Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Reminder
A] the following is somejew’s “psak” :
this is somejews language , copied and pasted :
In (very) short, that means that if goyim – chas v’shulem – threaten masses of jews, our kosher responses are: make peace, give gifts, run away, and pray to G-d. What we are not allowed to do is organize an army and physically fight the enemy.
[somejew]
——-
B] the following is maran habet yosefs psak in his halacha sefer the shulchan aruch :
halacha mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).
Will repeat again :
mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy.
—
This is the question mr somejew –
How do you fit A with B ?
.
.Reminder
A] the following is somejew’s “psak” :
this is somejews language , copied and pasted :
In (very) short, that means that if goyim – chas v’shulem – threaten masses of jews, our kosher responses are: make peace, give gifts, run away, and pray to G-d. What we are not allowed to do is organize an army and physically fight the enemy.
[somejew]
——-
B] the following is maran habet yosefs psak in his halacha sefer the shulchan aruch :
halacha mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).
Will repeat again :
mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy.
—
This is the question mr somejew –
How do you fit A with B ?
.
.Reminder
A] the following is somejew’s “psak” :
this is somejews language , copied and pasted :
In (very) short, that means that if goyim – chas v’shulem – threaten masses of jews, our kosher responses are: make peace, give gifts, run away, and pray to G-d. What we are not allowed to do is organize an army and physically fight the enemy.
[somejew]
——-
B] the following is maran habet yosefs psak in his halacha sefer the shulchan aruch :
halacha mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).
Will repeat again :
mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy.
—
This is the question mr somejew –
How do you fit A with B ?
.
.Reminder
A] the following is somejew’s “psak” :
this is somejews language , copied and pasted :
In (very) short, that means that if goyim – chas v’shulem – threaten masses of jews, our kosher responses are: make peace, give gifts, run away, and pray to G-d. What we are not allowed to do is organize an army and physically fight the enemy.
[somejew]
——-
B] the following is maran habet yosefs psak in his halacha sefer the shulchan aruch :
halacha mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).
Will repeat again :
mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy.
—
This is the question mr somejew –
How do you fit A with B ?
.
.you are right.
they are 2 different belief systems .
the problem is that one side hides it.
hides it behind feel good stories and feel good teachings.
it is important to feel good and to make other people feel good.
equally, however one should not fear the emet.
the truth as it is.
the facts as they are, without any sidestepping and without any other avoidance tricks.
they would earn trust if they could bring themselves to confront the facts .
confront them head on , with truth and candor .
and with courage.
it seems that they are so afraid of the facts , they run a mile whenever challenged.
.
.you asked about the rebbi of habad being mashiach ?
—first of all , there is absolutely no reason to assume that he is .
—second , there are clear proofs that he is not.
—third – according to habad long held belief , there is clear proof that he is not
—so – the only thing left for us to explore , is the following astounding fact.
belief in his supposed messiahship is widespread within the habadi circles.
whereas in non habadi circles [- the overwhelming majority of orthodox judaism] , this is non existent.
—
which begs the question – is this unreasonable phenomenon , engineered ?
or did this just ‘happen’ by itself ?
—
important query
.
.Reminder
A] the following is somejew’s “psak” :
this is somejews language , copied and pasted :
In (very) short, that means that if goyim – chas v’shulem – threaten masses of jews, our kosher responses are: make peace, give gifts, run away, and pray to G-d. What we are not allowed to do is organize an army and physically fight the enemy.
[somejew]
——-
B] the following is maran habet yosefs psak in his halacha sefer the shulchan aruch :
halacha mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).
Will repeat again :
mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy.
—
This is the question mr somejew –
How do you fit A with B ?
.
.Hello ?
@ somejew
Q is very clear .
So clear that I cannot understand what you dont understand.
You wrote that that the only recourse when threatened is running away giving presents or any shtadlanut besides for fighting.
Fighting is against the shavu’ot , AND EVEN PIKUACH NEFESH IS NOT DOCHEH THE SHAVU’OT.
Thats in short a summary of your writing.
And that last point which i put in bold , is THE ISSUE where you diverge from klal yisrael and all the talmidei hahamim and poskim.
