Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
an Israeli Yid:
Again, haTorah haZu lo tihei muchlefes.
vigam atem.
maintou:
Perhaps it is you who hasn’t learned the sugya.anIsraeliYid:
I already replied that I read both multiple times.Rabbi Hoffman did not provide a (sourced) counter-view from any gedolim/rabbanim. Essentially, Rabbi Hoffman simply expressed his dislike of Rabbi Shapiro’s sefer
edited
For example, the individual miracles that may have taken place in 1967 have no bearing on the overall thoroughly non-miraculous and fully expected Zionist victory in 1967, as you can see on the CIA’s web-site (check it out) as Rabbi Shapiro quotes.
Nor do the Zionists mention, for example, David Green (first Zionist Premier) purchasing (with donated Jewish money) Ninety Million Dollars (in 1940s dollars!) in weapons prior to 1948 in anticipation of the war he was going to launch to officially start the Zionist state. That’s besides the battles and terror the Zionists waged prior to ’48.
If you could find me a sourced equivalent to Rabbi Shapiro’s sefer then I would be happy to check it out.
But you and I both know that such a work doesn’t exist because your alleged “other shita” doesn’t exist, even if minor differences do exist.
As Rabbi Shapiro notes, the Satmar Rav forbade both joining the Zionists in their government and also voting in their elections; by contrast, Rav Reuven Grozovsky permitted, in Biayos haZman (under strict conditions, which, as it happens, are not being followed), frum Jews to become members of Israel’s parliament and for Israeli citizens, who are anyways under the Zionist jackboot, to vote in the Israeli elections.
So there is certainly some difference of opinion in “minor” matters like these (voting or not). But on the core issues, there is only one shita of all gedolim ever since that heretic started promoting Zionism: Zionism is treif, a shmad and a danger to Jews worldwide R”L L”A and we want nothing to do with Zionism.
Yeshivish rockstar:
Regarding “increase hatred of Jews in the world”, Rabbi YB Soloveichik, himself, is on record that Zionism/the State of Israel has enormously increased hatred of Jews world-wide, as Rabbi Shapiro quotes.Of course, those blinded by the idol of Zionism would find it very hard to see that, but if you would actually read Rabbi Shapiro’s sefer then you would realize that this is really quite obvious.
The Zionists arrogantly and very fraudulently proclaim themselves the representatives of Jews worldwide. Therefore, if a gentile believes that Zionist Big Lie (liHavdil, unfortunately, many Jews believe the immense propaganda the Zionists constantly crank out), then, when the Zionists do something the Gentile doesn’t like, then it would make sense that the gentile would therefore have a lower opinion of Jews.
But, again, it’s all a Big Lie. The Zionists represent nobody other than themselves (Zionists). They do not represent world Jewry, and never have. Even the (observant) Jews who live under the Zionist jack-boot are there only because they don’t want to leave the holy land, not because they want anything to do with the Zionists, who are unwanted invaders of the Holy Land.
Yeshivish rockstar:
It’s interesting that rather than praising Rabbi Shapiro’s sefer, which is trying to uproot the A”Z of Zionism from Jews the world over (who have been influenced by that idol, R”L L”A), you prefer a book that contains clear references to, and themes of, A”Z. Rabbeinu Yonah’s vort on “ViIsh kifi mahallalo” comes to mind; you know what someone is about based on whom/what they praise.Regarding the Kook-shmook story that Rabbi Shapiro quoted, he said he heard it from the original source. This story was also said over in Brisk by Rav Berel. It is well-known in those circles. So Rabbi Shapiro very obviously did not make up the story.
But you don’t need to believe or not believe stories. You can instead open up some sefarim. Both the Satmar Rav and Rav Elchonon HY”D blasted Rabbi Kook in incredibly strong terms. Each of the Satmar Rav and Rav Elchonon applied a different Rabbeinu Yonah, including the one I quoted above, with Rav Elchonon concluding that Rabbi Kook was, therefore, a “rasha gamur”, as Rabbi Shapiro quotes.
“Yeshivish Rockstar”:
In addition to your having violated the grave issur of bizui talmid chacham (on Rabbi Shapiro), you have also made the common Zionist error of conflating the Zionist idol/State and, liHavdil Eretz Yisrael.The Satmar Rav said decades ago that if the Zionists wanted out, they could tell the Gentile nations and the Gentile nations would figure out a way to take over politically while protecting our brethren there. He is, of course, right (not that he needs my haskama) and I addressed this above.
Regarding yishuv haAretz, there is a machlokes regarding whether or not that mitzva is applicable today. And other mitzvos may supersede that mitzva, even according to those that it is in force today.
Regardless, though, there is no need for the Zionists to be able to fulfill mitzvas yeshivas haAretz. If there were a normal Western-style Gentile government in that land, (which was what would have happened had the Zionists not invaded E”Y, never mind that Moshiach would have come, as both the Brisker and Satmar Rabbanim stated) and as there is in the USA, the UK, et al. then Jews would simply buy property in E”Y and live there under Gentile rule, just as millions of Jews do elsewhere in galus.
