somejewiknow

@yankel-berel
I am not reconsidering anything nor does my allegiance mean only thing, rather the only thing that should matter is the Holy Torah we have from Sinai.

The reason I have stopped responding to you is because if well breached any norms of yiddishkeit and have full on entered kefira mode. Until now, I had given you the benefit of the doubt as you seemed to be sincere in your (aforementioned) allegiance to the Torah.

I can’t point out every breach of yours, nor do I think you care. You’ve construed a false binary between a Zionist state and another Holocaust. You’ve rejected the axioms of schar vonesh on it’s face in thinking that the actions of the IDF exclusively decide life and death for the millions of people living within that evil state’s borders, and not their gzar din from Rosh Hashuneh.

You’re pushing the zionist propaganda that the Arab world want to mass murder all Jews while conveniently ignoring the clear truth that this fear is a direct explicit result of Zionist political activity in the region, turning our traditional friends and supporters in the Muslim world into our enemies. I can’t know what ‘s in the hearts of those non-Jewish nations, but the words they say align with historical precedence that they only have issue with zionists, not (per se) Jews. I am well aware of the Zionist agenda to blur that distinction and certainly the non-Jewish Arab world is vulnerable to that Zionist confusion. So, I am shocked that anyone who values Jewish life would reinforce the lie that all Jews must be targeted by those who want to stop zionism and dismantle the zionist state.

Of course, as mentioned. I’m not concerned about threats of violence from the Arab world, rather I am concerned about the sins of the ‘Sonei Yisroel’ who enable such attacks to, chv”sh, materialize. It is of specific concern for this conversation that the punishment for violating the Three Oaths, violations that the Zionist have achieved according to every known shita, is specifically the type of widespread mass death, chv”sh, as you speak about.

You can argue all you want about what the Avnei Nezer might mean about the shevious being halocho, regardless the Gemureh is clear that we shouldn’t breach them and warns us of the extreme and specific heavenly punishment that our own eye have seen to be the results of Zionism (and which the Avnei Nezer emphasizes!).

No Jewish person who cares about Jewish lives would ask for MORE zionism in response to the violence that zionism has caused!

In any case, the Ramban mentions that the only place where Jews are at risk of being, chas v’shulem, wiped out is in Eretz Yisroel, as that is the only place without the Divine promise to protect us. Yet he also teaches us that there will always be a land that Jews can escape to if our current location becomes too dangerous such that the whole nation will not be wiped out.

You imaginary binary seems to blatantly reject these many parts of Torah teachings, again, all based on our belief in Divine Providence, Schar v’Onesh, the guidelines of our Divinely decreed Gulis, and our specific reliance on Hashem Himself to redeem us from Gulis through the mechanism he taught us about called Moshiach.

So as not to avoid your absurd question: of course if the Divine will is that all the Jews in the world should (chv”sh) commit suicide, I would sign that Kol Koreh without hesitation. So too, any halocho that says “yaharog v’al yaavor”, I would not hesitate to follow. Not for myself and not for any Jews. However, this line of questioning is not sincere to the current situation, as no one except the Zionists is suggesting doing something that puts millions of lives at risk. Dismantling the Zionist state, may it happen soon, does not mean anything more that passing on control to any other self-identifying non-Jewish governance. This could be the USA, the UN, Jordan, or Hamas. I’m not intending to push my own opinions on what is preferred, I am only intending to point out the obvious reality that if the residents of Israel all wanted to give up their state, there are many relatively peaceful pathways to transition/evacuate to a more kusher path that aligns with the Torah.

Much more important than the practical political question about solving the problems created by Zionism is the requirement of every Jew to personally adamantly reject Zionism and the fake “Jewish” identity they claim to lead. There is nothing “Jewish” about that state and it does not represent Jews worldwide. We must reinforce dependence specifically on Hashem to redeem from the hands of non-Jews as He promised us.

@besalel
the jews haven’t “come back” to eretz yisroel, rather they never left.
if you mean “come back” to mean melech hamoshiach and rebuilding the Temple, he hasn’t come yet.

@smerel
I’m responding to the comment that is pushing kefira in ikarei eminah and pushing another religion onto a Jewish patform all in the name of, chsv”sh, the chofetz chaim ztz”l!

I can’t “prove” a negative, but if you want I can “prove” what the Torah obviously teaches about kibitz gulyos. And certainly the Chofetz Chaim didn’t consider the zionist project a positive “revival of the nation”, whatever in the world that zionist nonsense is supposed to mean.

also, @smerel
Thank you for looking up a meaningful quote, that indeed reflects the normative Torah outlook. So too, many Gedolim have pointed out that good certainly comes out of other evil movements and events in our history.

same as israeli or ukrainian or american soldiers. some might say “if they are there against their will, maybe we should include them into tefilos for shevuyim? If they are there voluntarily, then maybe honen hadaas, ask Hashem to give them sechel, and if they are real reshayim then in minim.”

but, chazal have already established a mi shebreach for all shevuyim as well as v’al’malsihninm for the reshoyim. So, have all the zionist and american and russian and ukrainian jewish soldiers in mind that the good ones should be freed ASAP and the and bad ones should be destroyed.