—Now – shulhan aruch clearly disagrees wiyh you on that very point
Shulhan Aruch mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).
Will repeat again :
mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy
.
.and again:
… mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy ….
———————–As simple a proof as can be ….
.
.
Am waiting for a response .
.
.
.still waiting for a response to the following ???
—Shulhan Aruch mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).
Will repeat again :
mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy
.
.and again:
… mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy ….
.
Another indication three oaths are NOT lehalacha.
.
.Somejew and katan are fraudulently dreing a kop.
They all claim that its preferable to rather let millions of innocent yehudim die , than be over on their corrupted version of non existent halachik shavu’ot.
This THE line dividing them and the majority of klal yisrael.
You can find any other weasel words to get out of acknowledging this true and extremely important halachik schism between us.
But this schism exists .
And is liable to have far reaching repercussions.
They should go back to the root of their mistaken thinking and carefully retrace their halachik deliberations to make one hundred percent sure their reasoning is foolproof.
Otherwise they will be guilty of megaleh panim batorah shelo kehalacha and on top of that be guilty of being mafkir damam shel harabim.
.
Somejew and katan are fraudulently dreing a kop.
They all claim that its preferable to rather let millions of innocent yehudim die , than be over on their corrupted version of non existent halachik shavu’ot.
This THE line dividing them and the majority of klal yisrael.
You can find any other weasel words to get out of acknowledging this true and extremely important halachik schism between us.
But this schism exists .
And is liable to have far reaching repercussions.
They should go back to the root of their mistaken thinking and carefully retrace their halachik deliberations to make one hundred percent sure their reasoning is foolproof.
Otherwise they will be guilty of megaleh panim batorah shelo kehalacha and on top of that be guilty of being mafkir damam shel harabim.
.
.
.Satmar , somejew and katan are fraudulently dreing a kop.
They all claim that its preferable to rather let millions of innocent yehudim die , than be over on their corrupted version of non existent halachik shavu’ot.
This THE line dividing them and the majority of klal yisrael.
You can find any other weasel words to get out of acknowledging this true and extremely important halachik schism between us.
But this schism exists .
And is liable to have far reaching repercussions.
They should go back to the root of their mistaken thinking and carefully retrace their halachik deliberations to make one hundred percent sure their reasoning is foolproof.
Otherwise they will be guilty of megaleh panim batorah shelo kehalacha and on top of that be guilty of being mafkir damam shel harabim.
.
.
.The problem with their false meshihiyut is that this was a project very long in the making .
This was cunningly conceived and in a drip drip fashion administered.
Reminds me of climate change [referring both to the dissemination of its theory and the actual climate change]
Chinese expansion is also similar .
They all happen , gradually.
In minute increments.
You do not realize its really happening , all the while it is happening .
And then , suddenly it’s there .
Suddenly it’s there ,growing right under your nose …
Without you ever noticing ….
The decades came and went and suddenly there is a whole established mashiach fantasy , right across your fence.
.
.Wow.
.
.
.But r shach for sure held that habad nowadays, harbor substantial departures from our collective mesorah.
@ejwebb
thanks .
you are right – dismissing them entirely means losing something precious.
.
This blow up of the so called three oaths halachot, is a minority satmar shitah.
Which is overused for polemical purposes
And not to be taken literally .
Feel bad for katan and somejew who naively are taking it at face value.
Even SR himself did not consider this literal halacha .
Nor did he consider the medina as literal kefira
He used language and stirred emotions normally reserved for real halacha and real kefira in order to accomplish great things in distancing the haredi world from Zionism.
Period.
.
.katan is spouting rubbish again , as usual.
Why do you post things that are against the Torah and that are also baseless? Giluy panim baTorah sheLo kaHalacha is not a joking matter.
Three oaths are omitted by yad halacha [rambam] . tur and shulchan aruch .
Says Avnei Nezer [gadol haposkim before the first world war] is clear proof that it’s not lehalacha.
.
.
.
.
Besides the above , Shulhan Aruch mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).Will repeat again :
mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy
.
.and again:
… mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy ….
.
Another indication three oaths are NOT lehalacha.
.
.
.
