somejewiknow

@smerel
it’s very simple Xtianity long ago stopped claiming (in a meaningful way, especially vis-a-vis common judaism) that it is the real Judaism.
Zionism, on the other hand, still claims itself a valid form of (or at least compatible with) Judaism.

That prefaning of the holy makes it much worse than just going of to India and, chv”sh, worshiping a getchke.

This might allow the argument that Jews for Zionism is the same evil as Jews for J.
(neither are great methods of kiruv)

@yaakov-yosef-a
you are missing the key point that being zionist is specifically לועג על דברי חכמים.

@smerel
it is obvious that being zionist is worse than being xtian, both for the rushe and for the yiddishe tzibor.

@damoshe
i agree that these stories mean nothing except to strengthen what is already taught in Torah.

Claiming that any zionist (especially a RZ galach) brought someone closer to Torah is like claiming the Mitzrim got the Jews to really daven. We cannot possibly know how great the damage being done by every money paid by zionists into otherwise kosher institutions. Nonetheless, we can be certain that we Jews would be better off if they had never started their war against Judaism, and we can be certain that we would be better off if they would disappear today, just as we daven three times a day for their quick peaceful downfall and destruction.

@yankel-berel

I don’t know if Rav Dessler wrote that, but either way it’s kefira in the Torah. It’s simply not “our state”, it’s not now and it never has been.

@yankel-berel

I asked chat GPT your question:


did the mo’etsete of aguda in 1937 agree to the Peel proposal of establishment of 2 states in palestine ?


and the answer it gave:


No, the **Mo’etzet Gedolei HaTorah of Agudat Yisrael** (Council of Torah Sages of Aguda) **did not agree** to the **Peel Commission proposal** in 1937.

The **Peel Commission**, appointed by the British government, recommended for the first time the **partition of Mandatory Palestine** into two states—one Jewish and one Arab. While the **Zionist leadership** debated the proposal (with some supporting it conditionally), **Agudat Yisrael**, which represented a non-Zionist Orthodox Jewish position, **rejected the proposal**.

The **Mo’etzet Gedolei HaTorah** did not support the idea of partitioning the land or establishing a secular Jewish state, which they saw as incompatible with Torah values. Their position was rooted in a religious worldview that rejected secular nationalism and emphasized waiting for **divine redemption** rather than political statehood.

So, to summarize:
**No**, the **Mo’etzet Gedolei HaTorah of Aguda** did **not agree** to the Peel Commission's proposal in 1937.


Now, I obviously don’t trust chatgpt without evidence, so let me ask you if you know of any sources that would support the claim that Agudah endorsed the “2-state” recommendation of the Peel Commission?

and in english:

One Who Doubts the Words of the Sages Defiles Wine Through Contact

In one conversation, [the Chazon Ish] exclaimed: Anyone who suggests that even a single statement of Chazal is “not to be taken literally” (lav davka), is considered one who “cuts down the plantings” (mekatzetz b’netiot), a metaphor for heresy. He added that the “intermediate” man (beinoni) is compelled to adopt such a position when he aligns himself [with skeptics].

He was also meticulous not to eat poultry slaughtered by a certain rabbi, a renowned expert slaughterer and inspector (shochet u’vodek), who was suspected of belonging to the aforementioned type of “intermediates.”

Our master, Rabbenu [the Chazon Ish], consistently maintained that a person with a distorted outlook is more potent in rendering wine ritually impure through contact than one who publicly desecrates the Sabbath. The venerable Rabbi Shmaryahu Greineman, of blessed memory, testified that he heard this stated in his name. He further related an incident from Rabbenu’s time in Vilna. During that period, a brilliant scholar (lamdan muflag) would lodge in his room and would honor him each Friday with a bottle of wine. This scholar would often discuss matters of Torah with Rabbenu. On one occasion, they brought up the statement of Chazal concerning Og, king of Bashan, who picked up a mountain with the intent to hurl it upon the Israelite camp, and the miracle that occurred when ants hollowed out its peak, causing it to become entrapped around his neck as if in a collar. The young man remarked, “Presumably, these words were stated in the language of poetic allegory and exaggeration (melitzah v’haflagah)…” Rabbenu’s countenance darkened, and he said to him cryptically, “For the coming Sabbath, do not bring wine with you…”

[The Chazon Ish] was present at the kiddish of a rabbi from the Mizrachi movement, and Rabbenu [the Chazon Ish] was in attendance. That rabbi sought to honor Rabbenu by having him recite Kiddush. [The Chazon Ish] responded to him, “This is the first time I am hearing that a Mizrachi rabbi does not render his own wine forbidden by contact…!?”. (As related by the great Rabbi Shmaryahu Greineman, of blessed memory).

