JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks on July 11, 2013, 04:14:18 AM
-
You and I both know this is not the first time this Pedofront sodomite has trolled JTF. So, who do you think this piece of dreck is?
WFTMPTC
-
A liberal convert to pisslam son of a nazi war criminal kkk prison gang pimp. Basically the kkk guy on prison break who likes women to wear the suits instead. What makes you think that? I can show you what made me think ^.
-
I don't know, but he could be a new troll.
-
He says he's from StørmFrønt. So basically he's a white nationalist.
-
An Islamic Nazi who was trying to use taqiyya. He just failed miserably.
-
He claims to be Jewish.
-
Maybe I am foolish but I don't hold it against him at this time. If I am wrong I will apologize, but it is possible that a Jew who was brought up in a self-hating house will associate with White Nationals for the purpose of hiding his or her Jewishness. And maybe when they grow older they will realize that they are Jewish and there is nothing they can do to stop people from hating them just because they have Jewish blood.
This is why I am not so quick to jump on this guy.
-
Okay, so I've been called pretty much everything but a white guy so far; that's special. It's pretty laughable that since I said I used to post on SF (and I also said I left that life a long time ago) that somehow permanently stains me as being "from SF" for all time. People do change, you know- or do you think that once a person makes a mistake they can do nothing to ever erase it or make up for it? I'm not proud of that part of my life- but it is a part of my history and I have to live with it. Although I am loathe to reference the Christian bible on anything, one quote is rather appropriate here, "He who is without sin among you, let him throw the first stone".
As it stands, I was looking for a Jewish online community when I found this place so if I'm not welcome here I'll be more than happy to be on my way and look elsewhere. I expected to be corrected (and would welcome the correction) if I made a mistake in theology or issues of Jewish practice, but I didn't expect to be personally attacked and accused of having all sorts of nefarious motives because of my self-admitted past.
Muman is correct in his observation, regarding self-hating Jewish individuals, but in my case I am not one of those kind of people; in fact, I've done extensive research on my family tree and despite my best efforts I've found no one in any of my family lines who was a born Jew or even a convert. To my knowledge, I am the sole Jew- and a convert, at that- in my entire family history. I chose this for myself: it wasn't something I was born into. At 50, I've had many years to go down many paths and experience many things in life yet this is where I have found myself at last.
Now, to borrow a quote from Winston Churchill, when they come for us Jews again we must hang together or we will surely hang separately. I'm with you- are you with me?
-
Okay, so I've been called pretty much everything but a white guy so far; that's special. It's pretty laughable that since I said I used to post on SF (and I also said I left that life a long time ago) that somehow permanently stains me as being "from SF" for all time. People do change, you know- or do you think that once a person makes a mistake they can do nothing to ever erase it or make up for it? I'm not proud of that part of my life- but it is a part of my history and I have to live with it. Although I am loathe to reference the Christian bible on anything, one quote is rather appropriate here, "He who is without sin among you, let him throw the first stone".
As it stands, I was looking for a Jewish online community when I found this place so if I'm not welcome here I'll be more than happy to be on my way and look elsewhere. I expected to be corrected (and would welcome the correction) if I made a mistake in theology or issues of Jewish practice, but I didn't expect to be personally attacked and accused of having all sorts of nefarious motives because of my self-admitted past.
Muman is correct in his observation, regarding self-hating Jewish individuals, but in my case I am not one of those kind of people; in fact, I've done extensive research on my family tree and despite my best efforts I've found no one in any of my family lines who was a born Jew or even a convert. To my knowledge, I am the sole Jew- and a convert, at that- in my entire family history. I chose this for myself: it wasn't something I was born into. At 50, I've had many years to go down many paths and experience many things in life yet this is where I have found myself at last.
Now, to borrow a quote from Winston Churchill, when they come for us Jews again we must hang together or we will surely hang separately. I'm with you- are you with me?
Hi Ralph
-
Hi Ralph
I think you're right.
-
Hi Ralph
How do you know Ralph?
-
Well "Stormfronter" assumes that you're a white guy. The reason people don't think you've changed is because the only thing you have contributed to the forum so far is:
1. Morally equating Islam with the Torah (Nazis have no respect for the Bible):
http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,70372.0.html
The Torah tells us that the punishment for homosexual acts is death; Shari'a law tells them the same. Is this 'morally equating' one with the other, or merely highlighting similar points of law? (Note that the *method* of punishment is not the issue- the issue is the nature of the penalty itself. There are degrees of brutality in administering a death sentence, agreed, but the end is still the same.)
2. Rationalizing McDonald's' right to be anti-Semitic (Nazis always find dumb reasons to support boycotts of all Israeli territory):
http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,70294.0.html
Everyone has a right to be anti-whatever, regardless if it's based on rational reasons or not. They hate us, we hate them- the door swings both ways. Recognizing that doesn't in any way mean that I think 'they' are right; I just recognize that they have a right to their opinions, too, whether I agree with them or not. Or are you taking the position that, as Jews, we are above all reproach for anything we do, no matter how bad it may be? Or is criticism or disagreement with a Israeli governmental policy (as in the McDonald's decision) the same as criticizing or disagreeing with Judaism itself?
3. Morally equating baseless Nazi hatred of Jews with righteous indignation against Islamic violence (Nazis have no conscience so they can't tell the good guys from the bad guys):
http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,70374.msg601070.html#msg601070
Again with the 'morally equating' allegation- is that a forum peculiarity, or a required 'buzz word' that we're supposed to use every time we don't agree with something?
-
בס''ד
1. When you come on this forum equating us with Nazis, don't expect anything other than a very hostile reaction.
2. When you defend the Muslim Nazis by basically saying they are no different than the Jews, ditto.
3. When you defend the Nazi boycott of Israel by McDonald's, which is aimed at getting Israel to commit national suicide, ditto.
As far as your story about having converted, I don't believe you.
-
The Torah tells us that the punishment for homosexual acts is death; Shari'a law tells them the same. Is this 'morally equating' one with the other, or merely highlighting similar points of law? (Note that the *method* of punishment is not the issue- the issue is the nature of the penalty itself. There are degrees of brutality in administering a death sentence, agreed, but the end is still the same.)
Everyone has a right to be anti-whatever, regardless if it's based on rational reasons or not. They hate us, we hate them- the door swings both ways. Recognizing that doesn't in any way mean that I think 'they' are right; I just recognize that they have a right to their opinions, too, whether I agree with them or not. Or are you taking the position that, as Jews, we are above all reproach for anything we do, no matter how bad it may be? Or is criticism or disagreement with a Israeli governmental policy (as in the McDonald's decision) the same as criticizing or disagreeing with Judaism itself?
Again with the 'morally equating' allegation- is that a forum peculiarity, or a required 'buzz word' that we're supposed to use every time we don't agree with something?
I'm glad you left SF , I thirst for the day Nazis are tortured and slaughtered!
-
An Islamic Nazi who was trying to use taqiyya. He just failed miserably.
Taqqiyah is a principle by which a Muslim may hide or conceal his faith in order to escape clear and present mortal danger, such as imminent execution. For example, a Muslim may claim he's not a Muslim if someone is holding a gun to his head threatening to kill him if he says he is a Muslim; he may NOT hide his faith for something like a job application or interview. In any case, the principle is not generally accepted by Sunni Muslims, who teach it's better to die for your faith than hide it for any reason. The Shi'a Muslims are generally credited for using it, though, given the allegations of their terrorist ties around the world (but, then again, many Sunnis claim the Shi'a aren't Muslims at all, so it's still a twisted argument altogether).
Now considering that a) I'm not Muslim and b) even if I were, I'm not in danger of being killed at the moment for any reason so the use of that principle is not allowed... your accusation just falls apart, dead on arrival.
-
בס''ד
1. When you come on this forum equating us with Nazis, don't expect anything other than a very hostile reaction.
2. When you defend the Muslim Nazis by basically saying they are no different than the Jews, ditto.
3. When you defend the Nazi boycott of Israel by McDonald's, which is aimed at getting Israel to commit national suicide, ditto.
As far as your story about having converted, I don't believe you.
1) I didn't.
2) I didn't.
3) I'm rather surprised that the loss of a McDonald's franchise is really an existential threat to the entire state of Israel; I had more confidence in the strength of its people and in the IDF than that. McDonald's must have more international clout than I imagined!
4) It's your right to not believe me; I can't make you believe or not believe anything.
-
I'm glad you left SF , I thirst for the day Nazis are tortured and slaughtered!
Thank you- I'm glad I left there also. There are a lot of sick minds still hard at work over there, I'm sure. I've got better things to do than live each day filled with hate.
-
1) I didn't.
2) I didn't.
3) I'm rather surprised that the loss of a McDonald's franchise is really an existential threat to the entire state of Israel; I had more confidence in the strength of its people and in the IDF than that. McDonald's must have more international clout than I imagined!
4) It's your right to not believe me; I can't make you believe or not believe anything.
So how do you feel about the many mosques being built in rural and urban parts of Texas? You said you're from Texas right?
Would you like to have a beer with them or would you like to raise a pig farm next to your nearest mosque?
-
Thank you- I'm glad I left there also. There are a lot of sick minds still hard at work over there, I'm sure. I've got better things to do than live each day filled with hate.
I understand your point...
-
Thank you- I'm glad I left there also. There are a lot of sick minds still hard at work over there, I'm sure. I've got better things to do than live each day filled with hate.
Its only used to promote David Duke, Don Black and his gay son. No really, take a look at his son, I'm not kidding.
-
So how do you feel about the many mosques being built in rural and urban parts of Texas? You said you're from Texas right?
Would you like to have a beer with them or would you like to raise a pig farm next to your nearest mosque?
I didn't say I live in Texas, but I was born there- on the old Bergstrom Air Force Base (now deactivated- my dad was a tailgunner on a B-52 when they still had tailgunners, before he died in '67). I did say in my intro greetings from the Deep South, so I can understand the confusion.
As for mosques, we have two in my city- one is a regular masjid (community center) and the other is part of an Islamic day school. There may be others scattered around, but I am personally not aware of any more.
And on the last, I see where you're going with that, but a) I don't drink, period, (they're not supposed to, either), and b) I'm not a farmer by any stretch of the imagination... so neither is a possibility in reality. In the larger scheme of things, as long as people of any faith behave themselves and play well with others I don't care- but when they begin pushing their agenda on others when it's not wanted, that's when problems will arise, obviously. So far there has been none of that in my city, and in fact the local Muslim community has had pretty good relations with all the synagogues (we have Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox locally) so far, and I hope to see it remain that way. (The local Christian denominations are less chummy, though, and almost every time the three faiths get together for interfaith meetings and such they usually turn it into an opportunity to bash both Jews and Muslims for not believing in Jesus and try to convert everyone in the building- it's not a pretty sight.)
-
I didn't say I live in Texas, but I was born there- on the old Bergstrom Air Force Base (now deactivated- my dad was a tailgunner on a B-52 when they still had tailgunners, before he died in '67). I did say in my intro greetings from the Deep South, so I can understand the confusion.
As for mosques, we have two in my city- one is a regular masjid (community center) and the other is part of an Islamic day school. There may be others scattered around, but I am personally not aware of any more.
And on the last, I see where you're going with that, but a) I don't drink, period, (they're not supposed to, either), and b) I'm not a farmer by any stretch of the imagination... so neither is a possibility in reality. In the larger scheme of things, as long as people of any faith behave themselves and play well with others I don't care- but when they begin pushing their agenda on others when it's not wanted, that's when problems will arise, obviously. So far there has been none of that in my city, and in fact the local Muslim community has had pretty good relations with all the synagogues (we have Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox locally) so far, and I hope to see it remain that way. (The local Christian denominations are less chummy, though, and almost every time the three faiths get together for interfaith meetings and such they usually turn it into an opportunity to bash both Jews and Muslims for not believing in Jesus and try to convert everyone in the building- it's not a pretty sight.)
Okay, what the hell ever!
-
I didn't say I live in Texas, but I was born there- on the old Bergstrom Air Force Base (now deactivated- my dad was a tailgunner on a B-52 when they still had tailgunners, before he died in '67). I did say in my intro greetings from the Deep South, so I can understand the confusion.
As for mosques, we have two in my city- one is a regular masjid (community center) and the other is part of an Islamic day school. There may be others scattered around, but I am personally not aware of any more.
And on the last, I see where you're going with that, but a) I don't drink, period, (they're not supposed to, either), and b) I'm not a farmer by any stretch of the imagination... so neither is a possibility in reality. In the larger scheme of things, as long as people of any faith behave themselves and play well with others I don't care- but when they begin pushing their agenda on others when it's not wanted, that's when problems will arise, obviously. So far there has been none of that in my city, and in fact the local Muslim community has had pretty good relations with all the synagogues (we have Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox locally) so far, and I hope to see it remain that way. (The local Christian denominations are less chummy, though, and almost every time the three faiths get together for interfaith meetings and such they usually turn it into an opportunity to bash both Jews and Muslims for not believing in Jesus and try to convert everyone in the building- it's not a pretty sight.)
Those are not good Christians. They could be communists. What the commies did in China was ban all religion. But they later decided to use the Buddhists instead of exterminating them. Now replace "China" with "America"; replace "Buddhists" with "Christians".
Now for muslims. They want you dead, infidel.
Really, you really need to get to know them. To summarise, when they're in the minority, they will be very friendly. As they grow, they become really nasty. They start demanding stuff. I know what, here's an easy answer. Just look at England: no filthy infidels in muslim areas.
-
Anti-Semites don't have a right to their opinion. Their opinion is invalid.
-
Anti-Semites don't have a right to their opinion. Their opinion is invalid.
¿¿Que??
¿you mean blue guy or anti-semites?
-
¿¿Que??
¿you mean blue guy or anti-semites?
That was a reply to post #12.
I meant anti-Semites, but if Blue Thread is one then it means him too.
-
So let me get this straight, you're a Jewish "convert" (even though you're not really a convert if you converted to Karaite Judaism), and you see a thread on Muslim brutality, and the first thing you think of is the Torah and say "wow, look at the similarities", and you see nothing wrong with this picture? The Torah's halachic system is much more humane than the Islamic sharia system, regardless of any similarities on certain levels. If you see a thread on the "chosen people" I bet the first thing you'd think of would be "oh the Nazis believed that they were a master race too" despite the fact that there are clear moral distinctions between the two.
Actually, the recent court decisions in the US a few days ago regarding 'gay marriage' had prompted me to go back and look up exactly what Leviticus says about it before I posted a reply to blog post on the subject that was in support of the decision- and this was a Jewish blogger, mind you, supporting gay marriage so I felt it was necessary for me to remind him what the Torah has to say on the issue. That's why the law was on my mind when I first saw that post; otherwise I probably would not have given it near the amount of thought I did at the time.
Just so you know, we post all kinds of examples on this forum of anti-Semitic behavior like this McDonald's issue. Are you telling me that your standard response is going to be "well they have a right to their opinion too" and then find a justification for it? Just because anti-Semites have opinions doesn't mean we have to justify them and make arguments for them. And with all our criticism of self-hating Jews on this forum, including Netanyahu, where do you get the idea that we think Jews are above reproach?
I see your point on the first item, the posting of anti-Semitic behavior. But in the case of the McDonald's decision, is it *really* anti-Semitic, or just anti-Israel, or just a business decision? That was my whole point on the matter. Even if McDonald's is critical of Israel on its policies toward Gaza and/or the West Bank, that doesn't automatically equate to a criticism of Judaism- do you see the difference?
