ZIONISM-----the wahington rally and politics
-
????? Posted - 17 April 2002 16:32
Moderator-
As a "Yeshivishe YU Bochur," I am puzzled and extremely distraught at the lack of Yeshivishe participation in the Solidarity Rally in
MODERATOR Posted - 17 April 2002 18:43
The rally was encouraged by a number of Rabbonim, and discouraged by others.
The reasons were basically, first and foremost, we can accomplish more for our people by praying and learning. It was also unclear what exactly the message was to
Of course unity is a wonderful thing, but why is anybody bound in the name of unity to do what the people who made the rally say we should do? Perhaps in the interest of unity, they change their course of action, and be unified with those who say not to make the rally?
People seem to feel that if a group of Jews do something, everyone else has to jump to do it too, or else they are making an "anti-achdus" statement. This is not true. People think that "If you don’t do what I want, you’re anti-achdus". Well, maybe you should do what the other guy wants or lese you’ll be anti-achdus. People disagree on methods of doing things. this rally was a good example. There were good rabbonim on both sides of the issue. But neither side has any privileged status that whatever they believe must be adhered to.
????? Posted - 18 April 2002 18:52
Thank you for your response, and what you are saying is basically correct. However, most of my friends from "black hat Yeshivos" were NOT ALLOWED to go. Their Roshei Yeshivos sent out the message that "people who go are lower than you, you shouldn't go." This is obviously incorrect based on the Moderator's premise that there were Rabbonim on BOTH sides. Thanks again.
MODERATOR Posted - 18 April 2002 19:00
Well obviously the Roshei Yeshiva of those Yeshiva held not to go.
I personally also told people not to go, as I agreed with those that discouraged it.
Plus, even if a rabbi encourages it in general, he will likely not want Yeshiva Bochurim there, as learning Torah accomplishes a lot more than rallies - the encouragement was for the Baalie Batim.
Then of course, there is the issue that the rally was mixed, with much pritzus, which is the opposite of a Kiddush Hashem.
Beautman Posted - 18 April 2002 19:14
As I've been reliably informed, the main reason some of the yeshivish world did not support, or gave limited support, for the rally is that no one could know in advance who all of the speakers would be and what they would be saying. The rally was put together very quickly with participation of a lot of non-torah organizations, so there was a danger that supporting the rally would also be supported something wholly unacceptable (kol isha, Reform or Christian speakers distorting torah, etc.) I understand, however, that by and large this did not turn out to be the case.
That was for people who would not otherwise have been learning.
While some may, and do, reasonably disagree with that position, it is very unfortunate that others have stupidly concluded that the modest participation by the yeshiva community is due to lack of concern for other Jews or what happens to
grend123 Posted - 19 April 2002 15:57
It just seems to me (as it apparently did to ?????) and to other posters here that the yeshiva response (or lack thereof) to the rally typified the attitude of "since we aren’t Zionists we couldn’t care less about
Im not saying this is true, merely that that’s is what it appears to be.. certainly no one in the yeshiva velt has gone out of the way to correct this image.
What angers the rest of the frum world is that many feel the politics of Zionism should put aside when Jews are being killed - certainly the neturai karta who demonstrated with Palestinians at the rally are rodfim in every sense of the word, and for many people the yeshiva world's decision not to cooperate in the rally signified a tacit admission for the neturei karta position - certainly to those (and there are many) who don’t recognize chassidish / litvash divisions and only know that the only religious looking Jews they saw at the rally were waving Palestinian flags.
MODERATOR Posted - 19 April 2002 16:39
Grend,
What "appears" to you is due to your own vision problems regarding the way you look at other Jews not of your "camp", rather than to any reasonable impression sent out by that camp.
Your impression is baseless.
The attribution of a lack of care for the death of Jews due to lack of Zionism to the Chareidi world is not only baseless, its insane to anybody who takes a moment to think objectively.
It ignores not only logic, but the screams and shouts orally and I writing of our Gedolim and lay leaders regarding these issues, which are all on public record.
It is particularly absurd considering that one of the main Chareidi claims against the Zionists is that acquiring and maintaining a State costs lives of thousands of Jews. It was the Satmar Rav who said in AL Hageulah that "there is no permit to allow the death of even one Jew for the sake of the State"; whereas it is Rav Soloveichik who said in Five Addresses if the State is religious, all the sacrifices of life for it "are worthwhile."
