reason: to convert them from Judaism to Zionism.

    “Sharing the burden” is not a Torah value. Just the opposite: it is a Zionist value. The Zionists chose to invade the area a century ago – against the wishes of the Jews there – and the Zionists proceeded to light the area (and world) on fire; it’s not anyone else’s responsibility to put out the Zionist fire.

    So sad.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2268578
    HaKatan
    Participant

    yankel berel:

    This is silly. Stop hocking irrelevant nonsense about the League of Nations, which was long gone in 1948. The Zionists violated multiple oaths including rebelling against the nations, regardless of the LON. That’s the point. They also violated aliyah baChoma and dechikas haKeitz, so it also was and remains forbidden due to those two oaths in addition.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2268576
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Again, the oaths are settled halacha, as per all the poskim through the ages that brought them down and applied them, including the Rambam, and nobody can possibly claim otherwise.

    Yankel Berel:
    You’re wrong/misquoting, and this has been discussed earlier. He permitted only voting in Israeli elections since that doesn’t impact the State’s existence.

    HaLeivi:
    It is not “my” pshat. It is the Torah’s pshat. No Torah authority disagrees.

    “And the fact that the state succeeded in being established, for quite a few decades now, is proof that this is not a violation of Olah Bechomah or Meridah Ba’umos. Because again, those Gezeiros meant that it can’t work.”

    Your invented pshat in gezeira, however, is yours and nobody holds that way, unless you can find someone like a Satmar Rav or Brisker Rav or the like who says that. Speaking of them, by the way, the Brisker Rav agrees to the Satmar Rav and actually goes further and stated that the Zionist State violates the entire Torah.

    If you think about it, though, you will realize that your pshat makes no sense. Hashem warned that if they violate the oaths, then he will make their flesh free as one would hunt game (“Ani mattir es…”). That inherently means that you could actually violate the gezeira if you want to do that – but that it’s not going to be pretty if you do. So the fact the State exists after all these years does not at all indicate anything regarding it being a violation of the oaths (which it most certainly is in multiple ways).

    On a related note, and this will offend the hard-core Zionist idolaters but I believe it is Torah: the fact that the Zionist paradise requires sealed rooms in all homes, and looking over one’s shoulder to ensure there are no savages waiting to attack R”L L”A, seems pretty obviously a continued “Ani mattir es bisar…”.

    Again, your pshat makes no sense and is totally baseless.

    Regarding your question about the reason it is so egregious to violate the oaths, that would be because it is kefirah in bias haMashiach and, regarding specifically the Zionist State as per the Brisker Rav, kefirah in the entire Torah. Please don’t bring in Tzlafchad here who had noble intentions to show how serious is Shabbos and not CH”V to rebel in any way, unlike liHavdil the Zionist paradise which is a total and utter rebellion including replacing Judaism with godless Zionism.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2268468
    HaKatan
    Participant

    HaLeivi:
    The Steipler in Karyana diIgrasa was discussing voting in elections, as mentioned above, not whether or not the State should exist. He and everyone else agreed that it should not. He wrote that since the voting in elections would not impact on the State’s existence therefore he held that Israelis could vote in their elections.

    anonymous re: bayis rishon:
    That’s why the Satmar Rav wrote an entire volume on the topic. He must have missed that. So must have the Rambam when he mentioned them in Iggeres Teiman. Wow. What were they even thinking? They should have asked you.

    SQUARE_ROOT and the rest of the Zionist idolaters:
    Give it up. The oaths are brought liHalacha as psak throughout the ages, including by the Rambam himself. The Zionists violated all the oaths, both rebelling against the nations (in massive ways), going up like a wall (tens of millions of dollars the Zionists schnorred from Jews to buy weapons in the 1940s) and, as a “bonus”, dechikas haKeitz, founding a State in E”Y which is Mashiach’s job.

    None of this is complicated – unless you’re trying to be a Zionist idolater and also keep the Torah.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267924
    HaKatan
    Participant

    AAQ:
    Avira > The balfour declaration (and even the UN partition plan) are irrelevant because when the zionists took over, the british were no longer baalei batim on the land.

