Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
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
.
the blame of early zionists going OTD is not to laid at door of the rabbanim
it is where it rightfully belongs – at the door of those zionists themselves
you are supporting revision of real history
.
.Nu
mr somejew
waiting .
three separate proofs not that halacha is not like maharal
expect three separate answers
thanks
1] sh’ a OC 329 mandates yotsin aleihen bikli zayin ,meaning
you go and fight them with weapons.
2] sh’a YD 156 clearly states that any other avera besides the three hamurot , meaning
all other averot [including supposed oaths] yaavor veal yehareig , because pikuach nefesh is doche all issurim , meaning
you go, fight and save lives
3] supposed issur of oaths are never mentioned anywhere in sh’a , not in OC , not in YD , not in EH, and not in CM., meaning
there is no issur to fight in the first place
Three clear proofs that sh’a plus rama plus all nosei keilim rule not like maharal [which is anyway mentioned in a non halachik sefer]
/
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 ….
,
,The Chazon Ish himself has in his Maaseh Ish that an apikores nowadays is one that either celebrates the Zionist “independence” day
wow
what volume
which page please
thanks
@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
.
.you write :
Age doesn’t make a practical difference. It is forbidden to put one’s self in a position of being shmaded and all three of the gimmel chamuros. They are yehareig viAl Yaavor.
—I personally know many people who served in IDF and were not shmadded at all .
So the original question comes back -:
katan permitted organized self defense in galut to save lives
but he rejected IDF because it is a shmad army
accordingly , what happens to bal tshuva who is a previous member of IDF and is now called to serve
he is not impressionable as he is older now
and knows he can withstand the tests how terrible they may be
q is
should he abstain from enlisting bichlal, even though he is needed for defensive operations only [eg Arrow anti missile unit]
and he knows objectively that there is no replacement for himor should he enlist because of pikuach nefesh
.
.
.
.
could you answer this question ?with the reasons .
.
.
think we deserve to get clarity in to the exact positions of the commenters …====
thanks mr katan
would like a full answer please
.
.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.
.
.you make me laugh
Stalin also held that he had a “conscience and a good connection to right and wrong’
plenty of others considered themselves as the above
and rivers of innocent blood and suffering resulted
.
.s/j = somejew
p/n = pikuach nefesh
I dont understand
is the moetset of aguda from 1937 not on record as publicly accepting the Peel Commission proposal of dividing the Land between Jewish and Arab States ?
didn’t the sages who were members of said mo’etset know about the gmara in ktubot re the oaths ?
.
.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 …..
..
I see katan did not grasp the essence of the avnei nezer ‘s shita.
he says [am repeating myself] that
transgression of the oaths are NOT the reason for any punishment at all
the punishment is for the disconnection from HKBH
transgression of the oaths is merely a SYMPTOM of this disconnection
so, the discussion should really center on the disconnection, which is the SOURCE of the problem
you can rail against the symptom as much as you want
but as long as you do not fix the source , you have not accomplished anything
.
.it’s equally clear that pikuach nefesh will for sure be doche the oaths
as according to avnei nezer there is no halachic value to the oaths whatsoever [he says this very clearly]
whereas the hiyuv to act bimkom pikuach nefesh is a foundational value in halacha
so much so that it is docheh the overwhelming majority of the torah.
.
.
think about this for a second – or a few minutes rather – before you react
.
.
.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.
.
..
@non political
you are right
I should have addressed this to sechel
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 rishonimRAMBAM 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.
.
.Nu…
@qwerty
@non politicalThe 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
.
.s/j:
you seem to be blissfully ignorant that the shalosh shavios are all specifically limits to Jewish action in the face of dinei nafashos. i.e. they all specifically tell us what we are NOT allowed to do to save Jewish lives from the difficulty of gulis.—
not muchrach .
supposed issur of the oaths could be in the face of other galut hardships , not necessarily p/n ones
there are plenty of other ones
or even without any hardships , just because they want to return to EY
.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
.
..
As I told s/j numerous times
1] sh’ a OC 329 mandates yotsin aleihen bikli zayin ,meaning
you go and fight them with weapons.
2] sh’a YD 156 clearly states that any other avera besides the three hamurot , meaning
all other averot [including supposed oaths] yaavor veal yehareig , because pikuach nefesh is doche all issurim , meaning
you go, fight and save lives
3] supposed issur of oaths are never mentioned anywhere in sh’a , not in OC , not in YD , not in EH, and not in CM., meaning
there is no issur to fight in the first place
Three clear proofs that sh’a plus rama plus all nosei keilim disagree with maharal [mentioned in a non halachik sefer]
.in any other area of halacha that means a clear
winning – hands down .
each proof by itself stands
they do not need each other
in other words
full proof , times three
.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
.
