Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I’m not really sure what you’re trying to say in terms of this conversation forward. If your goal is just to throw out random unspecific “questions”, “maybes”, and “I don’t knows”, well you did a very good job.
Regarding “Moshiach”:
I still have no idea what – if anything – I wrote was objectionable to you. You still have not pointed out what – if anything – I wrote is not explicitly in the Rambam, And you certainly have not proposed an explanation of whatever admission you are thinking of and in the end you’ll never even begin to leverage that speculative ins into tweaking a working definition of “Moshiach” that we can both agree on.Regarding “Zionism”:
What you are pointing out about any mention of “Eretz Yisroel” is simply the “religious” side of the title Religious Zionism It is not the “Zionism” side of that title. I would certainly agree that the heretical “Religious Zionist” movement has foolishly adopted and bastardized Torah concepts – concepts that continue to be Torah concepts, yet that has not changed the definition of the word Zionism. I believe this (Zionism being an ideology about Jewish independence NOT tied tied to any specific land) is not a controversial point, rather something that is accepted by all self proclaimed zionists. Religious Zionists just add the apokrisis that it was “siyata dishmaya” that Zionism chose EY because they believe – in their false religion – that Redemption will come from Zionism as their false moshaich.I would like very much to move this conversation forward and if you disagree with my proposed definitions please be specific why and provide an alternative.
@yankel-berel
zionism
we are establishing definitions of terms. “Zionism” means something specific, and that WAS true when the ideology gained momentum in the late 19th century and it REMAINS true today. That specific ideology is as I described: the “establishment of an independent ‘Jewish’ state anywhere”.The only reason that no one TODAY considers places outside Palestine is because there is currently ALREADY an existing zionist state in Palestine, so there i no fuel behind practical conversations of other lands. This is similar to the early zionist debate about the what language should be the official language of the zionist state, german? yiddish? arabic? Now that the profaned “Ivrit” has taken hold, there is zero conversation about alternatives, because why would there be? Nonetheless, the ideology (and its core) hasn’t shifted.
This can be proven if you consider the actions and reactions from the DL Zionists during the retreated from Gaza 16 years ago. The ideological protests were in no way dependent on the biblical status of the land.
This can also be proven by the number of CONTEMPORARY self declared secular zionists who give no value to “biblical” borders beyond having an excuse to the nations of the world for the zionist government they support.
In the same vein, early zionists leveraged real Torah yearnings for Eretz Yisroel to excuse their own antisemitic rebellion against Hashem. This continues to be nothing more than an excuse for zionism, not a redefinition of the ideology. (despite the many Jews who are, R”L, happy to benefit from Zionism to also be in EY and will, R”L, support Zionism as a “mitzvoh ha’bu b’avaira”)
Bottom line, no one anywhere makes the absurd claim that a secular “jew” today cannot be a zionist because the core ideology from its inception consistently until today is that zionism is the advocacy for an independent ‘Jewish’ state anywhere in the world. Practically, that means supporting the current zionist state called “Israel”.
moshiach
you will have to be more specific about what your concern is. My definition is basic and unanimous in Torah teachings.Is there a machlokes somewhere you are aware of that you believe is germane to the conversation and the definition of “moshiach”? or are you simply cofsucating the conversation because you yourself don’t know what the fundamental belief in “moshiach” is?
If the Rambam “left something out” in one place, you should check if he doesn’t bring it in other places. If he never mentions it, you would need to explain why. If chazal teach it and there is no cholek, you will need to be very very clear and very very careful about whatever claim you might have against my listing it. (zionists, btw, don’t worry about this because they have no problem being kofer in the Torah, especially the DL priests like Kook shr”y).
gulis
yes, the Gra you mention (which I can’t confirm, but the Steipler also calls this evil state “gulis under zera yisroel reshoyim”) would label zionism as another form of shibid malchiyos, another form of gulis. So, would you agree with my definition of “gulis” as recapped in my previous comment?here’s the original quote (an excerpt from a longer tshiva):
the Steipler writes:
[…]
????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???, ?? ?????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ????? ??? ??????? ?????? ????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ??? ?????? ????? ???.
??? ???? ????? ??? ??????? ????, ???? ???????? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ????”? ???? ?? ????, ?? ?? ????? ??? ???, ????? ???? ??’ ?? ???, ??? ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ????, ???”? ??? ?????? ??”? ????”? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ????.
??”? ???”? ????? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ?”?, ??? ?? ??? ?????? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ??? ?????.
??? ??’ ??? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??”?, ???? ??? ???? ?? ???, ??? ??????? ????”? ??? ??????? ???? ??”? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? ??????? ????? ???? ???? ?”? ????? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ?? ??? ?????? ????? ?????? ?”? ?? ????? ????? ????, ???? ??”? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?????, ??? ????? ??? ???? ????? ???.
?? ???”? ???’ ?? ????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??”? ????? ???? ?? ?? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ?????? ???????? ??”? ?? ?????? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ???”? ??? ????? ?”?, ?”? ?? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?”? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???”? ??????? ?????