    >> Actually, it’s much more than that. The British essentially rescinded that with the subsequent white-papers and, in any even, permitted only settlement, not political rule which the oaths separately forbid regardless. In other words, the only thing that Balfour would have accomplished, while it effectively was operative, is that the nation in power there would have allowed non-political settlement so doing that would not have been a rebellion against the nations.

    This is very brisker for me. Could you unpack this in detail step by step? From my simple reading, there were several steps:
    (1) initial zionist yishuv, somewhat supported by a small number of rabonim, but no others,
    >> No. Initial NON-Zionist yishuv, as in chovevei tzion, for settlement and non-political purposes only, was supported by only some rabbanim.
    (2) Balfour declaration – that made further arrivals not violating shvuos as they came with permission
    >> No. See above. Only during that time, pre-white-papers, would arrivals have been with permission and therefore not a rebellion.
    (3) state declaration by those who already arrived – not by shvuos – it is just a declaration, not arrivals and with UN permission
    >> Declaration of State was forbidden for numerous reasons as per various gedolim. It was against the UN which wanted to restart a Mandate there. It required massive sacrifice of Jewish lives, which was also forbidden.
    (4) later arrival from DP camps, arab countries, USSR – all according to international laws
    >> The State in which they arrived was and is forbidden. Thus, living there could still be a violation of the oaths even after the Zionists muscled their way in. For example, Rav Shach held it forbidden to live in the territories as an “higarus gasa baUmos haOlam”.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267914
    HaKatan
    Participant

    HaLeiVi:
    So, by that logic, if someone lit a fire on Shabbos, then there’s nothing wrong with adjusting that fire, as it has already been lit?

    You totally invented that “heter” (or whatever Zionist you found who invented it). The oaths require living in galus until Hashem chooses to end the Galus. Nowhere does anyone rule that if someone breaks this rule that they could therefore now be free of the requirement to live in galus. This, of course, would be akin to “sheLo yehei chotei niskar” from shas. And if you understood that galus was for our benefit, then you would immediately see why it’s absurd to even posit such a thing.

    The Steipler was discussing voting in elections. Since the State exists, and your voting in elections has zero impact on whether or not the State will exist, therefore you are allowed to vote in its elections, according to the Steipler (which is an eilu viEilu opinion on voting in Israeli elections). But, of course, if your vote would in any way cause the State to exist then you would not be able to vote.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267913
    HaKatan
    Participant

    RightJew:
    Your comment was quite absurd.

    It’s not Satmar propaganda. Look at the archives of old (secular, not Satmar) newspapers from the late ’40s; it’s plain to see. As well, the Zionists warred with and terrorized the British into leaving the area; they did not willingly hand over control to the Zionists by any means.

    Dechikas haKeitz is from the gemara. The poskim brought that long before Satmar came around. Regardless, founding a State, especially in part of E”Y, is very obviously a violation of galus because a central part of galus is living under the rule of the nations, not ruling over yourself in E”Y.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267791
    HaKatan
    Participant

    yankel berel:
    “Even if [this is debatable] the creation of the medina was against the torah, the EXISTENCE of the medina is not. [lehol hadeyot]”

    That makes no sense and is also a lie. It’s actually the opposite. LiChol haDeios, the State remains just as forbidden to have as it was to create it. But since it exists, there is a need to “deal” with it like one would with any type of thugs.

    The Steipler rules that way, in karyana diIgrasa, for example.

    Even if there is not a way al pi derech haTeva to actively shut it down without risking Jewish lives, that means only that it needs to be dealt with as such, but not at all that it needs to be actively supported, CH”V. If Jews for J or the Mormons were running the Zionist “State” and shmading Jews there, everyone would see this perspective plainly. It’s only because some of the Zionists happen to be Jews and their immense propaganda, that some people become totally confused when it comes to the Zionists.

    This one is interesting:
    “It is a means to an end – of keeping Yehudim and their property in EY safe.”
    So, in other words, it’s worth violating G-d’s word (the oaths and the entire Torah, according to the Brisker Rav) and sending His children to be shmaded in the Zionist army and all the rest just to protect Jewish “property” in the Zionist State (not E”Y, as the Zionist State is not E”Y even if it does cover part of that)? That’s essentially admitting that your concern is not just pikuach nefesh but rather Zionism.