.yb:
No, it says plainly – do it. Fight . Save the people .
I there would be a caveat , SHULHAN ARUCH or one of the other commentators would have said : STOP , only if this is bir’shut hamelechwhy did not anyone say one word ????
—
sj:
no, it says plainly that carrying weapons is not chilil shabbos. at no point does SA tell Jews to fight.=================
use your sechel .
if there is reason to be mehalal shabat its p/n
thats pashut , so
its pashut one is required to fight , and
that’s the language ‘yotsin aleihen bichei zayan’
we should go out and fight them with weapons , in sh’a hilch shabat 329 from eiruvin 45A
.@ 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 writingsanyone 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
.
shulhan aruch siman kaf nun vav YD
clearly rules that any mitsva besides the three hamurot is ya’avor ve’al yehareig ,
not like maharal which you quoted
have not heard or seen any topic in halacha where we take a maharal in hagada lema’aseh against a psak in sh’a , tur without holek.
everywhere we rule like the established poskim in klal yisrael
why in pikuach nefesh HACHAMUR ME’OD , are you deviating ???
.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 LEKULAmeaning 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
.
..
.
katan’s rantings are nothing more than a minority and distorted viewof torah ,
of reality, and
of the application of torah to reality
..
The whole mashiach / pseudo navi business is one big joke andeven the L apologists know it
.Hello ?
.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 ….
.Again, I’m not expecting you or anyone to agree with my assertations. But, I expect you to adopt the teachings of our universally accepted Gedolim like the Maharal and certainly the Talmud itself as pure unadulterated Toras Moshe m’Sinai. If you don’t understand something, come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped.
===
you seem to get mixed up here
what was my claim ?
that many gdolim and talmidei hahamim disagree with your assertions and that therefore your assertions that “oaths are undisputed halacha” are plain incorrect.
no one ever said that chazal chvsh is not ‘pure unadulterated Toras Moshe m’Sinai’.
why do you have this ga’ava dik approach of “If you don’t understand something, come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped.”
maybe it is you who has not grasped what rov talmidei hahamim grasped already ?
maybe it is YOU who should come to it with the humility of someone who know that the teacher is correct, but the student simply hasn’t yet grasped ?
—
we are arguing about the proper pshat and how to apply it to one of the biggest problems of our timewhy all those condescending remarks ?
why insinuate that your debater is a kofer ?
is it because you are running out of “on topic real arguments” directly relating to the subject at hand ?
—
you should know – I may write in strong terms , but always aim at the subject at hand
I may employ rhetoric , but always highlighting the subject which at the center of the debate.
and not baseless insinuations that you are a kofer ….
.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
.
.[somejew to yb]
in closing, I would point you to learn Vayoel Moshe and realize that in the Torah world – meaning in accepted Torah publications – there is no one cholek on his explanations of the sources he brings there—
this argument you mentioned already – or someone else of your allies like katan or ujm.
apparently , it goes as follows : because there supposedly are no refutations published to vayoel moshe, the halacha stays like him.
this is, however, a total fallacy .
you for sure know and heard about the radziner rebbi , the ba’al hatchelet , who claimed he rediscovered the original hilazon .
he wrote about it, publicized his findings and promoted the use of this techelet dye.
he was known as a formidable talmid haham and tsadiq
no publication was to my knowledge ever published refuting his claims
according to your reasoning , his discovery remains halacha psuka for klal yisrael.
is anyone accepting such a claim ???
the fact is and remains that klal yisrael ,without publicizing refutations , rejected his shita.
he was and remains a formidable t’ch and tsadiq
but his shita was and still is rejected
satmar rave is no different
the whole world read his vayoel moshe
all talmidei hahamim and rabanim read it
and did not accept his claims
so is this considered as ‘accepted halacha’ ?
definitely not.
.
.somejew to yb:
…regarding the Avnei Nezer and his point about “not haluche” is a language also used by Satmar Rebbe in Vayoel Moshe to describe the sugya.
But, that doesn’t mean that those gedolimm where – chas v’shulem – kofer in Toras Moshe, rather it means something different than you think …
—who mentions bichlal ‘kofer betorat moshe here ?
how does that come in to the picture at all ?