[…]
Translated:
“Regarding the essence of the matter, this is how my humble opinion is inclined: it is a great mitzvah to vote for the Haredi list, and in the current situation, this constitutes a veritable rescue of religion [???? ???]. This is because, in matters of Torah observance, the concept of trust in God without human effort [???????] is inapplicable. The obligation is to do everything that appears, in the natural course of events, to be good and effective for the preservation of religion.
As for what your honor has heard, that there are prohibitions involved in this matter—I have deliberated extensively whether it is worthwhile to respond. In truth, it is not my desire at all that my colleagues of Neturei Karta, may they live long and good days, Amen, should change their minds. Although there is no prohibition here, there is religious zealotry for the sake of His name, may it be blessed, and this too is necessary and beneficial for the preservation of religion in many circles. This is especially so given that all their actions are for the sake of Heaven and with self-sacrifice, and they are beloved to me, every single one.
Nevertheless, to your esteemed honor himself, I have agreed to respond in detail, particularly since you consider me, Heaven forfend [?”?], to be a mocker. But I request that you not show my letter to others, as there is no benefit in it, and why should it be given over to public discussion?
Your honor wrote that there is a prohibition in voting because it constitutes ‘acknowledging idolatry’ [???? ??”?]. This is a matter that has no basis. Is it not the reality, due to our many sins, that the government is currently in their hands? It is because of this reality that Torah observers vote and participate among them in order to save what is possible. What acknowledgment is there here that one agrees, Heaven forfend, with the wickedness of the wicked or with their impure ideologies? And your esteemed honor should know that even for the purpose of zealotry, it is forbidden to misinterpret the Torah contrary to Halakha [????? ???? ????? ??? ?????], and that which is not true will not succeed at all.
Also, in my humble opinion, even one who thinks that this is the beginning of the redemption [?????? ??????]—even though in truth it is not so, for it is merely a change from one exile to a more bitter exile, as the nations in recent generations at least did not interfere in matters of religious observance, which is not the case with these licentious ones [??? ?????], may God save us —nevertheless, one who holds that the change from the rule of gentiles to the rule of freethinkers and wicked people from zera Yisrael is the beginning of the redemption is nothing but mistaken. He is not, Heaven forfend, a wicked person, concerning whom it would be permissible to speak evil speech [???? ???] and to shame him publicly.”
@yankel-berel
I would note that
1) He does NOT reject or in any way push back against the claim that zionism is “avoda zureh”, rather the Steipler argues that voting is NOT being modeh to that avoda zureh, rather trying to contain its damage.
2) He is explicitly that claims of ?????? ?????? are FALSE, they are not compatible with Torah. That means that the belief is kefira in the (Torah) Truth. Believe in anything false is by definition kefira in the truth. (He is also clear that someone who mistakenly believes that the Torah teaches this zionist lie is NOT a kofer, as you and I have discussed extensively)@non-political
Not every DL necessarily has the status of a “kofer” even though their beliefs (the ones that establish their distinct “DL” identity vs just being a shomer Torah i’mitzvos Jew) are unanimously kefira.
There are many reasons why a person who calls himself DL might not be a certain “kofer”, such as them simply identify with the name DL but not even being aware of the kefira or alternatively they never had access to normative Jewish teachings and will quickly accept the authentic Torah as they get exposed to it.
This is all the same for all types of heretical movements that we suffer from, such as Reform or Sha”tz or MO. The title doesn’t mean much, rather as the Chazon Ish writes (YD 1), we must judge each individual according to their specific situation.@yankel-berel
it is certainly an interesting deep dive into when kefira is “yotzi m’klal amisecha”, but that doesn’t change what kefira is. the idea is kefira regardless of where on that red line an individual might fall. the kefira doesn’t become valid because we don’t pasul the yid!@yankel-berel
I can’t speak for a Hakatan but I would guess the reason not answering your question is because there’s no substance to it. You seem to have very little grasp on how halacha works and how to understand psak.
It’s not even complicated. I suppose it’s only that you’re so invested in your own confusion that you project it onto everything you learn.Take for example the statement of the Steipler above.It is obvious for any Ben Torah to understand what he means.
It’s not subtle.
it’s not abstract.
It’s not obscure.
It’s very straightforward:
This idea (aschaluh d’geila) is kefira, but someone who believes it is not necessarily a kofer because of it.So too the subject generally of puseling people who might be kofrim. Since there are no firm guidelines of knowing who is or is not a kofer based on their beliefs (see Chazon Ish YD1), we cannot make a general rule about it. Of course any Baal Nefesh should be careful who he chooses to associate with and who touches his wine. But, there are times when one must be careful and linient with the things that are hidden in a person heart. This is exactly the psak of the Aruch L’ner in his tshiva about the mechalile shabbos of his day and yayin nesech.
You are correct that the Haavara Plan was a great success for Zionism as was the Holocaust and the ongoing Zionist international fueling of intifada and general antisemitism have all brought riches and growth the to zionist state at the pithy cost of just rivers and rivers of jewish blood.