So there is no reason you can’t live in E”Y without the Zionists. To the contrary, it would be far better to live in E”Y without the Zionists than with the Zionists.
It’s also too bad that the Zionists have inflamed the hatred of the Arabs for a century (including well before 1948) while the Zionists falsely claimed to represent the Jews. Then, the Jews could have continued living in Arab countries, as some do even today. But the Zionists need(ed) Jewish blood to sacrifice on the altar of their idolatrous State, and, just as important to the Zionists, they also needed to rid those Jews of any attachment to Torah as well, so they used any means necessary to get Jews to come to their State (and still employ various propaganda and other tactics today to the same end) and also to shmad them, as is well known.
no mesorah:
Regarding the Avnei Nezer, you can check out this link, if the mods allow it:sorry
Regardless, it seems strange to ignore all the poskim going all the way back who do invoke the oaths as practical and in force, etc.
Not to mention, of course, the “Religious Zionists” themselves contend with the oaths rather than simply (and impossibly) declare them non-halachic as you still insist on trying.
Regarding your contention that nobody was talking about the oaths until the heretical founder of political Zionism:
1. Please see above. The Rambam, as mentioned, among many others did.
2. Until that heretic, there never was a hava amina to attempt to make a State due to that being, as everyone knew, a violation of the oaths.Regarding your opinion of what the Satmar Rav said, your prior posts make it seem likely that you have never even opened up his sefarim, so it seems silly to attempt to discuss this.
Regardless, though, the poskim who ruled that the oaths are binding are obviously well known enough that even the “Religious Zionists” take the time to (fail pitifully in their attempts to) contend with the oaths being very much halachic.
manitou:
What other pshat in the three oaths do you know of? From which Halachic decisor?The main issue is that you, and others, haven’t read Rabbi Shapiro’s sefer. Then you might know the “main issue” and the other issues.
Regarding giving up the State, that’s not what he advocates, though the Satmar Rav did say that if the Zionists went to the Nations saying they want out, then the Nations would find a way to figure that out while protecting our brethren there.
If you think about it, this makes much sense from a political perspective. It is quite obvious that the gentiles only tolerate what some even publicly call “that #$@ little country”, to quote that ambassador, simply because of the interests of their respective nations. So they would presumably be quite happy to take over whatever Zionist assets they could in the event of the Zionists choosing to leave the Holy Land.
Regarding your other baseless conclusion that Jews should “finally recognize that this is what Hashem wants”, the same could have been said about the Holocaust (gasp!), the meraglim and, most appropriately in comparison, the Egel haZahav.
Yet the entire shevet Leivi did not agree with that “logic”. Hashem, of course, did not either agree, for that matter. Similarly, no Jew, today, with any knowledge of the idolatry and heresy of Zionism, should G-d forbid believe in this idol of Zionism.
anonymous Jew, you mean to ask that you thought the oaths no longer apply due to the alleged reasons in your post.
The Satmar Rav handily dismissed those and many more.
For starters, the shevuos don’t work like that (you break it then I can break it). For example, the Rambam when writing to Jews in Yemen, was very clear that the gentiles then were going too far…
As well, even if it did work that way (which it does not), that would apply only to the oath against rebelling against the Nations, not the others like doing things allowed only by Moshiach, like having a State.
Regarding the non-rebellion because of the UN, there are numerous problems with this. For starters:
1. The Zionsts definitely did rebel. They literally terrorized the British in Palestine and, besides, the Arabs never agreed. Even the British ended up abstaining from that vote and simply left, due to Zionist terror.
2. The Balfour Declaration said only a home, not a sovereign independent state, and the British subsequently stated that the Zionists read way more into that statement than it stated.“And any Jewish ideology could be accused of the same sin.”
I have no idea how that reads as a true statement.
Actually, I do. A Jewish anything, including ideology, is one that is in full accordance with the Torah and mesorah. So if you define a Jewish ideology as a foreign ideology that conflicts in even a small way with the Torah and that happens to have Jewish proponents, etc. then your statement is true.
By contrast, my statement, in context, meant, as stated that it is simply impossible to accept anything that tampers with “Torah Hashem Temima”, all the more so if it jettisons the Torah entirely, in favor of anything else including Nationalism and/or pagan land worship. All flavors of Zionism lie somewhere on the spectrum mentioned here, as stated.
no mesorah:
The Satmar Rav decisively proved, from the many halachic authorities he quoted, going back centuries and more, that the oaths are absolutely binding. Period.The premise of your “question” to the “ardent anti-Zionists” is simply not there. The oaths were very much in halachic responsa going all the way back, as the Satmar Rav notes and as lhbc”c Rabbi Shapiro writes in his sefer. Open those up and see!
Even the “Religious Zionists” struggle to come up with how their idol/State could be exempt from the oaths. According to your “logic” they need not bother. Yet they do, because they know very well that the oaths have always been in force, as the Satmar Rav quoted numerous halachic authorities who openly hold this, as mentioned, and as even Chovivei Torah and, lihavdil, as even some “Religious Zionists” held openly.
Maybe it would be wise to first read the Satmar Rav’s sefarim on the topic and/or lhbc”c Rabbi Shapiro’s sefer. Then, you would be able to theorize based on the reality of the Torah and the mesorah going all the way back, not on your imagination of what the Torah and mesorah say or don’t say.
an Israeli Yid:
Rabbi Hoffman writes well, but the article he wrote about the sefer was not a review of the sefer. I read both. Multiple times.As to Rabbi Shapiro’s portrayal of Zionism, his portrayal is absolutely right: any attempt to rewrite Hashem and/or the Torah out of the definition of a Jew (or even remix that), is heresy and absolutely unacceptable to Hashem and the Torah and, therefore, to any Jew who cares about the same. And that remix or excision of Hashem and the Torah from Judaism is Zionism. Whatever your preferred flavor.
greatwizzo and anonymous Jew:
The Satmar Rav did not on his own claim that the oaths are Halacha; rather, he lists numerous halachic authorities going all the way back who hold that they are halacha.It is rather silly to make pronouncements, and further insist, on matters in which one is obviously ignorant.
Regarding those who think that Zionism is a matter of history and not relevant anymore:
1. they should probably (re-)read Rabbi Shapiro’s sefer. You can postulate about post-Zionism as much as you want, but he brings specific examples to show that the State of Israel is very much a Zionist state, and that the core issues have not changed, just as any gadol would tell you.
2. they should note that the WZO is, unfortunately, still very much “real” and that R”L tens of thousands of (frum) Jews (according to the WZO’s web site) were recently fooled into voting in the recent WZO elections, against the vehement opposition to doing so by Rav Aharon Feldman, Rav Moshe Sternbuch, as well all of Lakewood/BMG and many, many others.Had more people (or their Rabbanim) learned Rabbi Shapiro’s sefer prior to the WZO voting period, then perhaps they would have known better than to join this wicked group (WZO/Zionism), etc.
I presume the OP’s issues are primarily with Rabbi Shapiro’s quotes from Rabbi H. Schachter of YU and, perhaps also, lbc”c of Rabbi AY Kook.
In his sefer, Rabbi Shapiro accords due respect, including rabbinic honorific (e.g. Rabbi or Rav) to each. Moreover, he limits his criticism to their views/stated points, for which there seems to be tremendous toeles in covering, not ad hominem attacks.
It’s also worth noting (both in general and regarding the L”H question) that Rabbi Shapiro did not make up these criticisms. The Satmar Rav wrote extremely strongly against Rabbi Kook, both his material and on Rabbi Kook himself.
Rabbi Shapiro also quotes Rav Schwab Zatza”l’s beautiful follow-up piece, “He who Loves does not Hate” in his “Selected Speeches”, to Rabbi Schachter’s article in “Journal of Halacha” about the alleged mitzva to slaughter Jews for the idol of Nationalism. Rabbi Shapiro also notes that lbc”c Rav Schwab wrote that he did not intend to attack lbc”c Rabbi Schachter publicly; however, his article was about “those like him”.
Bottom line: Rabbi Shapiro preserved their respective honor but covered the material as needed.
anonymous Jew:
Last you checked, the three oaths are not halacha?Have you ever opened any of the numerous sefarim by halachic decisors quoted by the Satmar Rav (and, lhbc”c, in Rabbi Shapiro’s sefer as well)?
As well, the Rambam invoked them as halacha in his Iggeres Teiman.
In other words, have you ever actually checked that they are not brought down halacha (as mentioned, they are brought down as halacha by numerous halachic decisors), or are you just assuming that?
Presumably because, even according to the “Modern Orthodox” (as Rabbi H. Schachter stated) you need to live where you will be the best Jew that you can be (and for your family as well).
So if, by moving to Israel, you become CH”V a Zionist (to any extent) then it’s probably smarter to avoid becoming an oveid A”Z and not move there.
Then there are also the issues of parnassa and family, elderly relatives, etc.
Avi K:
Every gadol of any stature from Rav Chaim Brisker (grandfather of your “Rav”) and on held very clearly that Zionism is an idol.Unfortunately, the Zionist shmad machine is immense, and that “Institution on the Hudson”, as Rav Keller Zatza”L put it very, very mildly, promotes as a religious value this idolatry of Zionism, along with other Maskilic values. So it’s not the fault of anyone who studied at that institution if they have absolutely no concept of authentic Judaism.
