Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
lol
satmar rav writes kook shem reshai’m irkav [if my memory serves me right] and somejew is joining his rebbi
emrai emet writes harav hagaon ish ha’eashkoliyot r avraham kook shlita,—
and somejew is still trying to argue on the same thread of his quoting the above emrai emet, that there is no real difference between the gedolim and everyone agrees and that really deep down emrei emet holds of satmar shitah …Am surprised why somejew has not been diagnosed with severe headaches as seemingly his braincells must be undergoing some real stress ….
.
BTW.
Another clear mahloket between emrai emet and all other mo’etset rabbanim on one hand and satmar rav on the other – wether there is a practical mitsvah nowadays of yishuv EY or not.According to most rabanim it is
According to satmar rav its not.The major difference between the mekatrgim on the purim torah of sukah and menachem is : that menachem specifically agreed in his post that he would listen to his rebbi even when he does not understand him too.
Whereas the rest klal yisrael , the non habad hasidim, would not.
That is an excellent indication of bias.
Menachem declares that he follows ‘the infallible rebbi’ , even without understanding .
Is he then not biased to add ‘understanding’ to something he will anyway follow ?
Is it psychologically easier to follow something you understand and agree with or something you do not ?
MENACHEM TO YB :
Let me get your argument straight. According to you:
It makes sense to say that once the Mishna said that in a time of danger one can light menorah indoors, we can now have a minhag to davka light indoors even when it’s not a time of sakanah and we lack pirsumei nissa.
It doesn’t make sense to say that once Shulchan Aruch says that nowadays most don’t sleep in the Sukkah (and יש אומרים support for this), we can have a minhag to davka not sleep in the Sukkah.
Why? I can’t wrap my head around your distinction.
===================
By Hanuka which is a derabanan – HEM AMRU , VE’HEM AMRU .
They modified the takanah, and now the takanah is that you can light in or outdoors. Both are valid ways to do it and none is making a bracha levatala.
Any posek will tell you the same.There might be extra pirsumei nisa in one case more than the other , but the mitsva is equally valid in both options.
And once the mitsvah is valid both ways anyway , one can have the benefit of being surrounded by mitzvot on all sides- mezuza, tzitzit and ner. Or other benefits.
.
As opposed to sleeping in the sukka, or better said , outside of the sukka.WHICH IS A MITSVA DE’ORAYTAH, WHICH CANNOT BE MODIFIED, EVEN BY A PROPHET.
And when rama says the minhag was to sleep outside the sukah , that HAS TO BE ATTRIBUTED to a solid de’oraytah logic which would be matir the isur of sleeping outside.
Absent that , the nonnegotiable isur min hatorah is bemkomo omed.
Thats why the poskim all stress that if there is no cold and no marriage, it is assur min hatorah to sleep outside the sukkah.So those two logics, coldness and married life, are acceptable NOT BECAUSE THE ISSUR IS MODIFIED halilah , like by hanukah.
They are acceptable because there was a clause of teshvu ke’ein taduru IN THE ORIGINAL MITSVAH. Hence no modification.
Thats why purim torah is ineligible to be matir this issur min hatorah.
.somejew seems incapable lehalek ben hadvarim.
Is political rights obtained by tsionim ‘good’ ? According to emrei emet yes. According to satmar no.
Should one be part of the zionist organization ? According to both emrei emet and satmar , no.
Those 2 questions are totally different topics.
So does emrei emet agree to satmar ? Simple answer – sometimes yes , sometimes no.
Can you say that everyone agrees to satmar in principle, as somejew tried to argue ? Absolutely not.
As simple as can be.
.The following is an Excerpt from emrei emets letter :
…. True, it was also decided in Vienna not to cause harm to the guarantee of rights given to us in Eretz Yisrael. And even, Heaven forbid (chas v’shalom), to others, for the good will come from anywhere …..
=======
Rights given in EY.
Meaning Political rights by the British Mandate [and /or League of Nations] .Even to others, meaning non-religious Zionists.
We will not cause harm to rights obtained by the non religious Zionists on behalf of the Jews.
Why not ?Because the good, the above mentioned political rights in EY will come from anywhere , even from the non religious Zionists.
This is the essence of Imrei Emets words in plain English.
This is as far as possible from satmar ravs position.
According to satmar rav, political rights for Jews in EY brought about by Zionists is nothing more than ma’aseh satan, is stopping the ge’oula and has to be dismantled in order that mashiach be able to come. All this is pashut to anyone learning vayoel moshe.