No more so then pushing the enemy's perspective every time you disagree with something. Good vs. evil is not a matter of opinion. Like a typical Stormfronter, you seem to be very confused about the difference between good and evil, which is why you were attracted to StørmFrønt in the first place.
I don't push the enemy's perspective all the time- but it's always a good policy to know where the opposition's mind is before you move against them, right? For example, we think "X" is a good thing, but They think "X" is a bad thing- why do they think "X" is bad? Do they have a valid reason for thinking "X" is bad, or is it just a knee-jerk reaction to us thinking "X" is good? You have to get into the enemy's thoughts before you can have much of a chance of defeating him or persuading him to change his mind.
And I really wish you folks would quit saying I'm a 'stormfronter' or whatnot- I admitted in good faith that I had some dealings with them over a decade ago, but none since then, and I left that way of thinking behind long ago. I do agree with you, though, when I first went there I was a very confused individual- I didn't think so at the time, but age and experience showed me the error of my ways and I changed for the better.
-
Oi. Where did you get the numbers from? I don't see them.
-
He claims to be Jewish.
I thought he said he was only "partly Jewish" which there is just no such thing. Maybe I am confused with someone else?
As for the question, I don't know who "Ralph" is or "Homo Jr" is so how could I vote. I guess "other" and say it's some anti-Jewish anti-Israel troll but tries to use "logic" and rationalization to try and not appear as what he is saying is anti-Israel.
I am quite skeptical of this person.
-
Oi. Where did you get the numbers from? I don't see them.
The post numbers in the thread. For example the post where you asked this question was reply #29. This post is reply #31.
-
I thought he said he was only "partly Jewish" which there is just no such thing. Maybe I am confused with someone else?
As for the question, I don't know who "Ralph" is or "Homo Jr" is so how could I vote. I guess "other" and say it's some anti-Jewish anti-Israel troll.
He said no one in his family is Jewish, he "says" he's a convert.
-
Those are not good Christians. They could be communists. What the commies did in China was ban all religion. But they later decided to use the Buddhists instead of exterminating them. Now replace "China" with "America"; replace "Buddhists" with "Christians".
Now for muslims. They want you dead, infidel.
Really, you really need to get to know them. To summarise, when they're in the minority, they will be very friendly. As they grow, they become really nasty. They start demanding stuff. I know what, here's an easy answer. Just look at England: no filthy infidels in muslim areas.
I think we're in agreement on these points, ACK - I was raised in both Baptist and Methodist settings, and knowing the things I learned about them along the way, I don't trust them as far as I can throw them. Catholics are the least problematic 'converters', followed by the Methodists, but the Southern Baptists.... better hold on to your kippa when they start thumping that Bible and quoting chapter and verse at you!
As for the rest, I agree as well- I'll play nice as long as they play nice, but as always it's best to err on the side of safety and not get too chummy in the first place. And a loaded shotgun in a handy place is a good thing, too, just in case of trouble!
-
I thought he said he was only "partly Jewish" which there is just no such thing. Maybe I am confused with someone else?
As for the question, I don't know who "Ralph" is or "Homo Jr" is so how could I vote. I guess "other" and say it's some anti-Jewish anti-Israel troll but tries to use "logic" and rationalization to try and not appear as what he is saying is anti-Israel.
I am quite skeptical of this person.
I believe you have me confused with the poster who started the thread "I'm Partly Jewish". That is not me.
-
He said no one in his family is Jewish, he "says" he's a convert.
Ok, I just caught up. Well, he would be a Ger Tzedek had he done giyur through a Beis Din al pi Halacha. But if it not then....whatever.
-
I believe you have me confused with the poster who started the thread "I'm Partly Jewish". That is not me.
Ah yes, I see: http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,70409.0.html (http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,70409.0.html)
I am not going to pick on you, whoever you are. I am just skeptical of your intentions and will be watching. o_O
-
(now deactivated- my dad was a tailgunner on a B-52 when they still had tailgunners, before he died in '67).
I'm sure every adult male in your entire family is/was a "tailgunner", faggot.
-
The post numbers in the thread. For example the post where you asked this question was reply #29. This post is reply #31.
Its not there. Maybe only admins see them?
-
Really? This is your excuse to promote enemy propaganda on every thread?
Pointing out the opposition's thought process is not the same as endorsing their policies or opinions. In a more general sense, if you present only one side of the issue how can people think rationally about it or make informed choices on a given matter? (Unless, of course, the agenda is to suppress any other point of view than the Official Policy, in which case that's a perfectly valid tactic as well, even though it's being intellectually dishonest toward the target audience- we see this being done by national governments and political groups all the time.)
-
Its not there. Maybe only admins see them?
Look right below the thread title on each post, the post # ("reply #") is there.
-
Or are you taking the position that, as Jews, we are above all reproach for anything we do, no matter how bad it may be?
Our point is, we haven't committed some offense that makes us guilty or collectively guilty and worthy of punishments or reprisals from countries, nazi organizations, nazi muslims, hateful leftists et al. To assume we have some kind of collective guilt (usually attached by these hateful creatures to actions of ours which are quite justified and the furthest from "wrong" as you can possibly get) and therefore "punish" us for being Jewish is injustice of the lowest order.
To imply that we think we're "above reproach" is simply a reverse psychology to make your victim into the offender. The reality is that you (muslims, mcdonalds, whatever) consider us beneath or exempt from the principles of fairness that should be offered to all people. That is a victimization. And it is obviously a very stupid and incorrect assumption you are making to think that all forms of "reproach" lobbed in our direction are valid by default!
Or is criticism or disagreement with a Israeli governmental policy (as in the McDonald's decision) the same as criticizing or disagreeing with Judaism itself?
. Mcdonalds is engaging NOT in a criticism of the israeli governmental policy but rather in a denial of basic human rights and liberties to Israeli Jews who live in certain places, hold certain political views, and/or do not succomb to the liberal agenda which encourages their suicide. This is another reverse psychology tactic used by leftists and BDS to make their victims (Jews) appear like the criminal when in fact it is you who is criminal. Ie, they say "you don't allow criticism of Israeli govt" as if we are somehow stifling your freedom by disagreeing with you or pointing out why you are mistaken. It's a calumny on your part against Jews and against your opponents. No one is silencing you by calling you an idiot and pointing out what was idiotic about what you said. In addition to that, only an fool could ask this question of us seriously. We are constantly criticizing the Israeli govt and some of their suicidal insane policies at this forum.
Again with the 'morally equating' allegation- is that a forum peculiarity, or a required 'buzz word' that we're supposed to use every time we don't agree with something?
Snore.
-
.... better hold on to your kippa when they start thumping that Bible and quoting chapter and verse at you!
As for the rest, I agree as well- I'll play nice as long as they play nice, but as always it's best to err on the side of safety and not get too chummy in the first place. And a loaded shotgun in a handy place is a good thing, too, just in case of trouble!
But I'm not Jewish, why would I wear a kippah?
Again, they will be your buddy as long as they are in the minority.
When they are 1/4 of the population you'll see them change their ways. Look at Indonesia. How about Saudi Arabia.
-
Pointing out the opposition's thought process is not the same as endorsing their policies or opinions. In a more general sense, if you present only one side of the issue how can people think rationally about it or make informed choices on a given matter? (Unless, of course, the agenda is to suppress any other point of view than the Official Policy, in which case that's a perfectly valid tactic as well, even though it's being intellectually dishonest toward the target audience- we see this being done by national governments and political groups all the time.)
You want to know something? I'm a witch! I don't have to even read what you post, I can see right into your soul!
-
I'm sure every adult male in your entire family is/was a "tailgunner", faggot.
Just as long as they're not rear admirals.
-
Look right below the thread title on each post, the post # ("reply #") is there.
Oi I'm getting old.
-
Does disagreeing with and pointing out the fallacy in someone's illogical, irrational, dishonest, incorrect, and unfair "reproach" mean that I believe I am above reproach? No, it just means I think I am above stupid accusations and I like to refute them.
-
. Mcdonalds is engaging NOT in a criticism of the israeli governmental policy ET AL
I haven't delved deeply enough into the post count to see what all has been said previously about McDonald's and Israel- apparently there is a lot going on there that I am not aware of. My responses to date on the McDonald's issue have been solely on the decision by McDonald's to not build a franchise in the Ariel settlement area, and nothing more.
However, if there IS a problem and McDonald's is actively working against the best interest of Israel, why doesn't Tel Aviv just pull their business license and send them packing as enemies of the state? Seems to be the logical thing to do.
-
I'm pretty convinced it's not ralph btw. This guy is capable of civility unlike the iranian nazi behema ralph.
-
We present the enemy thought process all the time, which we disagree with, hence the term "enemy". You present the enemy thought process as your own ideas, which are not distinguishable from Stormfronter types.
I see your point- I was not aware my comments were being taken like that. I will be sure to properly reference things in the future.
-
I'm pretty convinced it's not ralph btw. This guy is capable of civility unlike the iranian nazi behema ralph.
Ralph has 500 different personae. This means nothing. The guy's the biggest MPD case the world has seen.
-
Just as long as they're not rear admirals.
Never heard that one before. :::D :::D :::D
-
You are still a confused individual, but this time as someone who thinks black or white is bad, but gray is good.
Meaning. There is only right and only wrong. And only good or evil. There is no in between. Anything that is in between is still evil.
I doubt you are a true convert since most true converts don't feed into moral relativism like you do. A true Jewish convert knows the Torah and Talmud like the back of their hand. You are unable to think properly like a true Jewish convert.
And if you say some reform or conservative rabbi had a hand in converting you, you've been fooled.
I don't buy your crap.
Actually, the recent court decisions in the US a few days ago regarding 'gay marriage' had prompted me to go back and look up exactly what Leviticus says about it before I posted a reply to blog post on the subject that was in support of the decision- and this was a Jewish blogger, mind you, supporting gay marriage so I felt it was necessary for me to remind him what the Torah has to say on the issue. That's why the law was on my mind when I first saw that post; otherwise I probably would not have given it near the amount of thought I did at the time.
I see your point on the first item, the posting of anti-Semitic behavior. But in the case of the McDonald's decision, is it *really* anti-Semitic, or just anti-Israel, or just a business decision? That was my whole point on the matter. Even if McDonald's is critical of Israel on its policies toward Gaza and/or the West Bank, that doesn't automatically equate to a criticism of Judaism- do you see the difference?
I don't push the enemy's perspective all the time- but it's always a good policy to know where the opposition's mind is before you move against them, right? For example, we think "X" is a good thing, but They think "X" is a bad thing- why do they think "X" is bad? Do they have a valid reason for thinking "X" is bad, or is it just a knee-jerk reaction to us thinking "X" is good? You have to get into the enemy's thoughts before you can have much of a chance of defeating him or persuading him to change his mind.
And I really wish you folks would quit saying I'm a 'stormfronter' or whatnot- I admitted in good faith that I had some dealings with them over a decade ago, but none since then, and I left that way of thinking behind long ago. I do agree with you, though, when I first went there I was a very confused individual- I didn't think so at the time, but age and experience showed me the error of my ways and I changed for the better.
-
ET AL
You don't have to believe me if you don't want to; I'm not here to 'prove myself' to you or anyone else. I can't make you believe anything you don't want to, so in the end it's all on you. If your distrust of me is such that you- as an administrator- don't want me here, I'll be on my way; I won't stay where I'm not wanted.
-
No you missed my point. It's not that I don't believe you. It's that it is a fact. Your not a true convert. Get THAT through your head. You sound like a transgendered boy who insists he's a girl.
You are not a Jew.
And I disagree with your opinions. They are wrong. No matter how eloquently your putting them together, they reek of insensitivity to the good guys. You are attempting to show cruelty to the kind and kindness to the cruel through your moral equivalent approaches.
You are like Ishmael who was the same way. And if you were a true Jewish convert you would understand that metaphor.
-
Why do people think you're a Karaite convert? are you?
-
You are not a Jew.
In Shakespearean terms, "Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much". Let that suffice.
-
How do you know Ralph?
I think everyone knows who Ralph is
-
Why do people think you're a Karaite convert? are you?
Perhaps they have me confused with the individual who has a Karaite website titled 'A Blue Thread'.
As for my conversion, I respectfully decline to answer that, because there are already too many labels on Jews and I refuse to add to the insanity. I don't ask anyone if they're Reform, Conservative, Orthodox, Karaite, or what have you- I don't make distinctions based on who converted whom.
-
Perhaps they have me confused with the individual who has a Karaite website titled 'A Blue Thread'.
As for my conversion, I respectfully decline to answer that, because there are already too many labels on Jews and I refuse to add to the insanity. I don't ask anyone if they're Reform, Conservative, Orthodox, Karaite, or what have you- I don't make distinctions based on who converted whom.
Obvious goy is obvious.
I found the shul he converted with:
(http://firstlightforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/1633.jpg)
-
The only "shul" Ralph "converted" in was when he sero-converted in the men's room of a Greenwich Village sodomite brothel.
-
Who is Ralph?
Only Ralph's I know are Ralph Hoffman & Ralph Bieber.
-
I don't ask anyone if they're Reform, Conservative, Orthodox, Karaite, or what have you-
But there's nothing wrong with asking that. A real follower of any of those things wouldn't be ashamed to admit it.
lol.
I don't make distinctions based on who converted whom.
But Judaism does. Reform and "Conservative" conversions are not valid. Only orthodox conversions are performed according to the Jewish law.
-
I haven't delved deeply enough into the post count to see what all has been said previously about McDonald's
What? I quoted YOUR comment about Mcdonalds directly and then responded directly to you. Stop playing dumb.
and Israel- apparently there is a lot going on there that I am not aware of. My responses to date on the McDonald's issue have been solely on the decision by McDonald's to not build a franchise in the Ariel settlement area, and nothing more.
And that's what I responded to.
They are discriminating against Jews who live in a certain place, hold certain beliefs, and will not accede to the leftist agenda which requires their suicide. That is unjust evil. Unjust evil which you support.
However, if there IS a problem and McDonald's is actively working against the best interest of Israel, why doesn't Tel Aviv just pull their business license and send them packing as enemies of the state? Seems to be the logical thing to do.
When did I say mcdonald's was doing that? Either you have really poor reading comprehension or you just didn't bother to read my comment, erased all the words except for a few and wrote ET AL, followed by a reply that was completely irrelevant and very dishonest.
And you mean "etc," not "et al." "Et al" refers to people.
Slimy behavior on your part.
-
In Shakespearean terms, "Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much". Let that suffice.
I know I found you out and you have nothing to say to prove who you are. You are insincere and only have your beliefs and agenda which is nazi like. If I were you, I would leave thus forum before you get banned from ever returning.
-
Can we just ban this sodomite already, Dan?
-
Can we just ban this sodomite already, Dan?
Not my call to do it.
-
Not my call to do it.
Wrong Dan, I meant DBN.
-
The reason I guessed Karaite is because A Blue Thread is a Karaite blog (I didn't say you were necessarily the owner), but you also have a Karaite tzitzit on your profile pic. Karaites are the only ones that use blue threads in their tzitziot. There are a very few Orthodox who do, but I doubt you are one of them because Orthodox would definitely be concerned with proper conversions. Normal Orthodox Jews only wear white tzitziot because the proper blue dye (techelet) is not produced currently.
I wear Tehellit and not a Karaite. And it is produced currently, the problem is that their are people who are never never ready for change thus now having the opportunity to wear it again is not concidered because after all one's grandfather in Poland or Morocco or Bukhara or Lithuania didn't wear it. Thats what it comes down to.
Same with Temple, same with the laws of Eress Yisrael and knowing how to fight our enemies and all the "forgotten Halachot". Our grandparents didn't do them or its not mentioned in the Shulhan Aruch therfore it arbitrarily doesn't exist.