—
not halacha means that – it does not have the weight of halacha.
chazal say a person should not get angry
chazal also say one should not 4 amot in reshut harabimboth are chazal
one is halacha
one is notbig difference between the two
the oaths according to avnei nezer and rambam and sh’a and tur and m’b
are like the getting angry – not like the carrying 4 amot.to point that out is kfira ????
come on … and on top of that …
to be accused of not posting in good faith ???.
.@somejew
…regarding the Avnei Nezer and his point about “not haluche” is a language also used by Satmar Rebbe in Vayoel Moshe to describe the sugya …—
on which page ?
.re the post on a different thread, you referred to as an answer
I will copy and paste it here.
====================================================
again, the shavuos are generally about our obligation to live under non-jewish rule and the issur to rebel against their government and its rulership. This includes, as stated by the Maharal and others, even at threat of death.There is a separate obligation to save one’s life in the face of a random non-Jew or non-Jews who are being violent. This would have nothing to do with the Three Shevios.
Up to here, is everything clear? – because this is basic basics of thinking ….
=======================================================You originally prohibited any organized fighting in any circumstance, even when it saves lives , because of the oaths
so I brought the sh’a hilch shabbat based on gm eruvin mandating organised fighting to save lives
organised fighting is mandated even when in our own locality there is no possibility for pikuach nefesh
nevertheless when the land will be noche lehikaveshmeaning the land behind our locality will be conquered easier and quicker if our city would fall
and in the places behind us there might be pikuach nefeshone is mandated to organize fighters to defend our locality
because of the pikuach nefesh of the places behind us.which proves that bimkom p/n organized fighting is mandated
it does not state in gemara eiruvin
nor in the sh’a hilch shabbat
any other preconditioni.e. that organised fighting to save people from p/n , would need the approval of the relevant authorities.
No, it says plainly – do it. Fight . Save the people .
I there would be a caveat , SHULHAN ARUCH or one of the other commentators would have said : STOP , only if this is bir’shut hamelechwhy did not anyone say one word ????
.
Al korchach that p/n is doche anything which is not part of the hamurot.
.
.
have not heard anything from somjew katan or ujm yet….as mentioned your unbridled kefira makes me reluctant to continue the conversation. i long ago lost belief that you are here in good faith, particularly because of your bullying style, spamming of multiple threads, and “forgetting” or “ignoring” already answered questions …
—
its not kfira nor is it unbridled kfira.
I responded to all your charges that I am chv’sh writing kfira and
you did not bring any to the point response to my responses, so
you should not complain about any kfiraits not spamming of multiple threads
it is rather responses to what you ,katan and ujm wrote on multiple threadsbtw. those opening new threads are doing a disservice because it is easier to concentrate on one thread
I am not bullying , I am just attempting to lay out the relevant arguments in an articulate manner
[btw that’s what satmar rave zatsal would probably say to those talimidei hahamim who felt bullied by his emotional approach to this matter and therefore kept quiet and did not want to argue with him]re forgetting or ignoring your answers , it is clear to anyone going through the back and forth of our arguments , that you sidestepped most of my questions , while as far as I can see, I answered all of yours.
We should go through the whole conversation , gather all our respective claims and answers , and
you will see that yours are paruts merubeh al ha’omed ….
..
@non political
yes he did
parshat shoftim 5751
I still remember this from when it happened
the big problem is the verification …
at the time kfar habad and associated publications claimed that his “prophesy” that no one will be harmed in EY and that EY is the safest place in the world qualifies as an accomplished verification.
everyone knows now that this was incorrect.
according to rambam hilchot yesodei hatora
which incidentally they themselves were pointing to
when [it suited him/them]
he made the original claim
according to the very same rambam
in the very same halachot
an aspiring navi who predicts the future and
is off by even one small detail
is established as a vadai navi sheker
and therefore is hayav mitah bebeit din
i think that any further discussion of him being a navi
is totally superfluous
.
.re the claim that the oaths are undisputed halacha as claimed by somejew , katan and ujm ….
while avnei nezer clearly points to the omission of the oaths from mishne torah and shulhan aruch
that they are not lehalacha
———
Seems there are two dictionaries .
one explains the word undisputed as ‘undisputed’
the other explains undisputed as ………. ?
.
.
seems that somejew , katan and ujm are hasidim of the second dictionary …..
.
