Jewish Forum & Discussions - Chabad Talk  

Go Back   Jewish Forum & Discussions - Chabad Talk > Torah and Judaism > Yiddishkeit > Eretz Yisrael - Israel

Reply
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 1.00 average. Display Modes
Unread 05-12-2007, 12:43 PM   #1
noahidelaws
Executive Platinum Member
 
noahidelaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,479
the Rebbe's Opposition to Yom Yerushalayim

Le'to'eles horabim: People should know that the Rebbe opposed the zionist holiday of Yom Yerushalayim,
Quote:
"יום ירושלים" כיום חג?
"הרי זה היום שבו שוחררה ירושלים עיה"ק ע"י בנינו המסורים, ומה בכך שיהיה יום הודיה?" הרב יעקב הלוי הורוביץ במאמר מיוחד (חצי שיעור)
הרב יעקב הלוי הורוביץ

ב"פרדס חב"ד" גל' 11 הבאתי בירור בשיטת כ"ק אדמו"ר נשיא דורנו בענין כ"ח באייר - האם יש לציינו כיום חג: "יום ירושלים", ושם נתבאר בארוכה שהחגיגה שעושים ביום הזה (אלו שחוגגים אותו) לכבוד "ירושלים המאוחדת" או "ירושלים השלימה" היא חגיגה ציונית לאומית במהותה, וכי הרבי - בעקבות רבותינו הקדושים כ"ק אדמו"ר מהורש"ב וכ"ק אדמו"ר מהוריי"צ (נשיאי חב"ד בתקופה המקבילה להתייסדות הציונות, שבאה לעולם בתקופת מאה השנים האחרונות), ששללו את הציונות (החילונית וגם הדתית) בתכלית - לא יכל להסכים לחגיגה ביום זה. שכן כמבואר במאמר הנ"ל בארוכה, כל מהותו, אופיו ונשמתו של היום - הריהו לאומיות (חילונית או (בעיקר) דתית). אבל מהבחינה היהודית המקורית לא אירע שום דבר מיוחד ביום הזה, ואנו ממשיכים לחכות ולצפות למשיח צדקנו שהוא, ורק הוא, יביאנו לשלימות האמיתית, ירושלים השלימה (בלי מרכאות( ובנין המקדש על מכונו (לא "שחרור הכותל") כשיוליכנו לגאולה האמיתית והשלימה בקרוב ממש. עיי"ש.

אלא שתחילה כדי למנוע אי הבנות והסתבכות ב"דקויות" של הענין, דומה שלא יהא זה מיותר לחזור ולסקור בקצרה את נקודת הענין שהוסבר במאמר הנ"ל:

במאמר הנ"ל התבארה שיטת כ"ק אדמו"ר נשיא דורנו ע"פ הידוע שהרבי לא נהג בעצמו, ולא הורה לאחרים לנהוג, שום דבר מיוחד ביום הזה (לא אמירת הלל לא עם ברכה ולא בלי ברכה ואף לא אי אמירת תחנון ובודאי שלא שום טקס חילוני), ואף לא איזכר אותו בשום פעם ובשום צורה. הוא לא מצא לנכון "לנדב" לכבודו איזו שיחה או התייחסות. פשוט - התעלמות מוחלטת.

אף שלכאורה הדבר אומר דרשני, שכן לכאורה זהו באמת "היום שבו שוחררה ירושלים עיה"ק ע"י בנינו המסורים" (כלשון הודעת הרבנות הראשית בקריאתה לציבור לציין את היום הזה כיום מיוחד להודאה לה' על נפלאותיו בהחזירו לנו את ירושלים), ומה רע בכך אם הוא יהיה "בכל שנה ושנה יום הודיה ותפילה". הרי ירושלים היא באמת עיר הקודש והמקדש, ואין צורך להכביר מלים על כך שהרבי באמת אחז מאד מקדושתה. וכן שחרור הכותל המערבי מיד אויבינו שארע ביום הזה, שהביא לכך שעכשיו יכולים לגשת אל הכותל שריד בית מקדשנו, ולשפוך שם שיח לפני ה', בודאי הוא דבר חשוב. וכן זה שבנינו המסורים מסרו את נפשם עליה גם זה אינו דבר של מה בכך, כידוע ומפורסם היחס החם והאוהד של הרבי לחיילים שמחרפים נפשם להגנת יהודים. וא"כ אינו מובן, מדוע הרבי גזר על עצמו שתיקה והתעלמות מוחלטת מהיום הזה?