Remember Mr. katan – Giluy panim baTorah sheLo kaHalacha is not a joking matter.
.
.Rav shach said clearly in public that the rebbi from habad was an apikorus.
He was very seriously against habad’s leader.
Question is only whether this was in his mind halachik kfira , apikorusut , or not .
If yes , then all meat shechted by habadi’s would according to him , automatically be treif, all gittin ve kidushin with habadi witnesses , invalid.
Which would have huge consequences.
My guess is that he did not consider them to be full fledged halachik apikorsim .
.
.
.The problem is – in my opinion at least – that they are good people , nice people.
With lousy theology.
If you attack them , there is a guaranteed backlash .
Such nice and good people do not deserve to be attacked .
And the backlash – again in my opinion at least – is correct.
They – as individuals , as human beings , do not deserve it .
The chochma is to differentiate between the people and their ideology.
Which happens to be true .
Wonderful people , with a substandard and self contradictory ideology , designed and packaged for mass brainstop.
Or mass brainwash , as one prefers.
.
..
.Negi’ot are just like blinkers.
A horse doesn’t perceive what outside his vision as reality.
The above seems the only way how a normal habadi does not see the inherent contradictions and inconsistencies in his own belief system .
If someone is noge’a bedavar , he is as good as blinkered .
Ki hashochad ye’aver …..
.Powerful.
.And ok maybe that’s not a nevuah so what???
Maybe it’s nevuah but a different level! So.. point??—
Its not halachik nevu’a .
but anonymous rabanim allegedly ‘paskened’ that it is ?
Come on …
.
.even according to sechels [non]claim re the actual and verifiable death of a well known lawyer from Petah Tiqva
, he still spouts the most illogical of rubbish
sechel :
I heard the kfar chabad wrote that [no one will be nizok] , but it was a mistake
—–
“the kfar habad” are fanatics [in their belief in their rebbi]
they should misquote their own rebbi ??
Yehoshua bin nun misquotes moshe rabenu ?
—
I remember the publications distributed by habad at the time – not the newspaper kfar habad.
Habad in EY , at the time , distributed every utterance of their rebbi in the streets .
Regularly.
As it happened .
It was very easy to follow.
Everyone took it as authentic at the time .
This was the shofar of the rebbi of the habadi’s .
.
.I clearly remember the promise that no yid in EY will be nizok.
He said , in addition ,also well publicized [and remembered by yours truly] that EY is the most safe place on the globe ….
—
Listen , mr sechel [and menachem , behind the door] , thats not the way to establish halachik nevu’a.
You cannot ‘cut and paste’ nevu’ot according to need.
You cannot claim retroactively that the part which [ostensibly] happened, was predicted and the part which clearly did not happen , was a ‘mistake’ .
Sounds more like a bad joke than like halachik prophesy ….
.
.
.
.sechel :
I wrote names of 2 respected rabbamim
Make all the fun you want, see rambam end of hilchos tzaraas
You remember a skud landing on someones head funny, maybe it was your head and you got mixed up—–
Which 2 respected rabanim ???
***************************
sechel :
“maybe it was your head and you got mixed up”
—
Is that really the best you can muster ?
Seems like all your bullets are gone …
menachems silence and your non answer point to the same direction ….
.
.Qiucck reminder of somejew’s post :
In (very) short, that means that if goyim – chas v’shulem – threaten masses of jews, our kosher responses are: make peace, give gifts, run away, and pray to G-d. What we are not allowed to do is organize an army and physically fight the enemy.
—Contrast that with maran bet yosef in shulhan aruch mentioned in my previous post .
Somejew is playing around with klal yisraels literal amud hahalacha here.
.
.
.You have not answered my question.
Shulhan Aruch permits , no ,- mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).
Will repeat again
mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy
and again
… mandates to …. physically fight against an enemy ….
That is from THE ultimate halacha sefer for all klal yisrael for the last 500 years.
.
.
.
.
.Besides my previous post re the guy from Petach Tiqva dying from a Scud.
Your rebbi “prophesized” that no one will even be nizok.
I remember .
I remember this very clearly . I followed , at the time, all utterances of your rebbi as they were coming out.
I read all so called “Dvar Malhut’s” as they were published.