The zionists acted then as they do now exactly like the nazi regime, stealing from Jews whatever they can and forcing those jews to work or die as servants to the state. The only distinction was that the Nazi amulek leveraged mass physical death to bring spiritual death whereas the zionist amulek leverage mass spiritual death to bring physical death.
[The rest of your “history” is absurd, ignoring the rampant political activism of zionists before and during the Holocaust to stop Jewish emigration to any other country besides Palestine, preferring European Jews die considering it a win-win: less religious Jews and more international sympathy for zionism. It is worth reviewing “Ten Questions to the Zionists” by R. Michoel Ber Weissmandel]
I have attempted, because I demand from myself, to provide definitions that are intrinsic and fundamental to each concept. So, the definition of zionism – as per this standard – must be unique and consistent to that specific ideology, meaning it applies to the first founders as well as each successive generation that carried their disgusting banner. And the inverse is true, meaning here if someone believes jews should NOT establish their own “Jewish” state anywhere in the world, they could never be called a zionist. While some have emphasized other ideas, working land, becoming rich, making peace, killing others, becoming secular, becoming religious, etc, the core defining feature of what is or is not “zionism” remains the same: establishing a “Jewish” state.
so too the definition of gulis I provided is consistent across all meforshim, both those meforshim who say that the years of Bayis Shaini were gulis and those who say they were geila.
However your feedback reveals a mistake you are making, perhaps in light of your reliance on artscroll translations. In Torah, “gulis” is a state of our relationship with Hashem, also called “gulis haShechina”. Pointing to the quote you mentioned, gulis is the reality of our sins standing in the way, and gulis is the means of fixing – and thereby removing – those sins. And this is not “added layers of meaning”, rather this is fundamental to the concept of gulis and geila, as chazal teach and is an explicit pasuk that gulis cannot end without tshiva.
A symptom of gulis and a key mechanism of gulis being the tikun is our dispersion amongst various nations and our exile out of eretz yisroel. Yet the reality of gulis exists even when jews gather together and even when we are in the physical borders of EY. This is why many haluches are different in EY during gulis vs geila. This is also why Yerishalmis today still say “leshuneh habu b’Yerishalyim”.
So, I would like to update my definition of “gulis” to: Gulis is a Divine decree for the Jews to suffer under “shibid malchiyis” specifically because of our sins to Hashem that caused “Gulis Shechina”. The gulis is the Divine mechanism towards our tikin and will necessarily only end when Jews do teshiva.
Regarding the definition of Moshiach, I omitted another distinct point worth mentioning: “???? ???? ?????” as the Rambam says it, which means gathering all the dispersed Jews together. I’ve added it below.
RECAP:
Zionism is the movement which advocated for establishment of an independent ‘Jewish’ state anywhere.Moshiachis a direct descendent of Duvid Hamelech who is a nuvi of Hashem (with all the established conditions of a nuvi) who brings back all Jews to tshiva (keeping all miztvos), can judge and issue psak with his smell, rebuild the Beis Hamikdash, gather all dispersed Jews together, and restore Malchis Beis Duvid as King. There are more details brought in chazal, such as Eliyuhi Hanuvi (also a nuvi of Hashem, of course) will publicly announce the arrival of Moshiach before he reveals himself, and all those details as well, even if here is not the place to expound on them all fully.
Gulis is a Divine decree for the Jews to suffer under “shibid malchiyis” specifically because of our sins to Hashem that caused “Gulis Shechina”. The gulis is the Divine mechanism towards our tikin and will necessarily only end when Jews do teshiva.
Please let me know if we are in agreement with the three definitions and I will continue to the next step.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Is this a distinction you made up? is there a kosher source you can point me to that gave you this concept?
Ideas of kefira and ideas of a”z are by nature “hashkafik”. When one acts on them and one must poskin on those actions, it becomes “halachik”. To be a bit more precise, the “halaha” is the thing you must do in response to a situation. So, vis-a-vis kefira, the psak halacha is the required reaction to a person (that seems to be) acting on a specific “hashkafa” of kefira.
However, there are not two types of a”z, one called “hashkafic” and one called “halachik”. That’s wordy gibberish trying to obfuscate actual thinking. Try expressing your idea without using the terms “haskafic” or “halachik”. I can do that very easily with my stance:
An idea that is inconsistent with traditional Torah teachings is called “heresy”. A person who knowingly believes in a heretical idea – either rejection or replacing a Torah teaching – is called a “heretic”. However, there are many cases of common misconceptions where kosher Jews innocently maintain heretical ideas either because they have been socially mainstreamed or because he was never exposed to the Torah concepts that challenge his flaw. Those people may not be heretics despite believing heretical ideas.
The “13 ikkarim” are an exception to this rule, as a person who even unwittingly rejects – or even has passing doubt in – those 13 fundamental Jewish concepts is necessarily a heretic, as those fundamentals are baseline requirements for Judaism.I would ask you to try to do the same thing and talk about the thing you are actually trying to say without hiding behind vague and distorted specific words. Try actually talking about the thing.