-
Do you celebrate 2-day holidays like Rosh HaShana on only one day now that we can precisely determine the correct date?
:::D I don't understand what you guys are talking about, but that was funny.
-
Do you celebrate 2-day holidays like Rosh HaShana on only one day now that we can precisely determine the correct date?
We do not currently use the system of calendar described by the Torah. Our calendar is pre-calculated according to an algorithm derived many years ago. In order to have a proper Jewish calender we require a sanhedrin and witnesses who report about when the New moon is visible. Thus it is impossible to determine the 'correct date' according to the current calendar. Outside of Eretz Yisrael we all observe two days of Chagim. And I believe it will be the case till we reconstruct the Sanhedrin.
-
See this article for a basic explanation of the Jewish calendar:
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/526874/jewish/The-Jewish-Month.htm
The Lunar Cycle
The Jewish calendar is based on lunar cycles.1 Towards the beginning of the moon’s cycle, it appears as a thin crescent. That is the signal for a new Jewish month. The moon grows until it is full, the middle of the month, and then it begins to wane until it cannot be seen. It remains invisible for approximately two days2—and then the thin crescent reappears, and the cycle begins again.
The entire cycle takes approximately 29½ days.3 Since a month needs to consist of complete days, a month is sometimes twenty-nine days long (such a month is known as chaser, “missing”), and sometimes thirty (malei, “full”).
Knowing exactly when the month begins has always been important in Jewish practice, because the Torah schedules the Jewish festivals according to the days of the month.
The first day of the month, as well as the thirtieth day of a malei month, is called Rosh Chodesh, the “Head of the Month,” and has semi-festive status. See Why is Rosh Chodesh sometimes one day and sometimes two?
.
.
.
Sanctifying the Month
“The L‑rd spoke to Moses and to Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying, ‘This chodesh shall be to you the head of months.’” (Exodus 12:1–2)
From the wording of this verse, “shall be to you,” the sages deduced that the responsibility of pinpointing and consecrating the chodesh, the crescent new moon, was entrusted to the leaders of our nation, the Sanhedrin, the rabbinical supreme court of every generation.
Originally, there was no fixed calendar. There was no way to determine in advance the exact day of a coming holiday or bar mitzvah, because there was no way to determine in advance when the month would begin. Each month anew, the Sanhedrin would determine whether the month would be 29 or 30 days long—depending on when the following month’s new moon was first sighted—and would sanctify the new month.
Nowadays
In the 4th century CE, the sage Hillel II foresaw the disbandment of the Sanhedrin, and understood that we would no longer be able to follow a Sanhedrin-based calendar. So Hillel and his rabbinical court established the perpetual calendar which is followed today.
According to this calendar, every month of the year, except for three, has a set number of days:
Nissan—30
Iyar—29
Sivan—30
Tamuz—29
Menachem Av—30
Elul—29
Tishrei—30
Mar Cheshvan—29 or 30
Kislev—29 or 30
Tevet—29
Shevat—30
Adar—29 (in leap years, Adar I has 30 days)
Regarding the variable months of Kislev and Cheshvan, there are three options: 1) Both can be 29 days (the year is chaser), 2) both are 30 (the year is malei), or 3) Cheshvan is 29 and Kislev is 30 (the year is k’sidran, meaning these two months follow the alternating pattern of the rest of the months). Hillel also established the rules that are used to determine whether a year is chaser, malei, or k’sidran.
The rules of the perpetual calendar also ensure that the first day of Rosh Hashanah will never take place on Sunday, Wednesday or Friday.6
When Hillel established the perpetual calendar, he sanctified every Rosh Chodesh until Moshiach will come and reestablish the Sanhedrin.
The Sanhedrin Sanctification
The following is a brief description of the procedure the Sanhedrin followed in days of yore to determine the date of the onset of a new month.
On the 30th day of every month,7 the Sanhedrin would “open for business” in a large courtyard in Jerusalem called Beit Ya’azek. Witnesses who claimed to have seen the new moon on the previous night would come to give their testimony and be cross-examined.8
The members of the Sanhedrin were well schooled in astronomy. They knew exactly when the new moon would have appeared, and where it would have been visible. Nevertheless, the sanctification of the moon depends on the crescent new moon actually being seen by two witnesses. The word “this” (in the above-quoted verse, “This month shall be to you . . .”) implies something that is actually seen.
The rabbis of the Sanhedrin would question the witnesses in the order of their arrival. They knew what the proper responses to their questions ought to be, and were thus quickly able to identify fraudulent claims. Starting with the elder of each pair, they would ask:9 “Tell us how you saw the moon:
* In which direction was it in relation to the sun?10
* Was it to the north or south?
* How high in the sky did the moon appear to be?
* In which direction were the crescent’s tips facing?
* How wide was it?”
After they had finished questioning the first witness, they would bring in his partner and question him in similar fashion. If the two accounts corroborated, the evidence was accepted.11
That day, the thirtieth day, was now declared Rosh Chodesh of the new month. The head of the Sanhedrin would proclaim: “Mekudash!” (“Sanctified!”) and everyone would respond, “Mekudash! Mekudash!” The previous month was now retroactively determined to have had only twenty-nine days.
-
Shabbat Shalom, everyone ~
As it seems I am not welcome here and my presence is distressing to many of you, I will make this my final post here and continue my search for a more open community. I am dismayed that I caused so much of a firestorm here by posting my thoughts; it was not my intention to do so. I should have spent more time researching what type of forum this is before I joined; I take responsibility for that mistake.
As for my being Jewish, I can't make any of you believe what you don't want to believe- nor should I have to. As I noted in a previous post, I was not born into Judaism- I chose it- and doing so this late in life leaves me at a disadvantage among those who have lived their whole lives immersed in the faith. There is much I still have to learn- even the most thorough conversion program can't produce someone who knows everything at the drop of a hat on Day 1. Apparently even a lifetime isn't long enough to learn everything, so why should anyone be singled out for not surpassing the best scholars? In any case, so much for welcoming converts into the community.
In closing I wish all of you all the best, and I hope that if at some point our paths cross again either in person or online it's a happier experience than this has been for me. Good afternoon, and a Good Shabbat to all.
-----
ABT
-
I wear Tehellit and not a Karaite. And it is produced currently, the problem is that their are people who are never never ready for change thus now having the opportunity to wear it again is not concidered because after all one's grandfather in Poland or Morocco or Bukhara or Lithuania didn't wear it. Thats what it comes down to.
Same with Temple, same with the laws of Eress Yisrael and knowing how to fight our enemies and all the "forgotten Halachot". Our grandparents didn't do them or its not mentioned in the Shulhan Aruch therfore it arbitrarily doesn't exist.
You are wrong as to the reason Orthodox Jews do not wear the thread of blue. Actually the reason we do not wear it is because there is still a valid question as to whether the dye used for the blue color is the correct Techilis as was used in the time of the giving of the Torah. It is because of this doubt as to the correct dye which leads us to not use any blue dye, not because it is what our fathers did. If there was complete agreement on the Techilis (blue die from a particular species of snail) then we would all wear the Blue Fringe.
Your explanation is simply not the truth.
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/529771/jewish/Why-do-some-have-a-blue-string-in-their-tzitzit.htm
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/530127/jewish/Techelet-Blue-Thread.htm
In the past century, there have been certain venerable rabbis who claimed to have identified the chilazon, based on this fish's distinguishing features described in the Talmud. Since then, tzitzit with techelet has made a comeback, and one can often spot people sporting such tallitot. There are many, however, who have cast doubts on the re-identification of the chilazon.
Rabbi Sholom DovBer, the fifth Rebbe of Lubavitch, maintained that according to the teachings of Kabbalah the chilazon will not reemerge until the coming of the Messiah.
-
Aish.com explains even more:
http://www.aish.com/atr/Blue_Techelet_Thread.html
I was in Israel recently and saw some religious men wearing tzitzit strings with a blue thread. I thought the strings were supposed to be white. What was this blue?
The Aish Rabbi Replies:
The Torah prescribes a blue dye called "techelet" to be used as one of the strings on the Tzitzit, and also used for dying priestly garments. (see Exodus 25:4 and Numbers 15:38)
However, Tzitzit are still fit for use even if they lack the blue string.
Techelet was a bluish color, obtained from the fluid of a sea creature called the chilazon (Tosefta Menachot 9:6). It is found on the coast of northern Israel, though here is a disagreement among scholars regarding what the chilazon actually is. Some say it is a snail, others say a squid, and some claim it is another type of mollusk.
At any rate, this particular dye was very precious and because of its value, the Romans (who conquered Israel in 63 BCE) seized control of its usage. This caused the Jewish dyers to go underground. By 639 CE, at the time of the Arab conquest, the secret of techelet was lost all together.
In the 1850s, Rabbi Gershon Henoch Leiner, the Radzyner Rebbe, began to search for the long lost chilazon. What he came up with was a type of squid that fit the Talmud's description. Within a few years, thousands of the rebbe's followers were wearing techelet.
However, in 1913 Rabbi Isaac Herzog (the Chief Rabbi of Ireland and later the Chief Rabbi of Israel) discovered that the techelet dye of the Radzyner Rebbe included iron fillings in the process. Rabbi Herzog ruled that this makes the dye synthetic – and thus unfit for use. Nevertheless, there are still people today who wear the Techelet of the Radzyner Rebbe.
As Rabbi Herzog continued his research, he found that the French zoologist Henri de Lacase-Duthiers had discovered a mollusk called murex trunculus that could create a blue dye. Subsequent research has prompted other Jews to use Rabbi Herzog's techelet.
Today, however, the majority of Jews still do not wear Techelet because we don't have a bona fide tradition coming from the time of the Sages of exactly which animal is used.
Next time you are in Israel, you can stop by the "Temple Institute" located in the Old City of Jerusalem to see examples of wool dyed from the various sea creatures thought to be the Chilazon. To learn more, go to www.temple.org.il and www.tekhelet.co.il.
There are many esoteric meanings to the techelet thread. The Midrash says, "Whoever observes the mitzvah of tzitzit is considered as if he greeted the Divine Presence, for techelet resembles the sea, and the sea resembles the sky, and the sky resembles God's holy throne." (Sifrei – Shelach) Thus the techelet thread is a method of gaining the highest levels of spirituality.
May the Almighty reveal the secret of the chilazon, speedily in our days!
-
I have a friend in minyan who does wear a blue thread, but he is the only one in our community who does. Anyone is entitled to do so, but whether it is Techelit is still debatable.
-
http://www.oztorah.com/2007/06/thread-of-blue-ask-the-rabbi/
Thread of blue – Ask the Rabbi
Q. Why don’t we have a thread of blue among the fringes of the tallit, as required by the 3rd paragraph of the Sh’ma?
A. The thread of blue commanded in Parashat Sh’lach (Num. 15:38) had to be t’chelet. Its purpose, according to the rabbis, is that blue suggests the sea, the sea suggests the heavens, and the heavens suggest the Throne of Glory. Thus the tzitziyyot with the blue thread are a reminder of our duty to God. In other ancient cultures the wearing of blue or purple was also highly esteemed as a mark of royalty (“royal blue”) or nobility.
The t’chelet dye derived from a snail called a chillazon, a small marine creature with a hard shell which was found along Israel’s northern coast. The dyeing process came to an end in the 7th century CE when the secret of the chillazon was lost. The Midrash then declared, “Now we have only white (fringes), for the t’chelet is not found” (Num. R. 17:5). It appears that with the Arab conquest the Palestinian dyeing industry came to an end, though here and there traces of it remained.
.
.
.
-
Do you celebrate 2-day holidays like Rosh HaShana on only one day now that we can precisely determine the correct date?
2. Completely different reasons. The 2 day is a Takanah by the Hachamim for those outside of Eress Yisrael Cannot be rescinded until their is a functioning Sanhedrin and it decides that the reasoning doesn't apply for a 2 day Yom Tov outside Eress Yisrael. (+ RH besides the others is more complecated as we see people even in Israel do it for 2 days).
With Tekhellet that reasoning does not apply. It would be like someone being in an airplane and the plane crashing and he's stuck on an Island. In that island he has no Tefillin no Sisit etc. So he is obviously pattur. One day a ship passes by and rescues him. He returns to his home, to civilization. Once he is back and has his Tefillin etc. he is again obligated to perform these Misswoth. Just because at the time of his stay on the island he didn't have them, thus was pattur does not negate the Misswah indefinitely. And once the opportunity arises again he not only can but must put on his Tefillin.
-
You are wrong as to the reason Orthodox Jews do not wear the thread of blue. Actually the reason we do not wear it is because there is still a valid question as to whether the dye used for the blue color is the correct Techilis as was used in the time of the giving of the Torah.
Dude I can understand REAL doubts being formed etc. BUT the underlying reason BEHIND many of these things is definitely the mentality. You cannot deny it. That is why their is no talk of rebuilding the Temple. That is why people still insist on Metzita Ba Pe, that is why not wearing Tehellit and that is why not real formation of the Sanhedrin, also why no willingness in writing up the Ketuba in a way that will make sure that the husband will give it more readily instead of tying up some women (with financial loss) which can be easily done because it is essentially a contract. These people are simply not used to ANY change and not wanting to come out of their comfort zone.
About the Tehellit
By the way their is real very very very strong evidence available for this. It is basically unanimous for those who are really knowledgeable in this field like for example these people
http://www.tekhelet.com/
Also shiur on this.
http://machonshilo.org/en/eng/list-audio-shiurim/41-audiohalakha/504-the-truth-about-tekheleth
-
Shabbat Shalom, everyone ~
As it seems I am not welcome here and my presence is distressing to many of you, I will make this my final post here and continue my search for a more open community. I am dismayed that I caused so much of a firestorm here by posting my thoughts; it was not my intention to do so. I should have spent more time researching what type of forum this is before I joined; I take responsibility for that mistake.
As for my being Jewish, I can't make any of you believe what you don't want to believe- nor should I have to. As I noted in a previous post, I was not born into Judaism- I chose it- and doing so this late in life leaves me at a disadvantage among those who have lived their whole lives immersed in the faith. There is much I still have to learn- even the most thorough conversion program can't produce someone who knows everything at the drop of a hat on Day 1. Apparently even a lifetime isn't long enough to learn everything, so why should anyone be singled out for not surpassing the best scholars? In any case, so much for welcoming converts into the community.
In closing I wish all of you all the best, and I hope that if at some point our paths cross again either in person or online it's a happier experience than this has been for me. Good afternoon, and a Good Shabbat to all.
-----
ABT
Bye. Don't let the door hit your tuchis on the way out.
-
Bye. Don't let the door hit your tuchis on the way out.
:::D :::D :::D
If the door did hit his tuchis, it wouldn't be blue but red instead.
-
Dude I can understand REAL doubts being formed etc. BUT the underlying reason BEHIND many of these things is definitely the mentality. You cannot deny it. That is why their is no talk of rebuilding the Temple. That is why people still insist on Metzita Ba Pe, that is why not wearing Tehellit and that is why not real formation of the Sanhedrin, also why no willingness in writing up the Ketuba in a way that will make sure that the husband will give it more readily instead of tying up some women (with financial loss) which can be easily done because it is essentially a contract. These people are simply not used to ANY change and not wanting to come out of their comfort zone.
