Jump to content


Photo

Zionism


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#61 Moderator #3

Moderator #3

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 66 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 08:08 PM

Zionism At A Glance

"Zionism is avodah zorah; Religious Zionism is religion combined with avodah zorah."

- Rav Elchonon Wasserman ZTL

Posted Image

#62 shaya

shaya

    Member

  • Members
  • 108 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 08:39 AM

I am asking how it can be that so many knowledgeable and good people can believe in something that is so clearly wrong?



your question can be asked about all of תנך...
Start with God - the first step in learning is bowing down to God; only fools thumb their noses at such wisdom and learning.

#63 taon

taon

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 421 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 04:28 PM

Someone of them only believed in Zionism after the holocaust, so shock may be a cause. Also, the world is getting more and more confused, the yetzer hora is making a last stand, and it becomes that much harder to see the truth.

#64 Rabbi Shapiro

Rabbi Shapiro

    Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 11 May 2012 - 04:38 PM

Rav Shapiro,

I do not expect any Zionists to produce an argument you could not refute. Your expertise on this subject is well known to many people, from the MO community all the way to the Satmar community. I have but one question. It is indisputable that there are very knowledgeable rabbonim who were Zionists. I know they were not the greatest talmidei chachamim in the world relative to those who opposed Zionism, but that just begs the question. Even if the Zionists never were as great as the Chofetz Chaim and Chazon Ish, why would talmidei chachamim believe in Zionism if it is so obviously wrong? How could they not see the arguments against them?

Please do not get the wrong impression. I am not saying there is any basis for what these rabbonim believed. I know Zionism is wrong according to the Torah. I am asking how it can be that so many knowledgeable and good people can believe in something that is so clearly wrong?

From the Brisker Rav on this topic:

"Maran [the Brisker Rav] was once asked how was it possible that such intelligent, virtuous people could do foolish things that are so destructive to Yiddishkeit. He answered by quoting Koheles (10:1): "Flies of death will ruin precious blended oil; a little foolishness outweighs wisdom and honor." Just as oil mixed with fragrant spices may be of the finest quality, if "flies of death" get into it, they ruin it and spoil its fragrance. So it is with wisdom and honor. If even a little foolishness gets mixed in, it befouls the entire person. Those into whom a bit of Zionism has penetrated are the same; this little foolishness perverts their intelligence and brings them to do things that are the opposite of wisdom." (The Brisker Rav, vol. 3 p. 369).

The Ridvaz (on Chumash, if memory serves, it is in Parshas Terumah) quotes Rav Chaim Volozhen as saying that if a person believes even one little piece of Apikorsus, he cannot understand the truth of the Torah in any area at all.

Apikorsus is like a virus. It infects a Talmid Chacham like a virus infects a supercomputer. It doesn't matter how strong and sophisticated the computer is, or how much data it has. If it is infected with a virus, it can render all the output unreliable.

So too even a Talmid Chacham can become foolish. This can happen if he is influenced by non-Jewish teachings (see here and listen here). And if what he believes happens to be Apikorsus, then the virus is so damaging that the Talmid Chacham will not be reliable in any area of Torah learning. Just as a smaller computer that is virus-free is more trustworthy than a bigger computer that is infected with a virus, so too the Torah opinions of a smaller person who protects his mind from outside influences (including, by the way, the Yetzer Horah) is more trustworthy than a bigger Talmid Chacham whose ideas have been influenced by foregin thinking.

One more thing: It was always destined to be this way. In Sefer Shoftim it tells how in the days of the Baal worshipers, there were only 300 Jews in all of Klall Yisroel that did not bow to the Baal. And our Seforim tell us that in the days before Moshiach comes, the Yetzer Horah for Apikorsus is going to be greater than the Yetzer Horah for Avodah Zorah in those days.

If we find it hard to fathom how the Yetzer Horah could get so many intelligent people to be idol worshipers in the olden days, we should just take a look at what is going on in our days. Said the Brisker Rav: "This state that they have managed to create [i.e. Israel] is the greatest triumph of the Satan since the sin of the Golden Calf" (p. 364).

