Rav Ovadia Yosef the spiritual leaders of shas is dead

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Holy thread derailment, Batman!

[muman613]

Holy thread derailment, Batman!

 

[Mein Koran]

I do not wish to continue this in this thread, maybe some where else... Saint Ignatius was a pagan that converted to Christianity, his father worked for the Romans and his mother was a Jew. The Romans had control and influence over his life and his beliefs. Do you not think it had an impact on his writings? That is one persons writings, there are others that go against the Trinity(Jesus was G-d) that were not included in the Canon. There were other followers that believed Jesus was " The Messiah",  but was not divine, because it go's against Torah...

Ignatius was not a pagan, he was most likely a pharisaic jew. There is a small chance he was a sadducean jew but its unlikely since almost all of the early jewish christians came from the pharisees. Second, no he was not influenced by any pagan religion. The didache, which discusses Jesus' divinity, was written entirely by Jews. As were all the epistles. There are no writings from the first century from Christians which say Jesus was not divine. The entire reason Jesus was put to death was because he claimed to be the essence of God placed within a human body.

[muman613]

Ignatius was not a pagan, he was most likely a pharisaic jew. There is a small chance he was a sadducean jew but its unlikely since almost all of the early jewish christians came from the pharisees. Second, no he was not influenced by any pagan religion. The didache, which discusses Jesus' divinity, was written entirely by Jews. As were all the epistles. There are no writings from the first century from Christians which say Jesus was not divine. The entire reason Jesus was put to death was because he claimed to be the essence of God placed within a human body.

That is what you believe. We believe quite a bit differently. Let us leave it at that. Unless you want to explain what kind of Jew is damned to eternal hell or something like that. But we are prepared...

[edu]

Someone on this forum asked is there any sages that might indeed classify Islam as pagan
The answer, there are views like that too.
See http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,70842.0.html

As far as those attempting to whitewash Shas by saying that they abstained on some Oslo vote, first of all they did support the government to get it to that point in time when there was an Oslo vote.
Secondly Shas voted for the Wye Accords giving up parts of Chevrone (Hebron) and other parts of Israel and which also included handing more weapons over to the terrorists.

[muman613]

Someone on this forum asked is there any sages that might indeed classify Islam as pagan
The answer, there are views like that too.
See http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,70842.0.html

As far as those attempting to whitewash Shas by saying that they abstained on some Oslo vote, first of all they did support the government to get it to that point in time when there was an Oslo vote.
Secondly Shas voted for the Wye Accords giving up parts of Chevrone (Hebron) and other parts of Israel and which also included handing more weapons over to the terrorists.

I remember that discussion, and it still is open in my mind, whether islam rises to avodah zarah or not. I just read through the discussion via your link and you present both arguments, whether it is idolatry to throw stones at kabbah (which is likened to the Roman diety Markolis).

Rather than continuing discussing this in the Rav Ovadiah thread we could continue with that topic back in the Torah section.

I hope it is clear that my opinion on this topic is not the psak halacha or anything. I try to learn what the sages think before forming my own opinion. And learn from any new information...

[muman613]

Edu,

I would appreciate if you can provide a link (other than JTF) which may provide an explanation of Shas involvement in the Oslo process... I am googling it now and have not found any data on this...

I found this, which states that the Rav's opinion on Pikuach Nefesh provided Rabin with a 'halachic' reason for Oslo:

http://972mag.com/could-ultra-orthodox-shas-or-arab-parties-be-israels-next-peacemakers/34529/

In fact, Shas’ position is complex.  Shas Interior Minister Eli Yishai has clearly stated that there should be no limits to construction in all the “Land of Israel,” but despite his role as deputy prime minister, he is not the final arbiter on Shas’ policy.  That role belongs to Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the elderly spiritual leader of the party.  Rabbi Yosef is known to be more sympathetic towards the idea of land for peace and essentially provided Rabin with his own Halachic (Jewish-legal) justification for the Oslo Accords in 1993.  Could Vaknin’s comments signal a shift back to this earlier policy as sanctioned by the great Rabbi himself?