Thus writes Rabbenu in one of his letters: “We recoil upon hearing the sound of doubt concerning the words of Chazal, whether in Halakha or Aggadah, as the sound of blasphemy רח”ל. One who deviates from this, according to our tradition, is considered a heretic regarding the words of Chazal. His ritual slaughter is deemed nevelah, he is invalid to serve as a witness, and more. In the early days of the peverse, fifty or sixty years ago, when the majority of the people were observant of the commandments, the perverse would begin by supporting themselves with such doubtful matters. The Chareidim would distance themselves from the spirit of heresy that emanated from them. The entire ‘free’ generation [of today] consists mostly of the children and grandchildren of those fathers and grandfathers.” (Kovetz Igrot Chazon Ish, Part I, Letter 15).

@anonymous-jew you wrote:

With regard to Israel, you can’t have it both ways. If it’s not a Jewish government, you can’t
refuse to serve if drafted by claiming a status of sitting and learning

The only reason a Jew listens to any non-Jewish government is because our Torah teaches us to. Our only obligation is to Hashem, so only if He tells us to do something do we do it.

If the Torah says a certain government is NOT legitimate it does NOT teach us to follow its laws.

This is very common in the laws of shmad, where there is an explicit rejection of any “dinei dmalchsei dine” when the government is actively challenging our Torah obligations.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

No, it says plainly – do it. Fight . Save the people .
I there would be a caveat , SHULHAN ARUCH or one of the other commentators would have said : STOP , only if this is bir’shut hamelech

why did not anyone say one word ????

no, it says plainly that carrying weapons is not chilil shabbos. at no point does SA tell Jews to fight.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

Al korchach that p/n is doche anything which is not part of the hamurot.

no, there is no hechrach here. if there is please spell it out.
you seem to be blissfully ignorant that the shalosh shavios are all specifically limits to Jewish action in the face of dinei nafashos. i.e. they all specifically tell us what we are NOT allowed to do to save Jewish lives from the difficulty of gulis.

this is besides the explicit torah taught by the maharal that the dinim of shallsh shevios is “yaharog v’al y’avor”, which specifically means they are not pushed off for pikiach nefesh.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

not haluche” is a language also used by Satmar Rebbe

siman 80 of the first maamar

@yankel-berel you wrote:

who mentions bichlal ‘kofer betorat moshe here ?

how does that come in to the picture at all

if someone rejects any of the torah sh’bksav or torah sh’baal peh, they are kofe in Toras Moshe. Every pasuk and ever word in the Torah is specifically meant to teach us how to think, speak, and act. Every paskuk and every word in the Torah is a Jewish persons inheritance that we have been promised access to “as much as our hand can reach”, each person according to their level. If a part of Torah is only understood by Gadolim, we accept it as students. Veering from any of this is rejection of Toras Moshe.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

chazal say a person should not get angry
chazal also say one should not 4 amot in reshut harabim

both are chazal

one is halacha
one is not

big difference between the two

taking your frame at face value without per se agreeing to it,
they would BOTH still be obligatory.
One must accept both statements of Chazal as both true and completely applicable to one’s life.

One should not carry things in reshis harabim on Shabbos.
One should not get angry.
One who, chas v”shulem, does any of these things will be punished.
One who refrains from doing these things will be rewarded.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

no publication was to my knowledge ever published refuting his claims

according to your reasoning , his discovery remains halacha psuka for klal yisrael.

this is pure am harutzes. There were many many consistent published rejections of wearing the Radziner techeles. The Rebbe of Jerusalem shlit”a explains this in the first chelek of his Tshivos v”Hanhugos , siman 26.

Of course, if there was no psak against his very well known and clearly reasoned psak, it would indeed be binding.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

all talmidei hahamim and rabanim read it

and did not accept his claims

except they all did accept his “claims”.
First, the sefer Vayoel Moshe wasn’t groundbreaking in Torah claims, rather it was a reinforcement of teachings of both many contemporaries of the Satmar Rebbe and a reinforcement of the many primary authorities he quotes in the sefer Vayoel Moshe. It is similar to the sefer Chofetz Chaim that did not innovate, rather it simply reinforced and clarified. (with the aforementioned caveats of specific halachik applications in VM that were indeed argued and rejected by some contemporaries. from this you also see what they DIDN’T argue with).