As far as the Neturei Karta, not only is the Agudah against them, but Satmar is as well. The Satmar Rav wrote in a number of places that we dare not give the State back to the Arabs, because doing so would endanger the lives of Jews - even though it was the Zionists who put those lives in danger to begin with by taking the land in defiance of the Arabs.
But even they are - mistakenly but sincerely - interested only in saving Jewish lives. Their problem is political, not Hashkafic. They basically are Satmar but with a political twist: They hold that the Arabs are interested only in their land, and that if you give them back the State, they will be happy and leave the Jews alone.
Ridiculous? I agree. Dangerous? Yes, but its not going to happen anyway, thank G-d, that the State goes back to the Arabs. But their intentions are only to make peace between the Jews and the Arabs, even if it entails giving back
That idea, in and of itself, means, that the State is not worth giving up lives for. And if giving back the State will save lives, that is what should be done.
That is an altogether reasonable theory. the problem is, giving back the State to the Arabs will NOT save lives but rather cause untold deaths.
Their theology is not a problem; their political perception is, big time.
As far as Rodfim go, it was Rav Elchonon Wasserman ZTL who ruled that the Zionist extremists who use terror to strike back against Arab terror are Halachic Rodfim, since they merely instigate the Arabs to greater levels of hate.
Your accusation that not coming to the rally bespeaks a tacit admission to the Neturei Karta position is baseless as well. Nobody is obligated to go to a rally if they hold it is counterproductive, or misrepresents the position of the ralliers, or is done not in accordance with Torah standards, or whatever.
As far as the "politics of Zionism", first , objections to Zionism are not political, they are Halachic, so your statement, properly made, should read: "many feel the halachah should e put aside when Jews are being killed".
But it is not relevant anyway, because, despite the blood libels of the people you are describing in your post, nobody ever said anything about politics or Zionism or not caring that people die.
grend123 Posted - 19 April 2002 17:40
There’s no politics to Zionism? Please. I have a question then. Why is it official Agudah policy that Agudah shuls should not recite a Mi’Sheberach for chayalei tzahal? Not for Medinas Yisrael, but for the Jewish soldiers who risk and lay down their lives every day protecting Jewish lives. Is there a halachic reason we shouldn’t daven for our fellow Jews?
The simple answer, that Agudah just doesn’t like mishebairachs, isn’t true - they recommend making one for the us government. So, please explain how there are no politics involved in agudas anti-Zionism.
Furthermore, you say that it's the fault of onlookers who misunderstand, not of the yeshiva world. As you know, the halacha is that a talmud chacham who wears stained clothing is chayav misa - there is a halachic obligation for "good PR".
Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, but we have a responsibility to at least attempt not to create the kind of mass chillul hashem of shev veal tasseh - when the world sees that only the non-religious or not so religious Jews care about their brethren in israel, while the more visibly religious appear not to care.
And finally, no one seriously doubts, at this point in time, that the Arabs have as their main goal killing Jews. Whatever the original Zionists were, there is absolutely no way a frum Jew can join with Palestinians and still be a frum Jew. Its like saying you can violate shabbos befarhesia, but still be frum. Contradiction in terms.
If, and this is not as farfetched as it sounds, neturei karta support for the Palestinians convinces one politician to pressure israel to more suicidal withdrawals, and if even one Jewish soldier dies because of that withdrawal, then that blood will be traceable to those very hands waving Palestinian flags in Washington.
That’s not politics. That’s just the facts.
MODERATOR Posted - 19 April 2002 18:11
First, there is no official Agudah policy against making a Mi Shebeirach for Tzahal - it is up to the individual Agudah Rav of the Shul.
Secondly, the reason for not making the Mi SHeberach is that we are already praying for all Jews in danger, as we say "kol bais yisroel hanesunim b'tzorah uvashivyah". There are Jews in danger in
Please note that Klall Yisroel never singled out a specific group of Jews for a specific Mi Shebayrach over any others - there was no need to, for as I said, all Jews in danger are already well accounted for in our Tefilos.
There are, and always were, many Jews in danger. So why single out the Israeli soldiers over any one else?