Now , does imrai emet agree to vayoel moshe ?
What satmar calls ma’aseh satan , Imrei emet calls ‘good’ ……Where is somejew’s basic logic and understanding ?
.Menachem is not getting it.
Its not the minhag of not sleeping there which is backwards .Its THE LOGIC which is backwards.
Its time to be modeh al ha’emet, menachem –
If your infallible rebbi would not have come up with this logic , would you say that on your own ??
what would your reaction be if a satmar hasid or a dye in the wool mitnaged would have come up with that type of logic ??Would you defend it with the same vehemence ? Or would you have a good laugh and say – Oh well …..
.
MENACHEM TO YB :
Yankel: If you can erase the words “בשעת הסכנה” from your Gemara Shabbos – why’s it so hard for you to accept that the Rama modified the mitzvah of Sukkah to not include sleeping?
—I am not erasing anything .
Most Poskim point to these very words , ‘besha’at hasakana manicho al shulhano vedayo’, and explain that this was a MODIFICATION.
Takana originally was to put it outside. Outside only.
And if you could not and were an oness , then you are patur legamrei.Then hahamim reconvened , because of the sakana , and modified the mitsvah that one can also put it on shulhano and be yotseh that way.
After this MODIFICATION, one can be yotseh inside also even for other reasons.Is it better to light outside after the modification ? That is a separate argument. Maybe the inyan of mezuza takes precedence. Other inyanim, etc…
However – No posek will say that someone who lights inside nowadays is making a braha levatala.
As opposed to before this modification of the gemara, lighting inside would be a braha levatala.
.There was no minhag in habad for generations to prefer sleeping out of the sukah even after all available standard halachik kulot are exhausted.
I personally knew a child of old habad hasidim who, way back, immigrated out of Russia who testified to me about their fathers stubborn insistence to sleep in the sukkah even in the face of extensive hardship.
.I did.
You must have missed it.
I quoted osef mihtavim of emrey emet zatsal where he writes on zhuyot gained by tsionim from the british and the league of nations in e’y as “huchlat lo lehitnaged lezhuyot ha’elu, ki YAVO HATOV MIKOL MAKOM … ”
Not like Satmar Rav.
—-I quoted rav yy kaniefski zatsal in karyane de’igrata that belief that the medina is athalta dege’oula is not kfira. It is a mistake , but not kfira,
Not like Satmar Rav.
—-I quoted tshuvot avnei nezer zatsal in taf nun dalet ,helek yore de’a, where he says that 3 shavuot are not mehayev yehudim lema’aseh .
Not like Satmar Rav.
—–
Even satmar rav himself is not like satmar rav.satmar rav himself will not invalidate a fully frum zionist ed for a get, and subsequent chilldren will not be mamzerim.
Not like Satmar Rav ……….
What I cannot understand is that Gemara Shabbat clearly modifies takanat derabanan of ner hanuka to put it al shulhano inside.
And people keep on ignoring this clear gemara and [mis]using it to advocate for a purim torah that it is preferable [!] to sleep out of the suka even when all kulot in halacha are exhausted.Not cold.
Not married.
Etc.And on top of that, they also want us to accept his source-less [!] infallibility …..
And to accept that their mashiach foolishness is equivalent to tanach ……
.MENACHEM TO YB:
The number one tool missionaries use is Tanach. Maybe start by canceling that instead.
====Lol.
We want to counter missionaries . We have a choice between canceling habad mashiach foolishness or canceling tanach.
Menachem proposes to cancel tanach and preserve habad’s pretsel mashiach theology ….
.
Tanach is the clear Word of God , accepted as such by ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF ERLICHE YEHUDIM FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS.Mashiach pretsel theology is REJECTED BY 99 % of erliche yehudim even during the few miserly decades it exists.
Imagine an ant comparing itself to the Empire State Building ….
.MENACHEM TO YB:
What you fail to realize is that most of these missionaries who draw comparisons between Chabad and Christianity are parroting Berger. His book — full of distortions and half-truths — is their primary source. So if you’re afraid of missionaries weaponizing misinterpretations of Chabad ideas like they from Tanach — you have Berger to blame.
======Missionaries do not need and are not waiting for Berger to point out the similarities between habad messianism and early xtianity.
Those similarities are as obvious as sunlight during the day.
Anyone sees that.I myself was confronted by a Protestant Pastor in 1993 , long before Berger, re the similarities between habad then [!] and early xtianity.