About the Tehellit
By the way their is real very very very strong evidence available for this. It is basically unanimous for those who are really knowledgeable in this field like for example these people
http://www.tekhelet.com/
Also shiur on this.
http://machonshilo.org/en/eng/list-audio-shiurim/41-audiohalakha/504-the-truth-about-tekheleth
You sound more and more like a Karaite or Samaritan to me because of your casting aspersions on the Rabbis. It's as if the Rabbis are the bad guys who are leading us astray. I on the other hand put my trust in the Rabbis who have kept us Jewish for all these centuries, and seek to find the majority opinion of the Gedolim of the generation.
There is not consensus on this issue and this is why most Jews do not wear the blue thread. If your Rabbi thinks it is correct, follow your Rabbi, but don't expect all Jews to suddenly accept the ruling of some Rabbis who may or may not have ulterior motives for selling blue dye.
There are many things which need to be done and yet nobody is doing it because we cannot do so today (rebuilding the Temple, aguna problem, etc.) . Go ahead and try if you would like, I am not stopping you. But I doubt you will have more success than others who have tried.
-
You sound more and more like a Karaite or Samaritan to me because of your casting aspersions on the Rabbis. It's as if the Rabbis are the bad guys who are leading us astray. I on the other hand put my trust in the Rabbis who have kept us Jewish for all these centuries, and seek to find the majority opinion of the Gedolim of the generation.
There are many things which need to be done and yet nobody is doing it because we cannot do so today (rebuilding the Temple, aguna problem, etc.) . Go ahead and try if you would like, I am not stopping you. But I doubt you will have more success than others who have tried.
1) ::)
2) ::)
I will B"H come back to this and rip your arguments apart some time later. Your attitude and words prove my point.
For now digest this song (I know you like Rap)
Warning* Black man rapping.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vL5sdu3pNrU
-
Tag,
Do you believe that the Torah was given to Moses and the Jewish people at Sinai and is the WORD of HASHEM? Does Hashem change his laws for the times? Do you think we can change Shabbat to Sunday instead of Saturday (the seventh day)? It seems to me according to your thinking we should be able to change all of these things. Maybe we can eat Cheese and Meat too... If a Rabbi says you can you should be able to do so. The Torah does simply say 'do not cook a kid in its mothers milk', and eating cheese on a meat sandwich is not 'cooking a kid with it's mothers milk', is it?
The Talmud, the sages, and the Rabbis of our generations have interpreted these things and our patriarchs have followed. The entire downfall of the Jewish people occured when the reform movement attempted to disassociate the beliefs from the Torah, relegating the Torah to an ANCIENT document which no longer has relevance today.
Orthodox Jews believe that the Torah is sacrosanct and no person can change the laws, and the interpretation of the Torah is relegated to the Levites who today are our Rabbis and Talmid Chochams. I will investigate the findings of the sages who are leaders of the generation and put my faith in the majority decision.
-
Look into Rabbi Solevetchiks opinion on the 'aguna problem' to determine why things are the way they are today concerning the 'chained woman'.
-
I do not listen to that kind of music... Never like tupac...
There is nothing to rip apart, save the belief of Orthodox Judaism... You seem to think our belief in the traditions of our forefathers is a bad thing... I strongly disagree with you on that.
-
Tag,
Do you believe that the Torah was given to Moses and the Jewish people at Sinai and is the WORD of HASHEM? Does Hashem change his laws for the times?
Now I am offended. You are not only slow but you accuse me of Keffirah? Why you always do this? you change the subject, make personal attacks like that and say things having NOTHING to do with the discussion. Like I said I g2g and if I dont forget (you can remind me as well) I will get back and address what I said I would address.
-
Now I am offended. You are not only slow but you accuse me of Keffirah? Why you always do this? you change the subject, make personal attacks like that and say things having NOTHING to do with the discussion. Like I said I g2g and if I dont forget (you can remind me as well) I will get back and address what I said I would address.
I do not intend to insult, but sometimes your accusations against the Rabbis is insulting.
Have a good Shabbat and I will look for you 'ripping' my points to shreds Motzei Shabbat.
-
* reminder to myself to also address and include the usual speeches you will probably hear about Tishabav and "rebuilding the Temple" what is USUALLY said and what is USUALLY NOT SAID.
Quickly about Agunot- Can be easily done. Hachamim prescribe and did at 1 time enforce beatings upon the man who refused to give the divorce, instead of some today telling the women to give the man some $ (like $10,000) soo he gives her the divorce. NO punishment upon him and incentive to criminals because they don't want to take care of the problems. REAL Torah laws addresses all these issues and the enforcement of real Torah is the answer.
-
Tag,
Indeed there is work in the field of resolving the aguna issue, and I am interested in seeing it resolved, but there are certainly halachic issues which need to be discussed (as you bring up the traditional method of beating the husband into giving the divorce)...
Here is Chabad's discussion of the issue:
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/613084/jewish/The-Agunah.htm
The Agunah
By Naftali Silberberg
In the overwhelming majority of cases, the get process proceeds without hitches, offering men and women the ability to be freed of unwanted matrimonial bonds. No rabbi will remarry the husband or wife unless the previous marriage has been terminated with a get, so arranging for a get is within the best interests of both parties.
Sadly, however, there are some people who refuse to grant their spouses the opportunity of a get. This distressing phenomenon that has effectively ruined the lives of innocent people is known as the "Agunah Problem."
Historical Overview of the Agunah Issue
Agunah means "anchored," or "chained." An agunah is a married woman who is not living with her husband, but has not been released from the bonds of matrimony. Though she wishes to put her marriage behind her, she is not free to remarry. She is chained to an unwanted marriage.
According to halachah, a woman may not remarry unless there is clear evidence that her husband had died or halachically divorced her with a get document. In times past, most agunot (pl. form of agunah) were victims of vanishing husbands. Traveling businessmen were often killed by bandits, who would dispose of the body leaving behind no trace of evidence. Or, a traveler would die in a remote location, and due to the lack of communication technology, or proper identification on the husband's person, the wife would remain uniformed. Frequent pogroms and wars habitually left agunot in their wake. Before recent times it was also fairly easy for an individual who had fallen upon hard times – or was unhappy with his current job, lifestyle, marriage, reputation, etc. – to simply vanish in the night and resurface in another city or country and start anew, unencumbered by previous obligations—including marital ones.1
The "agunah problem" was always one of the greatest challenges facing halachic authorities. The sages of the Talmud,2 recognizing the tremendous personal tragedy of the agunah, instituted various halachic leniencies intended to decrease the incidence of women in this woeful state.3 In biblical times, soldiers who were dispatched to the battlefield were required to first deliver a divorce to their wives,4 allowing the wives to remarry in the event that the husbands did not return.5 Halachic literature of the last millennium is dominated by "agunah responsa," penned by halachic authorities in response to inquiries from agunot who presented (sometimes flimsy) evidence of their husband's demise, and now wished rabbinical authorization to remarry. A precursory glance at these responsa reveals how these rabbis went to great lengths to find halachic precedent to declare these women widows.6
The Modern-Day Agunah
Today the world is "smaller," and it is it is very uncommon for people to simply vanish. Nevertheless, the agunah problem persists, primarily due to husbands who cruelly refuse to grant their wives a divorce—despite rabbinical courts' orders to do so. A variety of reasons motivate these recalcitrant men. Many of them are unhappy with the financial aspect of their divorce settlement, others with custody arrangements, and they use the get as leverage in negotiations. Others hold their wives ransom, refusing to give a get until the wife pays an outrageous sum of money. While others refuse to give a get simply out of malice and spite.
Ironically, this type of agunah, the one whose husband is very much present but refuses to give a get, is a relatively new phenomenon. According to halachah, though it is the husband who gives his wife the get, a woman too may demand a divorce if she can prove that the husband is neglectful, repulsive or abusive. In such an instance, the halachah is unequivocal:
"One who is halachically required to divorce his wife and refuses to do so, a Jewish beth din – at any place and at any time7 – corporally punishes him until he says, 'I wish [to divorce].' The get is then written and it is a kosher get."8
In short: the beth din is empowered to use any and all methods at their disposal to compel the husband to "agree" to divorce his wife. This includes imposing sanctions on having casual or business dealings with the noncompliant husband, and even using brute force if necessary.9
These measures were enough to induce the vast majority of people to comply with the rabbinical courts' decisions in these matters. This remained the case until relatively recently; because for the most part Jewish communities in the Diaspora were authorized to police, adjudicate internal disputes and dispense justice within their own communities.
Today, however, religious courts are not empowered to take justice into their own hands. Add to that the fact that today most Jewish communities are not united under the auspices of one specific communal body or rabbinical court, thus severely limiting the efficacy of any social or religious sanctions imposed by a given beth din.
Thus the agunah problem has evolved. The problem of vanishing husbands has practically vanished. In its stead we are faced with a new scourge: the recalcitrant husband.
Solutions
Recent years has seen an increased awareness regarding the agunah problem, and attempts to aid those women who find themselves in this unenviable situation.
Seemingly the most obvious solution – one that has been promoted, with some measure of success, by various individuals and organizations – would be to lobby the secular legislatures to enact laws that require recalcitrant husbands to grant their wives a get—along with punitive measures for those who disregard these laws.
Nevertheless, this solution has not been universally accepted by halachic authorities. One of the major issues involved is that according to halachah a get that is granted under duress, not entirely out of the husband's free volition, is null and void. Though we mentioned earlier that a beth din is free to use whatever measures necessary to persuade a husband to give a divorce, this only applies when these measures are taken by the beth din or by individuals (Jewish or non-Jewish) retained by beth din to perform this task.10
So many have shifted the focus of their efforts back to the rabbis, with different groups and organizations encouraging rabbis and rabbinical courts to actively do whatever is within their capability to induce husbands to divorce their wives—public shaming, community shunning, etc.
There are also several support groups that offer agunot the opportunity to dialogue, share ideas and offer each other moral support.
Chained Husbands
A little more than 1,000 years ago, the beth din of a German rabbi, Rabbi Gershom "the Light of the Diaspora," instituted major reforms in Jewish marriage law. He forbade polygamy, and decreed that a woman cannot be divorced without her consent. These reforms have been accepted as law in all Ashkenazi communities, and in certain Sephardic ones as well.11
As a result, a man whose wife refuses to receive a get12 is also "anchored" to his marriage.13
And again Tag, I am not intending to attack your beliefs, I am simply explaining how it looks from my perspective. I am sorry if what I said seemed to imply you are not keeping the commandments according to your Rabbis teaching... That is not what I am trying to convey...
And most certainly I do not seek to create divisiveness especially during these nine days.
-
Hey, why was the second Temple destroyed again? What did that lead to? Where are we today?
-
Hey, why was the second Temple destroyed again?
The Talmud says that it is due to 'Sinat Chinam' or 'Baseless hatred'... But according to my position I bear no hatred toward anyone I am having discussions with here. As I said in previous 'machloket' the purpose of holy machloket is the sake of heaven. Any conflict for the sake of heaven will stand, any conflict not for the sake of heaven will not stand.
-
A short article on why the Second Temple was destroyed:
http://www.tfdixie.com/parshat/devarim/042.htm
Many of us are familiar with the expression, "sinat chinam baseless hatred." The Talmud (Tractate Yoma) tells us that sinat chinam destroyed the Second Temple. It was, in effect, worse than the three cardinal sins of idolatry, immorality, and bloodshed which destroyed the First Temple. After all, we rebuilt the First Temple after just 70 years; we are still waiting to rebuild the second, 1,930 years after its fall.
Just what is sinat chinam, after all? I know that we cavalierly call it "baseless hatred," but that definition has always bothered me. Have you ever encountered someone who hated another person for no reason at all? Our reasons may be petty or trivial "he snubbed me; she’s too pretty, he parts his hair on the wrong side, etc." However, we always have some justification for our hatred, sensical or non.
I would suggest two interpretations of sinat chinam. The first relates to the well-known story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza. It was Kamtza who was invited to a gala banquet; but by mistake the host’s enemy Bar Kamtza was brought. No amount of pleading helped; even Bar Kamtza’s offer to pay for the entire banquet was rejected by the stubborn host. Bar Kamtza was humiliated and evicted from the hall, in full view of seemingly complacent and uncaring rabbinical leaders. Bar Kamtza’s revenge led to the destruction of Jerusalem.
Now, "Kamtza" means "cheapskate" or "stingy." There is an obvious play on words at work here. Though stingy by nature, this uninvited guest was willing to pay and pay dearly in order not to be embarrassed publicly, and to be able to stay at the banquet. The host, who would have ended up throwing this magnificent party at no cost to himself, instead chose to make a spectacle of his adversary by throwing him out.
The sinah (hatred) in this case was truly worthless. It generated no profit, it brought in no revenue whatsoever. The love that might have been shown would not only have soothed hurt feelings, it would have earned the host a pretty penny. Still, hate prevailed. When "worthless" hate outweighs "valuable" love, then we have really reached rock bottom.
One more thought on the subject: The words, "sinat chinam" literally mean "the hate of their cheyn." Cheyn is a hard word to translate, but essentially it means grace, likeability, charm. It is the unique quality which every person possesses in different measure, that which makes us special, and validates our presence in the world. Sinat chinam is the denial of another’s right to exist, the belief that he or she contributes nothing valuable to this earth. That attitude is an affront not only to the other person, but also to Hashem who made that individual. The antidote to sinat chinam, then, is not "free love," but rather the respect of every other person’s unique place in Hashem’s universe. May we see the fast of this Tishah B’Av become the joy of the complete redemption.
-
http://torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos/chapter4-14.html
Chapter 4, Mishna 14
"Rabbi Yochanan the sandal maker said: Every assembly which is for the sake of Heaven will eventually endure. And one which is not for the sake of Heaven will not endure."
http://rabbibuchwald.njop.org/2000/07/03/korach-5760-2000/
This coming week’s parasha, Parashat Korach, tells of the famed controversy between Korach and Moshe, which concludes with the earth swallowing Korach and his followers.
The Mishna in Avot, chapter 5, makes mention of Korach’s rebellion: “Every controversy which is for the sake of Heaven will endure in the end, and every one which is not for the sake of heaven will in the end not endure. Which is the controversy for the sake of Heaven? Such was the conflict of Hillel and Shammai. Which is not for the sake of Heaven? Such was the conflict of Korach and his entire assemblage.”
On a superficial level, controversy is controversy. What difference is there between the controversy of rabbis or the controversy of rebels. The Mishna in Avot argues that obviously there is a difference, and the difference is significant. Although the controversies between Hillel and Shammai were great and undoubtedly heated, both Hillel and Shammai ultimately submitted to the majority opinion, even if they were totally opposed to those positions. Despite the fact that Hillel was known to be lenient and Shammai far stricter, both Hillel and Shammai had one objective — to help the People of Israel grow in their observance of Torah. They only differed on the details.
As we all know, controversy has been part of Jewish life from time immemorial. In fact, most of the rabbis of the Talmud had “sparring partners” who would often give opposing opinions to their own. These opposing opinions are considered so valuable that they are recorded in the Talmud and are studied to this very day.
-
Sheesh Louise, how did a poll about a WN POS turn into a fight between Jewish members?
-
Sheesh Louise, how did a poll about a WN POS turn into a fight between Jewish members?
Well, one things leads to another... And I don't really consider it a 'fight', just a disagreement on issues. As an article I posted stated, Jews have a long tradition of arguing...
It started because of the member in questions nic 'A Blue Thread' which led to a question of whether we have the blue dye needed to fulfill this command.. Which led to, which led to...
-
(https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/images/artwork/hirsz3.gif)
Samuel Hirszenberg, The Black Banner
This is the reason we must support the rights of Jews to live in their homeland Israel with its capital Jerusalem.