The reason is not because they are in danger, since that would apply to many others as well. The answer is, since they are soldiers of Medinat Yisrael, they merit a special Tefilah. Not because of the danger they are in.
We don’t believe in that. All Jews in danger are equally entitled to prayers, and the fact that someone is "serving Medinat Yisrael" does not put him in any different category than any other Jew in danger. Hence, they do not get any Tefilos different than all the other Jews in the same position as them.
Secondly, although a Talmid Chacham must clean his garments, he is not responsible to clean the dirtied sunglasses of those who view his spotless garment as soiled, particularly if they refuse to take off their glasses and see the truth.
There is no "stain" here. The Chareidi policy of caring for every Jew is documented and well known. The money raised for rescue efforts, the public prayers said, the official policies in writing for all to see, the speeches constantly given, the Tehillim constantly said.
If some people just refuse to see that, then, no, we are not obligated to go to a rally that we don’t believe in because otherwise people will unreasonably accuse us of something in their imagination.
That’s "spiritual blackmail". "Either you participate in my activities even though you believe they are wrong, or else we will go around saying you don’t like Achdus, and since you have an obligation to have good PR, you have to do what we say!"
No, sorry, there’s no such obligation. The obligation is only to have clean clothing. Not to wear whatever you demand we wear.
MODERATOR Posted - 19 April 2002 18:23
Re: The Neturei Karta. Yes, a person CAN be Mechalel Shabbos B'Farhesia and still be frum. That is, where he holds, even mistakenly, that what he is doing is not Chilul Shabbos.
The Neturei Karta hold that the Arabs only want to kill Jews because the Jews took their land. If we give them the land back, under a deal that the Jews remain safe, they hold the Arabs will be pleased with the deal.
They are wrong, to be sure, but that’s how they see it. As dangerous as this is, its not a frumkeit problem, its a reason problem.
Your farfetched exampled is farfetched, but possible. On the other hand, equally possible is if the rally in
hadtosaythis Posted - 08 May 2002 17:08
re: the rally in
I don't think "ain somchin al hanes" does not apply here. The Gemara in Rosh Hashana records that when the Romans had decreed that the Jews could not observe the laws of milah, shabbos, or study Torah, the Chachamim went to a certain woman whom it was said about that the officials were often "found by her and asked for advice.
Clearly, they did not intend for her to give them guidance as to which kapitlach tehilim to say! She told them to go in the streets at night and to cry out. They followed her advice, and the decree was repealed.
In addition, once this rally had been billed as a "mass rally", to have anything short of a turnout would literally be an issue of safek nefashos.In a rally designed to show the mass support for Israel, any lesser kind of turnout would have been catastrophic.
It could have resulted in a situation where the
Many expressed concern that attending the rally would in effect be an endorsement of the non-frum there. I confess myself baffled at this line of reason. The rally was a political one with political overtones and political goals. The frum people in attendance were no m ore endorsing the Reconstructionist "rabbi" who said a perek of Tehilim than it was an endorsement for the pro-Israel Christians or Lubavitch loonies.
The "rabbi's" recitation of a Psalm in English was not meant to be a pro-Reconstructionist statement; it was intended and perceived as a pro-Israel statement. The media accounts that I saw ( and I saw a number of them only mentioned this "rabbi" as an example of the wide variety of Jews (and gentiles) at the rally. Imagine the Kiddush Hashem that would have been made if thousands of yeshiva bochurim had showed.
( I am aware of the alleged statement of Rav Avigdor Miller that the yeshivos should not go to the rallies for Soviet Jewry b/c "all you need is for one gay club to show up" or something to that effect. I will be dan likaf zechus that , if that statement was indeed made, it was because he felt that the government was already failing and they were unnecessary. The alternative is not pleasant. Yes, I know Moderator will bash me for saying that.)
Another issue that was raised was the pritzus at the rally. Mashal limah hadavar domeh: If someone must be rushed to the hospital, does one make sure that the nurses are all dressed in accordance with the laws of tznius, or does one see what he can do to those ends after having transported that person to the hospital first(i.e. standing with a frum group if possible, standing in one place etc.)?
(Most of the above I heard from my rebbe; any mistakes are undoubtedly mine or an error in the transfer.)
Of course, instances of Jewish terror are wrong; wanton murder is certainly not advocated by YAhadus, including Rav Elchanan's reason that it will provoke.