I myself overheard xtian visitors to an outdoor habad event featuring their rebbi , when he was still “alive” comparing him to their ‘saviour’.
Again, long before Berger.
—-The horse before the cart is not Berger.
It is habad’s crooked theology , itself.
Berger is merely following.
From a respectable distance.
.
.
Menachem , it is time to pause , take a deep breath, reflect and think ….
.@somejew
===========================somejew to yb:
as mentioned over and over by me, the Torah and its mesorah stand on its own and it is THE authority over us. There is no such thing of a “Gadol” going against the clear Torah, the Torah that THEY claim to follow. None of this is “Satmar propaganda”, rather it is simple: If a “Gadol b’Yisroel” does or teaches something against the Torah, that is a kasha on that “Gadol b’Yisroel” NOT a kasha on the Torah.
There wasn’t and never will be a legitamat “shita” in Torah that supports any moshiach sheker like Zionism.
=========================The Torah and its mesorah stand on its own and it is THE authority over us.
AND “THE TORAH AND MESORAH” ITSELF IS COMPRISED OF ……..
…… GDOLEI YISRAEL WHO EXPLAINED WHAT WE RECEIVED AND PUT THAT INTO CONTEXT WITH THE REALITY ON THE GROUND.
Like the Or Sameach . Like the Avnei Nezer. Like the Emrei Emet. Like Rav Aaron Kotler. Like the Chazon Ish.
They all are part of the mesorah.
And clearly disagreed with that extreme daat yachid , named satmar rav.
—
Zionism does not have to be a mashiach sheker perse.
The fact that it was used in the past as mashiach sheker, does not mean that it has to stay that way forever.Rambam [another part of our mesorah] writes clearly :
A RASHA could build a palace with the intent from Heaven that years later a TSADDIQ will shelter in its shade.
Yachin rasha vatsadiq yilbash.
—–ZIONISM IS NOT KFIRAH PERSE. [Steipler – another part of our mesorah]
MEDINAH IS NOT KFIRAH PERSE. [Steipler – another part of our mesorah]
It is merely a useful tool in the hands of the kofrim.
Until we grab it out of their hands , that is.That is the hashkafa of the mainstream and majority be’echut uve’kamut of gdolei yisrael .
—–
I know that somejew and hakatan will protest with all their might.
But when pressed for proof, they will fall far short and because of lack of alternative, revert to classic satmar propaganda tools.“Or its sheker
Or he is not a godol
Or he is misinformed.”They reuse the same tactics by every argument.
No honest debate about the issues themselves and no willingness at all to consider their merits.
.@aaq
aaq to yb:
yankel > The recent history of the modern Chabad (Lubavitcher) movement of Hasidic Judaism provides insight into the development of early Christianity.
—
interesting. I also saw a paper from Harvard: Modern yeshivas provide insights into development of Qumran communities who isolated themselves from other Jews in the caves and left numerous writings mostly similar to traditional Judaism.
———————————————–There is no imminent danger of Qumran communities using modern yeshivas to mass convert naive yehudim to their false religion.
But there definitely is a clear and present danger of xtian missionaries attempting to use the obvious habad – early xtian similarities to mass convert naive yehudim to their false religion.
.That’s why this Boston university paper should start the alarm bells ringing.
That’s why we should seriously reconsider the supposed ‘infallibility’ of the late leader of the habad hasidim.
That’s why we should not let any of the good that habad does, obscure the dangerous slippery slope they have started out on.
That’s why we should not merely stand by and observe the ‘mashiach foolishness’ and dismiss it as if this was nothing more than some childish prank in a playground.
That’s why we should applaud and support the courageous author of ‘harebi melech hamashiach’ , R Dovid Berger.
.You don’t mind someone unquestionably following his rov or rebbe regarding Shmini Atzeres and Chanukah, you only have a problem with following the Lubavitcher Rebbe.
===I have a problem with your rebbi’s alleged infallibility. Coupled with blatantly false aspirations to messiahship.
That’s all .
After numerous posts asking for a source of this supposed infallibility, I am back at square one.
Nothing, nada , zero , zilch, efes.
No source.
…..
.
Menachem , you still haven’t explained why you totally ignore my post re the clear difference between lighting menorah inside the house which was MODIFIED by hazal themselves ,as per clear gemara in shabbat without any mahloket – OBVIOUSLY NOT AT ALL AGAINST HALACHA .
as opposed to
supposed preferability of sleeping outside of the sukkah in all circumstances which would necessitate either a modification of din min hatorah or some earth shattering purim torah.