ונתבאר שם כי המפתח להבנת הענין תלוי בשתי התייחסויות של הרבי אחת בכתב ואחת בעל פה שזכינו להן בשתי הזדמנויות. בהזדמנות אחת (שיחת שבת פרשת מסעי ה'תשכ"ז), התייחס הרבי בצורה גלויה וישירה לנושא זה, וגילה בו את דעתו בצורה שאינה משתמעת לשתי פנים, וכה היו דבריו[1]:

"ח"ו לא יעלה על הדעת לקבוע את יום הנצחון כיום-טוב באמירת הלל וכו', שלזה אין שום מקום. ובפרט ע"פ המבואר בקבלה שהמועדים מכוונים כנגד הספירות, ג' הרגלים הם כנגד ג' האבות אברהם יצחק ויעקב חג"ת וכו' (כאן בא פירוט כיצד המועדים מכוונים כנגד הספירות. ולאחר מכן סיכם, ולפ"ז פשוט שאסור להוסיף יום-טוב.

ואפילו חג הגאולה י"ב תמוז שבו היתה גאולה כללית, אעפ"כ לא עלה על דעת אדם מעולם לקובעו כיו"ט ולומר בו הלל עם ברכה או אפילו בלי ברכה! והוא הדין לענין המאורעות שארעו בזמן האחרון - אין לתקן ולקבוע בהם יו"ט ח"ו! ואע"פ שמצינו כמה גדולים שהנהיגו לבני ביתם ולזרעם אחריהם לעשות יו"ט ביום שנעשה להם נס, אמנם זהו רק לענין שיתבוננו בחסדי המקום שעשה להם . . אבל לא יו"ט כפשוטו.

וכן גם בנוגע לחג הגאולה י"ב תמוז, כתב כ"ק מו"ח אדמו"ר במכתבו הידוע, בפירוש כיצד ובמה יש לנהוג בו יו"ט: שיעשו התוועדות להתעוררות והתחזקות בהפצת התורה והיהדות, ולהפיץ את זה בכל אתר ואתר - שבזה מתבטאת ההודאה, ועד"ז הוא גם בנוגע למאורעות שארעו לאחרונה ...".

כאסמכתא נוספת לשיטתו של הרבי בזה הובא במאמר הנ"ל מענה הרבי משנת תשכ"ח, לאחר הנצחון במלחמת ששת הימים - אף שנושאו העיקרי הוא יום העצמאות אך בכחו לשפוך אור גם על נושאנו - וז"ל[2]:

"אין מקום בשנה זו דוקא, וגם לאחר הנצחון של מלחמת ששת הימים, לשנות את ההנהגה ביום העצמאות [=היינו, שאלה שלא נהגו לחגוג אותו יום בשנים קודמות אין סיבה שעכשיו ישנו את הנהגתם ויחגגוהו], ואין גם לבסס את השקפת השמחה [=כלומר, לא רק שאין להסחף באותו יום במעגלי שמחה וריקודים הנובעים מהרגש שבלב, אלא שגם אין לתת לשמחה זו מקום בהשקפת השכל ולבאר לעצמו (או לזולת) את חשיבות הענין מבחינה הגיונית ושכלית קרה] - שהרי לאחר נסים כה גלויים, ביטוי השמחה היה צריך להיות בתוספת בעניני מחולל הנסים - תורה וקדושה.

ורואים כי אדרבה, גדלה ההרגשה של "כחי ועוצם ידי" (ואפילו לא מדגישים כ"כ המס"נ של הנלחמים). ולמרות כי גם הקצינים הגבוהים הודו כי "יד ה' היתה זאת"; וכל אחד הרגיש בזה, ובמיוחד ראשי הצבא שידעו את הכחות שמכל צד ואת הסכויים שע"פ טבע [=היינו, שבדרך הטבע לא היה שום סכוי לנצח במלחמה] הסותרים את המציאות של תוצאות המלחמה ואופנן [=היינו, שבפועל הי' נצחון נסי באופן שאין לו שום אחיזה בדרך הטבע] - אך ביטוי השמחה מוכיח את ההיפך הגמור [=היינו, שהאופן שבו מציינים ומבטאים את השמחה ברשות הרבים אין בו כדי להגביר את הזיקה (והביטול) של ישראל לאביהם שבשמים, אלא להיפך לחזק את רגש הישות והפירוד]...

ובמיוחד, כי גם אלו שנהגו לומר הלל לא היו צריכים לברך עליו, וכן ברכת ק[י]דוש ועוד, והרי אלו ברכות לבטלה. וי"ל אפילו בברכת שהחיינו [שהיא קלה יותר שיכול אדם לברך על שמחת לבבו הפרטית, ומ"מ בכגון דא אין לברכה] – וכמה מרבני אהקת"ו [=ארץ הקודש תבנה ותכונן] פסקו שאסור לברך על ההלל, ו[יתירה מזו] פסקו שלא לאמרו.

מצער המצב וההפקרות שגם קטנים - פס"ד [=פוסקים דינים] בזה, ומשמיצים את רבני ישראל שאסרו לברך על ההלל בימים ההם ולאמרו [להעיר, שלשון רבינו היא "בימים ההם" - לשון רבים. ואולי הוא רמז הכולל גם את יום ירושלים לצדו של יום העצמאות (שרק על שניהם תיקנו מי שתקנו אמירת הלל)], ומזלזלים בכבודם ואין פוצה פה ומוחה וכו'".

