Non Political

@ smerel

Nice Post!

@ UJM
“…to humor you, in order to even answer your potentially false question”

I assume you meant to say false question.

If, as you say, you never claimed that Z is Kfira / A”Z I will have to take your word for it I don’t have your many posts memorized and if I wrongly attributed HaKatan’s or Somejew’s position to you then I apologize.

Next

You wrote: “first you’ll need to provide the specific names of the specific Gedolim, who told specific individuals who you can name for us right over here, to join the IDF”

I did exactly that. I named HaRav Gedaliah Nadel. He himself joined the IDF. Look him up.

@ UJM

Are you looking into a Shiduch with the Bennet kids? Is that why you are interested in her shmira of Taharas Mishpacha?

Maybe review the Hazon Ish’s psak re: the tinok sh’nishba status of Hilonim.

@Menachem

I don’t accept the Gemara in Sotah and the Rambam’s Igeres Taimon as positive proof texts for the acceptability of the belief that the last Lubavicher Rebbe was a Navi. Sorry.

Have you ever met anyone outside Chabbad that does?

@ Simcha613

I think the correct answer to your question is “none of the above”

@ Seychel83

“Don’t make fun as if there is no nevuah if you haven’t learned basics in this sugya”

Learning the basics in a sugya, any sugya starts with Chazal and Rishonim. But that’s probably not what you had in mind, right?

Also, how do you know he hasn’t learned the basics? Wait…I know. Because he disagrees with what Chabbad has to say on the matter, right?

@ AAQ

“there would have been a large socialist caliphate – from the river Nile to the Caspian sea, maybe even joining USSR.”

Exactly. Per an extensive report, published by MINITRUE, such a calaphite would be a wonderful place to live. The very embodiment of justice, security, religious tolerance, and a thriving economy that will benefit all its citizens.

@HaKatan

“You wrote: Again, your idolatry of Zionism is not letting you think clearly….Nobody said anything about the Arabs taking over.”

Right Why would any reasonable person think that Arabs would take over if the State of Israel is disbanded? Many none-arab nations are currently running peaceful, multi-cultural countries in the Middle East. One of them could administer the land of Israel.

@ HaKatan and Somejew

Your comments are double plus good! Judaism is at war with Religious Zionism. We have ALWAYS been at war with Religious Zionism!!

@ somejew

How does someone who needs an Artscroll to learn Gemara manage to have such strong, clear opinions on complex matters relating to derech HaPsak and Ikrei Emuna?

@ YB

It’s funny that you get called a Zionist after making your position on the matter crystal clear in multiple posts.

@ AAQ

You wrote: At the basic level, if you put aside history of animosity between different groups, what would be your problem with the state?

Why are you asking him this? Isn’t it clear that from his point of view there are at least 2 things wrong with the state
1) It is forbidden to make a state before Moshiach comes
2) You are joining in an enterprise with people who are using the said enterprise to replace authentic Yidishkeit with Nationalism

I’m not saying that there are no responses to the above 2 points but HaKatan has been very clear and consistent regading where he stands on this, no?

As an aside, it is worth mentioning that when secular Zionists made clear that their agenda was not merely practical statehood but proactive shmad it was Rav Kook himself who said that the Rebbonim would have to downplay the importance of E”Y (like Chazal did with the Eserah Dibros due to terumos haminim).

@ ZSK

“I asked you to define Mesorah as a term”

Good luck with that

@ ZSK

You wrote: “What I disagree with in this thread (and in the threads about Zionism, the IDF, etc.) is the blatant disrespect and character assassination the Chassidish and Yeshivish communities continue to engage in vis a vis MO and RZ communities and their Rabbonim.”

I grew up in a MO community and also lived in Bet-El for a bit and learned with a talmid from R’ Melamid’s Yeshiva. What you describe has not been my experience. I heard (and hear) a good amount of derision from both sides. To a certain extent, this is by design. The tool to effectively shape and rally public opinion has always been rhetoric, not logic, v’hamaivin, yavin, (For those who will accuse me of ascribing Greek methods to Rebbonim, I refer them to the Ramchal’s Sefer Malitza.)

The original source for the statement from R’ Meir Simcha of Dvinsk is a letter on behalf of Keren HaYesod

@ HaKatan

You are misquoting me. I did not claim that “no poskim bring the 3 oaths as Halacha.” I did ask you you to provide citations for your claims so that the specific points made can be addressed in the context of this post.

@ The Satmar Rav, V’Yoel Moshe

ויש טפשים האומרים שיען שהיה בהסכמת רוב האומות אין כאן
לא איסור שבועה ולא איסור העברה על הקץ, וכל כך גבר
החשכות וסמיות העינים שנפל על העולם לטעות בדברי הבלים
כאלו.

There are fools that are saying that since there was an
agreement amongst most of the nations there is no
longer an Oath nor a prohibition of forcing the end.
This darkness and blindness has increased so much
that people are mistakenly following these words of
vanity.

I will leave it to Hakatan, Somejew, and UJM to explain this passage in v’Yoel Moshe in light of the quote from R’ Meir Simcha HaKohen of Dvinsk.

Also, maybe they can shed light on why we should give greater weight to what the Satmar Rav wrote vs what R’ Meir Simcha wrote. In the meantime I will go watch some paint dry as I listen to the sweet chirping of crickets

Re: my question about Yoma 9B.