    Regardless, pikuach nefesh goes only so far. The gimmel chamuros are yehareig viAl yaavor. Zionism is, according to all gedolim, A”Z, and their army serves up heapings of all three.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267777
    HaKatan
    Participant

    SQUARE_ROOT:
    No, they are not reciprocal as the gedolim noted and ruled halachically especially those who ruled during times of great persecution like the Rambam and Rav Yonasan Eibeschutz.

    But even IF (that’s for argument’s sake, though it’s not true) there were any reciprocity, that would be only the oath of rebelling against the nations, not the rest.

    In other words, there is zero logic to claim that Jews may violate all their oaths just because the gentiles violated theirs of not subjugating overly much. If anything, the natural counter-balance to that oath, is the oath of not rebelling. That would still not permit aliya baChoma and dechikas haKeitz, for examples, because those are open rebellions against G-d.

    But the Zionists flagrantly violated those two oaths as well, not “just” rebelling against the nations. And there is anyways no reciprocity, as per the poskim throughout history.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267776
    HaKatan
    Participant

    chiefshmerel:
    Actually, if you read it well, you would realize that it was much more than just Kastner’s rishus. He implies (correctly) that the Zionists caused the Holocaust as well.

    In any event, others point out the same fact, both secular and, liHavdil, gedolim.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267579
    HaKatan
    Participant

    “and the bad idea is further weekned when you consider that its not like there want Jew hunting going on in Europe pre State.”

    This is a big error. Zionism began its cataclysmic rebellion against G-d (including violating the oaths), decades before the wicked Zionists formally declared their “State” in 1948. In fact, the Zionists caused the Holocaust and also contributed to it, as the gedolim noted and, liHavdil, secular writers as well.

    Regardless, numerous poskim, including the Rambam, invoke the oaths as being in full force and inviolable, and none have ruled otherwise.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267577
    HaKatan
    Participant

    RightJew:
    I find it hard to believe you are being serious here, as that is absurd.

    On the off-chance that you are seriously asking:
    First, you’re leaving out all the rest of the history, much of which contradicts the cherry-picked points you’ve mentioned.

    The Zionists terrorized the Arabs and British, forcing the British to leave Palestine, at which point the Zionists went ahead with declaring their “State” even though the UN wanted to begin a different mandate in Palestine. In the final analysis, the wicked Zionists founded their “State” against the will of the nations (including the Arabs) and with tremendous force (almost $100 Million dollars – in 1940s money – of weapons), both of which are violations of the oaths.

    As well, creating any State – even with full permission of the nations – is forbidden as a violation of the oath of dechikas haKeitz, forcing the end, as in doing that which only Mashiach can do – namely, here, founding a State.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267422
    HaKatan
    Participant

    ADA and Smerel:
    Whether or not the Satmar Rav’s idea is or is not still valid – logically, one would have to conclude that it is, but that’s besides the point – the most important thing is to recognize the reality of the Zionist idol for what it is, and to daven for a yeshuah from that Zionist idol.

    Also, the issue with NK of today is not their political views about the Zionist State; it’s about their being mischabeir to/machzik reshaim. Of course, those who associate with the Zionists are worse, in that regard, but that’s also besides the point. NK obviously consider that to be pikuach nefesh, while typical gedolim do not. But the fact that the Zionist State will at some point disappear is not at all in dispute.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267402
    HaKatan
    Participant

    SQUARE_ROOT (and Could Be):
    “Stated simply: Midrashim are not Halachah.”

    Wrong, as mentioned above; see UJM’s post above.
    That the oaths are mentioned in the gemara as agadita has zero relevance to their being in full force.
    Again, the Rambam himself invoked them in Iggeres Teiman, and various poskim bring down the oaths as halachically binding. The Maharal makes it even more stringent, that they’re yehareig viAl yaavor. Not bad for “agadita”.