מכתב זה שופך אור על התייחסותו של הרבי לנדון דידן, שכן, הוא נכתב לאחר מלחמת ששת הימים ומתייחס במפורש לנסים הגדולים שעשה הקב"ה עמנו במלחמה זו (הכוללים את שחרור ירושלים והמקומות הקדושים), ובכל זאת דעתו של הרבי נחרצת לשלילת חגיגה בימים אלו - לאו מוחלט לאמירת הלל בברכה, לאו לאמירת הלל בלי ברכה ואפילו ברכת שהחיינו הקלה יותר גם היא נשללה.

והטעם לשלילה נראה, שהוא מפני שאלה שקבעו ימים אלה לימי זכרון ושמחה (והם והשקפת עולמם היא השלטת והמושלת בכיפה בארץ הקודש, לצערנו, לעת-עתה), לא נתכוונו להרבות בכבוד שמים ע"י שמחה זו. ואכן הריקודים עם הדגלים או עם ה"פטישים" או ה"מנגלים" ובמות הבידור למיניהם, באמת אינן מקרבים את לבן של ישראל לאביהם שבשמים, כנראה בחוש. אלא מה, יכול המיעוט התורני והחרדי בארץ לומר: אינהו בדידהו ואנן בדידן, הם ירקדו ריקוד של "כחי ועוצם ידי" ואנו נכוין את לבנו לשמים ונקבע את היום לתפלה והודיה על חסדי ה', משמע מדברי הרבי שזה אינו. וי"ל ההסברה בזה:

הרבי, כנראה, לא קיבל את הסברה שכל אחד קובע "חג" לעצמו. אלא כיון שהמייסדים והמתקנים חגיגות אלו קבעו אותן, ואכן עושים זאת בפועל, ברוח לאומית (כולל דתית-לאומית) שנשללה בתכלית ע"י רבותינו נשיאינו, שוב אין מקום לומר שקבוצה קטנה בעם (החרדים - אלה שלא נהגו לחגוג עד עתה, שאליהם נכתב מכתב זה) ימציאו חג חדש. כי מה שקורה בפועל (עכ"פ במרבית המקרים; ואולי בכולם, אף שהתוצאה לא בהכרח מורגשת מיד בגלוי על פני השטח) הוא, שהחוגגים הופכים לשותפים סמויים (או גלויים), ברמה כזו או אחרת, ל"חגיגה הכללית" שאינה עולה בקנה אחד עם רוח היהדות ואין רוח חכמים נוחה הימנה.

מהתייחסויות אלו של הרבי מובנת, אפוא, בטוב ובשופי שיטתו שאין כל מקום לציין את יום כ"ח באייר, כ"יום – חג – ירושלים", ואפילו לא כיום של שמחה או הודיה בגין שחרור הכותל המערבי מיד אויבינו, לא באמירת הלל (עם ברכה או ללא ברכה), ובודאי שאין בו מקום לקולות בדיני האבלות של ימי הספירה, ואפילו לא לאי אמירת תחנון ביום זה. עיי"ש במאמר שנתבאר הענין בארוכה עם ריבוי אסמכתאות ומקורות


IF anyone can post links or references to other articles describing the Rebbe's opposition, I'd be grateful.
noahidelaws is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-18-2007, 12:17 AM   #2
chossidnistar
Senior Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,699
I forgot that was this Yom Jerusalem, and I went to daven to a modern orth Shul, they said Hallel
chossidnistar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-18-2007, 04:48 PM   #3
tzfas
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 302
i read through what the guy wrote, and it does not imply any opposition to someone who wants to celebrate the nisim by being mosif in inyonei torah and kedusha. i think your mivtza here is without basis.
tzfas is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-19-2007, 10:11 AM   #4
noahidelaws
Executive Platinum Member
 
noahidelaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,479
Tzfas: If the whole day would be purely about, as the Rebbe says above, "sheyisbonenu bechasdei haMokom she'oso lohem." But that's clearly not what Yom Yerushalayim (or yom ho'atzomos) is about. That's just the sugar coating for the naive and gullible, a bit like the declaration of independence refers to "tzur Yisrael."

The day is tainted with gov't/kochi ve'oitzem yodi worship. One example of this is the name Yom Yerushalayim itself, which falsely implies that Yerushalayim is in our hands and now we're free to live there, when that's far from the reality. The gov't regularly discusses surrendering parts of it or surrendering other areas that would endanger it. And in the old city of Yerushalayim, which is the ikkar, the Jews are only allowed to live in a small fraction of it.