@always_ask_questions

Would I endorse organizing a response in this case? sure daven, bribe, and run away. As the Chofetz Chaim taught, following this path has served us very well in galus. Only when we have rejected those teachings have we seen such destruction, exactly as the Talmud warns us.

@yankel-berel

there are many questions that have been asked by and confounded gedolim over generations about how R’ Akiva could have thought BK was moshiach, specifically regarding the various psak of the Rambam on the subject. Let me know if you find anyone else who asks your question and if you find any good answers.
=

Regarding R’ Yakov Shapira’s book Empy Wagon, it is certainly not a halachic sefer. Most of it is filled with the documented history of the zionist kefira, something that was difficult for me to even expose myself to, much less come to terms with that revolting history.

However, he does indeed quote numerous Torah sources with a solid English translation. As such, I find it easier to leverage and give credit to his book for some copy.
=

I can’t respond to all the nonsense you wrote, mostly because I – again – even can’t make any coherent sense of what your intent might have been. You’re shooting off in all different directions, seemingly desperate to argue about something, antything. As I have said many times, please try to make a coherent point and I will try to responsd. You seem to be intetionally straw-maning my earlier statements, but for what? But my stamtments are (I claim) straight from Torah sources, so are you really so invested in your idol worship heresy fantasy that you don’t even want to learn the sources I am pointing to?

@square_root you wrote:

How many times did the Rabbis of the Mishnah say:
“Anyone who disagrees with me is apikorus”?

How many times did the Rabbis of the Jerusalem Talmud say:
“Anyone who disagrees with me is apikorus”?

How many times did the Rabbis of the Babylonian Talmud say:
“Anyone who disagrees with me is apikorus”?

How many times did the Rabbis of the Midrash say:
“Anyone who disagrees with me is apikorus”?

I imagine you’ve probably never heard of it, but there a rarely learned Perek in Sanhedrin called “Chelek” which lists all different types of Jews who are apikorosim as per the teachings of those Rabbis. This is also, you might be surprised to hear, the exact mishna where the Rambam explains the foundational principle that anyone who even doubts the Divine origin of the oral laws as taught in the Mishnah, Jerusalem Talmud, Babylonian Talmud, and Midrash is an…. APIKORUS(!).

You may also be shocked to learn that no respected Torah authority disagrees with this point, even the Raaved.
So, your guestimate of ‘approximately 0’ should be corrected, preferably after you turn away from whatever strange religion you are currently follow and learn some Torah.

@ard
i brought my source (the Chofetz Chaim) in the thread here titled “Neturei Karta Condemned by Jews on Youtube”

@yankel-berel you wrote:

was r akiva so badly mistaken ?

or is rather katan badly mistaken ?

The answer has been well discussed in rishonim and achronim that, yes, R’ Akiva was “so badly mistaken” in what he did, leading to the greatest slaughter of Jews in our history, perhaps greater than the recent Holocaust. AND, this was as per R’ Akiva’s belief that moshiach had already arrived allowing him to breach the three oaths!

Don’t take my word for it, rather look at one of the recent Gedolim, Rav Henkin ztz”l:

In Rav Henkin’s Lev Ivra (Sh’eilos Hazman, pp. 95– 96), he cleverly turns part of this Zionist narrative on its head. “Even though the Gemara says the students of R. Akiva died in an epidemic, people are wont to say (מרלגא בפי העולם) that the students of R. Akiva were involved in the war of Bar Kochba.” He then brings the Gemara in Brachos (48b) that says, “The day those killed in Betar were buried, Chazal made the blessing of hatov v’hameitiv — hatov, that they did not putrefy, and hameitiv, that they were buried.” R. Henkin asks: Why would Chazal invoke a blessing of hatov v’hameitiv on a tragedy of such enormous proportions? His answer: The Bar Kochba war was a violation of the Jewish principle of non-violence. After the Bar Kochba war, the militant tendencies of even those who were in favor of fighting the Romans were “buried.” Usually, violence begets violence, war begets war. In this case, however, the Jews, even the militants, learned their lesson from the tragic results of the wars against the Romans, and their militant aspirations came to an end. They learned that they must keep the Three Oaths that Hashem made them swear. Their militant aspirations were finally put to rest. They also understood that the tragic fate that was meted out to them was because of their own behavior, not due to any injustice by Hashem. Thus, after Betar, they did not “putrefy,” meaning they did not develop putrid hashkafos, and they were “buried,” meaning the militant aspirations that caused the tragedy to begin with were put to rest. Therefore, they declared “hatov v’hameitiv.”

R. Henkin goes on to say that this attitude of eschewing military action lasted until the new revolutionary Jewish movements, such as the Bund and the like. But, he says, at least those revolutionaries did not want to consider themselves Jews. Unfortunately, the Zionists constantly declare themselves Jewish nationalists and “guardians of the [Jewish] people,” and have chosen to “be like all the nations and glorify wars.”