However, complying with " haba lihargicha hashkeim lihargo" is by no stretch of the imagination being a rodef! As we all know, the Israeli Army lost tens of soldiers hyd trying to avoid civilian casualties which the Palestinians has tried to make inevitable by booby-trapping houses, using civilians as human shields, by smuggling weapons in ambulances, and taking refuge in houses, schools, the church in Bais Lechem, and in hospitals.
Jews can not abstain from a course of action if it will be wrongly accused of misdeeds; we merely avoid making any false impressions which will lead to honest mistakes based on what we have done. For example, Jews never stopped baking matzos as a result of the blood libels. Blood libels will always be around in some shape or form; it is impossible to avoid them.
With regards to the Mi'Sheberach for Tzahal, it is not historically accurate to say that a Mi'Sheberach has never been made for a specific group of people. We say a Mi'Sheberach for Cholim in my shul. The Tosfos Yom Tov composed a special Mi'Sheberach for those who refrain from talking in shul(which is a very select group of people).
In addition, many kehillas have the Mi'Sheberach for the government recited, even though it is slightly pandering in tone, no doubt b/c of the censorship, but nevertheless the unabridged text is recited. Tzahal is doing a better job protecting our brothers and sisters in Eretz Yisrael than Bush, Cheney, or Powell.
Tzaal literally put their lives on the line every single day to protect us; never before in our history have we had such a situation where people literally sacrifice themselves, day in and day out, knowing that manning the borders or checkpoints could very realistically end their life someday. Achenu is something we say on Mondays or Thursdays; perhaps something is appropriate for Shabbos as well.
To conclude, we unfortunately are in a situation where we lack the leadership we so sorely need in this troubled time. No one has the confidence to give an affirmation that might cause a machlokes. Why do I say this? A friend who goes to a mainstream black-hat yeshiva went to his rebbe and told him that he wanted to go very strongly, and his rebbe gave him permission.
I say this because the Aguddah was silent because of public relations with the potential consequences as severe as they are. I say this because no one from the yeshiva world stood up and said " this is an eis tzarah l'yaakov forget the politics, and instead hid behind the excuse of the bochurim missing seder.
The only time the sedorim in Volozhin ever stopped was b/c Rav Chaim Volozhiner wanted everyone to see a group who was making Aliyah off. Eretz Yisrael should be high enough on our radar screen that we can skip the petty politics. Kein nireh la'aniyas dati.
MODERATOR Posted - 09 May 2002 20:44
Point by point:
"First of all, while our Torah and Tefillah should obviously be increased, we must always have hishtadlus..."
The question is, who says your Hishtadlus is the correct one? Making rallies and asserting our demands to
Second, there is plenty of Hishtadlus done that the rally will not make the difference between relying on a
"The Gemara in Rosh Hashana records that when the Romans had decreed that the Jews could not observe the laws of milah, shabbos, or study Torah, the Chachamim went to a certain woman whom it was said about that the officials were often "found by her and asked for advice. Clearly, they did not intend for her to give them guidance as to which kapitlach tehilim to say! She told them to go in the streets at night and to cry out. They followed her advice, and the decree was repealed."
When the goyim make decrees against doing Mitzvos, we are then Moser Nefesh to fight against it; but when the danger is to our lives, we do not confront the Nations, we plead with them. This is all over our Seforim, and the traditional understanding of why we revolted on Chanukah but not Purim.
"In addition, once this rally had been billed as a "mass rally", to have anything short of a turnout would literally be an issue of safek nefashos."
So don’t bill it as a mass rally. And you say it is safek nefashos. I don’t. Your rally is not going to be the make it or break it for Jewish lives. Not even as a safek. The politicians in
"It could have resulted in a situation where the
No, it couldn’t have. this is dreaming. If you want to believe that, that’s your business, but you cant tell everyone else in the world they have to agree with you.
"It was vital that all "factions" of Judaism be represented in full."
There are no "factions" of Judaism.
"Many expressed concern that attending the rally would in effect be an endorsement of the non-frum there. I confess myself baffled at this line of reason. The rally was a political one with political overtones and political goals. "
Yes, and who said that those political goals are ones that we want to support? Should
"The frum people in attendance were no m ore endorsing the Reconstructionist "rabbi" who said a perek of Tehilim than it was an endorsement for the pro-Israel Christians or Lubavitch loonies."