Many people were wounded by the Scuds.
If your rebbi claimed to possess full halachik nevu’a – he is liable for mita bebet din as navi sheker.
Cf Rambam hilchot yesodeh hatorah [end] .
Where he clearly states
If the prospective navi fails even in one small detail of his prediction ,
we know for sure that he is sheker , and therefore hayav mitah .
.
.
.
.according to sechel
rabanim paskened that his rebbi is a navi.
Convinced that all paskeners are nothing more than third rate and all are habad “rabbanim”.
alma deshikrah.
.
.
.Sechel:
Example of the Rebbe’s nevuah is that no one will be killed from the skuds. I’m not a posek but many poskim signed that the rebbe has a din navi. Search Google for the psak din.
——
Lol.
I remember the guy in Petah Tiqva who died from a scud landing right on top of him.
He was known nationally as an anti religious lawyer who donated his services , pro bono, in any secular vs religion court case.
If your rebbi claimed to have fully halachik nevu’ah , then your rebbi is liable to mitat bet din as navi sheker.
Cf Rambam hilchot yesodeh hatorah [end] .
Where he clearly states
If the prospective navi fails even in one small detail of his prediction ,
we know for sure that he is sheker , and therefore hayav mitah .
.
.
..you conveneniently omitted to respond to clear proof that 3 shavu’ot are not binding lema’aseh .
From a clear psak in sh’a .
You continue to repeat the demonstrable fallacy that p/n are not docheh the shavu’ot ,
while the shavu’ot are not even binding at all lehalacha.
I call on somejew to stop ignoring clear psakim of rabban shel yisrael , maran habet yosef , just because of his mistaken fantasies .
.
.
.how do you explain smag that before eliyahu hanavi comes there will be no nevu’a anymore ?
is there proof that rambam [igret teiman] is holek on smag ?
By proof I mean , proof without any other way out ?
.
.
.
.Everyone knows that
The hazal type of nevu’a does not exist anymore .
That is a clear gemara.
Hazal type of nevu’a has clear and dramatic halachik ramifications. As opposed to non hazal type nevu’a.
For example –
1] a navi needs to tested .
if he fails the test , even by a hairsbreath , he is halachically considered a navi sheker .
And hayav be mitat beit din .
2] if he is a navi emet , any jew not listening to him is hayav mitah biyedei shamayim,
not something to be trifled with.
——
WHAT WAS THE REBBI OF THE HABAD HASIDIM thinking parshat shoftim 5751 ?
When he crowned himself as navi , that is .
Was he referring to non hazal nevu’a ?
Or to hazal nevua ?
.
.
.
.Why say that there is a machloket between rambam and smag ?
Afushei plugta lo mafshinan.
Smag says no nevua till eliyahu hanavih
rambam seems to say [as far as i remember] close before mashiach nevuah will return .
[would like a page number of rambam in igeret teiman if possible]
Because of Afushei plugta lo mafshinan , we should say that both agree that before eliyahu there is no nevu’a
and with coming of eliyahu and his nevu’a , rambams prediction will come true.
.
.
.hello ?
Hello Menachem ?
Are you there ?
.
A] It is clear to any orthodox community that even a fully meizid adherent to Z and simultaneously fully frum yehudi, ‘s
edut for a divorce or marriage is not invalidated because of his allegiance to Z .
So
per force – we can conclude that Z is halachically not heresy.
.
B] Can somejew pinpoint which of the 13 ikarim Z is contradicting and how so ?
Other than quotes by rabanim who sought to distance their flock from Z because of all the detrimental influence Z had.
Somejew clearly lumped Z together with Jews for j .
There is a huge difference between those 2 .
Belief in Jews for j is classified as halachik kfira, whereas
belief in Z is definitely not.
Huge and dramatic difference .
Divorce with fully frum Jews for j as edut
renders the resulting kids into mamzerim gmurim assur lavo bakahal lanetsach
whereas divorce with fully frum Z as edut
leaves the resulting children as ksheirei yichus lemehadrin,
.
.
.A] You have not answered my question.
Shulhan Aruch permits , no mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).