[muman613]

This article implies that Shas abstained from the 1st Oslo vote...

http://www.thejerusalemconnection.us/blog/2012/10/22/political-memory-aryeh-deri-and-the-oslo-agreement.html

The former Shas Party leader Aryeh Deri had a central role in advancing the Oslo process. Deri led the Shas Party politically from its inception until he was forced to resign in 1999 following his conviction on bribery charges. The Shas Party abstained in the first Oslo Accords vote in the Knesset in 1993, and voted against the Second Oslo Agreement in 1995. However, this does not tell the full story. Shas joined with Meretz and Labor (both left wing parties in 1992 to form the Rabin government that forged the Oslo Accords. Without the six Knesset seats of Shas, the 62-member government coalition would have fallen. Deri’s Shas was not a left-wing party, but it refrained from undermining the first Oslo agreement. Steven Bayme of the American Jewish Committee put it this way: “Deri was a key player in the Oslo Accords signed with the Palestinians.”

Apparently they are guilty of not shutting down the coalition which would have caused Oslo to fail...

All in all it does seem bad that Shas supported the process. It is my belief that the Rabbi did not think Oslo was a good decision toward the end of his life.

[Every Jew AK47]

I remember that discussion, and it still is open in my mind, whether islam rises to avodah zarah or not. I just read through the discussion via your link and you present both arguments, whether it is idolatry to throw stones at kabbah (which is likened to the Roman diety Markolis).

Rather than continuing discussing this in the Rav Ovadiah thread we could continue with that topic back in the Torah section.

I hope it is clear that my opinion on this topic is not the psak halacha or anything. I try to learn what the sages think before forming my own opinion. And learn from any new information...

An interesting article about the pagan origins of Islam and the idolatrous nature of the Ka'abah.. SInce you asked for some articles, I thought I share this one quickly, which caught my eye.

Prophet Muhammad discarded the 360 idols but retained for Islam, the Ka’aba with its Black Stone, justifying it with the claim that Abraham and Ishmael originally constructed it. However, there is no historical or archaeological evidence for the existence of the Ka’aba beyond a few hundred years before Muhammad's lifetime. In fact, Muhammad's own words disprove any connection he was attempting to make between Abraham, Ishmael and the Ka’aba.
The Qur'an says Abraham built it:
Remember We made the House a place of assembly for men and a place of safety; and take ye the station of Abraham as a place of prayer; and We covenanted with Abraham and Isma'il, that they should sanctify My House for those who compass it round, or use it as a retreat, or bow, or prostrate themselves (therein in prayer).
Qur'an 2:125
Muhammed says it was built 40 years prior to the Temple at Jerusalem:
Narrated Abu Dhaar: I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Which mosque was built first?" He replied, "Al-Masjid-ul-Haram." I asked, "Which (was built) next?" He replied, "Al-Masjid-ul-Aqs-a (i.e. Jerusalem)." I asked, "What was the period in between them? He replied, forty years.
Sahih Bukhari 4:55:636
The Temple at Jerusalem was built by Solomon around 958-951 BC. This implies that if Muhammad were to be believed, the Ka’aba must have been built approximately 998-991 BC. But Abraham lived around 2000 BC and both Abraham and Ishmael would have been dead by then.
If Muhammad is correct, then the Qur’an [and therefore Allah] is wrong. But if the Qur’an is correct in stating that Abraham and Ishmael built the Ka’aba, then Muhammad and the sahih hadith is wrong.
The Ka’aba has nothing to do with Abraham or Ishmael. It has a wholly pagan heritage. Egyptian Professor and foremost authority on Arabic literature, Dr. Taha Husayn, said the following:
The case for this episode is very obvious because it is of recent date and came into vogue just before the rise of Islam. Islam exploited it for religious reasons.[1]
Also, according to sahih hadith, Muhammad even considered dismantling it:
Narrated Aswad: Ibn Az-Zubair said to me, "Aisha used to tell you secretly a number of things. What did she tell you about the Ka'ba?" I replied, "She told me that once the Prophet said, 'O 'Aisha! Had not your people been still close to the pre-Islamic period of ignorance (infidelity)! I would have dismantled the Ka'ba and would have made two doors in it; one for entrance and the other for exit." Later on Ibn Az-Zubair did the same.
Sahih Bukhari 1:3:128
Worship at the Ka’aba and the kissing of the Black Stone are just the first of many practices adopted from 7th century paganism and repackaged within monotheistic Islam.