The naivete and sheer silliness of “Religious Zionism” is astounding. That’s not motzi shem ra; it’s simply fact and, again, as Rav Schwab wrote, the MO are to be pitied, not CH”V hated, for their heretical views (including Zionism) due to their controversial role models, etc.
Rav Schwab (among many others), under whose movement (TIDE) the MO tried to take cover, stated clearly that there is absolutely no masoretic source anywhere that allows for Zionism, and there is similarly no such source for the heresy of “Religious Zionism”.
E”Y *was* our home until Hashem kicked us out which we all say in every mussaf. While individual Jews may live there, we cannot move there en masse, as a people, until Mashiach comes. That’s even in a peaceful and non-political manner.
Unfortunately, about a century ago, the Zionists invaded large parts of E”Y and declared a State there while falsely claiming to represent the Jewish “nation”.
Moving there will not change any “balance of power”, but it will almost certainly result in massive Zionist shmad of those Jews, to varying extents (even if they still keep Shabbos and put on Tefillin), depending on how much they know about the idol of Zionism and how strong they stand in resisting that idol.
As akuperma said, moving there is, at best, moving from the frying pan to the fire.
DY:
No, it’s a very apt comparison.
In Israel, SOME of those Jews in the IDF may have died protecting Jews. Similarly, in other countries’ armies, Jews have also died protecting Jews (and, of course, other citizens of their host country, just like in Israel).So where is the comparable inherent holiness in, say, Arlington National Cemetery?
jdb:
I have no “political” concerns. I was coming from the perspective of religion, from the Torah.There is nothing that makes Mount Herzl holy, or at least not any holier than any other Jewish cemetery which has a wide range of Jews buried there. Mount Herzl, however, does have the distinct disadvantage of being a Zionist symbol, in addition.
Again, the fact is that the Zionists are (at the very, very least) secular. Many, if not all, of the decisions they make in their army are very likely NOT what the Torah would want. Therefore, their soldiers’ activities following those decisions are, also, very likely NOT what the Torah would want. Therefore, there is nothing particularly holy about that cemetery containing the bodies of those soldiers any more so than any other cemetery with bodies of Jews.
Chaim Baruch:
Please see the earlier part of this post.
Aish.com has, shall we say, Zionist leanings?
Both stories seem absurd and, by implication as presented, are heretical.
If some Jews (let’s say they are secular and even heretics) go to war in, say, South Africa, and don’t return, are they considered holy as a result? Obviously not. Same thing in Israel.Yichusdik, Mount Herzl is a Zionist military cemetery. Zionists fight in the Zionist army to promote or defend Zionism, not necessarily to save Jewish lives. In fact, sometimes, they fight knowing that they will be sacrificing Jewish lives, CH”V, whether for political or other considerations (more land, etc.).
Zionism, as we know, is anti-Jewish to the core, attempting to remake the Torah-based Jewish people into a new gentile Nation-State-based Hebrew people whose ancestors happened to have been Jewish. The Zionist army is obviously NOT a place of “kedusha”, in the Torah’s (i.e. non-Zionist) usage of the word.
So your characterization of those on Mount Herzl as “kedoshim” and “gave their lives to save Jews” seems “off”.
As well, your claim that visiting Mount Herzl could lead to Ahavas Yisrael is also strange. Would visiting a cemetery in the United States do the same? If not, then why would visiting one in Israel be any different?
KJ is, of course correct.
Regarding your reference to the United States, the OP’s question would be like asking if the continent of North America can count on British support. But that doesn’t make any sense. Do you mean Canada? The US? Mexico? All of the above? Two of the above? Parts of all three countries?
So if you mean to ask if, say, the United States can count on British support, it would be silly to write that as regarding the continent of North America rather than the United States.
Similarly, but liHavdil, Eretz Yisrael is a geographic area, not a political entity.
The State of Israel happens to be located on a large portion of the landmass of Eretz Yisrael, just as the United States happens to be located on a large portion of, liHavdil, the landmass of North America. That is, as you wrote, the reality “on the ground”.
So the OP’s title should obviously, read, “Can the Sate of Israel rely on..”, and not “Can E”Y rely on…”
frumtd:
The Satmar Rav was one of many gedolim who called belief in Zionism what it very obviously is: heresy and idolatry. Unlike those other gedolim, he also wrote multiple sefarim explaining the whole topic (rather brilliantly and comprehensively, at that – not that my opinion is worth anything).Your academic question of how, in light of that, one could visit E”Y, is not really a question (because visiting and even living in E”Y is not at all innately Zionistic). But even if it were a question, that would not therefore lead to your “obvious conclusion”.