    So sad that people refuse to accept simple reality of Torah just because it conflicts with the Zionist idolatry.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267304
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Could Be:
    100%? Machlokes?
    Which poskim rule that they are not halacha?

    HaKatan
    Participant

    @yankel berel
    Right. The fact that numerous other poskim bring it down as halacha including the Rambam himself in Iggeres Teiman is all to be ignored in favor of the idolatry of Zionism. So sad.

    Yes, they very much are halacha, both according to the Avnei Nezer and Rav Meir Simcha and all the rest. The Satmar Rav addresses this conclusively, of course.

    in reply to: Refuting the Three Oaths [Gimel Shevuot] #2267119
    HaKatan
    Participant

    SQUARE_ROOT:
    So sad.

    Your Zionist idol makes you not only distort and deny what is true but also makes you write outright falsehoods and nonsense.
    “because Jews did not come and conquer Israel by force (לא עלינו כחומה).”

    Yes, that is exactly what the Zionists did – they used lots of overwhelming force. The Zionists terrorized and fought both the British and the Arabs in order to create their “State” – very unlike what Rabbi Kook expected, as it happens.

    The Satmar Rav and others wipe out the arguments you attempted.

    The Rav Meir Simcha argument is particularly pathetic. If he actually said what the Zionists claim he said, all he said was that there is no problem with going to settle in E”Y given the permission of the nations. This doesn’t at all mean that the oaths no longer apply. In fact, just the opposite, he was saying that the oaths very much are in force but that this would not violate those oaths.

    So pathetic.

    HaKatan
    Participant

    anIsraeliYid:
    A much better idea would be to drop the idol and daven for Mashiach, at which point Jewish sovereignty will be permitted, unlike now when it is forbidden. Comparing the Zionists to the chashmonaim is absurd and, no, that’s not what the Rambam wrote. We don’t celebrate Chanukah for that reason; that’s background. Jewish sovereignty in E”Y is a massive negative as it is a violation of the gimmel shevuos, which are brought liHalacha by the poskim including the Rambam in Iggeres Teiman.

    in reply to: R Soloveichik on girls education #2265802
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Re:
    “Mods:
    Yes, really.
    The ‘oh really’ was in reference to your immature conclusion behind the edit. If you knew the truth, you’d be embarrassed you said it.”

    I don’t recall writing anything “immature”, but I apologize if either I did so or if whatever I did write was understood as such.

    It was the insinuation that me having to delete a post after weighing out every line of every post to determine what is public/substantiated, what is a quote from a gadol or what is stam a posters opinion was misconstrued as me deleting to protect the MO and probably for monetary reasons. Machul lach

    in reply to: R Soloveichik on girls education #2265599
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Mods:
    Yes, really.
    The ‘oh really’ was in reference to your immature conclusion behind the edit. If you knew the truth, you’d be embarrassed you said it.

    in reply to: R Soloveichik on girls education #2265156
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Re: the quotes – they’re in Michtavim uMaamarim, as memory serves.

    While American gedolim dealt with Rabbi Dr. Soloveichik as needed, including giving him kavod and/or working with him when that was necessary, they were perfectly clear about the heretical ideas he proposed (including Zionism) being exactly that: heretical. They certainly did know and respect his talmudic knowledge, but not beyond that.

    in reply to: R Soloveichik on girls education #2265155
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Rocky:
    It is a fair point that Rabbi Dr. Soloveichik held the perspective (unlike Rav Aharon Kotler) where he (and others) incorrectly viewed Orthodoxy as in danger of extinction – something that is impossible, of course.

    That could explain why he created the current incarnation of haskalah, known as “Modern Orthodoxy” which, as Rav Schwab pointed out (even decades ago, all the more so today), is really “stale and fossilized”.

    in reply to: R Soloveichik on girls education #2264920
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Rabbi Dr. Soloveichik was a professor of Talmud, and studied in the finest University study halls in Europe.

    He wrote things that, as Rav Shach put it, were “such kefirah that it was dumbfounding even to see it”.
    Rav Shach wrote that he repeated that heresy to show how great an extent secular wisdom causes “damage to, and a lowering of level of, daas Torah”.

    in reply to: Time for Frum Magazines to Change their Standards #2261341
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Avi K:
    It is a nice sensitivity to use the woman’s first initial, rather than her full name, in the byline, if that’s what you mean. Again, that is limiting her exposure to the public. It’s permitted to use the full name, of course, but it is still a sensitivity to use the first initial.