Thats not an agada sefer . [without a specific source – just maharal – without the possibility to look it up]
That is THE ultimate halacha sefer for all klal yisrael for the last 500 years.
.
.
An excellent proof by the way[according to you
– you claimed that it is prohibited to fight even when it is possible to save lives]
– from this shulchan aruch 329 , like the shut avnei nezer that the 3 shavu’ot are not binding lehalacha.
and clearly supported by the total omission of any issur of 3 shavu’ot , in yad halacha [leharambam] , tur and shulchan aruch.
.
B] There was a transport to Auschwitz, called the twentieth transport with an estimated one thousand innocent jews boxed in locked animal wagons.
there was one yid called lifshits who , together with two friends , simulated a red light , got the train to stop , opened fire at the german soldiers stationed at the end of the train , and under cover of fire opened the doors and helped many of these unfortunates escape.
Some of the escapees made it through the war and survived.
This lifshits was a year later, caught by the germans and executed as a member of the resistance.
My question to somejew – did lifshits transgress the 3 shavu’ot ?
He fought against the germans .
He did not run away .
He did not give presents.
He shot at and injured german soldiers.
According to your definition , he transgressed the 3 shavu’ot at that given time ….. . Correct or not ?
.
.
.
.
.yakov yosef a :
I suspect that the Divrei Yoel would not be pleased with that מהלך. He is on record, in internal Satmar sources, as having said that the lomdus of the Shalosh Shevuos is not for Goyim, and a Goy who claims to be opposed to ‘Zionism’ is really opposed to Jews…
—-
I hear that this is your private opinion.
On the other hand both nephews and mamshichim of Divrei Yoel actually kept quiet.
Both of of them , I would suspect are closer and therefore are more knowledgable about the real shita of the SR .
If it’s a tossup between you and them about what D’Y actually held , with all due respect , I would take their opinion over yours .
.
.
.
.
.Come on Menachem
Lets rehash it –
mag says clearly that there is no nevu’a untill elyahu hanavi.
He talks about nevu’a as chazal call it such.
That hazal type of nevu’a does not exist anymore .
That hazal type of nevu’a [again] has clear and dramatic halachik ramifications.
For example –
1] a navi needs to tested .
if he fails the test , even by a hairsbreath , he is halachically considered a navi sheker .
And hayav be mitat beit din .
2] if he is a navi emet , any jew not listening to him is hayav mitah biyedei shamayim,
not something to be trifled with.
——
Now lets face it – what type of navi did the late leader of habad claim to be , in his sicha of shoftim [5751] ?
The hazal type of navi ?
or the imitation of the hazal type of navi ?
.
.
.Ohhh
Menachem …
Shalom Aleichem !
Where have you been all this time ???
We have sooo many kushyot and you do have all the answers . Why have you not shared your intelligence and knowledge with us ??
Please , Menachem there is a huge backlog of unanswered questions . And an equally huge line of questions you [officially] answered , but really sidestepped.
Waiting to hear from you ….
With complete honesty and complete candidness, as is self understood …..
.
..
.You can only twist something if it exists first.
The impression katan is giving here that besides a broken record , there isn’t much more.
No answers to questions , no independent torah thinking , no understanding of ideas and putting principles into context, no sense of reality and the list goes on ….
.
.I am not in the business of judging other jews , not whether they are destined for olam haba , nor on anything else.
I only attempted to isolate the so called krumkeit of Z . and thereby arrive at a correct valuation of the extent of that krumkeit .
Thats all .
.
.
.Smag says clearly that there is no nevu’a untill elyahu hanavi.
He talks about nevu’a as chazal call it such.
That hazal type of nevu’a does not exist anymore .
That hazal type of nevu’a [again] has clear and dramatic halachik ramifications.
For example –
1] a navi needs to tested .
if he fails the test , even by a hairsbreath , he is halachically considered a navi sheker .
And hayav be mitat beit din .
2] if he is a navi emet , any jew not listening to him is hayav mitah biyedei shamayim,
not something to be trifled with.
——
Now lets face it – what type of navi did the late leader of habad claim to be , in his sicha of shoftim [5751] ?
The hazal type of navi ?
or the imitation of the hazal type of navi ?