Veneration of the Black-stone

The pagan gods of pre-Islamic Arabia were worshipped in the form of rectangular stones or rocks. For example, the pagan deity 'Al-Lat', mentioned in Qur'an 53:19, and believed by pre-Islamic pagans to be one of the daughters of Allah, was once venerated as a cubic rock at Ta'if in Saudi Arabia. An edifice was built over the rock to mark it apart as a house of worship.
Al-lat stood in al-Ta'if, and was more recent than Manah. She was a cubic rock beside which a certain Jew used to prepare his barley porridge (sawiq). Her custody was in the hands of the banu-'Attab ibn-Malik of the Thayif, who had built an edifice over her. [...]She is the idol which God mentioned when He said, "Have you seen Al-lat and al-'Uzza (Surah 53:19)?[2]
Kitab Al-Asnam (The Book of Idols), p 14
"A principal sacred object in Arabian religion was the stone, either a rock outcropping or a large boulder, often a rectangular or irregular black basaltic stone… of numerous baetyls, the best known is the Black-stone of the Ka’aba at Mecca which became the central shrine object in Islam".[3]
Encyclopedia Britannica
There is no denying that the Black Stone was one among many stones and idols venerated at the Ka’aba by the pre-Islamic pagans. The Black Stone was kissed during pre-Islamic pagan worship. Though Muhammad threw out 360 other objects at the Ka’aba, he retained this Black Stone and continued the practice of kissing it. It is this same stone that the pre-Islamic pagans once kissed, that Muslims kiss today when visiting Mecca.

Source:
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Pagan_Origins_of_Islam

[muman613]

Interesting articles EJa44..

[muman613]

Maybe we should take this discussion into the Torah section...

Realize I am not arguing to defend Islam, more arguing so that we can understand Judaism and why sometimes things seem unseemly.

Let me bid farewell to the topic of Islam (if I have your permission of course) and say that those beliefs run contrary to my own Jewish beliefs, and that fact will cause many muslims to hate me, so I have to see islam as my enemy. I do not belive that mohamud had any prophecy but rather he was an illiterate sheep shtuper who spread fantastically twisted stories to arabs who didn't know better.

As I stated earlier there are things revealed in our Jewish scriptures which reveal flaws in every man, from the greatest to the smallest. Aside from flaws the Torah also causes us to ask questions about why things are the way they are.

For instance what we were discussing previously reminded me of the fact that our father Yaakov (Jacob) was permitted to erect a pillar of stones (an idolatrous practice according to the Torah we have today). We (Torah Jews of faith) believe that all of our forefathers knew the commandments of the Torah even before it was given at Sinai. This was learned last week when we read Noach, how he knew which animals were Kosher and which were Treif (un-kosher) without Hashem explicitly explaining it. So too Abraham and Isaac kept kosher, and kept the laws without even being told (intuitively).

So why was it ok for Jacob to erect a pillar of stones?

Here is one discussion of the topic:

http://ravkooktorah.org/VAYISHLA58.htm

Vayishlach: Pillars and Sanctuaries

After 20 years of hard labor under his treacherous uncle Laban, Jacob returned safely to the Land of Israel. Jacob succeeded in appeasing his brother Esau, and finally made it back to Bethel.

Bethel was the place where, as Jacob set out to leave the Land of Israel, he dreamt of a ladder reaching to the heavens, of angels, and Divine promises. Now Jacob fulfilled his 20-year-old promise, and erected a pillar (matzeiva) in God's name.