Pnei Yehoshua (on Ketubot 111a) points out that Yoma 9b implies the opposite – that the redemption did not come because the Jews did not ascend as a wall. And since these two aggadic sources contradict each other, we must understand them in some other, non-halakhic way. (From footnotes on a shiur from R’ Eliezer Melamed).

I guess HaKatan got me on “just being lazy”

@ YB

You wrote: Facts are facts. Even katan cannot wish them away.

Apparently he can. Witness the power of Indoctrination.

@ ZSK

I saw Yoma 9b. Not sure how it “refutes the 3 oaths. Note, I am not taking a position here on if one does or does not have to refute the oaths. I am asking how you and Avi K see Yoma 9b as a refutation.

You wrote: Charedi blood is not סומק טפי in comparison to the צדיקים מק״ק דתי לאמי למיניהם, who have sacrified everything in a פיקוח נפש situation while Charedim refuse to do anything

This may reflect how the R”Z community sees the Charedi community but it is unfair generalization. A large number of first responders who rushed directly into harms way on Oct 7 to save lives where Charedi Hatzola volunteers. One of my Rabbonim is certainly Chareidi and I still remember him coming in with his IDF uniform during meluim. R’ Yisroel Zev Gustman was a Chareidi Rosh Yeshiva (who was offered to be R”Y of Ponovich), he said that speaking against soldiers in m’gala pnei Torah shlo k’halacha.

On the other hand I don’t think most Charedi Gedolim recognize the legitimacy of having secular Jews in positions of (military / civil / Judicial authority.

@ UJM

I read through the letters you posted from the Satmar Rav. Perhaps you would care to post where the Satmar Rav sees in Rav Kook’s written works or speeches that: ועל הכלל כולו יצא, לכפור בתורה שבכתב ובע”פ ובעיקרי האמונה לתת אותם לשמצה

enquiring minds want to know

@ YB

You wrote: “This is clear
Zionism was/is/remains a sakana for yahadut.”
Most Zionists were heretics.
Most Zionists were choteh umachti et harabim.”

For this to be CLEAR you would have to differentiate between S”Z and R”Z and qualify that you are referring to S”Z.
Otherwise please explain: how does following the hadracha and psakim of R”Z Rebbonim constitute a sakana for Yahadus? If you where machria like the Gedolim who reject R”Z what criteria did you use? What criteria should the rest of us use? Given the thoughtfulness of your posts in general I am confident it’s something better then “my Rabbi is bigger then your Rabbi and everybody should recognize that, duh).

@ HaKatan

You wrote: “…which is also brought down by poskim on the spot there and elsewhere.”

Which Poskim bring it “on the spot”? Citation please.

You wrote: we anyways pasken like the oaths, as per all the poskim that bring those as halacha

which Poskim? Since you claim that “all the Gedolim” agree with the Satmar Rav and the Brisker Rav you should have no problem citing their Halachic works where the 3 oaths are brought.

You wrote: including the Rambam himself in Iggeres Teiman.

The Rambam writes that the Mishna Torah contains all the Dinim of Torah sh’baal pe. The 3 Oaths are not there. Let that sink in.

Avi K wrote: Rambam does not pasken them in Mishna Torah. Neither do any of the Rishonim, Shulchan Aruchm Rema, and Achronim. You wrote: You are left with an academic question as to why it’s not in other sefarim too. The Satmar Rav and others addressed that academic question, which is otherwise irrelevant.

It is not merely an academic question and certainly not irrelevant. Omission from every major Halachic Code From the Rif through the Shulchan Aruch sets Halachic Precedent. To refer to this as academic and irrelevant is, in technical parlance, a big halachic boo boo. Now, it may be that the Satmar Rav addresses this objection. Have you read how he does this? Perhaps you would care to post an executive summary for us simple folk here in the CR?

@ ZSK

I’m referring to comments (not made by you or Chaim 87) that are מבזה תלמידי חכמים. Regardless of what segment of the Torah community one is from affronts to Kavod HaTorah must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. Comments that Hareidi Gedolim caused the Holocaust or somehow missed pashut pshat in Tanach are deplorable and certainly outside the pale of acceptable discourse. When such comments are made in the name of / in defense of R”Z one would expect the bnei Torah among them to protest.

@ somejew

“You wrote: we do have a clear Gemara in Chilin that say that we can paskin a question based on the observed actions of a Talmid Chuchem with a chazukeh as a Tzadik, that is obviously only in the case of a question between two shitas in Torah. Certainly, we don’t paskin to go after an observed avairah!”

Per the above ANY written or oral source that disagrees with Satmar / Brisk will simply be construed by you as (1) going after an observed avairah. Even if the Ravs authority (in the source presented) would be unimpeachable by your own standards you would certainly take the position that the source is (2) mzuif or (3) the Rav wrote based on misinformation.

But then you wrote: “To push the point home… I am looking for bona fida Torah sources.”

It seems to me that either (1) you did not write the above line (and the OP) in good faith or (2) you didn’t realize that what you wrote doesn’t shtim with itself. Of course, it’s also possible that I am simply misunderstanding you

Next

You wrote: If anyone here is interested in taking this conversation seriously, we need to start with defining our terms, specifically “what is zionism”…if anyone want to continue this and offer a meaningful definition of Zionism, ie. the novel ideology that started in the 19th century that the world refers to when they say “Zionism”, please go for it.

That was a very good example of begging the question.

Also, we don’t really need to define Zionism. It will be quite sufficient for the purposes of this discussion to state clearly the SPECIFIC anti-Torah beliefs and actions you understand to be associated with Zionism. We can then discuss each one individually.