As such, up to me writing this today, you will NOT FIND ONE accepted authority who has published an argument against Vayoel Moshe.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

you [plural] convince yourselves of your shita kdosha ‘s infallibility

you elevate your shita kdosha into the league of the 13 ani ma’amins

you sidestep any challenge to your understanding

and then you label anyone who disagrees as a kofer

I have not and continue to not be speaking about any “shita kdosha”.
A “shita” implies there are two sides. The rejection of Zionism and the
obligation to daven for the dismantling of their evil state is an direct expression
of the 13 ikarim.

This is the same for every moshiach sheker: the notzri, sha”tz, etc. Rejecting yashke is not
“a shita”, it’s directly tied to fundamentals of Judaism, such that if anyone would claim that you can
me a Jew for J (or Jew for Z), that person would necessarily be a kofer. (if they themselves were a Jew for J,
they would be a min, etc).
So too, if you start quoting english Artscroll biographies to try to claim that R’ Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg ztz”l supported
(chas v’shulem) Jews for J, I would say you are a crazy masis imasiach and you should be mevazeh talmideh chahumim with such nonsense. If you doubled down, and said “No, here’s a letter he wrote to a priest” and “here is a quote from a ben bayis who became a known notzri”, and “read what he wrote on parshas Behaloscha!” I would say, “all you might accomplish is convince people that R’ Pinchas was (chalila v’chas) a secret notzri, but you will never convince a Jew with yirash shomayim that this avoida zureh is kosher!”

@yankel-berel you wrote:

and to top it off when people are too intimidated to argue

you proclaim victory as if this shita kdosha is undisputed and accepted halacha

with as ironclad proof , obviously no one is arguing ….

again, I am a believer in the Torah, and the Torah is well known and published.
I will not accept another “Torah” based on am harutes speculation about current events, rather I will look
to accepted Torah sources for how to understand the world.
As such, I don’t “claim victory”, only because there is not debate to begin with.

@yankel-berel you wrote:

why do you have this ga’ava dik approach of “If you don’t understand something, come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped.”

I was not referring to myself (obviously?) as the teacher. I was referring to your rejection of the gemureh in ksivos, rejection of the maharal as mentioned, and really the blithe rejection of the dozens and dozens of makoros in referenced in Vayoel Moshe (many ma’marei chazal and psukim of tanach!) WITHOUT ANY COUNTER except your own claims of “not MY shita”. [and, when I say “no counter”, I mean published teachings of accepted Gadolim, as well expressed in my other post here in CR if anyone knows any published counter to VM]

@yankel-berel you wrote:

maybe it is you who has not grasped what rov talmidei hahamim grasped already ?

maybe it is YOU who should come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped ?

If you have a kosher well known teacher to learn Torah from, I will be happy to learn. I have searched “high and low” and have not foud anyone (as mentioned above and through these forums ad nauseum)

@yankel-berel you wrote:

we are arguing about the proper pshat and how to apply it to one of the biggest problems of our time

why all those condescending remarks ?

why insinuate that your debater is a kofer ?

is it because you are running out of “on topic real arguments” directly relating to the subject at hand ?

—

you should know – I may write in strong terms , but always aim at the subject at hand

I may employ rhetoric , but always highlighting the subject which at the center of the debate.

and not baseless insinuations that you are a kofer ….

I really don’t understand the disconnect ,and it seems to me that you are completely missing the
kefira intrinsic in zionisim and intrinsic in the “state of israel”.
and, I’m not using those word beyond their normal understood usage: real hardcore no-olam-habu 100% kefira.

Explaining it is not hard to do, but the resistance (because of propaganda and yetzer hureh and shoyched) makes
people cry out nonsense like “you want all the jew in israel to (chsv”sh) die??!!”.

I don’t know if this is understood without my saying it, but the sefer Vayoel Moshe spend a lot of ink answering up
the many pseudo-lumdishe questions people like yourself might have. If you are indeed approaching this sigya to understand the Torah behind it, learn the sefer! It’s crazy to me that you would be offended and angry at my accusation that you are a kofer without learning the actual Torah behind my claim to clarify if perhaps I am correct! Putting internet argument aside, do you want to live your life a kofer because you were afraid or didn’t have time to learn the sefer about the thing you emotionally care about? Do you really want to go to bais din shel malah and be thrown in the pit with all the galochs and murderers because you refused to take the Torah seriously?