It appears perfectly acceptable for Jacob to erect a pillar. Later on, however, the Torah specifically prohibits all pillars, even to worship God: "Do not erect a sacred pillar, which the Lord your God hates" (Deut. 16:22). What about Jacob's pillar? The Sages explained that serving God through pillars "was beloved in the time of the patriarchs, but abhorred in the time of their descendants."

Why did the status of pillars change?

To answer this question, we need to examine the difference between a pillar and a sanctuary. A pillar is a single large stone, focal point of Divine service, where all may gather around it. A sanctuary, on the other hand, is a house of worship, a building where the worshippers gather inside of it.
.
.
.

http://www.aish.com/tp/i/sms/100247889.html

THE PILLAR IN EARLIER TIMES

This explains the basic prohibition, but we still need to investigate why it was permissible for the Avos to construct pillars. Before Yisrael became a nation, the Avos were the whole of klal Yisrael in microcosm. Each of the three was the torchbearer for monotheism. They were exceptional people who exemplified the message which the Torah and its adherents, klal Yisrael, would bring to the world. Although they were individuals, they personified the values and qualities of an entire nation. Let us adduce several proofs for this concept:

Avraham was one, yet he inherited the land; we are many, and to us the land is given as an inheritance. (Yechezkel 33:24)

Avraham is the one who inherited the land, just as the whole nation was destined to do so. And behold, all of the souls which came out of the loins of Yaakov were seventy soul... (Shemos 1:5)

We note that the seventy descendants of Yaakov are described as just one soul, for Yaakov contained all of the elements of the nation which would generate from him.

Just as the verse says about God, ... and God alone shall be exalted on that day (Yeshayahu 2:17), so too about Yaakov it says, Yaakov was left alone... (Bereishis 32:25). (Bereishis Rabbah 77:1)

This is another proof that Yaakov was considered a single, complete being, similar (of course, only in some limited respect) to the unity and all-inclusiveness of God Himself.

We may thus suggest an explanation for the permissability of the pillar in the times of the Avos. The Avos, as individuals, were a complete nation in themselves. It was thus entirely appropriate for them to offer sacrifices upon, and to worship at, pillars. The single stone of the pillar expresses the service of the individual, which in their case was synonymous with the nation. This helps us to understand why the Canaanites chose the pillar as a means of idolatrous service. Idolaters by definition have no communal unity. They are merely a rabble of selfish individuals worshiping their idols. As such, the pillar, the symbol of personal devotion, is well suited to their needs. In contrast to the seventy "soul" of Yaakov, we find that:

Eisav took his wives and his sons and his daughters and all the souls of his house... (Bereishis 36:6)

Even within his own household, Esav did not attain any measure of unity. We may see him as the paradigm of the idolater. It is now clear why the pillar was attractive to the idolater and, although suitable even for Jewish use in the time of the Avos, remains strictly forbidden to us.

[Every Jew AK47]

Maybe we should take this discussion into the Torah section...

Realize I am not arguing to defend Islam, more arguing so that we can understand Judaism and why sometimes things seem unseemly.

Let me bid farewell to the topic of Islam (if I have your permission of course) and say that those beliefs run contrary to my own Jewish beliefs, and that fact will cause many muslims to hate me, so I have to see islam as my enemy. I do not belive that mohamud had any prophecy but rather he was an illiterate sheep shtuper who spread fantastically twisted stories to arabs who didn't know better.

As I stated earlier there are things revealed in our Jewish scriptures which reveal flaws in every man, from the greatest to the smallest. Aside from flaws the Torah also causes us to ask questions about why things are the way they are.

For instance what we were discussing previously reminded me of the fact that our father Yaakov (Jacob) was permitted to erect a pillar of stones (an idolatrous practice according to the Torah we have today). We (Torah Jews of faith) believe that all of our forefathers knew the commandments of the Torah even before it was given at Sinai. This was learned last week when we read Noach, how he knew which animals were Kosher and which were Treif (un-kosher) without Hashem explicitly explaining it. So too Abraham and Isaac kept kosher, and kept the laws without even being told (intuitively).