===========
There was no minhag in habad for generations to prefer sleeping out of the sukah even after all available standard halachik kulot are exhausted.
I knew a child of old habad hasidim who, way back, immigrated out of Russia who testified about their fathers stubborn insistence to sleep in the sukkah even in the face of extensive hardship.
I do not believe that there was an undocumented minhag in habad going back for generations, as you portray it.============
Yes , I read the mitteler rebbi’s words . Any normal talmid haham would explain his words the way I did.
Even you would.
If your “infallible” rebbi would not have provided his own explanation, that is.
===========
Classic satmar propaganda.
Or its sheker
Or he is not a godol
Or he is misinformed.They reuse the same tactics by every argument.
No honest debate about the issues themselves and no willingness to consider their merits.
.
SOMEJEW TO ALL PARTICIPANTS:
jews for z vs jews for j … which kefira will win the battle for yiddishe souls ….
==============================
FYI. jews for z is very far removed from jews for jBoston University School of Theology, 745 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA
“The recent history of the modern Chabad (Lubavitcher) movement of Hasidic Judaism provides insight into the development of early Christianity ….”
—–
The Question is – Did the late rebbi of the habad hassidim take this into account when he embarked on his mashiach frenzy campaign , or is this an unforeseen consequence of their mashiach frenzy ?MENACHEM TO YB:
Yankel, you still haven’t explained why you choose to attack the longstanding Chabad minhag to be meikel regarding sleeping the the Sukkah (as permitted in Shulchan Aruch) but don’t attack the sects of chassidim who don’t eat in the Sukkah on Shemini Atzeres (without basis in Shulchan Aruch)?
=====================
As mentioned in previous posts , I am not in the business of questioning minhagim of sects or kehillot.
Nor am I in the business of policing or ‘attacking’ chassidic , or otherwise, sects re the degree of their torah observance.The primary person who needs my policing re torah observance is myself , and there is plenty of work left, b’h.
You are missing the point ,seems like.
I questioned your rebbi’s alleged infallibilty.
Which should be called into question, when clear faulty reasoning comes to the fore.I have NO ISSUE with habad utilizing any of the available halachik kulot re suka.
And ,to let you in with a secret of mine, I [sadly] also do not have [so much of] an issue even if they use kulot which are not really available.But what I find impossible to understand is your rebbi’s alleged infallibility you [plural] so stubbornly cling to.
Sukka is a good example.
Any objective observer would agree to my observation.
Why would we surmise that the mitteler rebbi was mehadesh such an earth shattering hidush contradicting the pashtut of all tanna’im amora’im rishonim and poskim , i.e. that it is preferable [!] to sleep outside of the sukah, if there is a very simple and straightforward explanation available for the mitteler rebbi’s comment ?
He probably meant to encourage utilizing the time in the sukka with more worthwhile spiritual pursuits than sleeping.
So the original question returns with a vengeance :
Was the rebbi of menachem and his friends infallible ?
If yes , please, do you have source ?
From hazal ?
From torah logic ?
.MENACHEM TO YB ;
Another question: Shulchan Aruch rules that the menorah must be lit at the outer door facing reshus harabim. This is a necessary part of the mitzvah due to pirsumei nissah (thus, it’s probably more central to the mitzvah of Chanuka than sleeping is to the mitzvah of Sukkah).
Why then don’t you attack the Jews whose minhag it is to light the menorah specifically indoors, thus violating a central part of the mitzvah?
Don’t answer that it’s because this is how the minhag developed due to sakana, because that’s like excusing the minhag of sleeping outside the Sukkah due to the coldness in Russia.
——–Gemara in Shabbat specifically states that this takana derabanan was modified .
Not developed.
MODIFIED.
Because of sakana.
—–Hiyuv to sleep in suka is de’oraytah and was never modified. And will never be modified either.
—–
Major difference.
.Boston University School of Theology, 745 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA
The recent history of the modern Chabad (Lubavitcher) movement of Hasidic Judaism provides insight into the development of early Christianity.
In both movements successful eschatological prophecies have increased belief in the leader’s authority, and there is a mixture of ‘already’ and ‘not yet’ elements.
Similar genres of literature are used to spread the good news (e.g. miracle catenae and collections of originally independent sayings).
Both leaders tacitly accepted the messianic faith of their followers but were reticent about acclaiming their messiahship directly.
The cataclysm of the Messiah’s death has led to belief in his continued existence and even resurrection.