The much more “obvious conclusion” is that one who has likely never even opened a VaYoel Moshe and whose knowledge of Zionism is limited to popular propaganda, Zionist and otherwise, should probably not be be drawing any “obvious conclusion”.
frumtd:
The Zionists require Jews under their rule to be shmaded and subjected to the big three cardinal sins, in their indoctrination camp of Zionism known as the IDF, as a pre-condition to employment.One need only observe all the “Chareidi”-owned and run businesses everywhere else in the world, including Satmar, to realize that our religious brethren in Israel are being denied the ability to work unless they choose to subject themselves to Zionist shmad.
Regarding “reevaluating their positions” after the Holocaust, this is almost an heretical statement. The correct lesson to take from the Holocaust is how it fit in with the rules of schar viOnesh (and if we can’t figure that out, then we’ll have to wait for Eliyahu HaNavi to tell us BB”A), not how to turn Klal Yisrael into yet another Gentile nation, as was and is the goal of Zionism.
In terms of how to deal with the State once it, very unfortunately, came into being, there were gedolim who held that the tactics of dealing with the problem of Zionism had to change given this reality. But that Zionism was and is a tremendous problem for Jews has never changed.
Avi K:
1. Actually, appealing to international bodies against Israel could, in fact, actually be a tremendous mitzva, if, for example, doing so saves Jews from Zionist shmad or saves Jewish lives.2. Their “fighting spirit” is far, far better used in a milchamta shel Torah in the Bais Midrash, not in the Zionist army whose specific purpose is to shmad them, to take the Torah away from them, in addition to “treating them to extreme doses of the big three cardinal sins (particularly, but not all limited to, if they were in actual combat units).
3. “HaTekufa HaGedola” contains “falsifications of fact”, as Zvi Weinman wrote both in a journal and in his book Mikatowitz Ad Hei B’Iyar (pp. 134-136). (From truetorahjews, about half-way through the article).
link removedReb Eliezer:
I think Joseph addressed well that AHS is not relevant here.Regarding the Mahara”M Schick (from the Chasam Sofer) that you quoted, though, he is very obviously NOT discussing voting in Zionist elections because he died close to a century before the Zionist state was even founded.
Furthermore, his sevara there obviously has zero to do with Zionist elections. First of all, much of Klal Yisrael, B”H, lives outside of Zionist rule. Whereas in “biblical” Egypt, it was everyone.
In addition, Reshaim voting in Zionist elections vs. liHavdil, tzaddikim who do not vote, has nothing to do with the Mahara”M Schick (from the Chasam Sofer) discussing having children and literally keeping Klal Yisrael going to the next generation.
In other words, regardless of who does and does not vote in Zionist elections, Klal Yisrael will definitely continue to the next generation, ad beas goel tzedek BB”A.
This barbaric practice still exists even after the dangers of these carcinogen sticks are so well known, R”L L”A??
I’m sure the chosson could give out something of benefit to his friends to achieve (an even better or) same result, and I imagine the kallah could do the same if that were necessary.
manitou:
Rather than address any of my points, you chose the “Satmar” attack.
I suppose that’s because the only fact you could contribute to the discussion is that you don’t like the facts I’ve written. Sorry about that.Wow. There’s so much confusion about this topic.
First, nobody proposes boycotting “E”Y”; they propose boycott the Zionist State of Israel. The two (E”Y and, liHavdil, the Zionist State of Israel) are diametrically opposed, not CH”V the same and not complementary.
So before you can even attempt to have an educated opinion on this topic, you have to be able to separate the holy land from the very unholy Zionist invasion and state the Zionists made there in E”Y.
Jewish Anti-Zionism is, as Joseph wrote, both de facto and de jure, both Pro-Torah and Pro-Judaism.
Moreover, even according to the Satmar Rav (the story to which he refers, as implied here, is a myth), a Gentile’s anti-Zionism does not at all mean that the Gentile is anti-Jewish. He could very well be more pro-Jewish than might be his pro-Zionist neighbor Gentile.
Anyone can see how true this is, if they have even a small understanding of the fraud, shmad and identity-theft of the Jewish people that is Zionism. In fact, if a Gentile understood how anti-Jewish, to the core, is Zionism, it would be ANTI-Jewish of them if they did NOT oppose Zionism. In other words, it is pro-Jewish to oppose Zionism.
According to some, Anti-Semitism is, in fact, one of the reasons the UN allowed the creation of the Zionist State.
Anti-Zionism is not NK, even though NK is anti-Zionist. NK’s methods, etc. may not be correct, but they are not at all the definition of anti-Zionism. They are simply a vocal minority that does what they feel needs to be done to draw attention to the fact that Zionism is anti-Jewish.
Anti-Zionism, meaning a part of being pro-Jewish, is simply recognizing at least some of the myriad evils that the Zionists have done and continue to do R”L L”A against our own Jewish people, and to recognize that, as Rav Saadiah Gaon wrote, Hashem made us a nation at Har Sinai based on the Torah, not a common land, etc.