    Comparing to Devorah and Bruriah is ridiculous because we need to know those names as that is Torah – as opposed to a newspaper article for which there is zero need to know the first name of the author.

    in reply to: Time for Frum Magazines to Change their Standards #2260984
    HaKatan
    Participant

    In other words, you feel it’s time for frum magazines to be less frum, and for nebulous reasons, at best.

    A. Women were also in the world before.
    B. Jews in the olden days knew not to look at women, even if they knew what the Queen looked like.
    C. G-d blesses most families with both boys and girls, so that they each have a sense of how the opposite gender differs from theirs.

    The bottom line is that the Torah holds kol kevuda bas melech penima. There is no reason to expose women in any way unless it is necessary for them.

    in reply to: Why the Hostage Posters Are So Terrible #2249176
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Menachem Shmei:
    The Zionist army, its shmad, and all the rest, are all against the Shulchan Aruch. Obviously, for Jews to defend themselves as per Shulchan Aruch is not in question. But the Zionist army is a non-starter.

    in reply to: Why the Hostage Posters Are So Terrible #2249027
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Yankel Berel:
    “Not sure why you keep on omitting the clear psak of Harav Avnei nezer , that LEHALACHA it is mutar to ascend en masse as a bloc . ”

    Not sure why you omit that the Avnei Nezer also wrote “וקשה מאוד לעמוד על הבירור כי תלוי בדברי אגדה”.
    As well, the Satmar Rav strongly disagrees (as you noted) and brings multiple raayos for his position.

    Regarding the reason to favor the Satmar Rav over the Avnei Nezer: that would be Jewish lives,Edited

    Since WW II, has there ever been a more blatant instance of “Ani matir es bisarchem” than what occurred on Oct. 7?

    Please respect Hashem’s gezeiras haGalus. If you can gain more from going to E”Y, that’s great. But please don’t disrespect Hashem’s Torah.

    Edited 

    in reply to: Why the Hostage Posters Are So Terrible #2248851
    HaKatan
    Participant

    user176:
    The main problem today is what the Zionists do today, not only what they did for the past century.
    There certainly are alternatives to the Zionist shmad.
    As well, even if there were not any alternatives, it would still be crucial for Jews to disavow Zionism so that gentiles don’t blame Jews for anything the Zionists do.
    Bottom line: Israel is a Zionist (and therefore anti-Jewish) – not Jewish – “State”.

    in reply to: Why the Hostage Posters Are So Terrible #2248708
    HaKatan
    Participant

    yankel berel:
    No, the potential mitzva to live there today, as an individual, is a machlokes. It is forbidden to ascend en masse, regardless, as the Satmar Rav shows from multiple raayos, etc.

    Sending emails to congress to save Jewish lives (in Israel or elsewhere) is okay; but sending emails telling congress that Jews love Israel is not okay. The recent rally and the emails are all infested and infected with Zionism and that’s not okay.

    in reply to: Why the Hostage Posters Are So Terrible #2248707
    HaKatan
    Participant

    yankel berel:
    Yesh, actually, Evalemoshiv can indeed be that wrong.

    Gedolim (and talmidei chachamim) often use pesukim to describe their thoughts. That’s what the CC did in your story. But to knock out meforshim from your story is simply silly and a non-starter.

    As well, other nevuos discuss, and the Brisker Rav brought this as well, that half of [the people of] Yerushalayim will be taken and the other half will flee for the caves. Sounds very safe, yes?

    There is also the chazal that, just like by mitzrayim, there will be a 40-year exile of those in E”Y and, like the first time, only a fraction of those will merit returning.

    in reply to: Why the Hostage Posters Are So Terrible #2248706
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Menachem:
    You can’t compare the legitimate kingdom of Dovid HaMelech with the “band of thugs that descended there”, to quote the Brisker Rav.