@always_ask_questions
Don’t make this about be. I only ever publicize and defend established Torah ideas. And no, Zionism is evil and antisemitic in the US as in Uganda as in Palestine. Dont get me wrong, their Zionist movement has certainly profaned the holy land as much as the holy language and the holy nation, turning them all into physical secular concepts. And, I suppose it would be better if the didn’t profane the holy land and chose Uganda or had not profaned the holy tongue and chose Russian, and kv”ch bkv”ch if they hadn’t targeted the holy nation and called themselves anything but “Jewish”. Nonetheless, it would all be the same battle against Hashem and His Torah, just perhaps less effective on tricking simpler Jews.The Steipler clearly agrees with the premise that the DL claim of “aschula d’geila” is itself kefira. So, his statement about a “fully frum believer in athalta (sic) degeula” could only apply to someone who doesn’t know that this concept is itself a heretical idea from the false religion called “Dati Leumi”.
To the larger point, the kefira of that “dati leumi” religion is not just the simple mistake of “aschuleh d’geila”. As you said, the Steipler’s statement is very limited to being only about an otherwise “charedi” person who considers current political events as “aschula d’geila”.
@yankel-berel
thank you for the response.Zionism as you describe doesn’t fit the history. The first generations of zionism were not focused on EY, rather there were numerous suggestions and considerations before the movement voted on EY.
I would suggest tweaking your answer to “zionism is the movement which advocated for establishment of an independent ‘Jewish’ state anywhere “.
gulis is not only the dispersion of Jews, rather gulis is a reality even in EY. I would suggest a better definition: Gulis is a Divine decree for the Jews to suffer under “shibid malchiyis” – under the the rule of non-Jewish nations. This definition aligns very well with the makoros in Torah that point out that the gulis of buvel has never yet fully ended (as Bais Sheni was not fully independent from shibid malchiyis).
moshiach is a bit more specific than what you wrote. Moshiach is a direct descendent of Duvid Hamelech who is a nuvi of Hashem (with all the established conditions of a nuvi) who brings back all Jews to tshiva (keeping all miztvos), can judge and issue psak with his smell, rebuild the Beis Hamikdash, and restore Malchis Beis Duvid as King. There are more details brought in chazal, such as Eliyuhi Hanuvi (also a nuvi of Hashem, of course) will publicly announce the arrival of Moshiach before he reveals himself, and I am sure that you agree that the definition of “Moshiach” must include all those details as well, even if here is not the place to expound on them all fully.
Please let me know if you agree with my adjustments or provide your feedback in order to move the conversation forward.
it is Strange for me how you regularly confuse the distinction between rejection of the ideology and rejection of the person who might be a follower of that ideology. The Chazon Ish famously wrote (YD 1) that in our generation we have to judge each person individually and you can’t simply go after titles. However that certainly doesn’t mean that the majority of anybody falls on one side of that line or the other. It is certainly possible, acourding to the Chazon Ish, that all of Reform and Conservative and Catholic and Muslim and Modern Orthodox and dati lumi and 4/5 of the haredi world are all not part of “Amisecha” because of the avoda zureh you are referring too.
Many reform People think they are part the Jewish nation and if you would tell them That according to Torah followers of Reform heresy are not part of the Jewish people They would be incredulous and say are you really going to be pusel 80% of the Jewish world?! So too the Catholics would say you have to go after the majority and look the majority of the world 99% accept the Catholic version of Judaism! so how could it be the Catholics are all wrong?! But of course the truth is that the Torah is not a numbers game. There’s Torah and – lehavdil – there’s heresy. It is certainly possible that there is only a small “minyan mitzimtzen” of kosher Yidden alive today. So too the opposite extreme. It could be that in Bais Din shel Ma’aluh half the Reform population is nebuch tinik shenishbuh that will get their rewards as Jews. None of this changes the Torah. None of this changes the rules and axioms how we basar v’dum are supposed to relate to kefira and kofrim in either direction.
It’s not our business to know the actual din v’chesbon of anyone, since we can never know what’s in a persons heart. But we must point out heresy when it shows itself and we must reject with two hands every false moshiach or distortion of Torah such as Reform, Catholic, or Dati Leumi.
foundational to yiddishkeit (ikkarei eminah) is the firm belief that everything that happens to a Jew is with perfect Divine providence and that every difficulty – lo alaini – is both because of our sins and meant to arouse our tshiva.
Your comment is full of heresy from top to bottom.
you are ALMOST there. the Steipler simply said that believing in the kefira of “athalta d/g” does not make one a kofer.
They may or may not be a kofer.
that’s all.
@yankel-berel
answer your question, you would need to define “gulis”, “moshiach”, and “zionism” first.
You are welcome to provide your working definitions or request mine, I only ask that they are meaningful specific definitions, such as – for example – your definition of zionism must specifically mean the novel ideology that was started with that name in the late 19th century and is currently valid for that movement.
