mentalblog.com comments:
I have read, in response to this question, that now is payback time for all the times that mafdal failed to support the gedolim in things that were vital to those gedolim.
look at the crowd, their own people have left them...
Fine time to payback. at whose expense?
TA, under the circumstances a "no opinion" = tacit support, no?
yes paul
Schneur provides the list:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments...09796081/
#89572
Sometimes the Lubavitch influences on the 'blogmeister' cause silliness.
Does everybody have to 'know' the future?Can't even chosheveh rabbonim own up to the fact that they 'don't know'.
For some reason the Late Rebbe had to be omniscien-all knowing, (even when he was wrong)
There are various sides to the argument of over disengagement:Will it save lives or not:Rational rabbis will tell you they don't know!The settlers being expelled are going to be compensated and set up with housing, so lets not turn this into a 'Spanish' expulsion, with all it's inconvenience.
The halachik argument against disengagement brought up by the Rebbe (regarding giving up land, that one may be mechalel shabbos to fight over land, without pikuach nefesh)has not been accepted , by anybody besides Lubavitch, as far as I know.In other words:The vast majority of rabbonim would permit giving up land in the case of pikuach nefesh.The question here is :Will it save lives or not.
The Rebbe was adamantly against the return of The Sinai to the Egyptians.I believe that the relative quite and soldiers saved have proven him wrong.(That is not to say, that Lubavitchers agree.They still preach doom about it, but objective bystanders will agree that the peace with Egypt was a good idea)
The prerogative of Gedolei Yisroel in every generation, is to know. These same people are acutely aware of that; they do take the initiative in making their opinion loudly heard on every silly thing going on in Israel, from cell phones to wigs to Lubavitch is kefirah. When it comes time to take a stand, and it is unclear which way will be more profitable (דייקא ), suddenly the Great Ones of Israel are revelling in their new-found humility...
malach, my personal comment is that a ruling on insufficient grounds to oppose is in practical terms a rulling to support--I note, not criticize; I have no idea how this will work out--I have read a posek of the Rebbe in which he opposed disengagement based solely on pikuach nefesh, without consideration even as to giving up portions of the Land of Israel--unless I am mistaken, the citation referred to a prohibiition in Shulkhan Aruch to permitting non-Jews into a border town--given the circumstances he argued that opposing retreating from secure areas was a priori pikuach nefesh.
note also, from Haaretz:
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hase...ges/
611984.html
---
Lithuanian rabbis to students: Stay away from pullout protests
By Tamar Rotem, Haaretz Correspondent
As the yeshivas prepare for the start of their semester break Monday (known in Hebrew as "bein hazmanim" or "between the times"), the leaders of the Lithuanian yeshivas are warning students not to participate in demonstrations and other protest actions while on vacation.
The word "disengagement" is not being explicitly used, but the timing makes it self-evident. Despite opposition to the pullout within the ultra-Orthodox community, the rabbis of the Lithuanian yeshivas do not look favorably upon any connection with religious Zionism and are interested in keeping their ultra-Orthodox students away from religious Zionists.
"A yeshiva's student obligation is to the study of Torah, so we therefore warn yeshiva students especially ... not to participate in any demonstration. ... besides the additional spiritual peril concerning the boundaries of modesty," reads a letter sent this week to the heads of the yeshivas.
"Anyone who disobeys this has no place in the yeshiva," it says.
The signatories to the letter include the leaders of Lithuanian ultra-Orthodoxy, rabbis Yosef Shalom Elyashiv and Aharon Leib Steinman. And in fact, many yeshiva students were absent from the mass prayer rally at the Western Wall on Wednesday night, and from various other protests.
The Rebbe spoke for many hours, in public, explaining his reasoning to oppose such giveaways of land.
On the other hand, the "gedolim" have not explained their thinking process in support of dissengagement.
I think that either 1) Malach has the Urim vetumim and he "knows" what the gedolim's logic is (actually, he is just lifting his words from the New York Times; feh)
2)The gedolim haven't thought about this issue, because it's "bittul torah", and their "flock" will have to look for direction elsewhere (perhaps here)
3)"the Rabbi's in the Lithuanian yeshivos do not look favorably upon any connection with religious zionism", the "payback time" theory.
it's not just the litvakes, its like Schenur wrote:
Moetzes Gedloe Hatorah of the Aguda, of Degel HaTora and the leading rebbes of Ger, Belz , Vishnitz, Modsitz,Seret, Rav Vozner, rav Gestetner Rabbonim Lipkowitz, Shtainman, Elyoshev, Eidelstein, The zaddik Reb Chaim Kanievsky, Reb Chaim Graineman, Reb Nissim Karelitz etc
I included all those people in the term "gedolim"
Malach
Obviously you don’t know the Rebbe's opinion regarding Mesiras Shtachim, otherwise you would not have written what you wrote.