??????????????????????????????????
.
jews for z vs jews for j … which kefira will win the battle for yiddishe souls ….
==============================
jews for z is very far removed from jews for jMenachem , how was shabbat ?
You misread me , or mislead me that you misread me. Not sure.
But , please, read my post again .I did not ‘attack’ habad on the grounds that they actually don’t sleep in the sukka.
I rather questioned your rebbi’s alleged infallibilty.
Which should be called into question, when clear faulty reasoning comes to the fore.I have NO ISSUE with habad utilizing any of the available halachik kulot re suka.
And ,to let you in with a secret of mine, I [sadly] also do not have [so much of] an issue even if they use kulot which are not really available and are a product of the yetser.Halevai I would first rid myself from my own deficiencies in avodat hashem, before I point out those of good people who could very well be better than me.
But what I find impossible to understand is your rebbi’s alleged infallibility you [plural] so stubbornly cling to.
Sukka is a good example.
Any objective observer would agree to my observation. Why would we surmise that the mitteler rebbi was mehadesh such an earth shattering hidush contradicting the pashtut of all tanna’im amora’im rishonim and poskim , i.e. that it is preferable to sleep outside of the sukah, if there is a very simple and straightforward explanation available for the mitteler rebbi’s comment ?
He probably meant to encourage utilizing the time in the sukka with more worthwhile spiritual pursuits than sleeping.
But since our rebbi , our leader and our mashiach ,
CANNOT MAKE ANY MISTAKES ,
therefore we , the collective habad hasidim , will discard the obvious in favor of the unpalatable.
That’s the question . Or with Menachem’s choice of words – ‘attack’.
Hmmm …. On second thought …..
Still prefer my choice of words. Its a question , not an attack.
.This sukka controversy is as old as the hills.
The mitteler rebbi did not mean to encourage sleeping out of the sukka.
He probably meant to encourage utilizing the time in the sukka with more worthwhile spiritual pursuits than sleeping.But here we are back again to our infallibility syndrome.
Any objective observer would agree to my observation. Why would we surmise that the mitteler rebbi was mehadesh such an earth shattering hidush contradicting the pashtut of all tanna’im amora’im rishonim and poskim , i.e. that it is preferable to sleep outside of the sukah, if there is a very simple and straightforward explanation available for the mitteler rebbi’s comment ?
He probably meant to encourage utilizing the time in the sukka with more worthwhile spiritual pursuits than sleeping.
But since our rebbi , our leader , our mashiach ,
CANNOT MAKE ANY MISTAKES ,
therefore we , the collective habad hasidim , will discard the obvious in favor of the unpalatable.
Have got news for Menachem and his ilk :
1] One can be a great person , even if one makes mistakes !
And : 2] one will obtain much more admiration and respect if one can admit that a mistake was made.
Instead of mindlessly defending the indefensible.
.@hakatan
I am not making fun.You just do not debate.
You repeat ,broken record like, the same pat answers , without engaging with the substance of your debater.
We could substitute you with a robot and no one would know the difference.Last time I debated an issue with you, the best you could muster was to send me to my local orthodox rabbi.
Read my post. This is not only a mirror where I use your language against you.
There are clear refutations included in there which you, as usual , just ignore.Concentrate on the substance, not on the form.
Use some torah logic of your own instead of mindless repetition of slogans and rhetoric.
.An erliche yid ?
R Chaim Kaniefski z’l for sure qualified as “an erliche yid” …
And he thought about it.
.@non political
Its all a matter of perspective.
Or rhetoric , if you will.
So those name callers are sof kol sof , following in their rebbi’s footsteps.
—We owe their rebbi and them a certain debt of gratitude .
Behind , or underneath if you will,
their illogical and baseless statements, there burns a fire of stubborn allegiance to the RBSH’O and his torah. Which stokes their emotions and blinds them from seeing the reality in front of them. And which clouds their minds ,seemingly disabling them from coherent thinking.They to be cherished, but not followed.
somejew to yb:
you wrote:You seem such an enthusiastic proponent of the ‘zionism is necessarily kfira’ approach , that it should be easy for you to formulate in a few short sentences why this is necessarily so .
the longest part of a conversation is defining what means Zionism. I have a specific definition in mind that was novel in the late 19th century and is still alive an well by all self-proclaimed zionists, showing Zionist ideology alive and well today, R”L.
I can offer my definition or you can start with yours. Once we have that anchor, I can answer your question as to why Judaism rejects Zionism as heresy.