If your answer is “no one knows what zionism is” or some other ignorance, it precludes any meaningful persuasive conversation.@ujm
zionists don’t care about the pain of ehrliche yidden, they only care about the pain of themselves losing power. they are proud to die for their state, R”L.@always_ask_questions
every kosher rav must ” hold by the shevuos as halakha” because is it a gemara mefurash that has no one cholek, as we see in the numerous poskim rishonim and acharonim who paskin the shulosh shevios.You cannot find even one charedi Gadol who says the shevios are not haluche, including the Avnei Nezer, the Netziv (even according to the forged letter), etc. Even, l’havdil, kook shr”y admitted they are binding. And this is all because we are not allowed to add or detract from the Torah Hashem gave us, so claiming that one can ignore the shevios as “not haluche” would be an absurd point of kefira that even Kook couldn’t leverage to fool the am harutzim he taught. (and this – rejecting even one letter of the Torah – is exactly one of the points of kefira of the “dati leumi” heretical religion borne from kooks foolish students).
@yankel-berel
Nothing I said is at odds with “karyane de’igrata” nor with mainstream published halacha.
I addressed these complaints of your repeatedly and you ignore them and repeat the question as if I never offered an answer.So here it is again:
1) The Steipler Geon never said a Zionist cannot ever become a kofer b’ikar. (see https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/going-otd-in-the-idf#post-2445601 )
2) There are zero mainstream charedi poskim who have published psak defending zionism, zionist ideology, or full-fleged zionists. There has not even been a published disagreement with the well known Vayoel Moshe from Satmar Rebbe (see https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/the-antizionism-amongst-religious-jews-has-no-legitimate-detractors )Whatever “mainstream psak” you might be thinking of (if you are thinking at all.. can’t tell) would likely be the majority of
tinuk sh’nishba types that are not “full fledged” zionists, i.e those who have been deceived on what the Torah teaches and if they would be faced between accepting the 13 ikkarim OR “dati leumi” zionism would reject the false moshiach religion called “Dati leumi”. Others might very well choose zionism, R”L. In the meantime, fools like yourself think they can worship both Baal and Hashem, H”y. In light of the doubt presented by the reality that many shomer mitzvos mistakenly think “dati leumi” is a kosher shita in Torah, the poskim have poskin’d.@always_ask_questions
I feel like I’m arguing with a chatbot.
You wrote “more of a zionist”. I certainly didn’t make you a zionist! Reread what I wrote.@joe-blow
you sound just like a Reform “Jew”@always_ask_questions
I ask rabbunim questions all the time and I don’t remember that ever being request or the subject of debate around here.. I’m not sure what you are talking about.This whole conversation is bizarre, as who cares the identity of the writer on an internet forum, any G-d fearing Jew is only interested in Torah and not the messenger. More than that, no G-d fearing person is going to take ANY of the sources here at face value BECAUSE identities aren’t known and no one should learn Torah from an unknown source.
Again, this whole conversation is bizarre, as the argument against Zionism has nothing to do with the authority of Gedolim, per se, rather it has to do with the authority of Torah as given at Sinai. If they teach that Torah, good. If a Gadol, chas v’shulem, teaching something against that Torah, it’s meaningless vis-a-vis the understanding of a sugya.
Gedolim are only as good as the Torah they teach.
@always_ask_questions
you said:
“You made me more of a Zionist than I was before”So be it. Like Eliyuhi Hnuvi said, if Hashem is G-d go with His Torah, if Zionism is your god go with it”
You can’t be “more” of apikorus so nothing lost for you to become “more” of a zionist, but you CAN be more of a fool to think you can be both a Yid AND a Zionist.@hakatan
I think you should be clear on what likely obvious to you which is that the cause of Moshiach’s delay was because of the Zionist leanings of otherwise kosher yidden, ie those who had not already adopted the full fledged kefira of Zionism but simply acquiesced to or otherwise accepted the followers of the zionist moshiach sheker religion, since the real full fledged Zionists – shomer shabbos or not – are no longer part of klal yisroel as per Torah guidelines.
@ujm is talking about someone who is shomer shabbos.While I don’t know what sources you are referring to, I can only imagine that you must be talking about the question of i one can invite a secular jew to shil knowing that they will drive to get there. That is a very different question that centers on the status of secular jews today vis-a-vis the laws of tinik sh’nishbu and if we have any concern for “arvis” towards such profaned “jews”.
The minhag to invite would seem to point to there not being arvis even if the “jew” is coming to shil on shabbos…
Would you also claim that “it is assur to say lashon hara about ‘Jews for J’ evangelicals even if they [mistakenly] believe that the state is the forerunner of our ge’oula.”?
Would you say that this statement was also the intent of the Steipler Geon zy”a?Of course, it was not.
The kefira of the false religion called “dati leumi” is not the simple mistake of “aschuleh d’geila”.
The Steipler says very clearly that an otherwise frum yid does not cross the threshold of kofer in ikkarei hadaas if he makes the mistake of “aschuleh d’geila” vis-a-vis the false geila of the tziyonim. That doesn’t mean that everyone who indeed makes that foolish mistake now has a free pass to believe all types of kefira and apikorsus and can never become a rushe!
Is this nonsense your claim? Or is there some other reason you distort the words of the Steipler Geon?