Also, in the 6-day war Chevron, also one of the orai ha'koidesh was liberated. Why not make a Yom Chevron? Because the israeli gov't, the new decisor of Jewish holidays, did not see fit to do so. Bichlal, leshitosom that we should make a day of celebrating, what about having a Yom YeSHA to celebrate the fact that this all land Holy Land was liberated? Nope, the gov't can't do that, because it didn't annex that land, and clearly never intended to keep it, r"l, ba"h.

But to get together in that general time of year to remember the miracles--all of them, including the liberating of all of Yesha--and without any trace of kochi ve'oitzem yodi, or any ceremonies, religious or secular, or any trace of zionist symbolism; I see no inherent problem with that, though I could be mistaken.

Though the fact is that, as the writer of the article in the original post above points out, the Rebbe never mentioned marking any day, and would just speak in general about how the miracles of the 6-day war should inspire Yidden to teshuva.
noahidelaws is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-20-2007, 12:38 PM   #5
flyaway
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 231
Noahide, show me where it says that there's a mitzvah to bash zionism!
flyaway is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-21-2007, 01:56 AM   #6
noahidelaws
Executive Platinum Member
 
noahidelaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,479
in Bein or LeChoshech, p. 14, It is told by Rabbi Uriel Tzimmer:
Quote:
On another occasion in times of pressure I lamented my bitterness over my hard, war-like work (to the Rebbe), and I asked, "I am no Satmar, and I want to abandon the writing (of anti-Zionist literature). He said to me "On the contrary, you mus continue writing, and davka in the direction that you write." He then again asked me why I haven't written my anti-Zionist booklet. After the booklet was finally printed, the Rebbe said to me (in tof shin yud tes) "When I read the booklet I wanted to tell you that it is not written with sufficient sharpness."

I also told the Rebbe that certain people were upset that I had publicised the content of the Yechidus of Iyar tof shin tes zayin, where (the Rebbe spoke sharply against Zionism and the state (that zionism is "the sin of the generation"). And I said that I did so because I had understood from the Rebbe's words that he is comfortable with this. He said to me that not only is this so (that he is comfortable with it) but that this is an explicit instruction on his part that I should publicise the matter."
noahidelaws is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-21-2007, 11:41 AM   #7
Bittul
Executive Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,336
עד אחד?
Bittul is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-02-2008, 10:59 AM   #8
Groisah Tzaddik
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 194
Interesting.
Groisah Tzaddik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-02-2008, 10:17 PM   #9
qgh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by noahidelaws View Post
Tzfas: If the whole day would be purely about, as the Rebbe says above, "sheyisbonenu bechasdei haMokom she'oso lohem." But that's clearly not what Yom Yerushalayim (or yom ho'atzomos) is about. That's just the sugar coating for the naive and gullible, a bit like the declaration of independence refers to "tzur Yisrael."
You can make it about that.
Unlike Yom hoaztmous, seculars don't celebrate yom yerushalayim. The vast majority of the religous jews who do celebrate yom yerushalaim certainly don't associate it with the anti religous secular government.
They are thanking Hashem for the miracles he performed on that day. On that day the Temple Mount was in Jewish hands for a few hours.
qgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-03-2008, 09:14 AM   #10
Meshulam
Senior Diamond Member
 
Meshulam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,427
Even worse. The problem of Zionism isn't that it has been a michshol for frei Yidden. The problem is that it is a michshol for Frumme Yidden who are so deluded as to think that they're doing Hashem's ratzon by supporting this Avodah Zara.
Meshulam is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-03-2008, 08:16 PM   #11
qgh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meshulam View Post
The problem is that it is a michshol for Frumme Yidden who are so deluded as to think that they're doing Hashem's ratzon by supporting this Avodah Zara.
Please lets not go over board or exagerate.
What avoda Zara are the religous Jews living in Hevron or Itzhar doing?
Actually it is many of the Charedim who are NOT zionist who for money end up supporting the anti religous liberal government.
qgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-04-2008, 04:58 AM   #12
Returning
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meshulam View Post
Even worse. The problem of Zionism isn't that it has been a michshol for frei Yidden. The problem is that it is a michshol for Frumme Yidden who are so deluded as to think that they're doing Hashem's ratzon by supporting this Avodah Zara.
BS"D

Harav Kook was a great man who made a great mistake, and his followers are realizing that his way does not work anymore if it ever did. You, on the other hand, would make a great traveling companion for Moshe Aryeh Friedcircuits the next time he goes to Iran.
Returning is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-04-2008, 06:22 AM   #13
Meshulam
Senior Diamond Member
 
Meshulam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,427
I don't know what you mean when you call Kook a great man. You might mean that he was great in that the size of his impact was "great" or large. That is probably true. But if you meant that he lead a proper movement, for which he ought to be praised, you are simply wrong. Just take a look at the words of the Rebbeim (some of them brought above in THIS VERY THREAD) about Zionism.

