yankel berel

We have to remember all the questions somejew and katan did not answer

the tur and sh’a and nosei keilim YD 156 , clearly contradicting their far fetched psak allegedly relying [or blaming ?] on mharal , mandating millions of jews to let themselves be slaughtered ch’v , october 7 style , rather than defending themselves and their families

their total and despicable irresponsibility for hiding behind indefensible platitudes , like ‘giving the land to esav’ without following up in –
specifying exactly which country ,
what that country plans to do when threats arise to the yidden , and
how many dead soldiers are they are willing to absorb before they will withdraw , and
what the situation will be after their withdrawal …

their huge leap from [even leshitatam] maharal who is talking about establishing a medina vs
our situation which is only maintaining an existing medina recognized by the overwhelming majority of nations
a distinction clearly approved by steipler in karyaneh de’igrata vol 1

their total lack of massa umatan kedarka shel torah as practised in all , even so called minor questions , through the generations , their mehirut nora’a bechamurim shebechamurim [if they would not dress like haredim and act like haredim in other areas , one could suspect them to be members of Open Orthodoxy]
Shomu shamayim ….

we mentally fall prey to their bully language accusing their opponents of kfira on every second step , but when we stop and think , we realize the tremendous weakness in their arguments …
.

Summary

I personally know people who were advised by r shlome zalman auerbach to enlist .
They weren’t young and they were married.

Is that any indication towards enlistment of young bachurim ?
Definitely not.
RSZ’A is on public record against the enlistment of yeshiva bachurim.

But – did RSZ’A consider enlistment as a blanket issur ,in force even when there is no chashash of losing one’s religion ?

clearly not .

Obvious that RSZ’A did not consider service in the IDF as a blanket yehareig veal ya’avor due to the oaths.
.
.

@hakatan

Regarding your points:
It makes no practical difference if the Tur does or does not bring that Maharal. He doesn’t rule against the Maharal. And we still know very clearly, from poskim throughout the ages and from the terrible instances of destruction of Jews like harugei beithar, that the three oaths are G-d’s will and very much in effect.

===

It makes a HUGE practical difference whether maharal is CONTRADICTED by tur , sh’a and nosei keilim.

In all areas of halacha , in all Jewish communities , during all generations , we knew that halacha is like those poskim – tur , sh’a and nosei keilim.

Satmar , and katan is mindlessly repeating here, seem to hold opposite.

Tur , sh’a and nosei keilim in YD 156 are clearly CONTRADICTING maharal . They clearly state that that all mitsvot besides for the three hamurot , including the oaths , is yaavor veal yiehareig.

.
.
Besides that, there is another important point- maharal is NOT talking about defending an existing malhut.

Maharal talks about CREATING a malhut.
.
—

katan to yb :
The clear reality of what the Middle East is now, if anything, provides more opportunity than in the past for the Zionist “State” to be handed over to Esav, or some other solution, that does not involve loss of anything other than that idol and its numerous problems and astronomical waste of money.

—

again lol.

Am debating whether you yourself believe the total crap you have written here .

.

ujm , somjew and katan are owing still….

they have not responded to –
how three times tur mehaber plus nosei keilim are subservient in halacha lemaaseh to maharal not brought anywhere lehalacha

they have not responded to –
clear blame for terrible happenings ,like harugei betar, is due to the disconnection from the rbsh’o , instead of on the oaths, according to avnei nezer and by extension, all standard halacha sefarim like sh’a and nosei keilim , AS DULY NOTED BY AVNEI NEZER himself

they have not responded to –
the clear reality in front of us in the middle east AS IT IS NOW , not as it supposedly was once, and without any dishonest sidestepping and totally irrelevant blame game how things could or should have been

they have not responded to –
the factual and clear evidence that many people served in IDF without being shmadded and why that should not be taken into account when deliberating in one particular case where this individual’s refusal to show up , will have pikuach nefesh repercussions

they have not responded to –
clear evidence that the majority of haredei talmidei hahamim and tsadiqim, totally rejected their singular focus on historical transgressions of the oaths [according to the holkim on avnei nezer] as the source of all evil

they have not responded to –
the obvious reality , clear to any astute ten year old , that the majority of talmidei hahamim for the last eighty years , by their PASSIVE non participation in the demonization of the State per se, EVEN IF IT WERE TOTALLY FRUM , disagree [with this satmar obsession equating zionism to xtianity]

they have not responded to –
the implicit charge to why they think that they understand

torah ,

reality, and

torahs application to said reality,

better than all aforementioned t’ch and tsadiqim

—

in summary they have a lot to respond to which they did not do yet

we will see whether we will be zoche to receive TO THE POINT , HONEST and FULL responses without sidestepping
.
.
.

Have not heard from somejew and katan yet ….

What we are in the midst of now in the Holy Land is difficult to describe as “the beginning of the Redemption” (atchalta d’Geulah) but

it certainly represents great kindness.