So why was it ok for Jacob to erect a pillar of stones?

Here is one discussion of the topic:

Of course you have my permission.. I apologize for getting off-topic as others here have done.   

I also understand you are a seeker of the truth and I can respect that.  I, myself, would like to just keep the record straight on the truth of Islam. There is so much misinformation going around today, I feel obliged to discuss the topics when I am confronted with them.

Your last post was very interesting, but I must admit, it is a bit beyond me..  I am trying to understand still why it was tolerated for Ya'akov to built the pillar of stones?  Anyhow, perhaps it is, as you say, a good topic to discuss in the Torah section.

[kahaneloyalist]

About Shas, Eli Yishai is relatively right wing, remember he was born in Tunis and lived among the Arabs, plus he did serve in the IDF.

Aryeh Deri, is a extreme leftist, who absolutely and pretty openly hates non-Sefardic Jews. So since Deri and Yishai are both currently running Shas the party tends to bounce back and forth. Though the parties most extreme Left days were when Deri was solidly in charge.

But Rav Ovadia was more ambiguous. He did give the Halachic sanction for surrendering land by claiming if it saves lives its permissable. Though this ruling went against centuries of consistent Halachic rulings following the opinion of the Ramban in Sefer HaMitzvos MItzvah #4 that conquest of Eretz Yisrael is a national obligation that overrides danger to life. Though I have heard that following the Oslo war Rav Ovadia zt'l withdrew this ruling. We should also remember that Rav Ovadia did push Deri out once Deri's corruption became public.

Rabbi Kahane zt'l held according to the Ramban. Which is why we can never even if it would bring true peace surrender even one inch of Eretz Yisrael.

All that being said Rav Ovadia zt'l did many amazing things for the Jewish people and for reviving Torah. I truly believe rulings he made that I think were misguided were made with good intentions and with Ahavat Yisrael.

[Mein Koran]

That is what you believe. We believe quite a bit differently. Let us leave it at that. Unless you want to explain what kind of Jew is damned to eternal hell or something like that. But we are prepared...

I'm speaking solely from history. Lol I wasn't trying to convince anyone to believe in the trinity. But saying the trinity wasn't an early Christian concept, that's bad history.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

All in all it does seem bad that Shas supported the process. It is my belief that the Rabbi did not think Oslo was a good decision toward the end of his life.

No evidence of this whatsoever.
To the contrary.   No apology, no teshuva,  no change. They also continued to support all thesteps of oslo such as prisoner releases giving it false  halachik veneer.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

About Shas, Eli Yishai is relatively right wing, remember he was born in Tunis and lived among the Arabs, plus he did serve in the IDF.

Aryeh Deri, is a extreme leftist, who absolutely and pretty openly hates non-Sefardic Jews. So since Deri and Yishai are both currently running Shas the party tends to bounce back and forth. Though the parties most extreme Left days were when Deri was solidly in charge.

But Rav Ovadia was more ambiguous. He did give the Halachic sanction for surrendering land by claiming if it saves lives its permissable. Though this ruling went against centuries of consistent Halachic rulings following the opinion of the Ramban in Sefer HaMitzvos MItzvah #4 that conquest of Eretz Yisrael is a national obligation that overrides danger to life. Though I have heard that following the Oslo war Rav Ovadia zt'l withdrew this ruling. We should also remember that Rav Ovadia did push Deri out once Deri's corruption became public.

Rabbi Kahane zt'l held according to the Ramban. Which is why we can never even if it would bring true peace surrender even one inch of Eretz Yisrael.

All that being said Rav Ovadia zt'l did many amazing things for the Jewish people and for reviving Torah. I truly believe rulings he made that I think were misguided were made with good intentions and with Ahavat Yisrael.

Sorry but some of these contentions are laughable.  He "Pushed Deri out?"  He was going to jail!
And then he welcomed him back in after the jailtime.  I think your post is a serious kind of delusion.