Saying Tehillim is a religious act. The recinstructionist rabbi led the tehillim because he is a rabbi. That is a religious statement. "This man is a rabbi." Such a statement - implied or stated, is Kefirah. If you notice, the Jews for Jesus were not represented, an their "rabbis" (or Messianic rabbis) were not invited. Clearly, there was a decision that these people are "rabbis", representing "factions" of Judaism, and others are not. That is something I cannot join.
You should know that a Reform rabbi on
"it was intended and perceived as a pro-Israel statement."
It recognized him as a rabbi. That’s a statement that is heretical in nature, regardless of why you recognized him as a rabbi.
"Imagine the Kiddush Hashem that would have been made if thousands of yeshiva bochurim had showed."
That is not a Kiddush Hashem at all. Kiddush Hashem means people doing a Mitzvah in public. Unless you establish that this is a Mitzvah, you cannot call it a Kiddush Hashem. In fact, the mingling of men and women, the pritzus, are all things that G-d hates. A public display of that is the opposite of Kiddush Hashem.
And --- this is important -- the booing of Paul Wolfowitz was a big Chilul Hashem. All the man said was that there are innocent Palestinians dying - which is of course true - babies included - he did not say anything pro Palestinian or against
A paper in
Imagine if it were a Palestinian rally. And a Palestinian leader would say "innocent Jews are also suffering." And the crowd cheered!! Imagine what kind of impact that would make on the world, telling them that the Palestinians are fair, good people, who really do want peace and not bloodshed.
Now imagine the same statement made by a Palestinian, and then crowd Booing him off stage.
How would you interpret that??
Well, that’s exactly how the world interpreted when the Jews did it.
That’s what happens by these rallies, that are not representative of Daas Torah but rather political positions. We cannot have non-religious, non-Torah Jews representing Klall Yisroel. Who knows what they will say, what they will do? Yet that is exactly what happens at such rallies. You can never control what will be said, and what is said is NOT measured according to Daas Torah but rather according to non-religious ideas of what should and should not be said.
I cannot be part of that.
"(I am aware of the alleged statement of Rav Avigdor Miller that the yeshivos should not go to the rallies for Soviet Jewry b/c "all you need is for one gay club to show up" or something to that effect. I will be dan likaf zechus that, if that statement was indeed made, it was because he felt that the government was already failing and they were unnecessary. The alternative is not pleasant. Yes, I know Moderator will bash me for saying that.)"
I don’t know of such a statement by Rabbi Miller, but it so sounds like something he would say. Save you Judging l'kaf zechus; believe me he wouldn’t accept it anyway. Gays are enemies of G-d (i.e. those who flaunt their gayness), and we do not join with G-d's enemies to rally against our other enemies.
"Another issue that was raised was the pritzus at the rally. Mashal limah hadavar domeh: If someone must be rushed to the hospital, does one make sure that the nurses are all dressed in accordance with the laws of tznius, or does one see what he can do to those ends after having transported that person to the hospital first"
Bad moshol. In the case of the hospital, without the doctor the kid will die. Nothing less than a miracle would save him. Without your particular rally nobody suddenly finds themselves in mortal danger. Nobody will say that without that rally, we do not need a miracle but with that rally now we are safe. But that’s the situation with the doctor.
If your rally is so powerful, why only one? Why not another, every month? Or week? If its really sofek nefashos, why not demand that everyone take off from work, come from all over the world, and why only for a few hours? wouldn’t it make a bigger impact if we were there every day?? And how about emails? Why aren’t we demanding that everyone take off from work and school to send emails all day to Washington - that’s hishtadlus too, right? And if its safek nefashos you should do it on shabbos as well!
Who decided that specifically this rally and that time and place fulfills the requirements of safek nefashos - and that more rallies aren’t still required for safek nefashos? If so, when? Where? How?
Please. Obviously nobody can claim that any individual hishtadlus such as this is required as safek nefashos. We hope it does something, but halachicly nobody is going to obligated to violate shabbos to come to this rally, and not having the rally would not suddenly mean we now need a miracle (but thank g-d for the rally! now we don’t need a miracle anymore?!??!)