——————-yb to somejew :
No problem.
There we go :Zionism is – support for a homeland for Jews in order to better their lot.
So the question stands
Is there a source anywhere for the principle that the rebbi of the habad hasidim is infallible ?All the proponents , all the apologists, all their combined intellects
,please ….
Can you come up with something ?
.….. Coupled with forceful suppression of internal dissent.
Anyone who dissented or merely was suspected of dissent ,was made to pay a very heavy price….
[yb]
—
Are you alluding to the way Satmar or Ponevezh treated dissent?
[menachem]
==================The purpose of this argument between us is NOT to see who can throw more dirt on our opponents and thus emerge ‘victorious’.
@ujm
If you lived in Germany in the 1930s, would you vote in the Nazi party elections, since the Nazis are the party in power and the Nazi primaries determine the German government leadership?For sure I would.
.somejew to yb:
you wrote:You seem such an enthusiastic proponent of the ‘zionism is necessarily kfira’ approach , that it should be easy for you to formulate in a few short sentences why this is necessarily so .
the longest part of a conversation is defining what means Zionism. I have a specific definition in mind that was novel in the late 19th century and is still alive an well by all self-proclaimed zionists, showing Zionist ideology alive and well today, R”L.
I can offer my definition or you can start with yours. Once we have that anchor, I can answer your question as to why Judaism rejects Zionism as heresy.
——————-yb to somejew :
No problem.
There we go :Zionism is – support for a homeland for Jews in order to better their lot.
.Both Eim habanim smeicha and vayoel moshe , [bemhila of their illustrious authors] are emotional sefarim.
The emotion of yearning for the geuoula and tsa’ar of tsaratan shel yisrael in the case of the EHS on the one side, and the anger and outrage at hatslahatan shel resha’im [besides the yearning for the g] in the case of VM in the other case, are very recognizable in both sfarim, notwithstanding of their quoting of numerous torah sources.
Their readers should be warned not to ignore these clear overwhelming emotions. They will do so at their own peril.
.
.@mdd1
Secular Zionism is based on kefira. They deny that the golus and the punishments are min Ha’Shamaim. They say it is all derech ha’teva. And that they can save the Jews by having a strong army and a medina (which is also silly in addition to the apikorsus). And they say that the golus could have been prevented by having a strong army and a strong medinah (shoitim!!).===
You are correct , but religious zionists would disagree with you.
So , even though the secular were the majority, nevertheless , one could be a Zionist without accepting all these divrei minus.
.You pathetically imitate my post while bringing zero sources in attempting to portray my shitah as accepting an idol chv’sh.
The fact is and remains , that katan brought zero proof that Zionism is absolutely both heresy and idolatry, by logic and proof only, even without the gedolim saying so.According to katan , every form of Zionism believes in at least two things:
1. Judaism is a Nationality, not (only) a religion, and Zionism is the current manifestation of that Nationality..
2. The Zionist “State” is the Nation-State of that religion.the facts however speak for themselves.
1a] The Torah recognizes that Judaism is a nationality. Multiple times klal yisrael are being described with the moniker of ‘am’ . Which translates as ‘Nation’.
1b] I disagree that Zionism believes that they themselves are the sole manifestation of that nationality. I myself happen to know many Zionists who would clearly disagree with you on this point. And who consider themselves to be proud Zionists.
2] The furthest I can go towards you , is to state that according to Zionism , this State is the only one on the planet where Jews are the majority , and therefore govern themselves, without nominal jurisdiction from non Jews.
So, the torah does not disagree with the above stated points [1a-1b-2] . Vehemently or non vehemently .
There is no proof for any disagreement at allYou are beyond silly for pretending otherwise.
.
.@hakatan
You pathetically imitate my post while bringing zero sources in attempting to portray my shitah as accepting an idol chv’sh.
The fact is and remains , that katan brought zero proof that Zionism is absolutely both heresy and idolatry, by logic and proof only, even without the gedolim saying so.According to katan , every form of Zionism believes in at least two things:
1. Judaism is a Nationality, not (only) a religion, and Zionism is the current manifestation of that Nationality..
2. The Zionist “State” is the Nation-State of that religion.the facts however speak for themselves.
1a] The Torah recognizes that Judaism is a nationality. Multiple times klal yisrael are being described with the moniker of ‘am’ . Which translates as ‘Nation’.
1b] I disagree that Zionism believes that they themselves are the sole manifestation of that nationality. I myself happen to know many Zionists who would clearly disagree with you on this point. And who consider themselves to be proud Zionists.