If you would do any of that, well first thing is you would join my team. But besides that, you would be able to formulate real questions and hopefully learn real answers. But, instead you are currently an am huuretz who says “when I meet talmidei chachumim I want to bite them!”.

I honestly wish there was a platform to take this conversation private and in real time, instead of this discombobulated delayed public comment board that causes any conversation to become quickly derailed.

@yechiell
With Moshe, G-d said fight that war.

With the Zionists (may they be quickly destroyed, amen), G-d said don’t fight that war and don’t have anything to do with evil people that do fight wars.

Certain people in this Coffee Room never stop
attacking the Chareidim and never stop
attacking “The Ka’noim”.

Those never-ending attacks are a very big mistake,
and only cause Jews to HATE EACH OTHER
more than before, and they also push us closer
to a JEWISH CIVIL WAR, with Jews killing other Jews.

Those relentless attacks against Chareidim
and against “The Ka’noim” are NOT a mitzvah;
they are motivated by The Satan, who wants
Jews to HATE EACH OTHER more than before.

Those relentless attacks against Chareidim
and against “The Ka’noim” are NOT a mitzvah;
they are motivated by The Satan, who wants
to push Jews into to a JEWISH CIVIL WAR, with
Jews shooting at Jews and Jews killing other Jews.

The Satan knows what Chazal teach:

The Jewish people will not be redeemed until
they become UNITED. So the Satan constantly
pushes the Zionists into never-ending attacks
against Chareidim and against the world’s
Jews who reject the fake “Jewish” state.

@yankel-berel

as mentioned your unbridled kefira makes me reluctant to continue the conversation. i long ago lost belief that you are here in good faith, particularly because of your bullying style, spamming of multiple threads, and “forgetting” or “ignoring” already answered questions.

I answered your question about about the shulchan aruch in hilchos shabbos here: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/matzav-article-about-golus-and-eretz-yisrael/page/3#post-2423708

the maharal I have mentioned regularly is in netzach yisroel perek 24. he explains well the purpose and obligations of this gulis vis a vis the 3 shevios. if you are serious about understanding the Torah teachings and the gemara in kesibos, i would highly recommend learning the whole chapter. if you are instead just interested in winning an online argument, I would recommend you NOT learn that chapter.

regarding the Avnei Nezer and his point about “not haluche” is a language also used by Satmar Rebbe in Vayoel Moshe to describe the sugya. But, that doesn’t mean that those gedolimm where – chas v’shulem – kofer in Toras Moshe, rather it means something different than you think. As mentined the long Avnei Nezer itself leverages this designation to explain exactly why we SHOULD KEEP THE SHEVIOS! He doesn’t (of course and chas v’shulem) dismiss them. He explains that breaking them is worse than kureis!

I don’t know your chinich, but the concepts of “haluche” and “agudeteh” are well established and NONE of it means we can be kofer in even one word of the teachings of chazal. I don’t believe you care to learn anything from myself or anyone else around here if it pushes against your current comfort in dismissing whole sections of chazal saying to yourself “mutar li”. I can point you to the Ramchal’s “mamar agadtuh” that is available online and printed in many Ein Yaakov editions.

And, in closing, I would point you to learn Vayoel Moshe and realize that in the Torah world – meaning in accepted Torah publications – there is no one cholek on his explanations of the sources he brings there. There is some acute disagreement on psak regarding voting and money from the zionist state as well as some less halachically substantiated dilution of hischbris l’reshoyim as explained in the sefer Biyos Hazman.

Again, I’m not expecting you or anyone to agree with my assertations. But, I expect you to adopt the teachings of our universally accepted Gedolim like the Maharal and certainly the Talmud itself as pure unadulterated Toras Moshe m’Sinai. If you don’t understand something, come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped.

@besalel
I don’t understand what significance those percentages are supposed to mean to any party in this conversation. for Jews, this is fully meaningless as we know that these current events are certainly not “kibitz gulyous”. for non Jews, only the most foolish who think the zionist state is somehow (chalila) “Jewish” would then draw some non-jewish religious doctrine out of that.

the only people who I ever heard excited about “Israel” being a “coming back” are those who think that jewish greatness is found in the halls of universities, nobel prize lists, and olympic medals.

@square_root
why do you push kefira? from a Torah perspective, there is nothing Great about the zionist regime! there is nothing Jewish about the zionist regime!
it certainly is NOT the fulfillment of any good prophesy.