(http://blog.thefoundationstone.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/IDF-soldier-praying-in-field-IDF-Spokesperson.jpg)
-
So, was the faggot banned?
-
So, was the faggot banned?
He probably was either that or he left on his own.
-
So, was the faggot banned?
The guy who has a family of Rear Admirals?
-
The guy who has a family of Rear Admirals?
Yes.
-
A short article on why the Second Temple was destroyed:
http://www.tfdixie.com/parshat/devarim/042.htm
Many of us are familiar with the expression, "sinat chinam baseless hatred." The Talmud (Tractate Yoma) tells us that sinat chinam destroyed the Second Temple. It was, in effect, worse than the three cardinal sins of idolatry, immorality, and bloodshed which destroyed the First Temple. After all, we rebuilt the First Temple after just 70 years; we are still waiting to rebuild the second, 1,930 years after its fall.
Just what is sinat chinam, after all? I know that we cavalierly call it "baseless hatred," but that definition has always bothered me. Have you ever encountered someone who hated another person for no reason at all? Our reasons may be petty or trivial "he snubbed me; she’s too pretty, he parts his hair on the wrong side, etc." However, we always have some justification for our hatred, sensical or non.
I would suggest two interpretations of sinat chinam. The first relates to the well-known story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza. It was Kamtza who was invited to a gala banquet; but by mistake the host’s enemy Bar Kamtza was brought. No amount of pleading helped; even Bar Kamtza’s offer to pay for the entire banquet was rejected by the stubborn host. Bar Kamtza was humiliated and evicted from the hall, in full view of seemingly complacent and uncaring rabbinical leaders. Bar Kamtza’s revenge led to the destruction of Jerusalem.
Now, "Kamtza" means "cheapskate" or "stingy." There is an obvious play on words at work here. Though stingy by nature, this uninvited guest was willing to pay and pay dearly in order not to be embarrassed publicly, and to be able to stay at the banquet. The host, who would have ended up throwing this magnificent party at no cost to himself, instead chose to make a spectacle of his adversary by throwing him out.
The sinah (hatred) in this case was truly worthless. It generated no profit, it brought in no revenue whatsoever. The love that might have been shown would not only have soothed hurt feelings, it would have earned the host a pretty penny. Still, hate prevailed. When "worthless" hate outweighs "valuable" love, then we have really reached rock bottom.
One more thought on the subject: The words, "sinat chinam" literally mean "the hate of their cheyn." Cheyn is a hard word to translate, but essentially it means grace, likeability, charm. It is the unique quality which every person possesses in different measure, that which makes us special, and validates our presence in the world. Sinat chinam is the denial of another’s right to exist, the belief that he or she contributes nothing valuable to this earth. That attitude is an affront not only to the other person, but also to Hashem who made that individual. The antidote to sinat chinam, then, is not "free love," but rather the respect of every other person’s unique place in Hashem’s universe. May we see the fast of this Tishah B’Av become the joy of the complete redemption.
The whole story is interpreted incorrectly. Today the true heroes are blamed while the Rasha Bar Kamtza is in affect pitied. Yett another problem in outlook. Earlier generations and the Gemarrah itself shows and says who the real villian was. It was KBK. First the Hachamim ( I believe the Hattam Sofer) points out that he wasn't invited because he was a traitor. Literally. After the mix up he was correctly thrown out of the party because it included all the important people and the Hachamim who were working to overthrow the evil kingdom (Romans) from Israel. Knowing that this traitor being amoung them would cause him to snitch they didn't protest his rightful removal. Then his actions again proved what a low life he was in that he instigated the Romans against Jews just because he was thrown out. Then when the case came to *Rabbi Zechariah son of Avkulos he had the choice in executing him but instead did not do soo because of heavy deliberation. He should have killed him, because he did not that traitor later caused all that trouble and brought calamity. And that is how the Gemarah says it, who is to blame? Bar Kamtza for being a traitor and Rabban Gamliel for not making a decision when it was necessary (in killing him and getting ride of the threat). In today's upside down world who is blamed instead? The Hachamim who did not tolerate the traitor. Get the gist?
-
http://machonshilo.org/en/images/stories/files/Sinath%20Hinam-Hurban-Yoma9b-Rambam.mp3
Was the Temple Destroyed Because of Hatred? PDF Print E-mail
WRITTEN BY DAVID S.
WEDNESDAY, 22 JULY 2009 21:41
Some claim that it was, and that the way to rebuild it is to study the Halakhoth of Lashon HaRa. This approach is spurious. What else did Hazal say about the reasons for the Temple's destruction?
Why don't we have the Temple today? Could the fact that we have not built it have something to do with it?
Download the Shiur
-
I will investigate the findings of the sages who are leaders of the generation and put my faith in the majority decision.
Their is no majority vs. minority nowadays. Also who and how do you define a "Hacham" and who is not? The Talmudh is binding and the Oral Torah of the Sanhedrin and not necessarily anyone today with the title of "Rabbi" or "Gadol" The whole "Gadol" buisness is relatively very new and the Haredim themselves change their definition on who is and who is not a Gadol. Of they think someone is a "Tzioni" then they are an Am Haaress. If they see they change their view then he all of a sudden becomes a "Gadol" (case in point Rav Elyashiv). On the other hand one is a "Gadol" and then he supported Nahal Haredi soo now he is an "Am Haaretz" and his car was bombed + places canceled his speeches (ex- Rav Steinman). Soo who do you define as a "Gadol" and who is not?
No majority vs. minority today, only by proof of the Gemarah is valid even is its only 1 person. Had you really followed that "system" you wouldn't or shouldn't have anything to do with KACH and Rav Kahane because he too was accused of not having the support of the "Gdolim" therefore not correct. You agree with that?
http://kahane.blogspot.com/2007/06/who-is-gadol-and-how-to-choose-rabbi.html
-
Who is a Gadol, and How To Choose a Rabbi
(Pictured: Rabbi Meir Kahane z"tl h"yd)
Who is a Gadol, and How To Choose a Rabbi
by Rav Binyamin Zev Kahane, z"tl
One of the questions we are often asked is, "If you are so right, why don't the great rabbis agree with you?" Rabbi Kahane himself was approached with questions of this sort for years, as he stood alone proclaiming what he knew to be the Torah truth.
Many of our ideological opponents who use the argument that "the rabbis don't agree with you", (and therefore, we must be wrong.) often base themselves on the verse in our parsha, "and you shall observe to do according to all that they inform thee; ..thou shalt not deviate from the sentence which they shall tell thee, to the right hand, or to the left". From this, they claim, one must listen to the "gedole HaDor" -- the great rabbis of the generation.
No More Sanhedrin
First of all, certain concepts must be made clear so that the confusion surrounding this subject doesn't confuse us, too. The above verse is, unfortunately, no longer relevant for today, because it is talking about the Sanhedrin. This is explicitly pointed out a few verses beforehand, where it says, "you shall arise and go up to the place which the Lord thy God shall choose.." -- that is, to the place where the Sanhedrin sat. This means that the moment a Sanhedrin is established (may it happen speedily in our days), there is an obligation upon each and every one of us to obey their halachic decisions. All those who differ, whether it be a famous Rosh Yeshiva or Admoor, will be forced to accept the decision of the Sanhedrin.
But until that time comes, the verse, "you shall observe to do according to all that they inform thee" has no practical halachic application for us.
There are No "Gedolim" If this is so, the crucial question is: Who do we listen to? Is there no da'at Torah (Torah view) today? Of course there is! But it is the task of every God-fearing Jew to seek out what the Torah view is, and find a rabbi who goes on the path of Torah truth, clinging to him as long as his rabbi remains on that path. What about the "gedolim"? We ask you: Who are the "gedolim"? Is it Rav X or Rabbi Y? Is it the known Torah genius, or perhaps his rival, no less the Torah genius, who so vastly differs with him?
Let's be honest. No one just accepts the opinion of the "gedolim". In reality, one fellow sees this particular rabbi as a Torah "gadol", and follows him; another fellow holds by another rabbi, and even if a hundred great rabbis line up against his rav, he will follow his rav through thick and thin.
Don't Forget The Fear Factor
Rabbi Kahane was endowed with the trait of emet - - truth. He was a Torah scholar who clung to truth without allowing emotions or other subjective factors affect his thinking. This is why we continue in his path - - whether it is accepted by the "gedolim" or not. The truth is, that privately, behind closed doors, many rabbis agreed with him, encouraging him to continue, but were afraid to admit so in public.
Rebbe? Gadol? The key ingredient must be: truth, with no fear. And this was the dominant characteristic of Rabbi Meir Kahane, z"tl.
(written by Rav Binyamin Kahane in 1991, shortly after the murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane)
http://kahane.blogspot.com/2007/06/who-is-gadol-and-how-to-choose-rabbi.html
-
There are many things which need to be done and yet nobody is doing it because we cannot do so today (rebuilding the Temple, aguna problem, etc.) . Go ahead and try if you would like, I am not stopping you. But I doubt you will have more success than others who have tried.
WRONG. Many of these issues are resolvable. The Halacha tells us how to resolve them. Their isn't a WILLINGNESS like I mentioned earlier that is stoping a lot of these things and causing problems where they could and should be resolved.
1) We can rebuild the Holy Temple I know it would be a process and politics involved as well, but at the very least anyone calling themselves a Religious Jew at the very least should be raising this issue. Image every Religious party for starters start demanding this. How many coalitions would it take until they would need to be included and have this demand meet? Never mind the fact that had it been more publicized even many "non-Religious" Jews would demand it as well and at least more of the awareness would be available and the demand growing and growing. Instead it is shrugged away as if not important, after all it isn't mentioned in the Shulhan Aruch therefore these 2/3rds of the Torah in effect almost doesn't exist! After all we should expect the Temple to fall from the sky, as some propose and speak of (and this is no joke).
2) Agunot problems can easily be to a very large extent resolved. The Hachamim had the correct system. A women comes to make a divorce, the man refuses they make a (short usually 1 month) trial period where they try to see if the issues can be resolved. If they are not resolved the man has a Misswah and obligation to give his wife a GET. He gives it willingly, all and well they get on with their lives. He does not give it willingly he is to be whipped until he gives it up. Plain and simple. If this is too "primitive" and officially cannot be done because of gov. reasons, the contract can easily be written up in a way that would cause financial loss for every day that he delays in giving her the GET (for example $1,000 per day every day after the day he was supposed to give it to her) and other similar things which can be written up before. The purpose of the GET was always for the protection of the women, NOT to cause a situation where some evildoers can and do take advantage and the best answer that some of today's people tell her to give him $ in order for him to give her the GET.
( VERY WRONG ATTITUDE, showing you how we SHOULD NOT take on this issue and showing you the wrong attitude)
youtube.com/watch?v=1aP05Ngoktw&feature=share&list=PLFAC2EE51747C19BB
3) Same attitude of those who said "resettling Israel, go ahead try, it will never happen until Moshiah comes". You are wasting your time, you are putting yourself and others in danger by provoking the nations" and other similar things. These were precisely the people who many times got others murdered in Europe instead. Same attitude.
-
http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,56681.msg548355.html#msg548355
Last year, relevant to now as well on Kamtza Bar Kamtza
-
We were all taught from a young age that it was ?needless hatred? and infighting among Jews that caused the destruction of the holy Temple in Jerusalem and the Exile of Jews from Eretz Israel, close to 2000 years ago. This Tisha B?Av, once again, in synagogues and Yeshivot around the world, thousands of Jews will relearn the story of ?Kamtza Bar Kamtza? (Kamtza son of Kamtza) which is brought down in the Talmud (Gittin 55b). The story, as it has been taught to most of us for generations, supposedly reflects yet another case of baseless infighting and needless hatred between Jews. It is the moral of this Talmudic source which has been used to prove ?that we must all get along and be tolerant and hospitable, EVEN TO THE WICKED, lest we bring about further punishment and decrees upon ourselves and the nation of Israel.? Is this the correct conclusion to be reached from the story of Kamtza? Is this the true moral of the story of Kamtza? What really triggered the destruction of Jerusalem?
The story:
The Talmud tells us of a man in Jerusalem who hosted a lavish meal, and who sent his servant to invite his friend ?Kamtza?. The servant made the mistake of inviting the host?s enemy, who shared a similar name, ?Kamtza bar Kamtza? (Kamtza son of Kamtza, some such as the Mahrsha say that Kamtza bar kamtza was in fact the actual son of the Kamtza who was supposed to be invited). When the host recognized his enemy Kamtza bar Kamtza sitting at his table, he asked him to leave. Bar Kamtza, attempted to persuade the host not to embarrass him and to permit him to remain, being as he was already there. Kamtza beseeched his host to permit him to pay for his meal and to remain. The host refused. A desperate Bar Kamtza agreed to cover the costs of half of the entire affair. His pleadings were to no avail. The host again refused Bar Kamtza?s request. Bar Kamtza tried one last proposal: ?If you allow me to stay, I will pay for the entire banquet.? The host remained adamant in his refusal, and forcibly removed Bar Kamtza. Bar Kamtza left, but not before warning: ?Since the Rabbis were present and they did not protest, it is apparent that they are pleased with the behavior of the host of this banquet. I shall go and inform against the Jews to the authorities??
The Gemara continues: He went to the ?Caesar? (some say the local Roman Governor) and told him, ?The Jews have rebelled?. The ?Caesar? responded: ?Who shall prove this?? Bar Kamtza responded: Send them an animal to be sacrificed and you shall see if they will sacrifice it. He sent them a baby calf. Bar Kamtza inflicted a blemish in the lips of the calf, some say in its eye or eyelid ?something which is considered a blemish according to Jewish law but not so by the gentiles. The Rabbis considered sacrificing the calf, out of fear of the authorities, to maintain peace with the government. Rabbi Zecharia ben Ovkalus objected, stating that the Rabbis must not violate the halacha, lest people learn from their behavior that it is permissible to sacrifice an animal with a blemish. The Rabbis considered killing Bar Kamtza to prevent him from fulfilling his threat to inform on the Jews. Once again Rabbi Zecharia ben Ovkalus objected, stating that if Kamtza is killed people will think that the death penalty is the punishment for bringing a sacrifice that has a blemish. Rabbi Yochanan said, ?the humble behavior of Rabbi Zecharia ben Ivkalus destroyed our House and burned our sanctuary and Exiled us from our land.?
On face value, this story is testimony to yet another tragedy that represents the baseless rampant hatred amongst Jews that was so prevalent throughout that era. The way the story has been told to most of us, it is hard not to feel sorry for ?poor Kamtza? who was thrown out of the party after he was brutally insulted, and for no apparent justifiable reason. However, after a closer look at the incident, and at the commentaries, we come up with a very different picture. ?Poor Kamtza? is an informant a ?malshin? a ?moser? who committed one of the most severe national crimes. Regardless of his motives, he committed a horrible crime without any justification.
The key to the story revolves around the fact that Kamtza did not suddenly become a bad guy and an informant. Kamtza was an evil traitor far before this incident ever unfolded. This is the reason that he was not invited in the first place and this is why the Rabbis were silent when he was ejected from the banquet. The Chatam Sofer explains that Kamtza was always evil and that this is why he was not welcome at the affair. The Eitz Yosef on the Ein Yaakov explains that the Rabbis were not frightened of Kamtza and this is why they embarrassed him, because he was already a known informant. And so states the Mahral as well. The fact that he informed on the Jews as a result of a personal insult, further proves the point.