    I quoted the Brisker Rav that the “hishtadlus”/”metzius” argument of the soldiers accomplishing anything for Klal Yisrael is false. It is only Hashem Who saves and through the merit of those who learn. Comparing to Dovid HaMelech’s army is silly and a non-starter.

    in reply to: Why the Hostage Posters Are So Terrible #2248538
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Evalimoshavlo:
    It’s a machlokes to when that even refers, including yimei Chizkiyahu, bayis sheini – see Ibn Ezra.

    Regardless, it is forbidden for all of, or even a large bloc of, Klal Yisrael to ascend to E”Y before Mashiach. The Zionists tried that (and also rebelled against the nations and took political rule, all of which are forbidden under pain of “Ani mattir es bisarchem…”) and created the cataclysmic disaster there (and also the Holocaust) as a result.
    Of course, if there were no need for Jews to be in galus, to gather in the nitzotzos haKedusha wherever they are, then Hashem would just send Mashiach. Therefore, there must be Jews outside of E”Y when Mashiach comes.

    But Zionism doesn’t like any of that because it goes against its idolatry and heresy.

    Sending emails to Congress is also essentially driven by Zionism, whether they realize it or not, as the Zionist “State” is not what is protecting the Jews there; just the opposite. As the Brisker Rav noted, the Zionists’ unending war are due to Zionism, of course; the Jews who did not survive those wars – that’s also due to the Zionists; the Jews who did survive those wars – that’s due to the lomdei and shmorei Torah and not the Zionists.

    The Zionist “State” will be history, probably much sooner rather than later.

    in reply to: Why the Hostage Posters Are So Terrible #2248008
    HaKatan
    Participant

    These posters are, in a warped and “woke” mindset, viewed as provocative because, in their view, they are essentially defending the aggressor Israel. The rest is irrelevant to them.

    It doesn’t seem that the safety of Jews in Israel is guaranteed. Especially if you read the navi about what will happen at the end of days, etc.

    in reply to: Speakers by rally #2239920
    HaKatan
    Participant

    coffee addict:
    The Zionists misuse/abuse the Torah when it suits their propaganda purposes. That’s normal for them. Their current leader does it all the time, and their first leader, David Green, did so as well.

    HaKatan
    Participant

    GadolHadofi:

    Yes, it is actually very hard to understand.
    There are way more Muslims (whether Jew-hating or otherwise) and Jew-haters than there are Jews. If you think this is a numbers game, then it’s over before it started. That’s not the reason.

    That “Due to the great concern” nonsense was from the secular organizations, not from Agudah; they just parroted/forwarded the email.

    The rally poster lists three reasons to rally:
    March for Israel, March to Free the Hostages and March against antisemitism.

    This march will, of course, accomplish none of that (May Hashem please help all Jews immediately, regardless), and it is actually heretical to think that it could accomplish that last one. The first one is also a chilul Hashem, even if the intent is only to support our brethren there.

    HaKatan
    Participant

    AAQ:
    Agudath Israel lobbies for Jewish interests. There’s your comparison to Rome and Egypt. That has nothing to do with a rally of thousands of Jews.

    The march on Washington during WW II was by Rabbis and was for a very different purpose. This rally is sponsored by secular organizations and will be mixed, and is in support of the shmad State of the Zionists.

    HaKatan
    Participant

    Amil Zola:
    Presumably, it will be totally mixed, as nothing about that has been mentioned. Anyways, frum women do not belong at rallies – kol kevuda bas melech penima.

    in reply to: I guess ChaBaD is Zionist now? #2239084
    HaKatan
    Participant

    SQUARE_ROOT:
    Actually, it very much is the time to do so, given that untold thousands of Jews are set to march on Washington this Tuesday under the banner of the Zionists with one of the stated goals as “March for Israel”.

    in reply to: I guess ChaBaD is Zionist now? #2239015
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Chabad definitely became much more Zionist once their last leader took over their movement.