[We have gone] from one extreme to the other—

from the extreme of suffering, the destruction of six million of our brethren, to

the opposite extreme—the settling of our people in our state in the Holy Land . . . .

Woe unto he who comes to judgment and is still so blind so as not to see something as clear as this

(Michtav Me’Eliyahu, vol. 3, p. 352).
.

Nu

where are somejew and katan ?

they supposedly are proclaiming the ONLY TRUE explanations in the torah

the only true assessments of the reality in front of us NOW

and the only true way of applying their own torah explanations to their own version of reality facing us

and on top of that accusing the people challenging them as

amharatsim

biters of talmidei hahamim

kofrim

and any other sundry compliments

—

they have not responded to
how three times tur mehaber plus nosei keilim are subservient in halacha lemaaseh to maharal not brought anywhere lehalacha

they have not responded to
clear blame to be put at the disconnection from the rbsh’o , instead of on the oaths, according to avnei nezer and by extension [because the OMISSION of the oaths] by all standard halacha sefarim like sh’a and nosei keilim , AS DULY NOTED BY AVNEI NEZER indicating like the above

they have not responded to
the clear reality in front of us in the middle east AS IT IS NOW , not as it supposedly was once, and without any dishonest sidestepping and totally irrelevant blame game how things could or should have been

they have not responded to
the factual and clear evidence that many people served in IDF without being shmadded and why that should not be taken into account when deliberating in one particular case where this individual’s refusal to show up , will have pikuach nefesh repercussions

they have not responded to
clear evidence that the majority of haredei talmidei hahamim and tsadiqim, totally rejected their singular focus on historical transgressions of the oaths [according to the holkim on avnei nezer] as the source of all evil

they have not responded to
the implicit charge to why they think that they understand

torah ,
reality and
torahs application to said reality,

better than all aforementioned t’ch and tsadiqim

—

in summary they have a lot to respond to which they did not do yet

we will see whether we will be zoche to receive TO THE POINT , HONEST and FULL responses
.
.

Thanks for the one of prompt service of somejew and katan re the source of chazon ish supposedly considering someone who celebrates yom hatsmaut as an apikorus

we know now that is a fraudulent claim

nowhere in the quoted text does it say that

.

Nu

mr somejew

waiting .

three separate proofs not that halacha is not like maharal

expect three separate answers

thanks

I do not understand this whole hullabaloo

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

or not ?

are the members of this mo’etset lay leaders or torah leaders ?

did those sages have in their gemarot the section about the oaths or did they never hear of the oaths ?

/

common sense rabotai

instead of idiotic automatic and robotic repeated recital of the same distortions again and again ….

,
,

@square root

the gzera of enlistment of the yeshiva boys is terrible,

and everything possible should done to stop it.

the effect of this blatant attack on Judaism will in the long term have dreaded repercussions

this gzera is clearly illegal according to the medina’s own laws.

this should be stopped in its tracks straight away
.
.

@katan

according to avnei nezer [and by extension mehaber rama nosei keilim and tur]

harugei betar was because of a disconnection to the rbsh’o , not because of the oaths

you did not learn the avnei nezer , so

don’t speak in his name

.
.
moshe rabenu was the greatest navi , correct, and there are important halachic ramifications because of this,

cf ramban yesode hatorah where he cites this as reason why a navi who changes the torah is

a navi sheker and liable for mitah bebeit din

that’s why rambam mentions it in mishneh torah

if there would be no practical ramifications rambam would have omitted it from yad,

like ….. the oaths , which

were omitted from yad hachazaka , because

there are no practical ramifications !!
.
.

do not scream at me for writing those lines , because

I did nothing more than quoting avnei nezer here.

according to avnei nezer the practical ramification when a possible transgression of the oaths presents itself , is

to reconnect to the rbsh’o in a proper way
.

this is not very complicated .

As we know from all the satmar who fruitlessly attempt to magnify the oaths,

we all know that the oaths are not practical/halachically in force according to avnei nezer [and sh’a , rama,, tur and nosei keilim] just like Moshe Rabbeinu being the greatest navi who ever lived.

.
.

s/j = somejew

p/n = pikuach nefesh

@katan

Peaceful dismantlement of the Zionist “State” has never been publicly advocated by any religious Jewish political organizations , because there is no path to doing so without endangering millions of innocents.

reality , katan , reality …..
.

.

Avnei nezer was not a zionist

and neither am I –

when I merely quote avnei nezer

and neither are rov talmidei hahamim in klal yisrael when they reject satmar’s focus on the oaths , as

the source of all evil in the world .

.

as said , avnei nezer considers the oaths as a SYMPTOM of a spiritual malady , which is

THE DISCONNECTION from the rbsh’o , which is the real source of all evil in this world

which we should focus on , and rail against.
.
.