Thus, it was not the cruel and embarrassing treatment against Kamtza that brought about Jerusalem?s destruction. And it was not the silence of the Rabbis who permitted Kamtza to be shamed that caused the destruction, but rather the evil behavior of Kamtza and the lack of response to neutralize Kamtza, when he posed a threat to Jewish survival, that brought about the destruction of Jerusalem. And as it is said, ?because of Kamtza bar Kamtza the temple was destroyed?. We do not say ?because of the host, the temple was destroyed.? The conclusion of the story goes one step further and also holds Rabbi Ovkalus accountable for the destruction of Jerusalem ? because of his excessive humility in the face of the threat posed by the wicked Kamtza, or in the words of the Meiri: ?And we learn from this that one who brings about a threat of destruction upon Jews by the authorities, could be killed.? And Rashi explains Rav Zecharya ben Ovkalus? crime of misplaced humility, ?his humbleness ? that he (Rabbi Zecharya ben Ovkalus) tolerated Kamtza?s behavior and did not kill him.? In other words the lack of bloodshed against the wicked caused the destruction of Jerusalem and not as we have often been misled to believe - that the embarrassing of the wicked Kamtza was the cause.
Yes, baseless hatred of Jews is forbidden and brings about national destruction - Yes, baseless hatred such as the hatred betrayed by Kamtza against his fellow Jews. However, tolerance of such evil is the real trigger that caused the destruction of Jerusalem. The hatred of Jews which is forbidden by the Rabbis and which causes destruction is the baseless hatred displayed by the wicked Kamtzas. The only way to save Israel from destruction is by fighting against the Kamtzas without hesitation and without misplaced mercy and misplaced humility. I think that this is the exact opposite lesson from the one most of us have been taught for so many years. This is a vital topic to study as we approach the building of the Third Temple, G-d willing, in our days. Let it be known that tolerance and mercy upon the wicked will only postpone our redemption and prolong our bitter Exile.
(Most of the article was based upon partial excerpts from an article written in Hebrew by David Cohen
-
The reason I guessed Karaite is because A Blue Thread is a Karaite blog (I didn't say you were necessarily the owner), but you also have a Karaite tzitzit on your profile pic. Karaites are the only ones that use blue threads in their tzitziot.
That's not true at all. But you yourself admit it's not true with your next statement: There are a very few Orthodox who do,
but I doubt you are one of them because Orthodox would definitely be concerned with proper conversions.
Clearly.
Normal Orthodox Jews only wear white tzitziot because the proper blue dye (techelet) is not produced currently.
This is a matter of dispute, so why do you call those who were only white as "Normal orthodox Jews?" And those who wear techeilet are not normal? That's very biased on your part and very wrong. I have seen many people wearing them. They are usually in the minority but I've seen it in different types of shuls, and different types of Jews.
Btw, are you aware that Rav Belsky wears techelet? Well, he does.
What you have said about proper techelet not being produced currently is incorrect IMO, but at very least, the subject of a dispute.
-
I know this, that was going to be my point, since we need a Sanhedrin to return to the 1-day celebrations, we will need a Sanhedrin to officially authenticate the use of techelet.
That logic doesn't follow. One thing has nothing to do with the other.
-
Sheesh. You guys do not quit. This is getting preposterous. Why are good Jewish and Noahide members tearing each other a new one over such minutiae? Does this look good to the public?
Is it really that hard for us to unite against a WN pedophile sodomite troll? Sheesh Louise.
-
The whole story is interpreted incorrectly. Today the true heroes are blamed while the Rasha Bar Kamtza is in affect pitied. Yett another problem in outlook. Earlier generations and the Gemarrah itself shows and says who the real villian was. It was KBK. First the Hachamim ( I believe the Hattam Sofer) points out that he wasn't invited because he was a traitor. Literally. After the mix up he was correctly thrown out of the party because it included all the important people and the Hachamim who were working to overthrow the evil kingdom (Romans) from Israel. Knowing that this traitor being amoung them would cause him to snitch they didn't protest his rightful removal. Then his actions again proved what a low life he was in that he instigated the Romans against Jews just because he was thrown out. Then when the case came to *Rabbi Zechariah son of Avkulos he had the choice in executing him but instead did not do soo because of heavy deliberation. He should have killed him, because he did not that traitor later caused all that trouble and brought calamity. And that is how the Gemarah says it, who is to blame? Bar Kamtza for being a traitor and Rabban Gamliel for not making a decision when it was necessary (in killing him and getting ride of the threat). In today's upside down world who is blamed instead? The Hachamim who did not tolerate the traitor. Get the gist?
Wow. I didn't even realize this. Thank you for writing this out, I never looked deeply enough into this story apparently.
-
Sheesh. You guys do not quit. This is getting preposterous. Why are good Jewish and Noahide members tearing each other a new one over such minutiae?
It's an explicit commandment in the Torah to wear a blue string within the fringes. How can it be called "minutiae?"
When someone slanders good Jews for no apparent reason, it is impossible for no one on the forum to take issue with that.
Does this look good to the public?
I don't know, does it look good to the public to call Orthodox Jews wearing techelet as "abnormal?" Or, perhaps more importantly, does that look good to God?
Is it really that hard for us to unite against a WN pedophile sodomite troll? Sheesh Louise.
Obviously our discussions now have nothing to do with the troll. Why must the thread continue to focus on him? He already left.
There is nothing wrong with arguing. If only certain participants would keep it from becoming personal. But yet certain people on the forum take the opinions of others as an "attack" for some reason and then respond viscerally. I still don't understand why.
-
Shabbat Shalom, everyone ~
As it seems I am not welcome here and my presence is distressing to many of you, I will make this my final post here and continue my search for a more open community. I am dismayed that I caused so much of a firestorm here by posting my thoughts; it was not my intention to do so. I should have spent more time researching what type of forum this is before I joined; I take responsibility for that mistake.
As for my being Jewish, I can't make any of you believe what you don't want to believe- nor should I have to. As I noted in a previous post, I was not born into Judaism- I chose it- and doing so this late in life leaves me at a disadvantage among those who have lived their whole lives immersed in the faith. There is much I still have to learn- even the most thorough conversion program can't produce someone who knows everything at the drop of a hat on Day 1. Apparently even a lifetime isn't long enough to learn everything, so why should anyone be singled out for not surpassing the best scholars? In any case, so much for welcoming converts into the community.
In closing I wish all of you all the best, and I hope that if at some point our paths cross again either in person or online it's a happier experience than this has been for me. Good afternoon, and a Good Shabbat to all.
-----
ABT
Quit making yourself into a victim. You were criticized here for your support of nazi attacks on Yesha Jews. NOT for your lack of scholarship.
-
Shavuot Tov,
I have a lot of responses to Tag concerning his information he posted. Indeed what he says is true but in a way he is misrepresenting what it taught by most of the Rabbis, at least those who I study and listen to. Nobody ever has taught that Bar Kamza was a good guy, nor that the host of the party was incorrect in kicking Bar Kamza out. I have not heard this, although I admit it may be possible that some reform or conservative Rabbi may try to present it that way. But while it is true that Bar Kamza was an informant, this is only because of a trait which had become endemic in Klal Yisrael. This incident was one example which the Talmud gives, along with the story of the zealots who burned down the food storage buildings.
Sinat Chinam is baseless hatred between Jews, and it is the reason which the Talmud gives for the destruction. If the people of Israel had been more concerned with keeping the command of Ahavat Yisrael maybe a Bar Kamza would not have existed. Nobody I know makes excuses for Bar Kamza, and it is shocking to me to suggest that Orthodox Rabbis would misrepresent this story. I know my Rabbi has told the story with the explanation that it was a larger problem between Jews which led to the incident of Kamza and Bar Kamza.
I will attempt to address Tags points, which are all true, tomorrow morning...
-
I am sorry to be 'off topic' WFTMPTC but we are just discussing the topic of the destruction of the Temple which we have been mourning the last three weeks...
When Jerusalem Burned
by Rabbi Joseph Telushkin
http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/274,2145951/When-Jerusalem-Burned.html#articlepage
At the beginning of the Common Era, a new group arose among the Jews: the Zealots (in Hebrew, Ka-na-im). These anti-Roman rebels were active for more than six decades, and later instigated the Great Revolt. Their most basic belief was that all means were justified to attain political and religious liberty.
The Jews' anti-Roman feelings were seriously exacerbated during the reign of the half-crazed emperor Caligula who, in the year 39, declared himself to be a deity and ordered his statue to be set up at every Temple in the Roman Empire. The Jews, alone in the empire, refused the command; they would not defile G-d's Temple with a statue of pagan Rome's newest deity.
Caligula threatened to destroy the Temple, so a delegation of Jews was sent to pacify him. To no avail. Caligula raged at them, "So you are the enemies of the gods, the only people who refuse to recognize my divinity." Only the emperor's sudden, and violent death saved the Jews from wholesale massacre.
The combination of financial exploitation, Rome's unbridled contempt for Judaism, and the unabashed favoritism that the Romans extended to gentiles living in Israel brought about the revolt
Caligula's action radicalized even the more moderate Jews. What assurance did they have, after all, that another Roman ruler would not arise and try to defile the Temple or destroy Judaism altogether? In addition, Caligula's sudden demise might have been interpreted as confirming the Zealots' belief that G-d would fight alongside the Jews if only they would have the courage to confront Rome.
In the decades after Caligula's death, Jews found their religion subject to periodic gross indignities, Roman soldiers exposing themselves in the Temple on one occasion and burning a Torah scroll on another.
Ultimately, the combination of financial exploitation, Rome's unbridled contempt for Judaism, and the unabashed favoritism that the Romans extended to gentiles living in Israel brought about the revolt.
In the year 66, Florus, the last Roman procurator, stole vast quantities of silver from the Temple. The outraged Jewish masses rioted and wiped out the small Roman garrison stationed in Jerusalem. Cestius Gallus, the Roman ruler in neighboring Syria, sent in a larger force of soldiers. But the Jewish insurgents routed them as well.
This was a heartening victory that had a terrible consequence: Many Jews suddenly became convinced that they could defeat Rome, and the Zealots' ranks grew geometrically. Never again, however, did the Jews achieve so decisive a victory.
When the Romans returned, they had 60,000 heavily armed and highly professional troops. They launched their first attack against the Jewish state's most radicalized area, the Galilee in the north. The Romans vanquished the Galilee, and an estimated 100,000 Jews were killed or sold into slavery.
Throughout the Roman conquest of this territory, the Jewish leadership in Jerusalem did almost nothing to help their beleaguered brothers. They apparently had concluded - too late, unfortunately - that the revolt could not be won, and wanted to hold down Jewish deaths as much as possible.
The highly embittered refugees who succeeded in escaping the Galilean massacres fled to the last major Jewish stronghold - Jerusalem.
The scene was now set for the revolt's final catastrophe. Outside Jerusalem, Roman troops prepared to besiege the city; inside the city, the Jews were engaged in a suicidal civil war. In later generations, the rabbis hyperbolically declared that the revolt's failure and the Temple's destruction were due not to Roman military superiority but to causeless hatred (sinat khinam) among the Jews (Talmud, Yoma 9b). Though the Romans would have won the war in any case, the Jewish civil war both hastened their victory and immensely increased the casualties. One horrendous example: In expectation of a Roman siege, Jerusalem's Jews had stockpiled a supply of dry food that could have fed the city for many years. But one of the warring Zealot factions burned the entire supply, apparently hoping that destroying this "security blanket" would compel everyone to participate in the revolt. The starvation resulting from this mad act caused suffering as great as any the Romans inflicted.
Many Jews suddenly became convinced that they could defeat Rome, and the Zealots' ranks grew geometrically. Never again, however, did the Jews achieve so decisive a victory
We do know that some great figures of ancient Israel opposed the revolt, most notably Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai. Since the Zealot leaders ordered the execution of anyone advocating surrender to Rome, Rabbi Yochanan arranged for his disciples to smuggle him out of Jerusalem, disguised as a corpse. Once safe, he met the Roman general Vespasian, who granted him concessions that allowed Jewish communal life to continue.
During the summer of 70, the Romans breached the walls of Jerusalem and initiated an orgy of violence and destruction. Shortly thereafter, they destroyed the Second Temple. This was the final and most devastating Roman blow against Judea.
It is estimated that as many as one million Jews died in the Great Revolt against Rome. When people today speak of the almost two-thousand-year span of Jewish homelessness and exile, they are dating it from the failure of the revolt and the destruction of the Temple. Indeed, the Great Revolt of 66-70, and the Bar-Kokhba revolt some sixty years later, were the greatest calamities in Jewish history prior to the Holocaust. In addition to more that one million Jews killed, these failed rebellions led to the total loss of Jewish political authority in Israel until 1948. This loss in itself exacerbated the magnitude of later Jewish catastrophes, since it precluded Israel from being used as a refuge for the large numbers of Jews fleeing persecutions elsewhere.
-
Can someone be an erev rav and then stop being an erev rav but then become an erev rav again?
-
Can someone be an erev rav and then stop being an erev rav but then become an erev rav again?
According to my understanding Erev Rav is not a state of being a Jew, it is a descendant of the non-Jews who left Egypt with the Jewish people. So no, I don't think a person who is an Erev Rav can ever be anything but an Erev Rav. These people kept the idolatry of their parents even as they left Egypt, and they were the ones who inspired the building of the Golden Calf.
-
LKZ, you may find this discussion of the Erev Rav enlightening...
Parshas Ki Sisa - Parah
God told Moshe, "Go down. Your people which you brought out of Egypt have corrupted themselves." (Shemos 32:7)
Ah, the Erev Rav, where would the world have been without them? Where would the world be without them today? In Yemos HaMoshiach, that's where. All that went wrong for the Jewish people in the desert was instigated by the Mixed Multitude, just as God had forewarned Moshe Rabbeinu back in Egypt, on the way out.
And now, in this week's parshah, their coupe de grace: the golden calf. Had it not been for the Erev Rav, the Jewish people would have waited peacefully at the foot of the mountain in their camp below for Moshe Rabbeinu to return with the Word of God. Maybe they would have asked, "What's taking him so long?" and been a bit concerned.
But, they certainly would not have responded with idol worship and licentious behavior. Only the Erev Rav, as intelligent as some of them may have been at the time, could do something so dumb at Mt. Sinai. It is always amazing how a bad trait can lay waste to intelligence, even use it to engineer one's own destruction. We're watching the very same thing happen today as well.
Interestingly enough, another name for the Erev Rav was "HaAm," or "the people," as noted above. In fact, Chazal say that every time the Torah refers only to HaAm, which, on a simple level, can apply to the Jewish people as well, it is really a direct reference to the Erev Rav themselves. Hence, when the verse says:
After Pharaoh sent the people away. God did not lead them through the land of the Philistines . (Shemos 13:17)
the Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh says that it refers to the Erev Rav, whom Pharaoh sent along with the Jewish people to cause precisely the kind of trouble they cause in this week's parshah.
Of all the nicknames to give to a troublesome people, HaAm is not so bad. At least, that is what one might think at first, until one considers that they are not supposed to be an "um," that is, a separate nation. They were Egyptians who, because of the Bris Milah Yosef, as Viceroy, had the Egyptians perform to get grain during the famine, became converts to the way of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Ya'akov. By the time they left Egypt, there should have been no trace of a different origin.
In other words, the name HaAm was a way of denoting the lack of integration into the Jewish people by these Egyptian converts, evidenced by how quickly they reverted to Egyptian ways in this week's parshah. And, having not fully integrated into the Jewish people meant, means, that the conversion process was not complete on all levels, and therefore, that they remained a divisive force within Klal Yisroel.