You can equate the Rebbe's opinion with that of the fringe within Neturei Karta if you feel like it, but it doesn't make much sense. My words above merely echoed the sentiments of the Rebbeim. Like the Rebbeim, I have never been to Iran. So your comparison is inaccurate.
Meshulam is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-04-2008, 06:56 AM   #14
Returning
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meshulam View Post
I don't know what you mean when you call Kook a great man. You might mean that he was great in that the size of his impact was "great" or large. That is probably true. But if you meant that he lead a proper movement, for which he ought to be praised, you are simply wrong.
Assuming that what we know about him is true, he was motivated only by ahavas Yisroel and a desire to elevate Jews and E"Y. The failure of his movement was inevitable, but we do not need to gloat about it because perfectly kosher Yidden are still involved.

It is your presentation of the ideas that is so off center and unpalatable.
Returning is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-04-2008, 09:24 AM   #15
Meshulam
Senior Diamond Member
 
Meshulam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Returning View Post
Assuming that what we know about him is true, he was motivated only by ahavas Yisroel and a desire to elevate Jews and E"Y.
If you had read what I wrote above, you would realize that I specifically said that the problem of Zionism is its appeal amongst people who are motivated by a desire to do Hashem's ratzon (as opposed to those who do not know from Torah, and therefore understandably are not motivated by a desire to do the ratzon of Hashem).

You are the one who brought up Kook, and I don't know exactly what you hoped to prove by doing so. But my point specifically was that Yom Yerushalayim is (in some ways) more dangerous than Yom HaAtzmos, because frum Yidden dismiss Yom HaAtzmos outright (and even some "religious" Zionist Jews are beginning to reject it), while Yom Yerushalayim seems to be more acceptable amongst frum Jews. For that very reason Yom Yerushalayim is more dangerous. So your claim that Kook was motivated by Ahavas Yisroel is no response to my objection (and the Rebbe's objection, incidentally) to Yom Yerushalayim. It is specifically because one can approach this day with pure motives (which is davka not the case by Yom HaAtzmos) that makes it dangerous.
Quote:
The failure of his movement was inevitable, but we do not need to gloat about it because perfectly kosher Yidden are still involved.
The failure of the movement is inevitable because it is anti-Torah. But the movement is not dead yet, and we (as Lubavitchers especially) have an obligation to elevate Jews to a higher level, which includes rejecting false gods like consumerism, ******ianity, Buddhism, Zionism, communism, etc.

But who is gloating? You are the one who brought up Kook (probably to earn my response, thereby "necessitating" your insults). I am merely responding to the call of the thread with the Rebbeim's statements on these issues. I don't enjoy discussing this issue. I wish Zionism would go away, and Jews would start keeping Torah instead. But we have to "play the deck we're dealt."

If you want to bury your head in the sand on the issue of Zionism, that's your right. But don't insult me for grabbing the bull by the horns.
Quote:
It is your presentation of the ideas that is so off center and unpalatable.
I don't know what you mean by "off center." But I assume by "unpalatable" that you mean I have said something unreasonably insulting. I've reviewed my earlier posts, and cannot find anything insulting that I said. I understand that some people disagree with Chabad's position on Zionism. I respect that. But I don't see anything I said that was offensive.
Meshulam is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-04-2008, 10:01 PM   #16
Joey
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Returning View Post
BS"D

Harav Kook was a great man who made a great mistake, and his followers are realizing that his way does not work anymore if it ever did. You, on the other hand, would make a great traveling companion for Moshe Aryeh Friedcircuits the next time he goes to Iran.
Returning! What happened to Ahavas Yisroel?
Joey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-04-2008, 10:17 PM   #17
qgh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 191
Meshualm,
You are making some very general statements and you are making it seem like it is black and white.
you are saying the zionist movement was wrong and anti torah as opposed to the Charedi way which was the right path.

The problem is that the zionist movment at the time the state was created and in later years never had true leadership and never took the path of true religous zionism.

the teachings of Rav Kook are NOT anti Torah. The teachings of rav Tsvi Kalisher (author of Drishat Tsion) are not anti Torah. The teaching of Rabbi Yissachar Shlomo Teichtel (the author of " EM Habanim Smeicha") is NOT anti Torah.
Have you read any of these works?

The leaders of the religous zionism movement during the time of the establishment of the state erred and did NOT actually follow the path of the earlier zionist leaders. They simply joined the secular movement and tried to influence it from a religous stand point.

Even in later years there were great Rabanim in the zionist camp. However they were not mainstream in the movement.
Rav Dov Lior of Chevron is certainly not doing anything anti Torah.

Part of the reason the true religous zionist teachings never came into play was the great opposition from many of the Charedi leaders. They are actually a major reason why it failed. By opposing it and not taking any part in it , they left it in secular hands which created the current situation that all the leaders who have power in Israel are secular and anti religous.