.katan permitted organized self defense in galut to save lives
but he rejected IDF because it is a shmad army
accordingly , what happens to bal tshuva who is a previous member of IDF and is now called to serve
he is not impressionable as he is older now
and knows he can withstand the tests how terrible they may be
q is
should he abstain from enlisting bichlal even though he is needed for defensive operations only [eg Arrow anti missile unit]
and he knows objectively that there is no replacement for himor should he enlist because of pikuach nefesh
.
.
.
.
could you answer this question ?with the reasons .
.
.
think we deserve to get clarity in to the exact positions of the commenters …
.somejew to yb:
…. No Jewish person who cares about Jewish lives would ask for MORE zionism in response to the violence that zionism has caused!….—
The above logic does not make any sense at all and would be roundly rejected in any generation , from any beit hora’a around the globe
think about it
replace the word zionism with any other avera
for example hilul shabat –
the equivalent would be as follows
and you will see the absurdity straight away
the mafia came and organised mass hilul shabat r’l
as a result of this mass hilul shabat there are mass jewish wounded r’l
hatsole should not be mehalel shabat to save those wounded
because
“No Jewish person who cares about Jewish lives would ask for MORE hiliul shabat in response to the wounded that hilul shabat has caused….”
this would be the height of absurdity.
once pikuach nefesh is doche the issur , then there is no avera !!!!!
it is a mitsva !!!! not an avera.
Thats why hatsole will be mehalel shabat to save the temimim who were wounded because of the mafia’s hilul shabat
and ONLY BRACHA will result from hatsole’s hilul shabat
which was a mitsva gedola .
same here
the mafia tsionim caused pikuach nefesh while and because they were over on the issur of the oaths
[according to somejews possibly mistaken reasoning]
if pikuach nefesh is doche the oaths , then this is like pikuach nefesh being docheh shabat
which turns the hilul shabat into a mitsva which brings only beracha
likewise pikuach nefesh turns the hikul oaths in to bracha
and no harm will befall anyone because of this mitsva.
.think this is simple and should be agreed on by any normal and logical person .
.
.Looked in shulhan aruch and tur think YD siman 156
as clear as day
only 3 averot are yehareig ve’al yaavor
ALL OTHERS ARE YAAVOR VEAL YEHAREIG
including the so called oaths
I must say that you are getting me angry
you appear as someone who values torah above all
and when it comes to this extremely important halachic issue of pikuach nefesh
you suddenly depart in a very radical way from centuries established practice
of paskaning first and foremost with the established halacha sefarim like tur and shulhan aruch
and revert to agada sefarim AGAINST shulhan aruch !?!
.
.its in sefer smag where he speaks about the mitzvot asseh
one of gdolei harishonim
clearly there – the last nevi’im were the trei asar.
after them there will be no nevu’a.
.
@somejew
…. Dismantling the Zionist state, may it happen soon, does not mean anything more that passing on control to any other self-identifying non-Jewish governance. This could be the USA, the UN, Jordan, or Hamas. I’m not intending to push my own opinions on what is preferred, I am only intending to point out the obvious reality that if the residents of Israel all wanted to give up their state, there are many relatively peaceful pathways to ….—
Absolute hogwash .
I have not heard bigger shtuyot than this comment in a long time.USA ?
How many soldiers are the US willing to sacrifice for the big ‘merit’ to govern one of the most volatile places on earth ?
I remember how one or two attacks by hezbollah got the mighty US soldiers packing from Lebanon in 1983.
—
The UN ?they were meant to guarantee the demilitarisation of Sinai after 1956. Right ?
how much resistance did they put up when threatened by Nasser ?
they folded without a shot being fired .
—
Jordan ?
how many of the 37 shuls left in the jewish quarter of the old city in 1948 were still intact when the Jews returned after 1967 ?
how many jewish residents still lived in the old city during that period ?
do you really think Jordan would be able to suppress Hamas from their stated aim to drive out every Jew who cannot prove that his ancestors lived in Palestine before 1917 ?
—
Last but least – the most spectacular of all of your stupid claimsHamas ?
you are putting the fox literally in charge of the hen house.
any further comment is totally superfluous
—
schar va’onesh is only AFTER we do all possible to avert pikuach nefesh
never heard hatsalah saying anything like your krumme svarot.
.
.you state in your post that pikuach nefesh is not docheh the so called issur of the oaths .
1] what is your source
2] why doesnt it say in hazal that there are 4 hamurot – a’z , g’a shf’d and the oaths ?