In other words, in this case, HaAm is not compliment, but an indication of the Erev Rav's propensity to be divisive. If k'ish echad b'leiv echad1 describes the ultimate state of Jewish unification, HaAm, in reference to the Erev Rav, alludes to just the opposite. And, it has been by sowing disunity amongst Jews that the Erev Rav has been most successful in keeping us from fulfilling the ultimate dreams of our nation.
And, make no mistake about it: the Erev Rav comes in various different forms and types of people. In fact, the Zohar discusses in great detail five different categories of Erev Rav (Bereishis 25a), and all of them can have an application in every kind of Jewish community you can think of. And, as different as one group might be from the other, they all have one thing in common: they put themselves before the nation.
Therefore, says the Zohar, they can give charity, lots of it, even build synagogues and Torah study houses, but to act as base for their name plaque. Secondary to the good name they will receive for being so philanthropic is the good their actual contribution will do for the people for whom it is intended.
Or, they can take an activist role on behalf of some cause, or even specifically, a Jewish cause. But, if you truly analyze what they are doing, no matter how well-intentioned they make themselves appear on the surface, it is their personal mandate that they attempt to fulfill, not the national one of the Jewish people. Indeed, as they work on behalf of the Jewish people they in fact work against the Jewish people, often using their money and political clout to force their ways and means.
If they had their own flag, the golden calf would be their emblem in its middle. And, just as Amalek was the antithesis of Moshe Rabbeinu, the Erev Rav is just a derivation of that very antithesis. The trait of Moshe Rabbeinu was Netzach, which meant that everything he did was for the sake of Eternity. The Erev Rav simply lived for today, investing all of their energy in the physical pleasure of the moment.
The golden calf embodied this approach to life. A calf represents playful youthfulness, and gold represents longevity. In short, the golden calf represented man's desire to never grow up and take responsibility for himself and the world, so that he can party round the clock. And, when Moshe Rabbeinu came back down the mountain in this week's parshah caring the antidote for such a lifestyle, that's exactly what he found going on in the camp below: a wild party.
This week is also Parashas Parah, so the maftir jumps to Parashas Chukas, where we find the laws concerning the procedure of the Red Heifer, necessary for a person who has become defiled by contact with a dead body, or implements that have. We read it now because of the closeness of Pesach, but its juxtaposition with the reading of the sin of the golden calf couldn't have been better timed, for like Moshe Rabbeinu himself, it is the antithesis of the Erev Rav and all that they stand for.
First of all, it is red, and not gold. If gold represents longevity, then red, the color of blood, represents human vulnerability and frailty. If a calf represents wistful youthfulness, then a heifer represents responsible adulthood, the ability to wear a yoke and to channel energy in a meaningful and productive manner. If the golden calf represents eternal youth, but really results in early death, the Red Heifer looked like death, but actually resulted in a return to life.
Hence, the Red Heifer and the golden calf represent two extremes on a single continuum, and therefore, the ongoing challenge of the Jew, indeed of all mankind. We are caught in an ongoing internal battle between the drive for immediate pleasure and satisfaction, and long term gain. It is a battle that not only defines us as individuals, but as a nation as a whole:
[edit]
In other words, Israelis, at least the traditional ones, feel a sense of eternity, and its has to affect their way of thinking, and therefore, their way of acting. The ones who have lost this sense of eternity, and many already have, have done two things: they have given up on the future and turned to extremely temporal pleasures. In short, they have adopted the life of the Erev Rav and have become, hopefully only temporarily, like them.
Not just in Eretz Yisroel, obviously. One can travel to just about any country Jews are found in the world today, which, amazingly, is almost every place people can be found today, and find Jews pursuing the golden calf way of life. To the extent that they ignore the eternal reality of the Jewish people is the extent to which they follow the ways of the Erev Rav. And, today, you can be religious as well and fall into the same trap.
Indeed, there ought to be an Erev Rav-golden calf thermometer. I'm not quite sure how it would work, but somehow it would look at a Jew's life, and determine how much the person leans in one direction or the other, either in the direction of the golden calf, or that of the Red Heifer. It would measure how real a person is with eternal life, as projected by his or her approach to the material world.
This message comes right in advance of Pesach because this is really what Pesach is all about. As we move away from chometz, the symbol of which is bread, in the direction of matzah, plain flour and water, we shed more than pounds. We leave behind an attachment to the golden (calf) way of life, a branch of Egyptian life.
That's why they built it in the first place. For, you can take the Erev Rav out of Egypt, but apparently, it is far harder to take the Egypt out of the Erev Rav, and the golden calf was their way of making the Jewish camp their home away from home, that is, their Egypt away from Egypt. Unfortunately, less that 100 days out of Mitzrayim, those Jews still suffering from the Mitzrayim Syndrome got pulled into the spiritual abyss, like errant dust into an industrial strength vacuum cleaner.
Interesting how some knowing Jews today refer to America, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, as the "Golden Medinah," or, "The Golden Country." For, it has been, for decades, the place of great opportunity, especially for the Jewish people, a place where almost everything we have touched has turned to gold. The last time this many Jews were this wealthy was when the gold and silver of the Egyptian army washed ashore after they drowned in the Red Sea.
In some respects, it has served us well. It allowed us to rebuild the Jewish nation on American soil after the Jewish nation was wiped away from European soil. And, quite clearly, it helped pave the way for the Final Redemption, as countless Jews invested untold sums of wealth into the development of Eretz Yisroel, including the construction of many wonderful Torah institutions.
However, the same cannot be said about everyone who struck it rich in America. Some use their wealth, not to strengthen the Jewish people against the pitfalls of the golden calf lifestyle, but to encourage it. Some, as mentioned before, even use their financial clout, in the name of helping the Jewish people, to actually undermine the future of the State of Israel. They call themselves friends of the Jewish people, but then again, so did the Erev Rav.
And, before we say to ourselves with confidence, "Well, that's not me!" we should read the Zohar on the Erev Rav today. Once I did, I became very uneasy, and felt compelled to examine my lifestyle for any Erev Rav tendencies. Everyone ought to do the same thing, especially as scandals come to light from all sectors of the Jewish people.
At the very least, get back to Torah basics, and make sure that whatever you do, you do it for the right reasons, and with humility. Above all, let God be above all, meaning that you should fear no one but God Himself, and serve Him loyally. This will serve you the best of all, especially as we head into uncharted waters of history, and the world becomes less favorable to anything the Jewish people seem to do today.
-
Well i never spread disunity among Jews G-d forbid but there was this thing with five things the Erev rav do that I saw and I did all of those so I've been paranoid for a while and like wondering if I happen to be that, first of that sucks, second what are you supposed to do?
LKZ, you may find this discussion of the Erev Rav enlightening...
Parshas Ki Sisa - Parah
God told Moshe, "Go down. Your people which you brought out of Egypt have corrupted themselves." (Shemos 32:7)
Ah, the Erev Rav, where would the world have been without them? Where would the world be without them today? In Yemos HaMoshiach, that's where. All that went wrong for the Jewish people in the desert was instigated by the Mixed Multitude, just as God had forewarned Moshe Rabbeinu back in Egypt, on the way out.
And now, in this week's parshah, their coupe de grace: the golden calf. Had it not been for the Erev Rav, the Jewish people would have waited peacefully at the foot of the mountain in their camp below for Moshe Rabbeinu to return with the Word of God. Maybe they would have asked, "What's taking him so long?" and been a bit concerned.
But, they certainly would not have responded with idol worship and licentious behavior. Only the Erev Rav, as intelligent as some of them may have been at the time, could do something so dumb at Mt. Sinai. It is always amazing how a bad trait can lay waste to intelligence, even use it to engineer one's own destruction. We're watching the very same thing happen today as well.
Interestingly enough, another name for the Erev Rav was "HaAm," or "the people," as noted above. In fact, Chazal say that every time the Torah refers only to HaAm, which, on a simple level, can apply to the Jewish people as well, it is really a direct reference to the Erev Rav themselves. Hence, when the verse says:
After Pharaoh sent the people away. God did not lead them through the land of the Philistines . (Shemos 13:17)
the Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh says that it refers to the Erev Rav, whom Pharaoh sent along with the Jewish people to cause precisely the kind of trouble they cause in this week's parshah.
Of all the nicknames to give to a troublesome people, HaAm is not so bad. At least, that is what one might think at first, until one considers that they are not supposed to be an "um," that is, a separate nation. They were Egyptians who, because of the Bris Milah Yosef, as Viceroy, had the Egyptians perform to get grain during the famine, became converts to the way of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Ya'akov. By the time they left Egypt, there should have been no trace of a different origin.
In other words, the name HaAm was a way of denoting the lack of integration into the Jewish people by these Egyptian converts, evidenced by how quickly they reverted to Egyptian ways in this week's parshah. And, having not fully integrated into the Jewish people meant, means, that the conversion process was not complete on all levels, and therefore, that they remained a divisive force within Klal Yisroel.
In other words, in this case, HaAm is not compliment, but an indication of the Erev Rav's propensity to be divisive. If k'ish echad b'leiv echad1 describes the ultimate state of Jewish unification, HaAm, in reference to the Erev Rav, alludes to just the opposite. And, it has been by sowing disunity amongst Jews that the Erev Rav has been most successful in keeping us from fulfilling the ultimate dreams of our nation.
And, make no mistake about it: the Erev Rav comes in various different forms and types of people. In fact, the Zohar discusses in great detail five different categories of Erev Rav (Bereishis 25a), and all of them can have an application in every kind of Jewish community you can think of. And, as different as one group might be from the other, they all have one thing in common: they put themselves before the nation.
Therefore, says the Zohar, they can give charity, lots of it, even build synagogues and Torah study houses, but to act as base for their name plaque. Secondary to the good name they will receive for being so philanthropic is the good their actual contribution will do for the people for whom it is intended.
Or, they can take an activist role on behalf of some cause, or even specifically, a Jewish cause. But, if you truly analyze what they are doing, no matter how well-intentioned they make themselves appear on the surface, it is their personal mandate that they attempt to fulfill, not the national one of the Jewish people. Indeed, as they work on behalf of the Jewish people they in fact work against the Jewish people, often using their money and political clout to force their ways and means.
If they had their own flag, the golden calf would be their emblem in its middle. And, just as Amalek was the antithesis of Moshe Rabbeinu, the Erev Rav is just a derivation of that very antithesis. The trait of Moshe Rabbeinu was Netzach, which meant that everything he did was for the sake of Eternity. The Erev Rav simply lived for today, investing all of their energy in the physical pleasure of the moment.
The golden calf embodied this approach to life. A calf represents playful youthfulness, and gold represents longevity. In short, the golden calf represented man's desire to never grow up and take responsibility for himself and the world, so that he can party round the clock. And, when Moshe Rabbeinu came back down the mountain in this week's parshah caring the antidote for such a lifestyle, that's exactly what he found going on in the camp below: a wild party.
This week is also Parashas Parah, so the maftir jumps to Parashas Chukas, where we find the laws concerning the procedure of the Red Heifer, necessary for a person who has become defiled by contact with a dead body, or implements that have. We read it now because of the closeness of Pesach, but its juxtaposition with the reading of the sin of the golden calf couldn't have been better timed, for like Moshe Rabbeinu himself, it is the antithesis of the Erev Rav and all that they stand for.
First of all, it is red, and not gold. If gold represents longevity, then red, the color of blood, represents human vulnerability and frailty. If a calf represents wistful youthfulness, then a heifer represents responsible adulthood, the ability to wear a yoke and to channel energy in a meaningful and productive manner. If the golden calf represents eternal youth, but really results in early death, the Red Heifer looked like death, but actually resulted in a return to life.
Hence, the Red Heifer and the golden calf represent two extremes on a single continuum, and therefore, the ongoing challenge of the Jew, indeed of all mankind. We are caught in an ongoing internal battle between the drive for immediate pleasure and satisfaction, and long term gain. It is a battle that not only defines us as individuals, but as a nation as a whole:
[edit]
In other words, Israelis, at least the traditional ones, feel a sense of eternity, and its has to affect their way of thinking, and therefore, their way of acting. The ones who have lost this sense of eternity, and many already have, have done two things: they have given up on the future and turned to extremely temporal pleasures. In short, they have adopted the life of the Erev Rav and have become, hopefully only temporarily, like them.
Not just in Eretz Yisroel, obviously. One can travel to just about any country Jews are found in the world today, which, amazingly, is almost every place people can be found today, and find Jews pursuing the golden calf way of life. To the extent that they ignore the eternal reality of the Jewish people is the extent to which they follow the ways of the Erev Rav. And, today, you can be religious as well and fall into the same trap.
Indeed, there ought to be an Erev Rav-golden calf thermometer. I'm not quite sure how it would work, but somehow it would look at a Jew's life, and determine how much the person leans in one direction or the other, either in the direction of the golden calf, or that of the Red Heifer. It would measure how real a person is with eternal life, as projected by his or her approach to the material world.
This message comes right in advance of Pesach because this is really what Pesach is all about. As we move away from chometz, the symbol of which is bread, in the direction of matzah, plain flour and water, we shed more than pounds. We leave behind an attachment to the golden (calf) way of life, a branch of Egyptian life.
That's why they built it in the first place. For, you can take the Erev Rav out of Egypt, but apparently, it is far harder to take the Egypt out of the Erev Rav, and the golden calf was their way of making the Jewish camp their home away from home, that is, their Egypt away from Egypt. Unfortunately, less that 100 days out of Mitzrayim, those Jews still suffering from the Mitzrayim Syndrome got pulled into the spiritual abyss, like errant dust into an industrial strength vacuum cleaner.
Interesting how some knowing Jews today refer to America, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, as the "Golden Medinah," or, "The Golden Country." For, it has been, for decades, the place of great opportunity, especially for the Jewish people, a place where almost everything we have touched has turned to gold. The last time this many Jews were this wealthy was when the gold and silver of the Egyptian army washed ashore after they drowned in the Red Sea.
In some respects, it has served us well. It allowed us to rebuild the Jewish nation on American soil after the Jewish nation was wiped away from European soil. And, quite clearly, it helped pave the way for the Final Redemption, as countless Jews invested untold sums of wealth into the development of Eretz Yisroel, including the construction of many wonderful Torah institutions.
However, the same cannot be said about everyone who struck it rich in America. Some use their wealth, not to strengthen the Jewish people against the pitfalls of the golden calf lifestyle, but to encourage it. Some, as mentioned before, even use their financial clout, in the name of helping the Jewish people, to actually undermine the future of the State of Israel. They call themselves friends of the Jewish people, but then again, so did the Erev Rav.
And, before we say to ourselves with confidence, "Well, that's not me!" we should read the Zohar on the Erev Rav today. Once I did, I became very uneasy, and felt compelled to examine my lifestyle for any Erev Rav tendencies. Everyone ought to do the same thing, especially as scandals come to light from all sectors of the Jewish people.
At the very least, get back to Torah basics, and make sure that whatever you do, you do it for the right reasons, and with humility. Above all, let God be above all, meaning that you should fear no one but God Himself, and serve Him loyally. This will serve you the best of all, especially as we head into uncharted waters of history, and the world becomes less favorable to anything the Jewish people seem to do today.
-
Shavuot Tov,
I have a lot of responses to Tag concerning his information he posted. Indeed what he says is true but in a way he is misrepresenting what it taught by most of the Rabbis, at least those who I study and listen to. Nobody ever has taught that Bar Kamza was a good guy, nor that the host of the party was incorrect in kicking Bar Kamza out. I have not heard this, although I admit it may be possible that some reform or conservative Rabbi may try to present it that way. But while it is true that Bar Kamza was an informant, this is only because of a trait which had become endemic in Klal Yisrael. This incident was one example which the Talmud gives, along with the story of the zealots who burned down the food storage buildings.