2] The furthest I can go towards you , is to state that according to Zionism , this State is the only one on the planet where Jews are the majority , and therefore govern themselves, without nominal jurisdiction from non Jews.
So, the torah does not disagree with the above stated points [1a-1b-2] . Vehemently or non vehemently .
There is no proof for any disagreement at allYou are beyond silly for pretending otherwise.
.
.@some jew
Did you get my message about definition of zionism ?….. Coupled with forceful suppression of internal dissent.
Anyone who dissented or merely was suspected of dissent ,was made to pay a very heavy price….
[yb]
—
Are you alluding to the way Satmar or Ponevezh treated dissent?
[menachem]
==================I was referring to false mashiach movements , who as part of their indoctrination tactics try to play the infallibility card.
As far as I know , none of the names you mention are playing the infallibility card, none have any aspirations to occupy the seat of our Redeemer, and none are suppressing dissent with a mashiach goal in mind.
All the controversies, arguments or fights which happened there, are ,as far I understand, arguments over real estate and finances. Nothing more.
I am surprised that you do not see this obvious difference.
The purpose of this argument between us is NOT to see who can throw more dirt on our opponents and thus emerge ‘victorious’.
The purpose is to understand the operandus modi of false mashiach movements, and to salvage from them whatever is still possible.
That’s the reason of the original question – is there a source for infallibility of the habad rebbi – anywhere ? From proofs from hazal to cold torah logic ?
Can you prove that the rebbi of the habad hasidim is infallible and cannot make a mistake ?
And , in absence of such proof , can you explain why the hasidim from habad are obstinately refusing to even entertain that possibility ?
They will do themselves, HKBH and the whole of klal yisrael an IMMENSE FAVOR for taking this option into account.
Klal yisrael will then be able to stop and eliminate any and all attempts by Xtians to pull unsuspecting victims into their net , by rightfully asking : if your rebbi can come back, so why can’t mine ???
.Think about all those posts with sincerity , and let me know when you changed your mind about meshihiyut in habad.
.@yammo
Thanks for your lucid reasoning.@ujm
Please share the names of any Gedolim, if any, who disagreed with the SR on the general issue of Zionism, aside from the issue of how or whether to interact with the State or vote in elections. And very specifically tell us which position he (or they) disagreed with.
[ujm]
=============1] Emrey Emet in osef mihtavim clearly disagrees with SR about zionism.
He writes that zhuyot in EY which tsionim extracted from the British and the League of Nations should not be protested or resisted , “ki yavo hatov mikol makom”
2] Karyane de’igrata – Steipler vol 1 – believing that the state is athalta degeula is NOT kfira. It is a mistake – but not kfira.
There are many many more.
.
@somejew
No problem.Zionism is – support for a homeland for Jews in order to better their lot.
There is a very similar letter in igrot hazon ish re appointing and accepting rabanut in the pre war vaad haklali of the tziyonim in erets yisrael.
Remember Chason Ish himself was an ardent supporter of withdrawing from the Tzioni vaad Haklali as soon as the British Mandate gave the option to do so.
But when confronted with the choice of having real talmidei hahamim appointed as rabanim within vaad haklali he supported membership within the vaad with all his might.
Read his eloquent defense/explanation for his shitah . Beautiful.
Seems that our case of EH is very similar.
.
Chazon Ish himself likened some kanna’im to the heroism of a soldier in the second world war , not abandoning his post , defending the positions of the first world war.Heroism , yes. Self sacrifice , yes.
But usefulness ??? Thats already another matter.
As long as they do not bother the soldiers manning their positions in the current war, we can afford to keep quiet ….
.This is not a deep question, like Menachem claimed at one point in this conversation.
This is a very simple question.
If there is a source, would you please spell it out ?
[yb to menachem]
—–Why do I say this is a theoretical philosophical question?
Because: Do you believe that Ravina and Rav Ashi were infallible? If you answer that you don’t, does that mean that in some instances you claim the the Gemara is wrong and mistaken, ch”v?
This is my point. The question of infalliblity is not necessarily tied to the question of obeying one’s rebbe.
P.S. I’m not trying to say that we listen to the Rebbe because he is an amora or something, don’t use that as a strawman. I am using the example of Gemara to show why the question of infalliblity is philosophical and unrelated to practical action.
[menachem to yb]
==================================================Your argument here is not to the point at all.