#65 Rabbi Shapiro

Rabbi Shapiro

    Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 11 May 2012 - 05:11 PM

I guess we can conclude here with the first problem with Zionism that I mentioned earlier - it is nothing but secular Nationalism, which is a set of values antithetical to Judaism. A form of idolatry, Rav Elchonon Wasserman points out.

The Zionists created it in order to replace Judaism, which they thought was a bad thing for the Jews, and to create the "New Hebrew Nation" out of the soon-to-be refurbished Am Yisroel. Zionism has a totally different definition than Judaism of what a Jew is, what a good Jew is, and what the Jewish Nation is. The Zionists used Communist-like brainwashing tactics to convince the Jews to surrender their Jewish identity to them, to allow them to re-define Jewishness and to eliminate Judaism in the process. Many Jews succumbed and changed their identity. Religious Zionism succumbed partly, by accepting the Zionist values, including determination of when to give your life for the "cause," but were "פותח על שני סעיפים" - worshiping idols and being frum at the same time.

Now we understand what I said earlier, that the importance Zionists give to Israel, including making a national holiday in honor of its founding, is the influence of a non-Jewish idea, Nationalism, that seeped into their religious life. This is the first reason why Jews, even modern ones, should not have anything to do with Zionism, including their celebrations. Because the entire idea of a Nation-State in the Zionist sense is not a Jewish concept to begin with. It's as if some Jews would be influenced by some pagan custom or attitude. We have nothing to do with such things. It is alien to Judaism.

Worse, by giving this foreign influence religious value, you have created an Avodah Zorah. (Never mind that this particular influence was created in order to destroy our religion.)

Even worse, by making this non-Jewish attitude central to your Jewish identity and Hashkafa, you have been a victim of the original Zionist goal of replacing Judaism with secular non-Jewish values.

Which brings us now to the second problem with Zionism: Having a Jewish state in Eretz Yisroel before Moshiach comes is a terrible Aveirah, that Chazal say comes with a terrible punishment. Hashem says:

"I will allow your flesh to be hunted down like animals in the fields." Rachman Latzlan.

(to be continued)

#66 Rabbi Shapiro

Rabbi Shapiro

    Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 29 May 2012 - 09:04 AM

The Prohibition of Creating a Jewish State in Eretz Yisroel During Golus

Until now we were discussing that the the ideals of Zionism are contrary to those of our Torah, and believing in them is believing in ideas that oppose our Torah, which is heresy. But even without any Nationalistic ideals, even without believing that a Nation-State, contributes to one's Jewish Nationhood or Jewishness, the very existence of a Jewish sovereign state in Eretz Yisroel during Golus is a terrible sin, punishable by of Jews being hunted down and killed en masse, like animals - that's a quote from Chazal.

Prerequisite background material: Contrary to what many people believe, the Golus is not a curse in and of itself. The need for the Golus is the curse. See this and this. In those links you will see the role Golus plays in our lives.

While we are not worthy of being in Eretz Yisroel, we need Golus, like a sick patient needs a life support system. If we leave Golus before we are cured and well again, we die, רחמנא לצלן. Therefore, anything that Moshiach is going to accomplish because the Golus will then be over, we are prohibited to do until his arrival. Included in this is taking over Eretz Yisroel. That is something that Moshiach will do when he arrives, and not having possession of Eretz Yisroel is one of the required elements of Golus, which Hashem did for both our sake as well as the sake of Eretz Yisroel. As the Bais Halevy (Vayetze) says, the nation not being consolidated in Eretz Yisroel while we are still not worthy of Moshiach is vital for our survival, for in Eretz Yisroel we are judged harsher, and are subject to punishments and curses that do not apply to people living in Chutz Laaretz. Hashem threw us out of Eretz Yisroel because Klall Yisroel as a whole is not on the level these days to live there. Individuals of course may, for everyone can reach any level, but Klall Yisroel collectively will only severely hurt themselves as well as hurt Eretz Yisroel if we in our current state make Eretz Yisroel our home.

