Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
ultra-Orthodox Jews against Isarel. What does Chaim say?
judeanoncapta:
--- Quote from: q_q_ on January 27, 2008, 09:31:49 AM ---
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?
--- End quote ---
Yes, the Ramban who says that the Mitzvah of conquering Eretz Yisrael applies at all times. Obviously the three oaths are not taken into account if the Ramban is saying that we are ALWAYS obligated to conquer eretz yisrael.
Also the Vilna Gaon in the sefer Kol Hator says that the Jewish people should go to Israel with atleast 600,000 Jews at one time. That is the definition of en masse.
Also the Yaabetz Rabbi Yaaqov Emden says that we should move to Israel en masse. All of the Jewish people are required to go to Israel at all times.
Also Rashi who in his commentary on the verse in Song of Songs that the three oaths is based on, says "There are many Midrashim on this verse that do not make sense." and then goes on to say that the Gentiles and not the Jews are being sworn in this oath.
So there are plenty of Rabbanim who said at the time that there is no issur in moving back en masse. In fact, I would ask your non-zionist friend to find ONE poseq who brought this down as a halakha before the BACKLASH AGAINST the Modern Zionist Movement.
jdl4ever:
The Soncino is a conservative translation so you can't just rely on it alone but must read the Talmud together with the translation to make sure they are not mistranslating. However, I have used it and found this translation to be very accurate regardless of it's authors. Also it is very cheap. I would rather buy the Soncino than the artscroll since it is more reasonable.
q_q_:
Soncino is a publisher.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soncino
It goes back long before the reform/liberal/conservative e.t.c. movements. Neither their chumash, nor talmud translations are done by reform/conservative . It is all orthodox.
The talmud translation was done by Rabbi Isidore Epstein
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isidore_Epstein
The foreward to the translation was done by a former chief rabbi, rabbi dr hertz.
Conservative synagogues in america may use it but it is an orthodox translation. They just do not have any scholars to write their own translation. I have heard that they now have their own chumash translation..
The old Modern Orthodox shuls in britain have Soncino and Hertz chumashim. And there is no way that the rabbis would allow them in the shul if they were written by reform/conservative. That is just ridiculous.. Similar with the talmud translation..
So, you are very wrong about soncino.
jdl4ever:
Interesting. I didn't know it was an Orthodox translation.
q_q_:
--- Quote from: judeanoncapta on January 27, 2008, 05:10:42 PM ---
--- Quote from: q_q_ on January 27, 2008, 09:31:49 AM ---
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?
--- End quote ---
Yes, the Ramban who says that the Mitzvah of conquering Eretz Yisrael applies at all times. Obviously the three oaths are not taken into account if the Ramban is saying that we are ALWAYS obligated to conquer eretz yisrael.
Also the Vilna Gaon in the sefer Kol Hator says that the Jewish people should go to Israel with atleast 600,000 Jews at one time. That is the definition of en masse.
Also the Yaabetz Rabbi Yaaqov Emden says that we should move to Israel en masse. All of the Jewish people are required to go to Israel at all times.
Also Rashi who in his commentary on the verse in Song of Songs that the three oaths is based on, says "There are many Midrashim on this verse that do not make sense." and then goes on to say that the Gentiles and not the Jews are being sworn in this oath.
So there are plenty of Rabbanim who said at the time that there is no issur in moving back en masse. In fact, I would ask your non-zionist friend to find ONE poseq who brought this down as a halakha before the BACKLASH AGAINST the Modern Zionist Movement.
--- End quote ---
He is on paltalk, in a room called Torah Revolution or Torah Nation. He is the admin. He has a name like TorasMosheEmmes
I think it is EST 11PM to around 4AM.
If you do go on and have a chat with him, then please let me know how it goes.. He is a baal teshuva, who became religious only around 7 or 8 years ago, but he is very frum and intelligent and logical and well informed.
In britain(GMT, and GMT=EST+5), that means me logging on at 3AM, which is not feasible this week).
maybe if I get up early, then before I get to work.. I am not really a morning person.
I noticed about Rashi on the oaths , The pesach artscroll machzor has his commentary on it. It is strange that he says that oath is G-d to the nations. Since the gemara has it as being G-d to the jewish people. Does rashi have any basis for saying it is G-d to the nations?
Putting aside whether they bring it as halacha, he says they teach it as not to go up en masse. Regarding whether it is as halacha. I put it to him that the RAMBAM did not include it in the mishneh torah. He said he did, though not explicitly.. He says the RAMBAM Has a section on oaths, and the seriousness of oaths. And, he says (as neturei karta do) , that the epistle to yemen which the RAMBAM wrote, where it quotes the oath from shir hashirim, he thinks the rambam is telling them not to go up to israel en masse. (what else would the rambam be telling them, quoting an oath not to awaken the love.. )We love israel anyway, right? I do not see any plain meaning there regarding our relationship with israel. Only what the gemara says it means.. So that must be what he is telling them.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version