Thus they made sure that the movement they considered to be Treif did indeed become treif.

What we need to do now is put the current religous zionism path aside and put the charedi hashkafa on the side as well.
the state of Israel is a fact and it is our job to unite and do our part to turn it into a religous state the follow the law of the Torah.

Although what I am suggesting may not sound like the chabad path, but that is exactly what the Chabadniks in Israel are working at.

On Yom Yerushalayim Hashem performed great miracales for the Jewish nation and we should thank him for that, just as we thank him for Chanuka and Purim. (The events that took place in the following years after the mirracles of Chanuka and Purim were not so good or kosher either)

The fact that we chose anti religous leaders who led the state astray has nothing to do with what Hashem has done for us.
qgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-05-2008, 12:29 AM   #18
Meshulam
Senior Diamond Member
 
Meshulam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by qgh View Post
Meshualm,
You are making some very general statements and you are making it seem like it is black and white.
We're speaking about general themes here, so of course my statements are going to be general. But there is nothing wrong with stating a black and white subject like it is. Whether a Jew should vote Democrat or Republican is a matter about which there are probably shades of gray. Whether a Jew should eat pork is, by and large, black and white. Zionism is in the latter camp.
Quote:
you are saying the zionist movement was wrong and anti torah as opposed to the Charedi way which was the right path.
This is about the only correct statement in your post
Quote:
The problem is that the zionist movment at the time the state was created and in later years never had true leadership and never took the path of true religous zionism.
B''H the movement was prevented, to some extent, from having the outer trappings of religious Judaism. The movement is treif ingantzen, and putting a black hat and sidelocks on it does not change that fact.
Quote:
the teachings of Rav Kook are NOT anti Torah. The teachings of rav Tsvi Kalisher (author of Drishat Tsion) are not anti Torah. The teaching of Rabbi Yissachar Shlomo Teichtel (the author of " EM Habanim Smeicha") is NOT anti Torah.
Have you read any of these works?
There are a great many works I have not read, which I nonetheless oppose. I've never read the Quran. I don't peruse the Book of Revelations (whether in the bathroom or otherwise) for the simple reason that I don't need to know what they are about. So too here. The Gedolim have made the matter clear, and I don't need to go do an independent investigation to figure out whether their statements hold water.

With respect to Zionism: it is, out and out, an Anti-Torah movement. Books that use a Torah vocabulary, but nonetheless teach a non-Jewish religion are not kosher merely because you feel like attaching the word "Rov" before the author's name.

Kook is a great example of what happens when a person becomes infected with Zionism. When faced with the choice between Torah and Zionism leading up to the 1910 shmitta, he chose Zionism. He was mevatel a halachah m'doraisa for the purpose of his little political movement. Rather than tell those who would listen to follow the laws of Shmittah, he promoted a krum "heter mechira," earning the ridicule of many Chareidi rabbonim (the Ridvaz of Tzfas, the Keren L'Dovid, etc.).