E”Y serves as a holy land where individuals (not en masse) can grow spiritually, even in galus, though the Zionists have made even that very challenging in many ways, including attempting to shmad Klal Yisrael with their mandatory draft (of both men and women..like NK, as in North Korea) into their redefinition of Judaism/Zionist indoctrination engine known as the IDF.
When we merit it soon, BE”H, then E”Y will, of course, be the place where we will merit the building of the third Bais haMikdash after beas goel tzedek BB”A.
Charlie:
You seem to be conflating Zionism with, liHavdil, Chovivei Tzion, about which, incidentally, Rav SR Hirch and others were very against, and about which its founder ultimately expressed his regret.It’s simply impossible for any “Orthodox” Jew to be a proponent of what I wrote above – replacing Judaism with, liHavdil, an almost pagan land-based nationalist idol with some “Jewish” themes, etc.
Rabbi Soloveitchik proposed ideas (like Modern Orthodoxy and “Religious” Zionism) which were condemned by gedolim. So you can’t bring him as a support for Zionism. But even if you would bring him as a support, his students espouse positions about Zionism with which even he explicitly disagreed, and his stated reasons for supporting both “Modernity” and Zionism have been shown to be either irrelevant and/or wrong – certainly nowadays.
The Modern Orthodox “foolishness bordering on heresy” to quote Rav Schwab) has long been recognized as the silliness that it is, and the Zionist ideology and State/idol have long been exposed for the brazen heretical and idolatrous identity theft of Judaism that they are. Unfortunately, many are still taught this same “fossilized” (again, quote from Rav Schwab) nonsense with which no gadol even agreed.
besalel:
From where do you get that alleged definition of Zionism? It is simply not true and is also so simplistic that it couldn’t possibly be true. What would drive anyone to make a state only to immediately abdicate? Why would the Zionists insist on forced conscription of women, when that puts them on par with North Korea? Etc.Zionism was a Nationalist movement of the 1800s that sought to redefine Judaism and the Jewish nation from being one based on the Torah, to a nation based on a land. None of that has changed, unfortunately.
As Rav Chaim Brisker noted (way before the State was founded), people think that the Zionists shmad the Jews in order to achieve a State. In reality, it is the opposite: The Zionists need a State in order to shmad the Jews. Shmad is the goal. The State is merely the vehicle through which they perpetrate that shmad, R”L L”A.
besalel:
Zionism ended with the State? From where did you draw that conclusion? Certainly not from the Zionists who might know better about Zionism?But if you would know what Zionism is, then you would know just as well as any Zionist that, unfortunately, Zionism has most definitely NOT ended with the creation of the State.
You would also know that the larger issues with Zionism revolve not so much on its proponents and founders but, much more so, on the idolatry, heresy and identity theft of Judaism that is, liHavdil, Zionism.
Thank you, Joseph. I appreciate that.
Milhouse:
From where did you come up that these ideas that are allegedly Satmar ideas? I doubt that even NK holds that way, though, liHavdil, Satmar for sure does NOT hold like that. The Satmar Rav notes specifically that the Zionists could have peacefully ended their regime if they wanted to do so, and possibly still could do so even after the Zionists have (purposely) “inflamed” the region. Regardless, you cannot be machzik the Zionists.Instead of assuming what Satmar “seems” to hold, why not learn VaYoel Moshe and Al HaGeula viAl haTemura?
And from where did you come up with the alleged Chabad shita that the Zionist state “is the only thing that stands between millions of Jews and Holocaust Part II, r”l” This is mere Zionist propaganda and simply a bald lie (has anyone stopped to think how insane it is that a standard feature of an Israeli home is a “sealed room”!?), unless you mean that the Zionists are, in theory, protecting the residents of the parts of Eretz Yisrael that the Zionists have invaded.
Still, even that is not a reason to proactively support the Zionists. We daven for all our brethren worldwide, regardless of the government that rules the land in which they reside, but certainly not for the Zionist government.
Finally, your statement that — “If it happened, Hashem wanted it, and we have to deal with it.” and that, therefore, the State must NOT be a maaseh Satan — is simply not logical. What Hashem allows to happen versus what He “wants” are not at all necessarily the same.
Just as Hashem allowed the Eigel to come into existence, He also allowed the State to come into existence. While on the topic of the Eigel and the State, the Brisker Rav (not Satmar rav) noted that the State of the Zionists is the greatest achievement of the Satan since the Eigel haZahav.
The greatest Torah sages of the past century and beyond have blasted Zionism for the idolatry and heresy that it proudly is.
Rabbi Teichtal’s book was written during very desperate times and his introduction in any event states not to rely on it as a support for any -ism.
We’ve gone over this way too many times: the State is idolatry and heresy and a colossal chilul Hashem, not to mention communist-textbook-case propaganda and identity theft of the Jewish nation.
The gedolim were and are quite clear about the cataclysmic disaster for the Jewish people that was Zionism.