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

@yankel-berel
don’t worry. i’m still here.
i’m trying to take your question honestly. it took me a while to figure out what i think your kasha is. and now i’m trying to find any meforshim that have the same hava amina as you. I haven’t found anything yet that even addresses the point, so i’m not sure how to respond.

I believe we can both agree on the following:
If there is an imminent threat to the life of a jew, one is allowed to stop the murderer, even in galus.
That is also allowed on shabbos, because of p/n.
One is not allowed to organize an army and fight a ruling non-jewish king, as that breaks the 3 shavuos.

This section of SA says the above regarding shabbos very clearly, making a distinction between saving money and lives.
There is an additional line about a yiddish border settlement in a yiddish kingdom (a safir), which is a quote from a braisa that rashi explains as such.

So, I guess your kasha is that this braisa is talking about a yiddish kingdom in galus? or that jews are supposed to be mechalel shabbos to protect a non-jewish kindom (and not like rashi? explains the words).

So, I don’t really understand how you are learning the above, but I’m trying to find anyone who explains it as above.

The way I read this, since its the language word for word of the braisa as quoted exactly like this in the Tir as well as the Rambam, it is very hard to say that those authors meant any other meaning or application outside the specific application as is explained in Rashi that it’s not relevant in galus but is meant to be an added nuance to hilchos shabbos. However, I haven’t found any practical use of this line in SA in rishonim or achronim, so I I’m not sure what novel halacho it is meant to bring in SA.

In any case, if you somehow get past the meaning of the braisa and remove the word “safir” and apply it to the time of galus even when not an edge city to a kingdom, your argument against me would then seem to be that if a rebel gang of non-jews is an imminent threat to murdering a jew you can fight back whereas I quoted the chofetz chaim ztz”l (in lekutei torah on the parsha) that learns from yaakov about how we respond in galus. If we come to that generous point of the conversation, I would certainly admit that the distinction between a single rebelious non-jew attacking and a group of three rebellious non-jews attacking is not well made anywhere, and you perhaps could ask your kasha on the chufetz chaim on where exactly the red line falls. Again, I don’t think this SA is where THAT question would come from.

If you do know any classic meforshim that do address your understanding and certainly if I misunderstood you completely, please let me know. I was hesitant to write as much as I did here, since I don’t like saying anything from my own understanding, but you seemed eager to learn the sugya and wanted an answer, while meaningful source poskim are lacking in addressing your question.

@lerntmintayrah
nobody wants yidden to die (except tziyonim, apparently). stop with the straw-man you’ve constructed.

@damoshe
Supporting the state IS the apokorisos! It itself is forbidden and kefira in both 1) the belief that Hashem Himself by way of Moshiach will get us out of gulis (galus) and 2) the belief in schar and onesh that nothing good is gained from choosing an aveira.

@lerntmintayrah
I have no intention of stopping anyone from learning Torah. I also have no plans to dismantle the zionist state. I just pray daily for its destruction as per the common nusach of shmoneh esrai.

@lerntmintayrah

The sin of the Zionists was taking people away from Torah

That might be one of the many sins that zionism did, but that isn’t the defining feature of zionism. “Religious Zionism” is also kefira and perhaps worse than “secular Zionism”.

@yankel-berel, you wrote:

If SR would hold , like somejew fraudulently tries to propagate on these pages , that halachik p/n protections do not extend to yoshvei EY , because of the 3 shavu’ot, then SR ‘s supposed saying would make more sense.

I never said that “p/n” has anything to do with being “yoshvei EY”, i said that one cannot break the Shalosh Shevios for pekiach nefesh.

In (very) short, that means that if goyim – chas v’shulem – threaten masses of jews, our kosher responses are: make peace, give gifts, run away, and pray to G-d. What we are not allowed to do is organize an army and physically fight the enemy.

There is a lot more to say about both sides of the mutar/assur of the 3 shevios, but the foundational concept is as above. One cannot fight the non-Jews with violence because of pekiach nefesh, and that is both explicitly stated by Maharal but also blatantly obvious in context of the shevios that are fundamentally about dealing with the dangers of gulis (galus).

@yankel-berel

as I said above:
If my answer is not simple enough or you want to get into it more, I would request that you start a new CR thread and tr to formulate a full meaningful question that at at least tries to understand the above foundation of the Maharal that considers what you understand the answer(s) presented might be. With that, I and others can have more clarity on what you are missing or where your criticism might be well directed.

You seem to be well meaning enough to want to at list hear a Torah answer. I am willing to write, iy”H, a source and specific response to your questions IF you can please compose a clear and focused well-defined question. The more you and I can focus on specific points, the more likely we can actually learn something instead of getting emotional and distracted into other adjacent parts of this large sugya.

If you can take it a step at and time and try to take responsibility to keep the conversation on track, I would enjoy the conversation. (i wish there was a better platform for structured conversation, but I am afraid to suggest anything here).

So, if you also want, please initiate a new topic.