Not making Eretz Yisroel our homeland during Golus is to our benefit, and for the benefit of the land.

בית הלוי על בראשית פרק כח פסוק י
דמשמעות הכתוב דעיקר כוונת הגלות הוא היציאה מארץ ישראל וזהו שאמר ויצאו שלא יהיו כאן. והכוונה בזה דארץ ישראל בקדושתה אינה סובלת עליה עוברי עבירה והיא ארץ אשר ה' דורש אותה מראשית שנה עד אחרית שנה וע"כ כשחטאו שלחם ממנה, וזה לא היה לעונש על חטאם דהרי היה יכול להענישם בעודם יושבים עליה רק היה לטובתם דאם היו עונשים באים לא היה להם תקומה חלילה וע"כ שלחם לחו"ל אשר שם גם אם אינם צדיקים יוכלו להתקיים, ועיין ברמב"ן פרשת בחקותי שכתב דכל הקללות שבתוכה נאמרה רק בהיותם בארץ ישראל ולא בהיותם בחו"ל. ועכ"פ העיקר הוא היציאה. ואמר

The Golus was a Gezeirah from Hashem which we are prohibited to violate. We dare not violate it for our own sake - and for the sake of Eretz Yisroel, for not only will we be hunted and killed like animals r"l if we do, but the land itself will suffer tremendous pain if we return before Moshiach comes.

Unfortunately, the Gezeiras HaGalus has in fact been violated, ר"ל.

It can be violated by Klall Yisroel collectively making Eretz Yisroel into its homeland (even if there would not be a Jewish State there), as well as taking over Eretz Yisroel politically, i.e. making it into a Jewish State, even without any mass influx of Jews. There are other actions that constitute a violation of the Gezeiras HaGalus as well.

And even without any nationalistic tendencies, and regardless if the State is run according to Halachah or not. The existence of a Jewish State in EY during Golus is itself a violation of the Gezeiras HaGalus.

Hashem revealed to us the parameters of the Gezeiras HaGalus, as well as revealing to us the horrific consequences of violating it, in the Gemora in Kesuvos 111a. The Sugya is known as the שלש שבועות, "Three Oaths."

As we will see later on, the Zionists have struggled furiously to find a "heter" for the existence of Medinas Yisroel. Yet, despite their attempts, and despite their claims, they have produced none.

(to be continued)

#67 Rabbi Shapiro

Rabbi Shapiro

    Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 19 June 2012 - 09:22 AM

We saw here that the Golus is not merely a punishment - Hashem could have punished us while still in EY. Hashem put us in Golus because, due to our sins, we need the Golus in order to survive and in order for us to fulfill our purpose of our existence. Until we do Teshuva and are healed of our sins, we must wander the world, sanctifying it

The purpose of Hashem creating the world was in order for us to sanctify it, thereby bringing Moshiach and receiving eternal bliss. And since, because of our sins, the only way we can accomplish this is by wandering the world in Golus, locally sanctifying different places that need sanctifying, what emerges is that the very goal of creation depends on our accepting the Golus. If we choose to end the Golus before its proper time, that is before we have finished sanctifying the world and brought Moshiach, we have sabotaged the very purpose of creation.

Yet the Golus is an unnatural state. Klall Yisroel outside of Eretz Yisroel is an aberration. But because of our sins, we must endure it. Hashem could have punished us for our Sinas Chinam in Eretz Yusroel, but Golus was not merely a punishment - it is what we did to ourselves by severing from our souls the ability to sanctify the whole world from EY. We must now go out of our home and deal with the world hands-on.

In addition, the Bais Halevi adds, because EY is the most spiritually sensitive place on earth, and all since done in EY are worse that those done in Chutz LaAretz, it is for our own benefit that we not live as a nation in EY any longer, because our sins will bring upon us terrible punishments, nto to mention pollute the land itself.

So as long as we have not fixed those sins for which we have been kicked out of EY, we need the Golus to fulfill the purpose of our existence in the world and the very purpose of creation, as well as for our protection from the strict standards of judgement for those who sin in EY, as well as EY itself needing a respite from sinners who pollute it and cause it pain.

Eretz Yisroel itself hurts when people sin in it.

But all of this is unnatural. Jews' natural home is EY. But until we fix our Aveiros we are forced to live in an unnatural state - Golus.

So in order to protect us, and deter us from trying to return to Eretz Yisroel before the time, or otherwise ignoring the need to remain in Golus, and in order to ensure that the purpose of creation is fulfilled (i.e. Klall Yisroel sanctifying the universe) and in order to protect Eretz Yisroel from being violated and pained because unworthy people will settle in it, Hashem commanded us not to violate the Gezeias Hagalus.

And because of the terrible consequences that happen to the world and Klall Yisroel and Eretz Yisroel if we ignore the Golus - i.e. the mission of Klall Yisroel is sabotaged and the purpose of the universe remains unfulfilled - the punishment for ignoring the Golus is terrible to behold.

An horrific punishment is meted out for ignoring the Golus and trying to regain our natural situation before its time.

Hashem made us promise we won't violate the Golus. And, the Gemora says (Kesuvos 111a) if we chas v'sholom violate that promise, the punishment is that Jews will be hunted down freely, and slaughtered like animals in the field”.

This is the most horrific punishment anywhere in the Torah. Jews will be hunted down, without restraint, just like game in the fields.

The reason for this is, the Golus is necessary in order for Klall Yisroel to fulfill their mission, and for the very purpose of the world to be fulfilled. And there is a natural urge for Jews to resist Golus. But its necessity – a necessity that we brought on ourselves through our sins, מפני חטאינו גלינו מארצינו – requires that, for the sake of Klall Yisroel and the sake of the world, Golus must be accepted no matter what.

The Gemora says:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת כתובות דף קיא/א

ג' שבועות הללו למה אחת שלא יעלו ישראל בחומה ואחת שהשביע הקדוש ברוך הוא את ישראל שלא ימרדו באומות העולם ואחת שהשביע הקדוש ברוך הוא את העובדי כוכבים שלא ישתעבדו בהן בישראל יותר מדאי




These promises were exacted by Hashem in order to maintain the integrity of the Golus, to ensure it is allowed to do its job – allowing the Jews to live all over the world, wherever Hashem sends them, in order to elevate and sanctify the world.

The first promise: Klall Yisroel will not settle Eretz Yisroel with strength (lit. “like a wall” or: “with a wall”). Having a stronghold in Eretz Yisroel does violence to the Golus because that is one of the redemptive actions that Moshiach is going to perform – bringing the Jews back to and establishing Jewish sovereignty over Eretz Yisroel.

The second promise: Klall Yisroel will not rebel against the nations of the world. During Golus, Jews must be subservient to the Nations. We are in exile among them. Golus is their domain, while we are exiled we are one sheep among 70 wolves, and it is foolhardy for a sheep to wage war against 70 wolves. Rebelling against the Nations does violence to the Golus because during Golus the Jews must be subservient to the Nations.

The third promise: The Nations of the world promised that they would not persecute the Jews “overly much” (lit. “more than enough”). In order for Golus to do its job, the Jews must be able to live throughout the world. Even though Golus was not designed to be a comfortable experience to say the least, but in order for the Jews to do their job of sanctifying the world from their various locations in Golus, they need to be able to live in those locations and so the required sanctifying. If the Nations persecute the Jews to the point that they can’t do their job, violence is done to the Golus.

These rules were enacted by Hashem in order to ensure at nothing interferes with the Golus process, which is at once so very unnatural, yet essential for the fulfillment of the purpose of the universe.

The terrible punishment for violating the Golus – “I will permit your flesh to be treated like game in the field” – was the reason that the tribe of Efraim were all killed in the desert after leaving Egypt. Because they did not wait for Hashem to take them out during the Geulah of Yetzias Mitzrayim, and left on their own, they were all cut down and killed in the desert. The bloodbath after Bar Kochba was because of the violation of Golus as well. Any redemptive activity before the redemption is a terrible Aveirah and incurs a terrible punishment r”l.

Efforts to create a Jewish sovereign State in Eretz Yisroel during Golus, and certainly if it is successfully created, is a violation of the Golus as well, and is subject to the terrible punishment of אני מתיר את בשרכם וכו'.

And the fact that the Zionists had to fight a bloody war (more than one) to get their State makes it an even more severe breaking of the promises above.

This is a reason to oppose Zionism even if it would not carry with it anti-Torah philosophy, even if it would not be a Nationalistic movement, and even if it were not designed to replace Jewish values and redefine the Jewish nation.

This objection to Zionism is an objection not to the philosophy of Zionism but to the simple existence of the State of Israel, regardless of who or why it was created.

The very existence of a Jewish sovereign State in EY in Golus, particular one that was only came about because the Zionists defeated non-Jews in a war, is a violation of the Golus, and that, in and of itself, is the problem.

This has nothing to do with politics or Israel being “good for the Jews” or “bad for the Jews.” It is a theological, Halachic opposition, which states that even if politically Israel would be the best thing for the Jews, it is still a violation of the Golus and is therefore prohibited in the most severe way, and puts us in the same position r”l that the tribe of Efraim was in when they left Egypt early.

(to be continued)

#68 Chaim613

Chaim613

    Member

  • Members
  • 75 posts

Posted 26 July 2012 - 08:10 PM

Does visiting "Independence Hall" in Tel Aviv, contain any prohibition? Is it like going into a church or going to an exhibit on evolution in a museum....?

#69 Rabbi Shapiro

Rabbi Shapiro

    Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 01 August 2012 - 06:54 AM

What do they exhibit there?

#70 Rabbi Shapiro

Rabbi Shapiro

    Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 07 June 2013 - 07:51 AM

Important Kinus This Sunday Against the Gezeiras Shmad in Israel

 

 

Attached Files



#71 YosefTorah

YosefTorah

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 29 April 2014 - 12:45 PM

Rabbi Shapiro, I was just reading Rabbi Aviner's pamphlet Do Not Ascend like a Wall. I found it pretty convincing. I have also seen the Rav's refutation of it  but I only saw part refutations and I do not know whether a full refutation exists. Why should it be rejected? 



#72 taon

taon

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 421 posts

Posted 01 May 2014 - 04:13 PM

Like you said, we have refutations of various arguments around. I don't think the Rav has the time or need to respond to every argument in every book. Are there particular arguments which bother you?



#73 YosefTorah

YosefTorah

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 05 May 2014 - 12:24 PM

Yeah, there are some arguments that bother me. First, what is the response to the letter of R' Meir Simcha of Dvinsk? Also, what about the argument that it is a Machlokes in the gemorah (specifically Yoma 10a). Also, Doesn't the Gra say that the oaths only forbid buiding the Beis Hamikdash? Also, I have a heard time with the fact that the neither the Rosh,  Rambam, or Rif bring down the Oaths l'halacha. (Yes I know the Rambam mentions it in Igeres Teiman) But why would these Rishonim bring them down L'halacha? 



#74 Rabbi Shapiro

Rabbi Shapiro

    Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 05 May 2014 - 02:02 PM

Yeah, there are some arguments that bother me. First, what is the response to the letter of R' Meir Simcha of Dvinsk? Also, what about the argument that it is a Machlokes in the gemorah (specifically Yoma 10a). Also, Doesn't the Gra say that the oaths only forbid buiding the Beis Hamikdash? Also, I have a heard time with the fact that the neither the Rosh,  Rambam, or Rif bring down the Oaths l'halacha. (Yes I know the Rambam mentions it in Igeres Teiman) But why would these Rishonim bring them down L'halacha? 

These were all answered on the old site. Please see these places:

 

 http://classic.frumteens.com/search.php?mode=doit&search=balfour&andor=+and+&forum=0&searchdate=0



#75 YosefTorah

YosefTorah

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 06 May 2014 - 12:52 PM

For a while I have been reading thru the old site (not just since yesterday) and the myriad index's of it. And I have some of those questions I mentioned above. I did  realize, though, that some of my questions are not really kashes. For instance I say the Rav say that that Gra I mentioned does not exist. Also, the proof from Yoma 9b is a pretty (really) bad proof. Just from reading Rav Aviner about it is clear that that Gemorah is not at all conflicting with the Oaths. Because its pretty clear from that Gemorah that the oaths are only talking about in the days of Ezra that the Jews should have gone up as a wall but nowhere does that gemorah say that in the future (i.e our time) your supposed to go up as a wall. But I still have the Kasha about the Rishonim. I know, as is mentioned, on the other site that there are certain Rishonim who mention the Oaths L'halacha but I still do not understand why people like the Rambam (in Mishna Torah not in Igeres teiman), Rosh, and Rif don't mention it L'halacha. Also, I have seen the Rav argue elsewhere that the oaths are not Aggadic but if it is aggadic as as you say some people hold that there are Addagic and the Teshuvos Noda B'yehuda 2: Yoreh Deah 161 disagree with Rabbeinu Tam and says that we dont learn halacha from Aggada even if it doesnt contradict halacha.



#76 Rabbi Shapiro

Rabbi Shapiro

    Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 06 May 2014 - 08:55 PM

For a while I have been reading thru the old site (not just since yesterday) and the myriad index's of it. And I have some of those questions I mentioned above. I did  realize, though, that some of my questions are not really kashes. For instance I say the Rav say that that Gra I mentioned does not exist. Also, the proof from Yoma 9b is a pretty (really) bad proof. Just from reading Rav Aviner about it is clear that that Gemorah is not at all conflicting with the Oaths. Because its pretty clear from that Gemorah that the oaths are only talking about in the days of Ezra that the Jews should have gone up as a wall but nowhere does that gemorah say that in the future (i.e our time) your supposed to go up as a wall. But I still have the Kasha about the Rishonim. I know, as is mentioned, on the other site that there are certain Rishonim who mention the Oaths L'halacha but I still do not understand why people like the Rambam (in Mishna Torah not in Igeres teiman), Rosh, and Rif don't mention it L'halacha. Also, I have seen the Rav argue elsewhere that the oaths are not Aggadic but if it is aggadic as as you say some people hold that there are Addagic and the Teshuvos Noda B'yehuda 2: Yoreh Deah 161 disagree with Rabbeinu Tam and says that we dont learn halacha from Aggada even if it doesnt contradict halacha.

 

I would suggest that if you want to learn about the Oaths, that you pick up a copy of the Satmar Rebbe's Vayoel Moshe. He answers these questions there. In fact, it is the main topic of the Sefer. The Pnei Yehoshua and the Rambam are included in the discussion. You will see, for example, that the pnei Yehoshua is a much worse proof than even you realized. The Gemora never says that the Jews "should have" gone up like a wall, even then. All it says is that "had they" gone up like a wall they would have merited etc. . This is no different than when Chazal say, for example, that "had Moshe gone into Eretz Yisroel, the Bais HaMikdash would never have been destroyed." It does not mean that Moshe did wrong by not going into Eretz Yisroel - Hashem told him not to. It means that had he been zocheh o have gone in, then good things would have happened. The same with the Gemora in Yoma. Had the Jews merited a Geulah and gone in during the days of Ezra etc. But it does not even say they should have done so.