The zionist state is the greatest chilil Hashem in our history, as you very well highlighted in this disgusting article. It shows loud and clear the Zionist disgraceful claim that what makes the Jewish people “great” is our military, medicine, security, technology, agriculture, intelligence, etc! In that evil worldview, what makes Jews great are that we are the greatest goyim! the most goyish of them all! look at all our science! look at all our money! look at all our guns!

That claim would make any erliche Jew want to throw up!

@always_ask_questions
no, I always point to published mainstream Torah sources, and you point to nonsense Zionist fantasies.

Torah has integrity. You don’t.

@always_ask_questions
that story about the Chofetz Chaim is obviously a lie. try learning torah instead of haskuleh nonsense.

@yankel-berel

again, the shavuos are generally about our obligation to live under non-jewish rule and the issur to rebel against their government and its rulership. This includes, as stated by the Maharal and others, even at threat of death.

There is a separate obligation to save ones life in the face of a a random non-Jew or non-Jews who are being violent. This would have nothing to do with the Three Shevios.

Up to here, is everything clear? – because this is basic basics of thinking

Now, there is certainly room to speculate when those two halachos clash, like in any other sugya. So, what if there is no kingdom, what if someone is caught on the border between two waring armies, etc etc. Those might be interesting studies to find responsa about. Nonetheless, the axioms themselves – pekiach nefesh and the shalosh shevios – are well documents across chazal and poskim.

@yankel-berel
you are correct that I lost track of the original conversation. I also blame you, since you took a quote of mine out of context and put it into numerous threads, undermining the integrity of the conversation and your ability to try to understand what I wrote.

While I certainly stand behind the words of the Chofetz Chaim, my original statement was indeed about the shalosh shevios, which include a prohibition of rebelling against non Jewish nations. As such, it would not inform us about how an individual should act in galus (as the Chofetz Chaim seems to speak about) rather it would inform us how to act as a group vis-a-vis the non-Jewish nations ruling over us.

With that, the Shabbos p/n halocho you referenced in SA has nothing to do with the shalosh shevios, as that halocho is talking about a band of violent non-Jewish troublemakers, whose defeat by local jews would certainly be fully endorsed by and praised by the non-Jewish authorities. SA tells us that even such an armed resistance is allowed on shabbos.

@yankel-berel
you wrote:
<blockquqote>
somejew has not answered the clear proof from maran bet yosef re pikuach nefesh docheh somejews [mistaken] understanding of the 3 shavu’ot.
</blockquqote>

no, we weren’t discussing at all the 3 shavios and my statement that I taught was simply based off the chofetz chaim.

If you think you have a kasha on the chofetz chaim I was teaching, go ahead and make your argument against him. But, don’t fault me for repeating what I learned from him.

@zsk

The source I brought was R. Henkin ztz”l. I’m not sure what he has to do with NK. Regardless, he’s a solid, well respected source. If you believe I misquoted him, please reference the correction.

i realize i misquoted the name of the source from the chofetz chaim, the sefer is called chofetz chaim al hatorah. it is available on Hebrew Books, book #38071

@yankel-berel

I don’t have a problem with this shulchan aruch, rather you claimed it is a problem. I don’t understand the problem you claim to see, nor do you, apparently.

Beyond that, this was not even a conversation about the shalosh shevuas, it was a conversation about the chofetz chaim’s sefer lekutei torah that bothered you.

I’ll quote it here:

The Torah teaches us here not to stand up against the nations even when they confront us. We are obliged to follow in the footsteps of our father Yaakov during his war with Esav his brother. As the Ramban explains in Vayishlach: “This [episode] contains a message for the future generations, for all that has happened to our father Yaakov with Esav his brother will happen constantly to us with the children of Esav. And so we should follow in the way of the righteous one [Yaakov], and prepare ourselves for the three options for which Yaakov prepared himself then: for prayer; for giving gifts; and for salvation by way of war, meaning, by fleeing and thereby being saved. And behold — whenever we have followed this tried and true strategy, Hashem has saved us from our enemies.

— Translation from “Shapiro, Rabbi Yaakov. The Empty Wagon: Zionism’s Journey from Identity Crisis to Identity Theft.”

So your question is simply how the chofetz chaim understood the SA you mentioned.

I am now further confused by your ramblings now about how to be kofer in the shalosh shevios, something this SA has nothing to do with.