(I am not commenting on R' Teichtel at this time. It is my understanding that the Rebbe might have said that R' Teichtel was not a Zionist.)
Quote:
The leaders of the religous zionism movement during the time of the establishment of the state erred and did NOT actually follow the path of the earlier zionist leaders. They simply joined the secular movement and tried to influence it from a religous stand point.
I'm not sure what you'e trying to say here, but one things stikes me as worthy of comment: the notion that you can join a treif movement and somehow make it more kosher is highly problematic. We don't encourage Jews joinin a Catholic Church in order to bring Catholics closr to Judaism. We don't join a Reform church in order to bring the Reform pastor, and his flock, closer to authentic Judaism. Simply put: we don't lend credence to anti-Torah movements by joining them (even for the purpose of making them look more kosher).
Quote:
Even in later years there were great Rabanim in the zionist camp. However they were not mainstream in the movement.
What are you trying to prove here?
Quote:
Rav Dov Lior of Chevron is certainly not doing anything anti Torah.
Without getting into specifics: A.) I don't know why you picked this name out of a hat, but B.) he's made some seriously wacky statements and "Piskei Dinim" (for lack of a better term), claiming that they are Torah rather than merely political position statements of a somewhat deranged individual.
Quote:
Part of the reason the true religous zionist teachings never came into play was the great opposition from many of the Charedi leaders.
I don't know what you mean by "true religious zionist teachings," but the religious zionist movement is alive (if not well) today. But you're right, the Chareidim did valiantly fend off the "religious" zionists and prevent them from becoming bigger.
Quote:
They are actually a major reason why it failed. By opposing it and not taking any part in it , they left it in secular hands which created the current situation that all the leaders who have power in Israel are secular and anti religous.
I have already responded to this notion too many times, but just to make sure the point is not lost: Zionism is anti-religious by definition. If its leaders wore black hats and had long beards (like your friend Dov Lior) it would not change the fact...
Quote:
Thus they made sure that the movement they considered to be Treif did indeed become treif.
The movement always was, and always will be treif. That's because it violates Torah, not because the Chareidim didn't enlist...
Quote:
What we need to do now is put the current religous zionism path aside and put the charedi hashkafa on the side as well.
Chas v'Shalom. What crazy thing are you suggesting?
Quote:
the state of Israel is a fact and it is our job to unite and do our part to turn it into a religous state the follow the law of the Torah.
Chas v'Shalom. We need to do our part to keep Torah, and hopefully Moshiach will come and dismantle that state.
Quote:
Although what I am suggesting may not sound like the chabad path, but tha is exactly what the Chabadniks in Israel are working at.
I don't kno who you're talking about, but I am aware that some Lubavitchers have lost their way on this issue.
Quote:
On Yom Yerushalayim Hashem performed great miracales for the Jewish nation and we should thank him for that, just as we thank him for Chanuka and Purim. (The events that took place in the following years after the mirracles of Chanuka and Purim were not so good or kosher either)
L'havdil alfei havdolos between the holy days of Chanukah and Purim and this secular day.
Quote:
The fact that we chose anti religous leaders who led the state astray has nothing to do with what Hashem has done for us.
I didn't chose anybody. But we give thanks to Hashem for all of His miracles by keeping Torah, and running as fast as we can from any and all anti-Torah movements.
Meshulam is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-05-2008, 03:21 AM   #19
Returning
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey View Post
Returning! What happened to Ahavas Yisroel?
What happened to Aaronke?
Returning is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-05-2008, 08:30 AM   #20
Torah613
ChabadTalk.com Elder!
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,716
Meshulam - first of all, R' Kook earns the Rav before his name.
Second, the shmitta issue back then was no way as simple as you make it out to be, starting from the pashtus that שמיטה בזמן המזה מן התורה, as is obvious from the tshuvos.
But I will not involve myself further in this argument, as I found it somewhat distasteful, on may levels.
Torah613 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-05-2008, 09:15 AM   #21
Meshulam
Senior Diamond Member
 
Meshulam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torah613 View Post
Meshulam - first of all, R' Kook earns the Rav before his name.
Pardon. You are right.
Quote:
Second, the shmitta issue back then was no way as simple as you make it out to be, starting from the pashtus that שמיטה בזמן המזה מן התורה, as is obvious from the tshuvos.
Obviously the matter is not totally clear. But the vast majority (if not 100%) of the chareidi Rabbonim were against heter mechira.
Quote:
But I will not involve myself further in this argument, as I found it somewhat distasteful, on may levels.
Sometimes you have to get your hands dirty when cleaning dirt out of the gutter.
Meshulam is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-05-2008, 09:29 AM   #22
Torah613
ChabadTalk.com Elder!
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,716
I don't know what "Chareidi" meant 100 years ago. But at least concerning the first heter mechiras, there were many that supported it, including many that would surprise you...
In any case, I am not getting into that topic now. I just objected to the pashtus in a big machlokes rishonim.
Torah613 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-05-2008, 09:45 AM   #23
qgh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 191
Meshulam you are stating your opinions as facts and basically any Rov who has a different opinion obviously is wrong whether that be Rov Kook Zatsal or Rov Dov Lior Shlita or Rov Mordechai Eliyahu Shlita.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Meshulam View Post
Whether a Jew should eat pork is, by and large, black and white. Zionism is in the latter camp.
this statement of yours says it all and proves my point.
You are saying that establishing a Jewish Monarchy in Israel even if it ran according to the Torah is Treif by definition and that is as clear as pork being Treif.
Many great Rabanim simpy did NOT understand that

Quote:
The movement is treif ingantzen, and putting a black hat and sidelocks on it does not change that fact.
There are a great many works I have not read, which I nonetheless oppose. I've never read the Quran. I don't peruse the Book of Revelations (whether in the bathroom or otherwise) for the simple reason that I don't need to know what they are about. So too here. The Gedolim have made the matter clear, and I don't need to go do an independent investigation to figure out whether their statements hold water.
And off course EM Habanim Smeicha is treif just like th Koran is.
So are the works of Rov Kook.

Perhaps you should do some investigation as these Rabanim were Gdolim themselves and have many more clear sources (comming from the Torah, Chazal Rishonim and Achronim) to back their veiws than Rov Yoel had for his book.

You have the ability to determine who is a Gadol and which Rabanim don't know what they are talking about. WOW

Quote:
Kook is a great example of what happens when a person becomes infected with Zionism. When faced with the choice between Torah and Zionism leading up to the 1910 shmitta, he chose Zionism. He was mevatel a halachah m'doraisa for the purpose of his little political movement. Rather than tell those who would listen to follow the laws of Shmittah, he promoted a krum "heter mechira," earning the ridicule of many Chareidi rabbonim (the Ridvaz of Tzfas, the Keren L'Dovid, etc.).
Before I even start responding to this let me say that I am very much against Heter Mechira especially today.
But you got all your facts wrong.
According to all the major poskim today (and at the time of Rov Kook) Heter Mechira is Medrobonon today. I don't know of one Haredi Posek who says otherwise.