[Dr. Dan]

What is clear to me, in my mind is what happened in the Torah to Avraham and Yitzhak after he made a concession to Avimelech.

Concessions to give up land for any potential for peace will inevitably lead the sacrifice of the children of the next generations when that peace is no more.

Again, in my opinion, Rav Ovadia Yosef made a critical mistake with Oslo, unless proven otherwise.  He was not an evil man, Gd forbid.  And in the next world  his soul will realize the error.  As for all of his followers, may every single one of them embrace Kahane's Torah.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

Rabbi Kahane zt'l held according to the Ramban. Which is why we can never even if it would bring true peace surrender even one inch of Eretz Yisrael.

 Are you sure its by the RambaN and not others? Because I think their would be a problem going by the RambaN because he held (and I need to double check but it seems soo) that the Urim Ve Tumin are needed even in a Milhemit Misswah. RambaM on the other hand does not mention it.

Soo going by the RambaN would pose a halahic impediment if you will since these are not available today.
http://www.vbm-torah.org/archive/salt-shemot/20-10tetzaveh.htm

[edu]

Muman613 you asked for more info on the Shas party's role in voting in favor of the phony peace process.
I tried to find an article in English to make it easier for the readers, but
it was easier for me to find the source in Hebrew so someone is going to have to translate
בינואר 1997 התקיימה הצבעה על תוכניתו של ראש הממשלה בנימין נתניהו להעביר חלקים מהעיר חברון לרשות הפלסטינית, במסגרת הסדר. ש"ס הצביעה בעד ההסדר.
source: http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%94_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%A2%D7%99
The article is describing the the support of the Shas party for the surrender of most of Chevrone (Hebron) to Arafat's Terrorists.

[edu]

For the Benefit of those that don't know what exactly Bibi and Shas did to Chevrone {Hebron}
http://www.hebron.com/english/article.php?id=478

Bibi's Hebron conundrum

David Wilder
March 08, 2009


On September 7, 1995 Binyamin Netanyahu, candidate for Prime Minister, while visiting Hebron, issued the following statement:
The Jewish settlement will remain in Hebron permanently. If someone tries to take it away, my friends and I will be here, and they will have to take us away as well. It will be a fatal mistake to bring hundreds of armed Palestinian policemen here, and there will be a small area where the Jews can pass and where the police and IDF can operate. If there will be a conflict, the IDF will not be able to function and will quickly collide with the Palestinian forces. This is a prescription for tragedy. There is one body responsible, and that has to be the IDF".

On May 13, 1996 he declared "redeployment should be put off until the final settlement. Hebron is a very complicated problem. It is the oldest Jewish settlement in the world, and the Jewish community there is in great danger. We all remember what happened in 1929. It is preferable that such a complex matter be carefully considered at the final status talks."

Yet, in early 1997, during a press conference dealing with the Hebron Accords, Netanyahu proclaimed: "the ideological concepts he grew up believing are "not all within reach anymore," necessitating "hard decisions and generating a "meeting ground between vision and reality. This is leadership."

On January 14, 1997, Prime Minister Netanyahu, together with Yassar Arafat, signed the Hebron Accords, which were implemented six days later. Those accords divided Hebron into two sections, leaving over 80% of the city under the security control of the Palestinian Authority. Amongst the land abandoned were the Abu-Sneneh Hills, overlooking Hebron's Jewish community to the south, and Harat a-Shech, to the north. It was from these hills that Arafat's gunman terrorized Hebron for over two and a half years, shooting day and night, into people's apartments, cars and walking on the street. Abu Sneneh became infamous following the murder of ten month old Shalhevet Pass, exactly eight years ago.

[muman613]

Muman613 you asked for more info on the Shas party's role in voting in favor of the phony peace process.
I tried to find an article in English to make it easier for the readers, but
it was easier for me to find the source in Hebrew so someone is going to have to translate
בינואר 1997 התקיימה הצבעה על תוכניתו של ראש הממשלה בנימין נתניהו להעביר חלקים מהעיר חברון לרשות הפלסטינית, במסגרת הסדר. ש"ס הצביעה בעד ההסדר.
source: http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%94_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%A2%D7%99
The article is describing the the support of the Shas party for the surrender of most of Chevrone (Hebron) to Arafat's Terrorists.