I am under the impression that habad would answer this last question always differently .
Depending on the audience …..
For themselves , for their pnimi chinuch and own adherents they would say – this is the hazal type of nevu’a
But when confronted with ‘outsiders’ posing this very same question , the answer is , no this not the the real hazal type of nevu’a
.
.
.
.
.@yaakov yosef
yya:
Someone who starts a conversation among Yidden by asking for suggestions on what would be the best way to do something that בלי שום ספק would jeopardize millions of Jewish lives is not Satmar, he’s stam a troll or a ‘pyromaniac’. If a Goy would write the same thing he would clearly be an antisemite.
—–
Agree.
But , you write ” ……. is not satmar ”
I have to take issue here.
Fact is that the then -Senate Majority Leader , Sen Shumer [D/NY] in his Senate speech ,defending his vote for holding back from the IDF , certain essential US weaponry ,
quoted satmar ideology and constituents as backing.
This went past without any correction from satmar –
meaning that official satmar was happy that their name and their shita kdosha be used to withhold essential weapons to defend innocent yehudim in EY …
Here we have proof that ‘official satmar’
would definitely jeopardize millions of Jewish lives ….
.
.
.ujm :
Yaakov Yosef: You would, seriously, take Naftali Bennett, married to an open and proud mechallel Shabbos and lack of taharas hamispacha woman, even b’dieved, as an Eid?
—————————I see that many people are not ‘getting it’ .
The point of paslut for edut re divorce because of Z ,which I mentioned
is only considering the Z aspect ,
not the question of the persons general kiyum hamitsvot , which coud be lacking and be a separate and distinct cause of its own for paslut le’edut.
I want davka to isolate the problem of Z ideology …
is the Z ideology , on its own , enough cause to halachically invalidate an otherwise valid person ?
Think the answer is a clear no.
As opposed to the other real heresies where an otherwise fully frum believer in ‘j’ , would definitely be an invalid ed,
by sole virtue of adhering to that belief.
So whether Naftalie B does or does not adhere to taharat hamishpacha, seems totally irrelevant to this discussion.
.
.
.
.@yaakov Yosef
As with almost everything else you write, I find it hard to disagree with your most recent post.
However the main point I am making to somejew is :
You cannot equalize between xtianity and zionism IN THE LEVEL OF KFIRA inherent in both of those movements.
Or between communism and zionism for that matter.
Or between atheism , paganism , idol worship on one hand and Zionism on the other.
All those other movements and belief systems are heresies with clear HALACHIC repercussions.
Whereas Z ,even according to those very same rabanim labeling Z as a heresy , has no clear halachik repercussions.
Anyone honest , has to agree with this observation, notwithstanding his righteous anger at the real destruction Z has wrought upon religion .
—
Besides I have not yet heard specifically why a fully frum jew , living in our generation, advocating for the continued existence and welfare of the state untill mashiachs arrival ,
could be accused of anything heretical .
Could anyone please pinpoint in what way does the continued existence and welfare of the state contradict the torah ?
If they will – validly – point towards the many anti torah activities the state engages in .
Then the answer should be al pi torah that we advocate for the cessation of those activities.Simple.
.
.somejew:
In (very) short, that means that if goyim – chas v’shulem – threaten masses of jews, our kosher responses are: make peace, give gifts, run away, and pray to G-d. What we are not allowed to do is organize an army and physically fight the enemy.
There is a lot more to say about both sides of the mutar/assur of the 3 shevios, but the foundational concept is as above. One cannot fight the non-Jews with violence because of pekiach nefesh, and that is both explicitly stated by Maharal but also blatantly obvious in context of the shevios that are fundamentally about dealing with the dangers of gulis (galus).
————
Shulhan Aruch permits , no mandates , violating Shabbos to physically fight against an enemy that attempts to seize even ‘kash vateven’ —since it begins with kash and ends with lives (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 329).
Thats not an agada sefer . [without a specific source – just maharal – without the possibility to look it up]
That is THE ultimate halacha sefer for all klal yisrael for the last 500 years.
.
.
An excellent proof by the way [according to you] – like the shut avnei nezer that the 3 shavu’ot are not binding lehalacha.
.
.