ZIONISM / ANTI-----r yaakov weinberg

Here is what Rabbi Weinberg said:

With regards to the medinah-how can a Jew who believes in the Ribono shel olam relate to the medina? It is anti-God from its inception.

When they proclaimed the State of Israel they made it clear, officially, that there is no God of Israel.

The only other nation in the world that followed this path was Communist Russia. These were the only two countries in the world who, in proclaiming their freedom, refused to mention God.

As a compromise, they accepted "Tzur Yisroel," the Rock of Israel, so that it should not, chas v'shalom, be the God of Israel or of the world.

"Tzur" gives everybody the option to interpret it any way they want. You cannot relate to a medinah that is built on such a premise.

You have to understand more deeply. The medinah not only rejects God but also rejects the whole history of K'lal Yisroel since the churban until the establishment of the State.

The "galut mentality" is not only deprecated but is also dealt with contempt, and all those years of K'lal Yisroel's mesiras nefesh, harbatzas Torah, building and creating, are looked at as an aberration and are rejected.

How can you relate to a medinah that does that? We cannot. We can relate to the Jews in Eretz Yisroel-frum or not-to their needs, their safety, their financial well being.

But to the State-it is impossible for a Jew who has a Ribono shel olam, a Jew who has a respect for 2000 years of Jewish history, to relate to the medinah.

It is impossible. So we have to speak about Eretz Yisroel, about its importance and preciousness, and about the waiting of all of K'lal Yisroel to come back to it, without dealing with the medinah. We cannot deal with the medinah! It is impossible!

I am just going to ask a question and I am sorry if it will offend someone, I really would like not to.

How can a Jew celebrate a Yom Ha'atzmaut, the day of the proclamation of the State of Israel that rejects God as being involved?

I would ask you to think a minute and see whether you can think of a greater chilul Hashem that has occurred in all the history of K'lal Yisroel, from creation until the day that the proclamation was made, than the proclaiming of a State of Israel without God?

The United States is under God; England in under God; France is under God... Communist Russia and Israel are not under God! I am asking you in all honesty, can you think of a deeper, more far-reaching chilul Hashem that has ever taken place in the history of the world than that-than Jews officially rejecting God? This is an awesome chilul Hashem.

If we had a bais din it would be a day of fasting and mourning. It would be a Tisha B'av. A day in which a Jewish state was proclaimed by officially rejecting God is literally a Tisha B'av, a churban she'ain kamohu.

I am asking you to be a little honest-how can you celebrate a day that such a chilul Hashem took place?

The truth is the truth; I do not know how you can live with it.

It was much more than just leaving out Hashem from the declaration of independence.

And please do not misunderstand the reason for my quoting Rabbi Weinberg -- it was not to invoke his authority against the Zionists.

The issue of Zionism was well determined and settled way before Rabbi Weinberg was born. The reason I quoted him was in response to the commonly disseminated Zionist propaganda that "only Satmar and Neturei Karta" are against the State of Israel. The fact that Ner Israel is so far from Satmar was my point.

And so, considering the authority of those Gedolim who had already weighed in on the topic, if in fact Rabbi Weinberg would have believed that Israel is Aschalta Dgeulah or something to that effect, you would not have a machlokes but a kasha on Rabbi Weinberg.

Clearly, though, the reality is he did not believe any such thing.

Proving "g-d's existence" by Medinas Yisroel's existence was, I would imagine, done not in a public forum describing the greatness c"v of Medinas Yisroel but in some Kiruv situation which, although I definitely don’t agree that such a thing is justified in the name of Kiruv, I do know that Rabbi Weinberg had a greater tolerance for what is permitted in the name of Kiruv than others would.

And because I am certain that Rabbi Weinberg would not permit teaching heretical ideas for Kiruv, when combined with the fact the statement you quote from Rabbi Weinberg as you quote it does not really say anything positive about Medinas Yisroel - citing the accuracy of a prophecy of Jews returning to EY does not imply that their return was permitted, merely that it occurred - and that the prophecy talks about Jews living in EY and says nothing about creating a Medinah - does not tell me that there was anything in that statement to contradict or make more complicated Rabbi Weinberg’s previous statement.

I would imagine he made a milsa dmisparshe btrei anpei in order for cause people to believe in G-d, which he may have felt justified.

That’s just to try to make sense out of what you’re quoting so that there would be no contradictions (what you refer to as "complexities"). But it doesn’t matter. If in fact Rabbi Weinberg would have meant that the creation of Medinas Yisroel was the aschalta dgeulah then simply would have been wrong, together with other rabbis who believed it.

Nobody is saying that there were not rabbis who believed that. I am saying that they are wrong.

You can choose either of two approaches - you can either examine the Halachic sources and see this is very black and white (pleas see the Zionist Apologetics forum - none of the religious Zionist rabbis have come close to formulating any reasonable defense for their position), or you can rely on the authority of the Gedolei Yisroel. Either way you arrive at the same inescapable conclusion.