I found this on the wiki you posted edu... I cannot understand the google translation of the article but maybe it contains some information which you can bring and explain here...

http://www.kikarhashabat.co.il/%D7%90%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%94-%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%A2%D7%99-31.html

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

As for ROY, yes he was a very knowledgable Bible scholar but he used that knowledge for some very bad things, like trying to find "justification" in the Jewish Scriptures for "land for peace". I think that's worse than just being a regular secular Israeli leftist to be quite honest. It's similar to when so-called Christians try to make an anti-Israel argument from the Bible.

[muman613]

As for ROY, yes he was a very knowledgable Bible scholar but he used that knowledge for some very bad things, like trying to find "justification" in the Jewish Scriptures for "land for peace". I think that's worse than just being a regular secular Israeli leftist to be quite honest. It's similar to when so-called Christians try to make an anti-Israel argument from the Bible.

I don't know if I agree with you. I have not seen the responsa which the Rav wrote.

There is a firm concept in the Torah concerning Pikuach Nefesh (saving lives). The concept is so important it is the basis of the rulings which allow a Jew to violate the Sabbath in order to save a life. I cannot argue whether there was any halachic support for suggesting 'land for peace' is a valid case of Pikuach Nefesh, and while I disagree with it, I cannot suggest he didn't know what he was saying or doing. He made his ruling based upon his learning of the Torah, and for this we must respect him (while not always agreeing with him).

I do not believe that the finding of Rabbi Ovadia was anti-Israel as all religious Jews are zionists in their hearts. This man emigrated to the Holy Land at the age of four, from Bagdad Iraq and was a leading Rabbi in the land for may years. To compare him to anti-zionist 'christians' is a little much.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

I do not believe that the finding of Rabbi Ovadia was anti-Israel as all religious Jews are zionists in their hearts. This man emigrated to the Holy Land at the age of four, from Bagdad Iraq and was a leading Rabbi in the land for may years. To compare him to anti-zionist 'christians' is a little much.

 His whole family was in the Irgun, literally bombing the British. He supported them as well with words (although not physically himself because his whole life was literally in the books). Its in the documentary of his life I posted earlier, his brother talks about it).

 Here is the exact part

 http://youtu.be/Oqfb45DrV3k?t=3m12s

[Chaim Ben Pesach]

בס''ד

The treachous and corrupt scum of Shas are responsible for the Oslo catastrophe in which huge sections of the most sacred parts of Biblical Israel were handed over to the Muslim Nazi terrorist mass murderers.

Without Shas, the Rabin-Peres regime of treason did not have a Knesset majority. Shas voted against all "no confidence" votes that would have brought the Rabin-Peres regime down. At the time, Shas was rightly condemned by the vast majority of Israeli rabbis, including the son and the grandson of HaRav Ovadia.

The money-grubbing filth in Shas brought this bloody horror on the Jewish people in exchange for massive funding for their institutions.

The same Shas vermin that supported inviting the Arab Hitler Yasser Arafat and 80,000 armed Muslim Nazi terrorists into the land of Israel under the Oslo accords - the same Shas traitors were directly responsible for expelling me from the Jewish homeland. My expulsion order was signed by Shas Interior Minister Eli Suissa yimach shmo vezichro. Suissa, a protégé of Aryeh Deri yimach shmo vezichro, met with the PLO terrorist mass murderers while he was expelling me.

HaRav Ovadia himself was a very learned Torah scholar and we should not curse him out of respect for the Torah. But his rulings on Oslo and many other issues caused terrible harm to the Jewish people and led to the murder of 1800 Jewish men, women and children.

As for HaRav Ovadia's corrupt followers in Shas, they are evil traitors and we are permitted to curse them. May Hashem do to them what they have done to the Jewish people.