For an enlarged, easier to read index click here . To "google search" this site, scroll to the bottom of this page. (This site is best viewed with "Firefox")

(Tips: F11 key enables full screen viewing & Ctrl-F to search the index)


ZIONISM / ANTI-----lubavitch

I'm very confused.

I happened to have gotten in a discussion with my father about Israel (big mistake), and I suddenly found that we kinda disagree completely.

My question is: 1) What does Lubavitch hold?

So, what you say on these sites, about Israel not being ours until Moshiach comes, and about the 3 oaths saying we cannot get Israel, until Moshiach..

My father told me that I hold like the Neturai Karta hold, that Israel is not ours yet, until Moshiach comes.

2)What's the difference between what you're saying and what Neturai Karta says?

My parents say that Hashem gave us the land through miracles and we gotta kick the arabs out.

3) Who says that? Which rabbaim?

As I said, the Gedolei Yisroel were against creating a State of Israel, and this includes Lubavitch. In fact, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rav Sholom Ber ZTL was one of the most extreme and outspoken opponents of the State of Israel, for many reasons, but first an foremost, because it is against the Oaths that G-d made us swear to wait for Moshiach before we take Eretz Yisroel.

In a famous letter (printed in Ohr Layeshorim p.57) the Rebbe Rav Sholom Ber ZTL writes:

"Regarding the Zionists and their camp, I will answer in short: First, even if they were followers of Hashem and His Torah, and even if they will be successful in their goal [of creating a Jewish State], we cannot listen to them in this, to make a redemption by our own power, for isn’t it true that we are even not allowed to "put pressure" to bring the time of redemption by praying too much for it (as Rashi says in Kesuvos 111a, see also Medrash Rabbah Shir Hashirim 2 "I made you swear.." [i.e. the Oaths - MOD]), all the more so with actions and physical means. That is, we are not permitted to leave the Golus through our own power.

Not from this [creating a State] will come our redemption and freedom, and especially since this is against our real desire, for our entire desire and hope is for Hashem to bring Moshiach speedily in our days (Amen) and the Geulah will be through Hashem Himself, as the Medrash says, that even a redemption by Moshe Rabbeinu and Aharon HaKohen will not last, all the more so a Geula by Chanaya Mishael and Azaryah ... and in this current Golus we have to wait only for our redemption and our salvation from Hashem Himself, not through human beings ...

"Signed, your true friend, who is waiting for G-d salvation soon ... Sholom Dov Ber"

The next Lubavitcher Rebbe was equally opposed to the Jewish State.

The last Lubavithcer Rebbe, however, changed the tradition of his predecessors in this issue as well, and, although he could obviously never say that he is in favor of the State of Israel, for anyone who says that was branded total persona non grata by Lubavithc tradition - he kind of avoided the politically incorrect (but Halahcicly correct) view of his predecessors. I found the following description of the Lubavithcer Rebbe's change in his tradition on a Lubavitch website (

"Although the previous two Lubavitcher Rebbes were fierce opponents of political Zionism, there is a letter from 1959 in which the Rebbe responds with great respect to "His Excellency, Mr. David Ben-Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel."

"The Rebbe, who modified the Lubavitch stance from anti-Zionist to non-Zionist, maintained a warm correspondence with Ben-Gurion, even when having one early exchange about the "Who is a Jew" debate that exploded some 30 years later." (emphasis mine)

This was one of the great claims that the Satmar Rebbe ZTL had against the last Lubavitcher Rebbe, that he refused to take a stand on this issue, which was so important to his predecessors the previous Lubavitcher Rebbes, and instead chose to be very politically correct and wishy washy.

I mentioned in the Other / Lubavitch forum that a writer once asked the Lubavitcher Rebbe (Rabbi Menachem Mendel) point blank "what do you think of the Satmar Rebbe's views on the State of Israel?"

The Lubavitcher Rebbe was in a corner and avoided the question. He said "What difference does it make what I think of the views of a man I don’t know about a place I have never been?" He added, that the issue does not concern him.

SO of course, officially Lubavitch is very anti-Zionist, and anti-State of Israel. You will never ever see an Israeli flag or a Yom Hatzmaut celebration in Lubavitch (I hope. Though nowadays you never know). But you will also not hear them ever repeat the stance of traditional Lubavich before it was "modified" by the past Rebbe and became politically correct.

I once saw an article in "Midstream", a Conservative magazine, taking Lubavitch to task for "hiding" from the non-religious Jews that they are so buddy-buddy with, the fact that they are so very anti-Zionist. If the non-religious would know this about them, the magazine charged, they would never follow Lubavitch.

They are probably right, and that is probably the reason why the lubavithcer Rebbe "modified" the Lubavitch hashkofo. Or at the very least, he made sure never to commit himself to it on the record.

As far as rabbis who hold that the land is ours and we have to kick out all the Arabs, those are two things. That the land is ours cuz G-d "gave it to us" via "miracles" is total religious Zionist philosophy. Nobody else including Lubavitch holds like this. And to throw out the Arabs, well, the first to say that was Teddy Herzl in his diary (1895), followed by the so-called "iron wall" approach by Jabotinsky, and lastly, Meyer Kahane. The Lubavithcer Rebbe never said such a thing. Not even the last one.

PS - The Neturei Karta.

This was discussed. The NK hold that we if we would give the land back to the Arabs now it would be safe for Jews, and therefore that’s what we should do. They also hold that it is OK to join the Arabs in protests and the like against Israel. Neither of those two views are shared by Satmar or Lubavitch.

No comments: