Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
ultra-Orthodox Jews against Isarel. What does Chaim say?
judeanoncapta:
--- Quote from: Kahane-Was-Right BT on January 21, 2008, 01:37:49 AM ---
--- Quote from: jdl4ever on January 09, 2008, 10:37:27 PM ---Well, if the Rambam thought like the Satmurs, he would have said that Chanukah shouldn't be celebrated since we fought against the occupiers of Israel before the Massiah and brought a wicked kingdom to Israel in the near future.
--- End quote ---
You are saying we established a "wicked kingdom" but this is not what Hanukkah is about. It is about Torah-true Jews led by the Hashmoneans rebelling against the wicked hellenists and Syrian greeks to retake the Beis Hamikdash and re-establish the control of Jewish affairs to Torah-true rabbis rather than saducees, hellenists and other defilers of the faith. The miracle was that G-d gave victory to the Torah-true Jews and enabled them to purify Judaism again. It has nothing to do with who the king was or became.
--- End quote ---
And yet the Rambam praises the fact that there were Jewish Kings at all, despite how they later acted.
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
--- Quote from: judeanoncapta on January 21, 2008, 03:26:57 PM ---
--- Quote from: Kahane-Was-Right BT on January 21, 2008, 01:35:10 AM ---
--- Quote from: jdl4ever on January 09, 2008, 10:29:08 PM ---It proves plenty. The Rambam is saying that having a wicked Kingdom of Israel is better than having no state and being subjugated by foreigners such as the Greek-Syrians.
--- End quote ---
No. The Hashmoneans re-established Jewish (true Torah observant Jewish) control of the Beis Hamikdash. He is not referring to the kings, wicked or otherwise.
--- End quote ---
Have you read the first paragraph of the Laws of Hannukah in the rambam?
It is quite clear that he praises the Hasmonean re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty for over two hundred years which includes Antipater, Alexander Yannai and Herod.
--- End quote ---
But the point of the "Jewish kingdom" is not having to do with the king per se and his behavior, it has to do with the fact that Jews can freely live in our own holy land and that we have control of the Beis Hamikdash to do our temple service mitzvot. I don't think you have established from Rambam that he is saying it is better to have a wicked Jewish king than a non Jewish one. His point lies elsewhere. It is better that Jews have control of EY, rabbis control and Jews own Temple Mount, rather than be in exile, not free to serve Hashem in our land with our temple service, as happened after that 200 years.
To be more specific, what exactly changed by way of the Hasmonean revolt? We technically had jewish "sovereignty," but unfortunately through bribes and other meddling by the goyim, unfit rabbis with heretical beliefs (the sadduccees) often became kohen gadol and controlled the Temple Mount service, at times allowing nonkosher sacrifices to occur. But technically Jews were somewhat autonomous under the syrian greek auspices during this time. It remained so, even later under the Romans, after the hanukkah revolt. Autonomy was there. But what changed was the purity of the Temple service, no? It's worth looking into this further, I should brush up on this.
q_q_:
There are arguments I would put to neturei karta - explain this: how moshe killed the egyptian that beat the jew, chanukah,
But the argument that I would put to you who say the 3 oaths are not relevant in some way.
Just saying that ketuvot 110B-111A is not halacha, and is aggada, does not cut it. Because if it is aggada, then what does it teach?
Scholars here have said it is just different opinions.. and Reb Zeira was not of that opinion. However,
Reb Zeira (who was in bavel and wanted to go to israel) did not disagree with the 3 oaths, he just said it banned jews from going en masse. But it allowed individuals.
Here is a great challenge put to me by a non zionist in the diaspora..
Do you know of any source, pre modern zionism, that discusses this idea that the 3 oaths are not serious, or that they are not relevant, or do not apply, such as the idea that the 3 oaths are inderdependent, and if the nations break their oath with G-d and persecute us, then we can break our oath with G-d and go up en masse?
This website(which happens to be anti-semitic) has a full accurate copy of the soncino translation of the talmud
http://www.come-and-hear.com/tcontents.html
http://www.come-and-hear.com/kethuboth/kethuboth_0.html
Seder Nashim, Tractate Ketuvot, (end of) 110B to - mid 111A
Tzvi Ben Roshel1:
You cant look at and rely at all on an anti-semitic site (so its counted as if it doesn't exist).
If you want to learn Talmud go to http://www.dailygemara.com/
q_q_:
For goodness sake, the translation is soncino. I happen to have the soncino translation on CD from davka software too. It is not tampered with.
You are welcome to ignore that link if you want, and use a proper gemara. Or your own website that just has an audio of the daf, and the daf in hebrew. This does not affect my post at all..
My post has the same argument, without that link. Without even looking at that website. So if you are responding to it, then please deal with the substance.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version