 

As for the Rambam not bringing them, I also discussed that at length on the old site. In short, first, the Rambam not only "mentions" the Shevuos in Igeres Taimon, he warns us not to violate them. According to many Poskim, if the Rambam mentions something in Igeres Taimon, that would override any contradictory content in Mishne Torah, assuming there is a contradiction. But besides that, the reason the Rambam (and others) do not quote the Shevuos as a Halachah is because it is not adding any prohibitions that didn't exist before. The Shevuos are only a punishment for being Kofer in the Gezeiras HaGalus, which the Rambam says is only over when the signs of Moshiach's arrival have been fulfilled, which of course has not happened yet. Again, please see Vayoel Moshe - this is straight out of there.

 

But regardless of what the reason is for the Rambam not bringing them, the reason cannot be that he does not hold from them, because if that were true, he would be contradicting himself in Igeres Taimon. You cannot learn a pshat in the Rambam that the Rambam himself clearly did not hold of.

 

Besides which, the Shevuos have been invoked in actual practice throughout the last 2,000 years in Golus by various Rishonim and Achronim - including those who knew full well of the Rambam. In fact, until the Zionists came along, nobody ever claimed that the Shevuos were not binding (and even the Zionists didn't have the gall to make such a claim at the beginning), and nobody ever said that the Rambam's omission means he disregarded them. On the contrary - we have the Megilas Esther on the Sefer HaMitzvos saying that the Rambam omitted the Mitzvah of Yishuv Haaretz because of the Shevuos. Although the Megillas Esther is interpreting the Shevuos is a much more strcit fashion than the majority of authorities, who hold they do not preclude individuals from living in Eretz Yisroel, still, the Megilas Esther had no problem learning in the Rambam that the Shevuos are binding. 

 

Your question regarding Halachah from Agadah is also discussed on the old site - please refer. The idea is, frankly, silly. Let us assume, arguendo, that the Shevuos are Agdiata and cannot be used to derive prohibitions. Still, the Gemora says that if Jews do violate the Shevuos, they will be hunted down and killed like animals. Even if there would be no Halachic prohibition to violate them, how would anyone who believes Chazal's warning violate them? So there is no Halachic prohibition - what difference does that make? We know that violating the Shevuos will result in Jews being killed like animals. Is that what you want to happen? (Especially since we know that violating the Shevuos has resulted in that in the past - as in the Bnei Efraim).

 

But the fact is, they are Halachah. The definition of Halachah is when we are told we may or may not do something; Agada is an incident from which we derive lessons. The Gemora is telling us that we are not allowed to go from Bavel to Eretz Yisroel because of these Shevuos which we derive from Pesukim, and that if we do, we incur a punishment. That, by definition, is Halachah. When we are told not to do something, something in actual practice, that is Halachah. Note that the Gemora uses the Shevuos in actual practice. Again, that, by definition, is Halachah. (Compare, for example, the Gemora in Shevuos about the Jews making an Oath on Har SInai to keep the Mitzvos. We use that L'halachah for אין שבועה חל על שבועה etc.). But as I mentioned, the entire question is moot. Chazal said Jews will be - and have been - massacred en masse for violating these Oaths. Halachic prohibition or not, you have to be insane - or a Kofer - to violate them.

 

Once again, I suggest that if you want to know the answers to such questions, you pick up a copy of Vayoel Moshe which is, to this day, the best Sefer, by far, written on this topic. And although you would not know it from reading Aviner's tracts, it already answers those questions that you mentioned he raises.



#77 YosefTorah

YosefTorah

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 24 June 2014 - 11:15 PM

I'm making my way through Vayoel Moshe. Just a quick question. A certain person was arguing with me the other day that the Gedolim who were against the state only said it because they believed it would turn into "ani matir es bsarchem" but now when they would see that it has not turned into that they wouldnt not be against it. My response was that the gedolim were against it because the held that that's 100% halacha. It has nothing to do with we see in the stat "matir es bsarchem". Correct me if I am wrong on that point. Also, a side point of have seen some of what the Rav has written regarding Rav Kook. I don't understand how, if what you said is true, Rav Elyashiv have Rav kook as his misader Kidushin and Rav elyashiv once got upset when someone disrespected Rav kook. Pls explain. Thank you.