There is a huge practical difference whether your rebbi is infallible or not , as detailed at great length in previous posts.Remember , we are not talking here about an Amora where all of klal yisrael collectively and individually accepted that it’s impossible to argue on.
We are talking here about someone in our generation who is subject, like all other talmidei hahamim , to review of his peers based on torah logic and hazal.
Those other talmidei hahamim are OBLIGATED to speak up if and when they see something which is according to their view against the torah. Provided that they are higi’a le hora’a, as mentioned from rav moshe in his hakdama.Not his hidush , by the way. This has been pashut to all hahmei yisrael ledorotehem. Just that he articulated this davar pashut.
Obligated to speak up , means per force, that they are saying that your rebbi made a mistake . Even if and when they themselves happen to be a habad hasid.
Like the courageous stand the rosh yeshiva of torah vada’t, a habad hasid , but also a Jew, and hence still subject to Shulhan Aruch, took.
It ended up him costing his life , however.This is not merely “theoretical” as you are attempting to dismiss it. This is extremely practical .
Now let’s analyze this rosh yeshiva’s stance for a moment. Let’s try to see this from his viewpoint for a minute.
He definitely was a hasid and a talmid of your rebbi. Otherwise he would not be considered a habadi. I was told by habad insiders that he was one of the hashuvei habad. In the pictures of those times he is apparently seen seated quite close to your rebbi. He definitely held himself that he a lot to learn from your rebbi. Otherwise he would not come to all these farbrengens.
And nevertheless when he saw that your rebbi made a mistake he refused to be swept up with the tide .
So the question is – why can habad talmidei hahamim nowadays , not adopt a similar stance ?
We are continuing to learn from our rebbi, in all aspects.
We are still habad hasidim.But since subsequent events coupled with cold torah logic have proven our rebbi wrong in this one issue, we will respectfully say , like the age old tradition in klal yisrael,the following –
sorry but here , in our humble opinion, notwithstanding your greatness everywhere else, you made a mistake.
Not deep. Not theoretical.
Very simple.So, the question comes back . Is there a source , anywhere .
From torah logic or hazal that your rebbi is infallible ????If yes , could you or any other habad supporter , provide it ?
the CLAIM of Vayoel Moshe is that the author PROVES that Zionism is NESSESARILY kefira!
The long sefer labors tirelessly to prove the opposite from every angle possible, and the author spells out his every step as well as the practical halachik ramifications of the Torah teachings he lists. He says in his intro that the long maamarim are meant to be psak halacha, halacha l’massah vis a vis Zionism when it was published in the 1950s. The author followed up in doubling-down in his 1968 sefer explaining why the status has not changed and no one should be confused from the 6-day war.
IS ZIONISM IN ITSELF NECESSARILY KFIRA ?
That is the question.
[somejew]
———————————–
I have gone through most of vayoel Moshe and I have not seen any clear proof that zionism is inherently kfira.
He writes at great length and sometimes the main message can get lost like the proverbial tree in the forest.You seem such an enthusiastic proponent of the ‘zionism is necessarily kfira’ approach , that it should be easy for you to formulate in a few short sentences why this is necessarily so .
We are ready and waiting to hear your pearls.
@hakatan
You can engage in silly misrepresentations [or falsifications] of the position of the rest of the gedolim.
But it is indisputable that Zionism is not idolatry and heresy perse, and (therefore) of course not perse against the Torah, despite the nonsense cranked out by zealous emotion driven kana’im who are unable to distinguish between cold torah logic based on hard halahik facts on one side and divrei mussar ve’hit’orerut on the other.Just drop the idolatry argument already, and stop with the abysmally stupid meme that everyone holds of the “Zionism is heresy” fallacy , when the reality is that everyone holds that Zionism , while responsible for much mischief and evil , is inherently not idolatry and heresy.
Even Satmar , while talking the talk of the ‘Zionism is heresy’ fallacy , is not fully walking the walk of this fallacy.
Even they only use it as a divrei mussar vahit’orerut tool.You are silly for pretending otherwise.
.serious question [from somejew to aaq]
who are the “rabunim” you would want at such a meeting that are pushing Jews to vote, chalila, in WZO?
————-
Hrav SHMUEL KAMINETSKY shlita
Hrav AVRAHAM GURWITS shlita
Hrav SHMUEL FORST shlitaand impossible untill thiyat hametim
Hrav CHAIM KANIEVSKY zatsal
——————-
methinks that those people should be good enough “rabunim” even for someone on your level ..