@square_root
a person like @ujm who quotes the many many quotes from chazal that mention that there will be a time that Jews will suffer under a kingdom of the “erev rav”. Many many quotes from chazal that express this “erev rav” as being direct partners with the S”M and Amulek.
And now, with the rise of this antisemitic stated called “Israel”, a state the has brought so much death, a state based on the same ideology that brought us the Holocaust less than 100 years ago, a state that continues to send Jewish boys off to die in order to stay in power, you can many many many rabunim and gedolim who say explicitly that this evil state called “Israel” is exactly that malchis of “erev rav” that chazal mentioned. and that this evil state is amulek in our days.Why do you call a person who reiterates those Torah teachings as a “Rasha Gamur”(sic)?
@simcha613
It is strange to me that you find what I (or @ujm or @hakatan) are saying is novel. Our stance is not just mainstream amongst the teachings of Gedolim, if you accept the “OTD” lines drawn by those gedolim, the stance is unanimous. In other words, if you accept any of the Steipler, the Chazon Ish, the Brisker Ruv, Rav Elchunon Wassermen, Rav Kotler, Rav Vosner, Rav Elyashiv, the Beis Yisroel, etc. as the “gold standard” of Torah mesorah, they have all said – some more gentle than others – that “dati leumi” is rooted in kefira and just another unfortunate form of moshiach sheker just like Reform, Yashkeh, etc.This is why there is no specific rejection of Vayoel Moshe because the fundamentals are agreed upon by all “charedim” across our camps (despite the clear dissent of some to pursue questionable “hora’as shueh’s”).
I think I saw it from Maharam Shick zy”a that said that he wishes he had the power to separate out real yiddishkeit as a distinctly different religion than “reform” in the mind of the public and have its crooked followers at least stop claiming their heresy was “Jewish” as the previous Gedolim were successful to do under the rebellion that from Xtianity. Certainly, with the infringement of “dati leumi” kefira today, we are in even more dire straits, H”Y.
In any case, I don’t understand why you are surprised that I express the Torah from these many gedolim regarding this threat.
unfortunately, @yankel-berel is deperate to always remove Hashem from the equation, believing his histadlis are what saves lives and that ultimately he is in control of his destiny. Zionist call this “self fulfillment”. Jews call this “kochi votzem yudi”.
@hakatan
I always appreciate your beautiful writing and the clarity your comment provide.@hakatan
I can’t begin to understand how you can claim that anyone who adopts the shitif of zionism and lehavdil Torah is not “off the derech”.
Does that mean they are necessarily kofrim/minim/goyim? no certainly not, as both the Chazon Ish and the Stepiler have said about such a grave mistake for some people it’s done innocently enough that they simply need to hear to correct(ed) Truths and they will quickly realign themselves to doing rutzon Hashem and keeping the pure Torah. This is exactly the distinction the Rambam makes about so-called “tinikei shenishbu”, some – perhaps a small minority – will happily reject the sheker when exposed to truth.
(Others will continue to show their true colors in Coffee Room comments… )
In any case, those unfortunate sincere “tinikei shenishbu” are still “off the derech”, until they aren’t.@simcha613
correct. have I not been saying this explicitly over and over?
as I added above, ‘I’m also very curious how many members who join “Jews for J” also go off the derech…’@hakatan
I would suggest the non-jewish population that leaves there could and perhaps should rule the area.
before the zionists, the arabs were well regarded by jews as good, respectable caretakers of the land in our gulis.@ujc
a zuken mamre, perhaps?I’m also very curious how many members who join “Jews for J” also go off the derech…
previous comment is a direct, clear answer to your question(s).
@yankel-berel
there is a havtucheh that there will always be a place for the Jewish Nation to escape to in gulis.
the problem with your theorieticals is that they ignore he Torah.
We DO believe in hashguche prutis, so theoretical horrors don’t scare me, but the real horrors of the kofer religion called “Dati Leumi” DOES scare me.I already gave you a direct answer. here it is again:
SA does NOT say what you want it to say. It says[taken from Hebrew Books and transcribided without Ramu for brevity]
???? ??? ???? ???: ?? ???? ?????? ????? ??? ?????, ??? ?’ ??????
???? ??? ??????? ??????, ??? ?????? ???, ????? ????? ??????? ????, ?? ?????? ?? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ?????, ?? ??? ?????? – ????? ??? ?????. ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??????, ????, ?? ????? ?????? ????? ??????? ?? ??.
??? ??? ???????, ?????? ???? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ??? ?????, ?? ????? ?????? ????? ??????? ?? ?? .??? ?? ???? ????? ??? ??????, ????? ??? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ?????? , ????? ?? ????? ?????? ????? ??? ?????.
??????? ??????, ????? ????? ??????? ????, ????? ?????? ???? ???? ??????, ?????? ??? ????? ?????? ????? ??? ?????? – ????? ??? ?????.and the translation:
Yoreh De’ah Siman 157: On Which Transgressions One Should Be Martyred Rather Than Transgress, and It Contains Three Sections
Section 1
Regarding all transgressions in the Torah, with the exception of idolatry, forbidden arayos, and bloodshed: If a person is told to transgress them or be killed, and the transgression is committed in private ( b’tzinah ), they should transgress and not be killed. However, if they wish to be stringent upon themselves and be martyred, they may do so, provided the non-Jew intends to make them abandon the Torah.