Sinat Chinam is baseless hatred between Jews, and it is the reason which the Talmud gives for the destruction. If the people of Israel had been more concerned with keeping the command of Ahavat Yisrael maybe a Bar Kamza would not have existed. Nobody I know makes excuses for Bar Kamza, and it is shocking to me to suggest that Orthodox Rabbis would misrepresent this story. I know my Rabbi has told the story with the explanation that it was a larger problem between Jews which led to the incident of Kamza and Bar Kamza.
I will attempt to address Tags points, which are all true, tomorrow morning...
It is many times implicit and explicit that KBK was a poor fellow who just wanted to stay in the party and was willing even to pay for his meal and for others, BUT because of "baseless hatred" the host threw him out. The Important Rabbis didn't protest therefor they are to be blamed. Bro who are you kidding me, I can link you to shiurim where they bring that story line, I wont single anyone out particularly but since now is the time and you would probably be listening to shiurim by them I can bet you will hear it yourself. Just go listen randomly you will see what I said is statistically correct.
sinat Hinam is not THE reason. It is one of many reasons and things said throughout the Talmudh. It is projected to be THE reason today because it perfectly fits a certain haskafa view (the way they interpret it) and the solution they bring is disastrous. Year by year you hear why was the temple destroyed? Because of Sinat Hinam, therefor what do we need "ahavat hinam". AND THAT IS IT, the end of it. Not much serious talk about actually working to rebuild the Temple. etc. etc.
-
You make it sound like this is out of control. There are no personal attacks here, just differences of opinion.
Ok now as for you, KWRBT, BRING IT ON!
(kidding) I'm actually not going to continue discussing this for now, other than to say I agree with Muman on the techelet issue and Tag on pretty much everything else.
Ok. Just know that many people find the arguments regarding present-day techelet (at least one type) to be convincing, including an esteemed Rabbi such as Rabbi Belsky who would otherwise be assumed to be 100% conventional haredi. And the vast majority of the people who do NOT wear techelet have never even looked into the matter. So it can't be used as a proof that so many do not wear it, therefore it must not be the real one. In addition, I know someone personally who became baal teshuvah and went to an esteemed haredi gadol in Eretz Yisrael to ask if he could wear techelet because it was something not encouraged or even mentioned in his BT yeshiva, and he was convinced it was the real thing, while his rabbis were not in favor of him wearing it. The gadol said yes. So, again, it's just not useful to make blanket assumptions.
-
Meanwhile, wherever he is, ABT is laughing his (used and abused) tuchis off...
-
Meanwhile, wherever he is, ABT is laughing his (used and abused) tuchis off...
Perhaps his shul is also having a conversion parade.
-
Wild question here, but do we know anyone who has ever used the initials ABT??
All I keep thinking is A Baal Teshuva? Or what if it was someone who was really not Jewish or a covert but just trying to put us on? A...B...T?
>:(
-
Wild question here, but do we know anyone who has ever used the initials ABT??
All I keep thinking is A Baal Teshuva? Or what if it was someone who was really not Jewish or a covert but just trying to put us on? A...B...T?
>:(
I'm not doing the numerology for it.
-
I'm not doing the numerology for it.
No need for numerology. But was there not some antagonist named "Allan something T"?
I don't mean to sound paranoid but this person used ABT... I don't know what the B is but A T?
That sounds familiar. I still do not know who "Ralph" is though.
-
No need for numerology. But was there not some antagonist named "Allan something T"?
I don't mean to sound paranoid but this person used ABT... I don't know what the B is but A T?
That sounds familiar. I still do not know who "Ralph" is though.
I don't see why you differentiate between trolls.
-
I don't see why you differentiate between trolls.
Nu?? Was there not a voting poll in this very thread asking people to vote on who they think Blue Thread was??? o_O Are people not allowed to vote anymore?
Because I voted "other" and the "other" on the poll says "please list". Which I will list based on Blue Thread posting "ABT" as his initials.
Anyways, it was just a thought.
-
No need for numerology. But was there not some antagonist named "Allan something T"?
I don't mean to sound paranoid but this person used ABT... I don't know what the B is but A T?
That sounds familiar. I still do not know who "Ralph" is though.
You really have no idea who Ralph is? Are you saying you weren't here in 2008 or 2009?
-
You really have no idea who Ralph is? Are you saying you weren't here in 2008 or 2009?
Why the question? I really have no clue who he is, though I hear "Ralph" all the time. I guess I'll just use the search feature to find out.
-
He's been here in some form or another since at least 2007. I thought that you've been here quite a while.
-
Sorry but I was not aware of who he was. Just people mentioning him all the time.
But I am reading about it right now in the search feature. Too bad most search results just show posts about Ralph Nader.
-
Sorry but I was not aware of who he was. Just people mentioning him all the time.
But I am reading about it right now in the search feature. Too bad most search results just show posts about Ralph Nader.
He's supposedly a young man with a gambling problem, an Iranian "Christian" living in NYC. At first he claimed to be Jewish though. He first came on in 2007, I think (under the name of Ralph) and he started off asking Chaim a bunch of weird questions on Ask JTF. He gave off the vibe of someone with serious depression and/or other mental issues. Shortly after this he began flaming people randomly, for no reason, and making idiotic racial comments. He was banned in 2008 at around the time that Tina Greco, Kelly Taylor, Mills, Newman, etc. were causing all of their trouble, but Chaim opted to give him a second chance. He kept trolling away though and was soon banned again, for good. Since that time he has come back countless times to troll our forum under various new screennames and fake personae/identities; one of his most common MOs was to spam the forum with disgusting Holocaust pictures. Some of his alteregos included a black nationalist, a Klansman, a Pedofronter, and so on and so on. He especially gets mad when somebody makes fun of or criticizes his homeland of Iran in some way.
The following identities are Ralph:
"Khufu"
"George"
"N*ggerLyncher"
"OrthodoxJew"
-
According to my understanding Erev Rav is not a state of being a Jew, it is a descendant of the non-Jews who left Egypt with the Jewish people. So no, I don't think a person who is an Erev Rav can ever be anything but an Erev Rav. These people kept the idolatry of their parents even as they left Egypt, and they were the ones who inspired the building of the Golden Calf.
Eruv-rav is probably from the Zohar. And even that is not a genetic thing. It is a psychological thing based on behavior that is said about certain people. You can have 2 brothers 1 a great G-D fearing one and the other we can name as being an "erev-rav" traitor, etc.
Anyway I was told by you, you would make a response in the mourning (of today) the time already passed, still waiting.
-
In that case, I think this Blue Thread does sound like Ralph then! >:(
-
I thought the Erev Rav just keep coming back in different generations. I never thought they keep passing their evilness genetically but rather they just keep coming back.
-
ABT probably just stands for "A Blue Thread"
OH MY GOSH!! You're right. I feel dumb.
-
Yes, ABT is "A Blue Thread".
-
Ok, I made a mistake. I kind of should have used my mind to think today. I can't believe I did not realize it. Hence I feel like a moron at this moment.
-
I thought the Erev Rav just keep coming back in different generations. I never thought they keep passing their evilness genetically but rather they just keep coming back.
Just don't take this too seriously. It is just a modern label we make, not that much more. When we say it we just mean "traitor" or "scumbag" or something like that. Making the psychological portrayal that that person isn't part of the Jewish people even though he/she was born Jewish. Thats what it is. Don't get too caught up about it though.
-
Muman the latest for those I was talking about earlier and the Haredi haskaffa and their vile anti-Torah actions.
Attacking soldiers again and calling the Kippot Shrugot (Knitted Kippa Religious Jews) "Amalek".
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/169908#.UeM2JI03sfQ
-
Yes, ABT is "A Blue Thread".
Whatever happened to him? Not that anyone cares.
-
Tag,
There have been a lot of issues brought up in this thread.
I would like to address this by asking some questions (of course) and inspiring some thought. Is there a question from any of the sages that Jewish unity is a necessity for the advancement of the Torah idea in this world? Is there not a commandment, even according to Rambam, for Ahavat Yisrael? Does the Talmud not say that 'baseless hatred' was a contributing factor to the destruction of the Temple? If all of this is true then we must conclude that we must learn a lesson about what constitutes 'baseless hatred' and what constitutes 'Loving a Jew', does it not?
This is where I think the conversation should concentrate. The Talmud rabbis do place a lot of merit on the Jewish people, as people who want to do good (Chessed), merciful and with a good eye (Being a son of Abraham). It is also related that even the most basic Jew (who is not a Rasha, but not a Tzadik) has good deeds which will bring him mercy in the judgment of Heaven.
So the Torah must teach us how we can distinguish between the truly evil, and those who are off the path but salvegable. I recently posted in the Torah section a bunch of Kinot by the great Rabbi Leff in which he explains that there is a mitzvah to hate the evil doers, the heretics, and the informers. This is most certainly true, but what we must learn is that the hatred between Torah Jews leads non-Torah Jews to hate Torah Jews, and thus the nations of the world hate the Jewish people.
I found his explanation to contain truth and I recommend people who want to explore the parameters of 'baseless hatred' and 'ahavat yisrael' to listen to his discussion.
I posted my opinion of the recent attack by the Shas Rabbi against the entire religious Zionist establishment. I rebuke those Rabbis for making a grave mistake during a time which is most distressing. This Tish B'Av I will mourn even more for the people of Israel than previously for I am beginning to see how much baseless hatred exists which I did not acknowledge previously.
I hope to post more on the topic of baseless hatred versus loving a fellow Jew in a future post in the Torah section.
-
http://www.torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos/chapter5-22a.html?print=1
"Whoever possesses the following three traits is of the students of our father Abraham, and [whoever possesses] a different three traits is of the students of the wicked Balaam. [Those who have] a good eye, a humble spirit and a 'lowly' soul [are] of the students of our father Abraham. [Those who have] an evil eye, an arrogant spirit and a desirous (lit., 'wide') soul [are] of the students of the wicked Balaam. What is the difference between the students of our father Abraham and the wicked Balaam? The students of our father Abraham enjoy this world and inherit the World to Come, as it is said, 'There is for those who love Me to inherit [in the World to Come], and their storehouses [in this world] I will fill' (Proverbs 8:21). But the students of the wicked Balaam inherit Gehinnom (Hell) and descend into the pit of destruction, as it is said, 'And You, G-d, will bring them down to the pit of destruction, men of blood and deceit; they will not halve their lives. But I will trust in You' (Psalms 55:24)."
http://m.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/324229/jewish/Flow-Chart-of-Goodness.htm
Kindness is often presented as a central virtue of the Jewish people. Abraham, the hero of our parshah, together with his wife Sarah, is a paradigm of kindness. One sees their hospitality to wayfarers at the beginning of the parshah, and later G-d says that He loves Abraham because "he will instruct his household after him to keep the way of G-d, doing charity and justice" (Genesis 18:19).
"Charity and justice" signify acts of kindness, and the Talmud cites this verse when it declares that there are three distinguishing features of the Jewish people, the descendants of Abraham: They are 1) modest, 2) merciful, and they 3) do acts of kindness. "Anyone who has these qualities," the Talmud goes on to say, "is fit to join the Jewish people."1
-
Not that I want to drag this thread on any longer than it should be dragged on, here is the embedded link to Rabbi Leffs interesting discussion on the parameters of 'sinat chinam' vs 'ahavat yisrael'...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNAo9mLNS04
-
Muman- dude seriously? Why do you write such silly questions with an accusation as if I or others don't believe in them. Anyway you shifted the discussion to something else while earlier you said you would directly answer my points made. You didn't even address one of them (the mourning passed) perhaps I can give you another day or 2 or more, but don't twist and shift to other topics while you said you would address my points. If you will do soo with honesty and with integrity instead of shifting the discussion and even calling me a heritic or something else you said earlier. If not then perhaps I don't need to be talking with you, but will just address the concerns of people like Dan and others who asked and wanted to debate issues such as Techellit and other things and if they are applicable or not.
By the way the latest from Shas just put the cherry on the cake as they say and proved my point precisely. Enough said. The soo called leadership is broken, NOTHING to do with real Judaism, and even Shas who are supposedly "Sefardic" party having nothing to do with real Sefardi culture and way of thinking. See this for example where ALL of Rabbi Ovadia's family (brothers and sisters except him) were involved in the Jewish underground and bombed British out of Israel, while today THE "Haredi" position and stance is that a good Jew just sits and learns and does not fight. That is also partly why the whole "amalik" latest comment came as well. They will either teach math and English or have budget cuts + go to army like everyone else.
(Watch this, I already put the exact time and very short).
http://youtu.be/Oqfb45DrV3k?t=3m12s
-
Muman- dude seriously? Why do you write such silly questions with an accusation as if I or others don't believe in them. Anyway you shifted the discussion to something else while earlier you said you would directly answer my points made. You didn't even address one of them (the mourning passed) perhaps I can give you another day or 2 or more, but don't twist and shift to other topics while you said you would address my points. If you will do soo with honesty and with integrity instead of shifting the discussion and even calling me a heritic or something else you said earlier. If not then perhaps I don't need to be talking with you, but will just address the concerns of people like Dan and others who asked and wanted to debate issues such as Techellit and other things and if they are applicable or not.
By the way the latest from Shas just put the cherry on the cake as they say and proved my point precisely. Enough said. The soo called leadership is broken, NOTHING to do with real Judaism, and even Shas who are supposedly "Sefardic" party having nothing to do with real Sefardi culture and way of thinking. See this for example where ALL of Rabbi Ovadia's family (brothers and sisters except him) were involved in the Jewish underground and bombed British out of Israel, while today THE "Haredi" position and stance is that a good Jew just sits and learns and does not fight. That is also partly why the whole "amalik" latest comment came as well. They will either teach math and English or have budget cuts + go to army like everyone else.
(Watch this, I already put the exact time and very short).
http://youtu.be/Oqfb45DrV3k?t=3m12s
Tag,
I am not sure why you feel a need to argue with me, honestly I apologize for the tone in my previous message. I do consider you a great source of wisdom and I believe you have studied quite a lot since we first began conversing almost 2 years ago.
I have already stated what I believe concerning Techilis. I go with the majority decision of the Rabbis I learn from which is that the blue thread is not worn till we are completely sure of the source of the dye used before the destruction. If you find fault with that I am sorry. I cannot prove or disprove whether this is the case. And there are reasons I have which lead me to believe that there are other forces which may lead people to endorse the dye you are mentioning.
Aside from this I don't know what there is to argue about concerning the blue thread. You believe that the Rabbis just don't want us to wear the blue thread for the reason that our fathers didn't, but I think the reason boils down to a halachic question.
If you would like to post the positive proof that this dye is the Techilis which we are supposed to wear maybe I will reconsider. I realize it is not easy to ensure that the dye is correct, but I also think that the Orthodox Jewish community as a whole has instituted this custom and I will follow it. Although I assume that wearing it, even if it is the wrong dye, couldn't hurt?
I will again apologize for the tone of my previous message. It has been a difficult week for me, and I resorted to a tactic which has always bothered me about the way a friend used to accuse me through back-handed questions. I did not intend on doing that, and I ask your forgiveness.
Let me disagree with you that Shas is representative of the greater Orthodox Jewish community. As you know I am Ashkenazi and do not really hold Shas as a representative of my beliefs. I do not hate Haredim, but I think they are being misled by some politically crazed Rabbis who are making a chillul hashem through their acts and words. But I don't condemn all Rabbis who lead Jewish chassidim... I hope that this doesn't inspire more hatred of the religious Jews, no matter what their 'affiliation'.