3] sh’a when mentioning the three hamurot, OMITS ANY MENTION of the oaths . why is this not proof that pikuach nefesh is not docheh the oaths ?
for the sake of honesty , you and your compatriots ujm and katan should stop quoting a so called ” universal all poskim agreement that the shavu’ot are bnding lahalacha ” .
Dismissing AVNEI NEZER who is basing himself on omission of yad hachazaka, tur and shulhan aruch , is dishonest.
.
Katan went on a holiday ?
.somejew to yb :
You push the zionist propaganda that the Arab world want to mass murder all Jews while conveniently ignoring the clear truth that this fear is a direct explicit result of Zionist political activity in the region, turning our traditional friends and supporters in the Muslim world into our enemies. I can’t know what ‘s in the hearts of those non-Jewish nations, but the words they say align with historical precedence that they only have issue with zionists, not (per se) Jews.
===
Your claims here seem to come from another planet.
Ask the Druze about the reliability of what comes out of Arab Leaders mouths.
Ask the Alawites .
Ask the Kurds.
Ask the Yazidi’s.
Ask the xtians .
The Hamas supporters in Europe claim that the jews will have to choose between the coffin and suitcase.
Thats what they say now.
And what will happen if there [for some silly technical reason] is no option of suitcase ?
And what will the average Arab do when his leader is overthrown and there is no obvious replacement ?
Who do you speak to then ?
===
The real reason you do not take any of this into account is like I wrote:
According to you the whole existence of IDF is yehareig ve’al yaavor, meaning that even if [chvsh] millions of innocents would be barbarically slaughtered , you still would close down the IDF .
So thats why you have the liberty to come up with total nonsensical non solutions .
You anyway ARE NOT CARRYING THE RESPONSIBILTY OF PIKUACH NEFESH on your shoulders .
This is crystal clear from your whole approach .
And on top of it, we heard it from your own mouth , claiming to rely on some [still] source less agadic maharal , contradicting clear poskim clearly traced back to gemara without holek , and poskim without any preconditions.
So this whole discussion , according to you, is anyway totally irrelevant !
—
Summary :
one side is attempting to have real responsible pikuach nefesh discussion based on cold reality as it is now
while
the other side has bekalut da’at dismissed the pikuach nefesh side of it and therefore comes up with clear flippant theories [supposedly based on long gone history] on which the originator himself would not dream to rely on if it would pertain to his very own little daughter’s health and wellbeing.
—
somejew has not yet answered how A fits with B …
.
.somejew to yb :
You push the zionist propaganda that the Arab world want to mass murder all Jews while conveniently ignoring the clear truth that this fear is a direct explicit result of Zionist political activity in the region, turning our traditional friends and supporters in the Muslim world into our enemies. I can’t know what ‘s in the hearts of those non-Jewish nations, but the words they say align with historical precedence that they only have issue with zionists, not (per se) Jews.
===
Your claims here seem to come from another planet.
Ask the Druze about the reliability of what comes out of Arab Leaders mouths.
Ask the Alawites .
Ask the Kurds.
Ask the Yazidi’s.
Ask the xtians .
The Hamas supporters in Europe claim that the jews will have to choose between the coffin and suitcase.
Thats what they say now.
And what will happen if there [for some silly technical reason] is no option of suitcase ?
And what will the average Arab do when his leader is overthrown and there is no obvious replacement ?
Who do you speak to then ?
===
The real reason you do not take any of this into account is like I wrote:
According to you the whole existence of IDF is yehareig ve’al yaavor, meaning that even if [chvsh] millions of innocents would be barbarically slaughtered , you still would close down the IDF .
So thats why you have the liberty to come up with total nonsensical non solutions .
You anyway ARE NOT CARRYING THE RESPONSIBILTY OF PIKUACH NEFESH on your shoulders .
This is crystal clear from your whole approach .
And on top of it, we heard it from your own mouth , claiming to rely on some [still] source less agadic maharal , contradicting clear poskim clearly traced back to gemara without holek , and poskim without any preconditions.
So this whole discussion , according to you, is anyway totally irrelevant !
—
Summary :
one side is attempting to have real responsible pikuach nefesh discussion based on cold reality as it is now
while
the other side has bekalut da’at dismissed the pikuach nefesh side of it and therefore comes up with clear flippant theories [supposedly based on long gone history] on which the originator himself would not dream to rely on if it would pertain to his very own little daughter’s health and wellbeing.
.
.