If the situation is public ( b’farhesia ), meaning in the presence of ten Jews, one is obligated to be martyred rather than transgress,
if the gentile intends to make them abandon the Torah. But if the gentile’s intention is merely for their own pleasure, one should transgress and not be killed. If it is a time of decree ( sh’as hagezirah ), one must be martyred rather than transgress, even for the sake of a sandal strap.
And concerning idolatry, forbidden arayos, and bloodshed, even when committed in private and not during a time of decree, and even if the gentile’s intention is merely for their own pleasure, one must be martyred and not transgress.
@yankel-berel
Beyond this, there are many makoros in chazel, such as the medrash says bne efroyim were punished by mass death for breaking the shevioyos to escape mitzroyim, which clearly say one cannot break the shevios for pekiach nefesh.
If you have a serious question, just read the relatively short paragraph of maharal where he explains himself. or read vayoel moshe where the whole sugya is explains. your questions are not “bomba kashos”, rather they just show your deep insincerity and readiness to lie about what the Torah says, oy.I never said “Z is bad because it is anti-religious”
I say zionism is bad because it rejects fundamentals of Yiddishkeit: moshiach, schar v’oesh, and the definition of “Klal Yisroel”.
By extension zionists also come to reject more fundamentals such as Torah min hashomayim, emina Bashem, and more.
These are heresies currently code to religious zionism and have nothing to do with their technical kiyim hamitzvos, just like their similar buddies Jews for J, it is heresy no matter how much shabbos they “keep”. They can preach “you must keep every one of the 613 and believe in yashke as moshiach”, and they will not be yidden, rather they are still tziyonim or notzrim or whatever word you want to call them.yes. what you say is not just obvious but well documented as well. my earlier comment was sarcastic in nature to mock the heresy of notzri and/or zionist supporters. I ended it with the customary “/s” annotation to clarify for anyone foolish enough to believe the nonsense the zionists spew forth.
You are invited to offer ANY pre-zionist (pre 1890) source in Shas or Poskim that forces a machlokes anywhere in the sugya of gezeiras hagulis generally and the application of the shulosh shevios specifically.
There IS a mochlokes in the gemureh about between R’ Zeira and R’ Yehuda, so that shikel daas between them is fair.
There are ALSO perhaps nuanced machlokesim about what exactly are the guidlines of the shulosh shevios, such as what is “aliyah k’choma”, etc, but poskim have resolved all if not most of those such that there is no machlokes. You are welcome to present somewhere you think there is valid machlokes in something if my understanding of this is mistaken and you want to leverage that shita to present coherent context for a needed shikel daas.
Beyond these two points, there are many many regular mekoros of how Jews must ask in gulis, about how to understand and safeguard breaking the shevios. These all present a singular cohesive view, from midrashei chazal to tshivas in psak to sodos haTorah to mifarshei hachimash to baalei musar and hashkufeh.
I don’t see any room for shikel daas if you cannot present an alternate deyoh in Shas! Who (in shas and poskim) is expressing the alternate shitah you claim that would put into question anything I wrote visavis gulis and the shevios?
@yankel-berel
THIS is your question?
that is way too many theoreticals with many more unknown to get to anything close to a psak.
why, in your theoretical case, are the Jews at risk if they are indeed tzadikim gemurim and there are no reshoyim in their midst?@keith this is a completely anti-Torah rant of yours!
I don’t know your background, but what you are saying goes against Torah fundamentals as well taught by everyone from the Chofetz Chaim to the Baal HaTanya.>> We are told we will not our temple back until we fix ourselves with ahavas chinam.
No, “Ahavas chinam” is a zionist trope with no source in chazal.
>> Do we spit on them because they don’t keep kosher?
YES. ideologically yes. but, we Jews don’t generally resort to violence.>> Do we reject them because they don’t keep Shabbos?
YES. this is much worse than kashrus problems, as this places them outside of “klal yisroel”>> They are our brothers and sisters.
MAYBE. Someone who doesn’t keep kosher because of ta’avos is still a Jew that is “achicha b’mitzvos”. However, a michalel shabbos or someone who reject generally the obligation to keep the Torah (and even one who rejects tochaha about a single aveira, but that situation is more complex today…) are all NOT “achicha b’mitzvos”, they are NOT our “brothers and sisters”.>> We love them regardless if they choose to come back or not.
NO. Jews are not allowed to love those who rebel against the Torah, those who are not part of klal yisroel.>> Perhaps one day they will and perhaps not.
YES. The door for tshiva is always open. Maybe they will come back. We shouldn’t reject them if they want to do tshivah.>> There is however NO chance they will bless H-Shem if we do not love them.
NO. Tshiva is not dependent on anything except for each individual’s free choice. They, like anyone, cannot blame others for not making the right choices.>> They will CURSE H-Shem because we show them hate not love.