The Rambam who the MO love so much brought down the oaths in Iggeres Teiman. The Satmar Rav answers all the nonsense that Zionists try to bring up in a desperate attempt to hold on to their idols. Might as well just give it up.
jacoby211:
I don’t think he was questioning how much learning they do in MO places.
As Rav Schwab begged the MO decades ago, they should abandon their stale and fossilized “modernity” and join the true modern Orthodox, the traditional Orthodox binei Torah.
DaMoshe:
AS DY pointed out, the word “Modern” is in the title of the thread. Given the gedolim’s views on “MO”, it would not appear likely that this thread would thus be to your liking.
Burnt Steak:
As stated on their web site, OJ is not “MO”, even if they attract a variety of students.
From their site: “Yeshivat Ohr Yerushalayim is unaffiliated politically or philosophically with any political parties or formal religious movements. Its goal is to emphasize the primacy of high level Torah study and love of Klal Yisrael and Eretz Yisrael.”
The last line, however, does, at first glance, seem to neatly align with MO’s “Am Yisrael, Torat Yisrael and Eretz Yisrael”, which probably makes it attractive to MO.
Looking at it more closely, however, they note (in English) “limud haTorah”, not “Torat Yisrael”, and “Klal Yisrael” rather than “Am Yisrael”. Those particular word choices imply Torah-true orthodoxy, not “MO”. But it’s probably still “kosher” for “MO”, too.
The Brisker Rav stated that had the Jews in 1948 davened for the true geulah then they would have gotten that and Mashiach would have come. But since they davened for this heretical State of Israel instead, Hashem gave them that instead. This was the reason the State unfortunately came into being and also what severely derailed your “incontrovertible proof”.
In other words, after the great suffering from Germany, we would have had Mashiach in the 1940s, but, instead, the “Religious” Zionists (and perhaps others, liChaOra) ruined it by davening for this idol State instead of davening for, lihavdil, Mashiach.
At this point, instead of Mashiach, you have a State that has cost rivers of Jewish blood to create and maintain, not to mention the shmad of hundreds of thousands of acheinu binei Yisrael. And after all those human sacrifices on the altar of Zionism, the Zionists need their citizens to be armed as they walk around the streets so that they can ward off the savages with knives, etc. Hashem Yishmor, and they want to spend Billions (with a “B”) of dollars to turn the Zionist paradise into one big ghetto. In other words, the State has, of course, been a tremendous failure (at best) both spiritually and physically, despite the scientific awards, etc. of the Jews there. Yet you still believe in this idol.
As the Brisker Rav noted, the State they have managed to achieve is the greatest triumph of the Satan since the cheit haEigel. Nothing since the Eigel has topped this. Yet you maintain this fantasy that the State was a good thing in spite of this and in spite of the multitude of massive disasters that the State has wrought on Klal Yisrael.
As mentioned before, if anyone wonders how it is possible that only 600 people in all of Klal Yisrael did not bow down to the baal idol in the time of Eliyahu HaNavi, one need only look at Zionism today to understand.
No. What you see as “incontrovertible” is deluded (due to idolatry) and simply illogical, even if the sources in reality do imply what you claim.
First some basic facts, as per our gedolim.
The heretical (and disastrous on so many levels) State of Israel has pushed off the geula, CH”V. The “Reishis Tzemichas Geulaseinu” Zionist fantasy was based on a fraud, so that’s nonsense in and of itself.
Next, we have your sources.
Germany was definitely terrible to the Jews in WW II. (The Zionists did their part, too, but that is somewhat tangential here.)
Regarding the returning to Eretz Yisrael, there could certainly be a limited return to Eretz Yisrael before Mashiach comes. Individual Jews have the right to live in E”Y so long as their move to E”Y does not constitute an aliya biChoma and violate the oaths, CH”V. Political sovereignty is strictly forbidden due to dechikas haKeitz, so that rules out the State as a non-starter, Zionist fantasies not withstanding.
So this is irrelevant to the State; you’ve conflated living in E”Y and, lihavdil, the heretical State of Israel, which is typical of Zionists, whether “Religious Zionist” or otherwise.
Zionism is a massive physical churban, too.
The Zionists successfully lobbied governments AGAINST allowing Jews during WW II in to their respective countries.
The Zionists, who claimed to and were given to represent world Jewry for around a century, considered Zionism to be the greatest priority over everything including Jewish lives, and therefore insisted that Jews somehow get to Palestine or suffer their fate by the Nazi mass murderers.
Think about that for a minute, especially given their lies about being protectors of Jews. With friends like that…
Besides for the spiritual cause of the Holocaust, the Zionists very much did their physical share, too, including what was mentioned above. The motto of Zionism during WW II was “rak beDam tihye lanu haAretz”, and that meant Jewish blood.
Zionists today would be wise to avoid WW II in their attempted defense of their idol.
And the inflammation of the Arab world is also a physical problem of the State, not “only” a spiritual one.