.

sechel is leading us into the seventy second merry go round whether

mashiach can die after he proclaimed himself as mashiach , and

then return for a second coming to finish his job ,or

not
.

.
.
This question has long been settled by two of our major rishonim

RAMBAM and RAMBAN, in the clear negative

as mentioned before

in the countless previous merry go rounds
.
.

RAMBAN is in sefer havikuach and

RAMBAM is in hilchot mlahim in yad hachazaka

.

.

any further discussion by habad about this, amounts to nothing more than a bad joke.
.
.

@qwerty
@non political

The word nevu’a has been used in many formats

habad claims that their late leader is a navi as in the biblical format

re a biblical navi , it says that someone not listening to his directive that is hayav mitah biydei shamayim [if remember correctly]

in addition a biblical navi is authorised to suspend temporarily any mitsva except for avoda zara

smag one of the leading rishonim says clearly that this biblical full fledged nevu’a has stopped with hagai zharya and malachi [part of trei asar]

rambam spells out criteria for acceptance of biblical nevua

habad’s claims for biblical nevua are clearly disproven by rambams criteria
.

as opposed to biblical nevu’a , any later use of the term nevu’a pertains to the lower leve non biblical nevu’a, which

does not mandate anyone to listen and is not subject to admission criteria as per rambam .

important to keep this stinction in mind whenever

discussing habad’s leaders claim to biblical authority to command any jew to listen on pain of mitah byedei shamayim

and his claim to the authority to suspend temporarily any mitsva except for avoda zara

are not to be taken lightly at all

these are very major discussions to be had
.
.

avnei nezer says there is no punishments at all for going against the oaths

the punishment mentioned is for an apparent disconnection between the person and HKBH

the persons inclination to go against the oaths is only a thermometer of the level of [dis]connection between the person and HKBH

pikuach nefesh would for sure be doche that
.
.

.

if there would be any reservations or qualifications in these halachot in sh’a

either sh’a or rama or nosei keilim should have said something

this is halacha pesuka

ledorot and lema’aseh

for p/n , if needed,

you fight
.
.

@ somejew

according to somejew the refutation of the baal hatchelet came in the form of the recent tshuvot vahanhagot by r moshe sternbuch shlita

the baal hatchelet lived 150 [about ?] years ago, so

according to somejew , until RM’S recent writing, the tchelet dye was binding halacha on everyone in klal yisrael ….

in one word … absurd.
.
.

klal yisrael , mainly its talmidei hahamim , read the claims of the baal hatchelet AND REJECTED THEM

without any explicit refutational written work.

that is pashut kebeya bekutcha.

.

.
exactly the same with satmar rav’s writings

anyone with a tiny drop of sechel and common sense knows that

extreme writings like katan and somejew’s ARE NOT ACCEPTED, AND REJECTED by the overwhelming majority of talmidei hahamim
.

somejew is entitled to rant as much as he wants about the supposed kfira of anyone opposed to his views

and some supposed similarity of association with Zionism to association with xtianity

which is blatantly mezuyaf mitocho wherever you go in orthodox judaism , but

his rants will not change the torah ,

not change reality

and not change the judicious application of the torah to said reality in this specific case, as

it was done through centuries of halachik practise , in

numerous other issues and topics

.

Katan claims that The Chazon Ish held that wine owned by a “Religious Zionist” is yayin nesech.

This is sheker gamur.
.
The Chazon Ish did not hold that wine owned by a “Religious Zionist” is yayin nesech , only because of his religious zionism .

This is as clear as day.
.
.

What is possible that there was a man who was a RZ and in addition held other dei’ot kozvot.

And therefore was considered an apikores.

Those commenters like katan are not to be trusted .

They take reality and invert it , so that it fits their pre – imagined worldview.

.
.
Even SR am not sure whether he held a fully frum RZ as an apikores EVEN LEKULA

meaning that kidushin with fully frum RZ witnesses are null and void and do not need a get.

Am mistapek what he really held in such a case

remember — hafets hayim permits exaggerations in a case of malign influence .

could be SR exaggerated when he described RZ because of bad influence from RZ
.
.

.

.
The whole mashiach / pseudo navi business is one big joke and

even the L apologists know it
.

Bottom line

there are multiple extremely important questions on somejew’s writing, which he did not address

besides his unfounded and baseless accusations of kfira

.
.
same goes for katan
.
.
ujm disappeared a long time ago already ….
.

@somejew

somejew to yb :

…NONE of it means we can be kofer in even one word of the teachings of chazal.

—–

Must say I am offended by the suggestion and suspicion inferred.

where did I ever even insinuate that chazal ‘s words are not correct chvsh ???
.
.

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

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 ….
.
.

please mr somejew , please .

come down from your pedestal

and consider your debater here as a normal haredi jew like you

a ma’amin in 13 ikrim bishlemutan

just minus the shitah hakdosha
.
.