MAYBE. There is usually little reason to tell anyone outside of Klal Yisroel that you hate them.>> And it’s OUR fault not theirs.
What is our fault?>> They were never exposed to Torah Judaism and its beauty.
MAYBE. Many secular Jews have been exposed to Judaism, and that makes their sins even worse. Regardless, this doesn’t change how WE JEWS are obligated to relate to such an evil person regardless of their exposure.>> We were. It’s OUR JOB to love them and bring them to our loving Father.
NO. Our job is literally to keep the mitzvos of the Torah. While it is generally a kiddish Hashem when a baal tshiva returns, that is very far from creating a new mitzvah – chalila – of us bringing them back. Certainly, we cannot make a mitzvah from the sin of loving a rusheh,>> We are told that every generation the temple is not rebuilt it’s not that we didn’t merit to rebuild it. It’s that we actively destroyed it.
YES. Stop loving reshoyim.>>Many here live the story of the Chofetz Chaim … I am warning you now when you get to shomayim don’t use my name.
Yes the Chofetz Chaim was very explicit in his teaching about how one must hate and curse reshoyim like the ones we are talking about here. He warned you, @keith>> You think people michaleil Shabbos are delaying geulah?
No. They aren’t part of Klal Yisroel. The sins of Jews, like those who think well on kofrim and apekorosim, are the ones delaying geila.>>I think everyone here should stop saying anything negative u til learning Chofetz Chaim.
Please, take your own advice. You clearly haven’t learned it yet.>> I think many here may as well start eating non kosher – the lashon harah coming out of our mouths is worse than eating non kosher.
This is kefira. We don’t allow aveiras in lieu of other shortcomings. We don’t say one mitzvah is worthless because of another one is lacking.Please, take your own advice and learn the sugya that you speak about.
@always_ask_questions
I adamantly disagree with your statement. The core ideology of zionism is alive and well, and it is a kefira that is at the core of the heretical teachings of RZ in the same way as across all zionist groups.beyond the well known zionists like kestner and avraham stern of Lechi. you can read about many more at wikipedia “Jewish_collaboration_with_Nazi_Germany”
survivors I have spoken to claim that many days in the Nazi slave camps there were some nazi’s that would provide them old bread and sometimes soup-water. They even had established kitchens on campus to support jewish life.
That food helped them stay alive.In fact between 1942-1944 Nazi Germany was the SINGLE GREATEST SUPPORTER OF JEWISH FOOD for Polish Jews still alive.
Sure, you might be confused as the Nazis were ALSO the ones who confiscated as much food from Jews as possible and took control of their lives, forcing them into camps. But, that was Nazi Germany from 1938-1941, a VERY different almost unrecognizable thing entirely.So too Zionists claim themselves the SINGLE GREATEST SUPPORTER OF TORAH in the world…. v’hamaiven yuvin.
I appreciate the honest response that seems intent on moving the conversation forward.
I don’t have an issue with trusting the Torah “to the millimeter” nor do I doubt any part of it on any level.
However, since my point about hishtadlis seems to be novel to you, I will soften the suprise by expressing my disagreement with your claims on their own merit.
Histadlis generally is the exception that must be proven, not the other way around. For example, the starting point of being a Yid is believing everything is in Hashem’s hands. Specifically when a person is niftar is gozer on Rosh Hashuneh. This is clear in our mesora. So, every action – even general hatzula nefushos – is an exception to our normal understanding of the world and something that must be proven before allowed. So too medicine and parnsas. This doesn’t mean that those issues haven’t already been clearly established, hatzuleh nefushos and medicine and panuseh have all been well codified in Torah and in the Jewish life. Nonetheless chazal are clear that if nor for the Torah telling us explicitly, going to a doctor would simply be another form of avoda zureh and kefira in Hashem.
Beyond that clarifying point, your last comment included a very foolish false-binary of break the shevious or watch millions – chas v’shulem- burn. Keeping the shevios does not mean letting any individual Jew get – chas v’shulem – hurt. As I have written in other places: if zionists believe Jewish lives are in danger inside the medina, help them escape to safer lands. Running away from adversity is part of keeping the shevios, not breaking them.
This touches on my question to you in another thread around here right now: what is the real question? If I specifically don’t go to the army, will a Jew – chas v’shulem – die? If I specifically don’t answer the Hatzuleh Radio Medic Call on Shabbos, will someone -chas v’shulem – die? Can that person go to the hospital before Shabbos? Can that person escape the zionist danger and move elsewhere?
So, no, while of course the Torah is 100% correct, your attempt to divide and conquer its teachings is foolish and empty.
I’m being honest. you’re specifically asking for psak l’maiseh and not hashkufeh. So, please ask a specific well defined question.
“you know” is not enough of a retort when you can’t even formulate your own question intelligently.
there is no “side-stepping” here.
if the morman’s did ALL that with the only caveat being they believed in their false moshiach, then it would still not be valid.
so too Judaism rejects this false moshaich called zionism.
we cannot remove even one letter of the Torah.
huh? Hakatan, just in his last comment to you, referenced the statement of the survivor Rav Baruch Kaplan.