Zionism has been and is a uniquely disastrous calamity for the Jewish people.
ROB:
While everyone is entitled to their own opinions, that is not the case with facts. The Zionists started Zionism for the simple reason that they wanted to be accepted by the gentiles as part of their club. This is fact.
Read the Holocaust literature: the Zionists admit that Zionism was and is the greatest value above all else, including above saving lives. The Zionists have intentionally and otherwise, and admittedly so, endangered and forfeited Jewish lives in WW II and in Israel, Zionist lies and propaganda not withstanding.
Zionism has been an absolute disaster for the Jewish people. Zionism is idolatry and heresy, and the Zionists have no answers.
ROB:
How dare you conflate your idol with “Eretz Yisrael” and accuse Health and others of “seeing only the bad in E”Y”? CH”V.
Health and others very clearly distinguished between the land and, liHavdil, your idol of Zionism.
Avi K:
Most of your post doesn’t apply to mine. Regardless, your own “Rav” admits that MO is a radical new invention.
Sam2:
We’ve discussed this before. The theology is indisputably erroneous. But the gedolim still hoped that the MO would return to the mesorah of unadulterated Torah from Har Sinai.
Luna Lovegood:
The Zionists themselves have already disproved your theories about Zionist protection. The Zionists created and maintain their state solely for the sake of Zionism, and not to protect Jews as, again, they have more than amply demonstrated both before and after 1948.
Regardless, your choice of being a Zionist, with the faith in the Zionists that comes with that, has zero religious backing, contrary to Zionist belief.
May Hashem protect all His children, wherever they may be.
yichusdik:
This has zero to do with any opinion of mine – I merely quoted – and it is plain fact that MO has zero historical authenticity. We have gone over this in many other threads.
Joseph has quoted your “Rav”‘s “chameish drashot”, where he clearly states that MO was a radical new invention that he thought was necessary, that Traditional Orthodoxy would become a museum piece, etc.
With the benefit of hindsight, this is obviously not the case. That’s besides for the gedolim’s clear and strong condemnation of MO, Zionism, etc. with one even specifically stating explicitly that your “Rav” cannot be considered as a link in the mesorah from Sinai.
Again, it is absurd to suggest that “shiv’im panim laTorah” can justify a non-starter like MO, Zionism or any other kefirah, A”Z, etc.
Nonetheless, Rav Schwab seemed to recognize that MO was simply misguided and, therefore, implored them to return to the Torah. And, yes, he addressed MO as “our achim baEidah”.
yichusdik:
Shiv’im panim laTorah applies only to Torah approaches, not to those outside of Torah like MO, as many gedolim have clearly stated and even entreated the MO to return.
MDG:
There is no reason that my posts should cause you anguish unless I somehow offended you personally, which I cannot recall doing.
Of course, if I have offended you personally, please tell me how I have done so; I certainly did not intend to do so. Moreover, my prior post was simply factual.
So instead of “losing it” and violating this severe prohibition (and continuing to insult me, too), you could have simply asked me respectfully, regardless of whether or not you think I engaged in “name calling” and “insult left and right” towards anyone else.
I still don’t understand why, for example, my post to ROB, would elicit the reaction from you that it did.
MDG:
I assume your misspelling of “HaKatan” was not intentional because you are surely aware that calling someone a derogatory nickname causes one to lose their Olam Haba. Certainly, you did not mean kesem as in “?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ???????” which is obviously not relevant here.
You greatly misunderstood my post. Rabbi Akiva was, of course, NOT naive. Bar Koziva was so great that, unfortunately, he was able to fool even Rabbi Akiva.
Regarding the Nazi leader, the recorded historical facts are not in accordance with Zionist whitewashes of their abominable behavior before, during and after WW II. Again, Rav Hutner (who also lived before, during and after WW II, including in E”Y) and others wrote about this. Rav Weissmandl also wrote much on this subject.
The Zionists have no answers.
ROB:
You have no answers for your idolatry and heresy. This has all been discussed numerous times. As well, when you bring up matters like Bar Koziva and the Holocaust, you are hurting, not helping, your idol.
May Hashem illuminate your eyes (and the rest of Klal Yisrael fooled by this evil idolatry and heresy) and guide you (and them) to the correct path, to His Torah.
ROB and others:
Of course, in a free society, everyone is entitled to their views. But, for Torah, there is only “eilu viEilu” for Torah-conforming views, which, as discussed, does not include Zionism. Your idolatry is not, CH”V, Torah.
Regarding this despicable libel on gedolim, it is worth pointing out that the Chazon Ish wrote that people who blame the gedolim for deaths in the holocaust are apikorsim.
Had the Zionists not declared war on Hitler in the name of world Jewry, and had they not lobbied governments to not allow Jews in to their country, etc. Rav Hutner wrote on this subject as did many others. No, it was not because of “the gedolim”.