"Of course, instances of Jewish terror are wrong; wanton murder is certainly not advocated by Yahadus, including Rav Elchanan's reason that it will provoke. However, complying with " haba lihargicha hashkeim lihargo" is by no stretch of the imagination being a rodef!"
This only applies to a specific individual who is coming after you to kill you. You cant just decide in your mind that "these people" as a whole are guilty of that. Secondly, the violence committed by the extremists, like the Kahanists serve only to create more killers against the Jews, not to reduce them.
More importantly, acts of inflammatory rhetoric do not "kill" any attackers - they only create attackers. When Tatiana Soskin spread cartoons of Mohannad as a pig stepping on the Koran in Arab neighborhoods, the Arabs made a riot in direct retaliation. She was a Rodef. When
Those who "retaliate" for violence with more violence are rodfim - haba lehargecha etc does not say to kill others in retaliation for an attack. It says to kill the attacker. Such retaliations serve only to inspire more attacks, and that makes it redifah. (That was the context of Rav Elchonon's statement, btw).
"As we all know, the Israeli Army lost tens of soldiers hyd trying to avoid civilian casualties which the Palestinians has tried to make inevitable by booby-trapping houses, using civilians as human shields, by smuggling weapons in ambulances, and taking refuge in houses, schools, the church in Bais Lechem, and in hospitals."
We do not "all know" that the Israeli military did not / does not harm innocents. They are not all Tzadikim, to say the least, and are no more trustworthy than any other military.
"Jews cannot abstain from a course of action if it will be wrongly accused of misdeeds; "
If in the wake of accusations of misdeeds, Jews will be killed then we should definitely avoid such courses of action.
"Jews never stopped baking matzos as a result of the blood libels. Blood libels will always be around in some shape or form; it is impossible to avoid them."
True, but if, in the Matzo bakeries, people would yell "Death to the Goyim", that surely would be a Rodef. And the inflammatory acts of the settlers, the making of the settlements themselves are not obligatory Mitzvos but do indeed serve to generate Jew hatred, Palestinian nationalism, and danger to Jews.
"With regards to the Mi'Sheberach for Tzahal, it is not historically accurate to say that a Mi'Sheberach has never been made for a specific group of people. We say a Mi'Sheberach for Cholim in my shul. ..."
You missed the point. We don’t say a Mi sheberach for any one group of cholim than any other. So if you want to make a mi sheberach for all Jews in danger all over the world, that’s one thing, but for one group over another, that’s plain Zionism.
"never before in our history have we had such a situation where people literally sacrifice themselves, day in and day out, knowing that manning the borders or checkpoints could very realistically end their life someday. "
Jews in
"I say this because no one from the yeshiva world stood up and said, " This is an eis tzarah l'yaakov forget the politics," and instead hid behind the excuse of the bochurim missing seder."
Its not politics, its Torah. And because it is an ais tzorah that means we should NOT do what they did at the rally.
"The only time the sedorim in Volozhin ever stopped was b/c Rav Chaim Volozhiner wanted everyone to see a group who was making Aliyah off. Eretz Yisrael should be high enough on our radar screen that we can skip the petty politics. Kein nireh la'aniyas dati."
Your assumption that making this rally is good is what is in question. Those who said not to go held it is counterproductive and better - [for Eretz Yisroel and the Jews there if we do not go.
WanderingSoul Posted - 20 May 2002 20:06
Moderator,
In light of what you say here, what is the rationale behind the esteemed rabbonim who endorsed the rally?
MODERATOR Posted - 20 May 2002 20:42
Well, there weren’t many of them to begin with. Most didn’t endorse it at all.
Of the handful that did, some (such as Rav Henoch Lebowitz) regretted the endorsement when he heard what the rally was "really" going to be.
So there definitely was misinformation fed to the esteemed rabbis, which means you have to know what exactly they believed they were endorsing. Ask them if they endorsed Booing Paul Wolfowitz off the stage, or if they endorsed their Talmidim standing there with the half naked men and women.
Also, Rav Shach ZTL writes in his letters that the concept of Hisgaros B'Umos - not demanding things of the nations - is "unknown even to many great torah scholars and Tzadikim".
Beyond that, you'd have to ask them what their rationale was. I cant speak for other people, and I do not want to put words in their mouth.
No comments:
Post a Comment