So it is ok to do Mechirat Hamets (which many Rabanim were against as well) which is dealing with a deoraita but not ok to do Heter Mechira which is a derobonon.

Now what did Charedim do with regards to Shmita? Did they follow the teaching of Chazon Ish?

The Chazon Ish encouraged Jews to keep shmita and made many kulot to enable them to do so.
99% of the Charedim today simply buy produce from our arab enemies which is a major Halachic problem (Lo Tichanem)
After all Charedim are not farmers.
Most of the Farmers who follow the Chazon Ish today come from the Zionist camp. Most of the Rabanim who encourage them to do so come from the Zionist camp.

Quote:

(I am not commenting on R' Teichtel at this time. It is my understanding that the Rebbe might have said that R' Teichtel was not a Zionist.)
I'm not sure what you'e trying to say here, but one things stikes me as worthy of comment: the notion that you can join a treif movement and somehow make it more kosher is highly problematic. We don't encourage Jews joinin a Catholic Church in order to bring Catholics closr to Judaism. We don't join a Reform church in order to bring the Reform pastor, and his flock, closer to authentic Judaism. Simply put: we don't lend credence to anti-Torah movements by joining them (even for the purpose of making them look more kosher).
Well perhaps R Teichtel's teachings would not fit your definition of Zionism. But it represents what true Religous Zionism should be.
He called for massive aliya and taking part in establishing a religous state. You call that Treif. I suggest you read his book. As he came from your camp thinking it was treif untill he investigated the matter and clearly saw that he was wrong and blind to the facts.


Quote:
Without getting into specifics: A.) I don't know why you picked this name out of a hat, but B.) he's made some seriously wacky statements and "Piskei Dinim" (for lack of a better term), claiming that they are Torah rather than merely political position statements of a somewhat deranged individual.
Rov Dov Lior is one of todays Gdolim and his positions stem from his greatness in Torah.

But you obviously know better.

Quote:
I don't know what you mean by "true religious zionist teachings," but the religious zionist movement is alive (if not well) today. But you're right, the Chareidim did valiantly fend off the "religious" zionists and prevent them from becoming bigger.I have already responded to this notion too many times, but just to make sure the point is not lost: Zionism is anti-religious by definition. If its leaders wore black hats and had long beards (like your friend Dov Lior) it would not change the fact...

The movement always was, and always will be treif. That's because it violates Torah, not because the Chareidim didn't enlist...
YOu keep on saying that by definition they violate the Torah. It is so clear to you. But is it exactly that they are violating? I can imagine what you are referring to as I am well aware of the Satmar position and their writtings. The fact that you are ignoring opposing views is one thing. But to claim that it is so clear cut black and white violating the Torah weakens any argument you may make.

Quote:
Lubavitchers have lost their way on this issue. L'havdil alfei havdolos between the holy days of Chanukah and Purim and this secular day.
Take a look at the Talmud Bavli and Talmud Yerushalmi. When the Mordechai and Esther wanted to institute the yearly celebration of Purim most of the Chachamim initially were very opposed.

What is a secular about a day which celebrates the mirracles Hashem has done for the Jewish nation defeating its enemies in the holy city of Jerusalem?
qgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-05-2008, 01:05 PM   #24
Joey
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Returning View Post
What happened to Aaronke?
That went over my head.
I got no issue with heatedness, but this thread and the one about Orthodoxy seems to imply that you can't stand Meshulam or something like that.
Lets fight ideas not people...
Joey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-05-2008, 03:05 PM   #25
Returning
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torah613 View Post
I don't know what "Chareidi" meant 100 years ago. But at least concerning the first heter mechiras, there were many that supported it, including many that would surprise you...
That is because the economic situation in E"Y was beyond abysmal at the time. Also, tshuvos have been found that prohibit the sale of land in E"Y to any goy, even if he is not an oived avoida zoro.

At this point, it is doubtful whether hi-tech "Israel" should even engage in agriculture considering how expensive and in demand land is there. So the heter mechira is very dubious now.
Returning is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A short presentation about Yerushalayim Rustler The World of Lubavitch 0 08-27-2006 12:47 AM
Boineh Yerushalayim The Eighth King Chassidus 10 09-07-2005 10:07 PM
The Holy Yeshiva Kaballah Academy (Yerushalayim) Yankel Nosson Eretz Yisrael - Israel 2 09-22-2004 07:32 PM
Yerushalayim and Tzfas Yankel Nosson Eretz Yisrael - Israel 3 07-28-2004 11:14 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2001 - 2016 ChabadTalk.com