    As well, this war is bringing out the latent Zionism in many who fooled themselves that they are not Zionist.

    in reply to: Forgotten Halachah MB 167 #2209721
    HaKatan
    Participant

    I’ve almost always, if not always, heard birshus haKohein. Not sure where they missed out on that by you.

    in reply to: Problem with Melech HaMashiach from the Dead #2203669
    HaKatan
    Participant

    ChabadOrthodoxrabbi1995:
    Yes, that is our mesorah, going all the way back to that gemara. And nobody called your deceased leader a heretic. But your theology does contain heresy.

    Also, it’s not “bias” and it’s not “sinas chinam” and it’s not any sina at all, despite Chabad trying to deflect edited; in fact, as a card-carrying Chabad defender, you are obviously the one with the bias.

    Most Jews appreciate Chabad’s services and therefore would have no reason to want to speak against Chabad’s theology. So, if anything, they would be biased in favor of Chabad.

    But the Torah is truth, and you cannot corrupt it with your heretical theology of what was heretofore normative Christian theology, Rav Keller Zatza”l noted.

    Anyone interested in the truth, including the quote from Rav Keller above, can find it at the Identifying Chabad Organizational Website. They also sell a sefer of the material so that you can learn it on Shabbos or Yom Tov or anytime.

    in reply to: Problem with Melech HaMashiach from the Dead #2203626
    HaKatan
    Participant

    The answer is that Klal Yisrael’s mesorah says he will be from the living, even if it once was a theoretical possibility as debated in the gemara.

    And even if it were possible, it would be, as the gemara notes, Rabbeinu HaKadosh or Daniel (the Navi), not Chabad’s deceased leader.

    Coffee:
    It very well involve serious aveiros, not just a “shtus” to believe that Chabad’s deceased leader is Mashiach.

    We have a mesorah that Mashiach will come from the living. They can’t claim that they know better; doing that is essentially throwing out all of Torah sheBaal Peh. If you can argue against all the chachmei haMesorah for thousands of years, then you could just make a new religion, which is what they are unfortunately slowly doing.

    in reply to: Chabad Inspires all Jews to Yearn for Mashiach #2198530
    HaKatan
    Participant

    sechel:
    The org site “Identifying Chabad” has that and more there for you.

    in reply to: Chabad Inspires all Jews to Yearn for Mashiach #2198401
    HaKatan
    Participant

    Back to the OP, “lakewhut”:

    That was a solid piece of Motzi shem ra on all of Klal Yisrael.
    Especially given what is going on in the world, it is rather slanderous to write that Jews in general are not really waiting for Mashiach and that only Chabad does so.

    In fact, Chabad is waiting for their Rebbe to return, which is why they may express more passion about it than do Jews who are waiting for (the actual) Mashiach from among the living.

    in reply to: Chabad Inspires all Jews to Yearn for Mashiach #2198398
    HaKatan
    Participant

    “i didnt see those words there.
    so the rebbe is explaining about asking about asking תיקונים
    then the rebbe brings the zohar of ישראל אורייתא וקוב”ה כולא חד”
    Are you sure those are the words of the Zohar?

    The quote I saw was:
    ” קב”ה ואורייתא וישראל מתקשרין דא בדא”

    That’s very, very different.

    in reply to: Bridging the Gap Between The Torah World and MO #2195055
    HaKatan
    Participant

    No Mesorah:

    You are denying and distorting reality and, as in the past, not addressing the clear and specific points mentioned.

    in reply to: Bridging the Gap Between The Torah World and MO #2194694
    HaKatan
    Participant

    No Mesorah:
    “The only difference is that MO is much more likely to be honest with their religious standing. Which is not intrinsically a bad thing.”

    Not exactly. The satan tests everyone, so everyone has their challenges. And MO does claims loyalty to “halakha”. But that is where the commonality essentially ends.

    1. Being MO is a “permit” to intentionally violate certain issurim while still considering yourself 100% orthodox.

    2. MO’s embrace of Zionism as a core tenet of their faith is, of course, hugely problematic because Zionism, of any flavor, is literal idolatry according to Rav Elchonon Wasserman HY”D and the rest.

    3. MO’s embrace of secular culture and their disregard for hashkafas haTorah is almost as large a problem as their Zionism because it results in a total distortion of what Jewish (Torah) life should be.

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 1,133 total)