The Rebbe's opinion was based almost entirely on Pikuach Nefesh. Although the Rebbe did mention numerous times that Eretz Yisroel was given to the Jews by God and that nobody has the right to give it away, nevertheless the deciding factor was that of Pikuach Nefesh.
Yossi, you included ALL 'THOSE' PEOPLE, and then proceeded to mock them.Does this tell little me, that Lubavitch teaches disrespect of other rabbonim and opinions, or is it just you?
The prerogative of Gedolei Yisroel in every generation, is to know. These same people are acutely aware of that; they do take the initiative in making their opinion loudly heard on every silly thing going on in Israel, from cell phones to wigs to Lubavitch is kefirah. When it comes time to take a stand, and it is unclear which way will be more profitable (דייקא ), suddenly the Great Ones of Israel are revelling in their new-found humility...
770 bochur | 08.12.05 - 5:27 am | #
Another (sad) example.............
770, besides mocking some leading sages, you also prove a basic lack of understanding.My point with the disengagement was:Most rabbonim DO NOT see a halachik problem in giving land up IF IT SAVES LIVES!!!!!So the real problem with the Gaza disengagement is:Will it save lives???
How does that compare to halachik problems with wigs that may or not be from 'avoda zorah' hair.How does that fit in with the problem of allowing cell phones that may or may not cause young people to stray.
Why don't you guys get it:You are allowed your opinions, but don't force others to agree!!
Maskil:I do know the Rebbes opinion on 'mesirras shtochim'.The Rebbe considered it prohibited even not in Eretz Yisroel and even if the 'enemy' is only coming to steal hay, one may be mechalel shabbos, because, it will ultimately lead to pikuach nefesh.Paul Freedman already pointed this out.
I only said that the vast majority of rabbonim disagree! (please don't give the 'argument' that it says so in shulchan oruch.Do you think these rabbonim do not know that? What I believe their understanding to be is:Once one has tried all 'tachsisei milchomoh' and bederch hateva giving up land, may be the answer it is allowed.According to your logic one may not retreat even when all odds are against them.)
malach, you seem to know exactly what these rabonim's understanding is. As they haven't stated anything publicly, am I to assume that you speak to them on the phone?
Malach,
I feel for you. You are forced to stand up and defend people who in any previous generation would be considered run of the mill. Talk about the emperor not having any clothes. Just because they have white beards and run religious institutions doesnt mean they are above reproach. These guys are like Rabbi Pam, very good jews, who through old age and not rocking the boat have managed to become leaders in their respective worlds. However, what they are not willing to do, is make the tough choices and raising their voice when the situation really warrants it. Seriously, WHO ARE THESE GUYS??? Being a Roch Yeshiva, in our generation, should not entitle you to god status. Just call it what it is: these guys dont have a clue, and if they do, they arent willing to publicly announce what it is.
And yes, this has everything to do with our Lubavitch upbringing. We know who we are, and we know who they are, and they do too, and we arent willing to cut people slack. We are not going to pretend like these people are Gedolim, the same way we dont pretend like Ezra Schochet is. Good jews, yes. Great jews, no.
The only ones who can decide if it will save live are those in the defense establishment. Even those in the establishment must view the situation from a military perspective as opposed to a political perspective. Once it has been established that by giving back land lives will be saved it is then permissible to transfer land.
It has been widely reported that Sharon did not consult with the military brass before deciding to push though with his plan.
If we look back just a few years it is quite obvious that Oslo was violence.
* Oslo was a failure and brought more violence.
Three lessons that Israel should have learnt from America's experience in Vietnam:
1) You can't win a war with one hand tied behind your back; if one is in a war, don't hold back
2) Don't let the politicians interfere
3) Get it over with quickly.
Yossi for President!
(It's so easy, right?)
One link to a redaction of the Rebbe's position:
http://middleeastinfo.org/articl...cle.php?
sid=220
--again, I do not personally have a forecast as to the outcome of disengagement, which is, I think, yes, a kind of strategic retreat. but Yossi, if it were clear that on a "cost-benefit" basis a "quick" solution should be tried--I think the military would be pushing for it (I refer to the tactics of the wars against the Palestinians in Lebanon)
Maskil:Sorry, I don't 'buy' your argument.Israel is unique in that many of its goverment come from the ranks of the army.Sharon served for many years and was considered a military genius,a warrior, idol of the rightwing.Till he disagreed with them.
I believe that most Israelis support the disengagement as does most of the military brass.
With a smart 'caveat' you managed to sidestep the opinions of men in the military by saying 'Even those in the establishment must view the situation from a military perspective as opposed to a political perspective. Once it has been established that by giving back land lives will be saved it is then permissible to transfer land.'
Obviously since your 'negia' tells you that the military man whose opinion you don't like, is doing it because of 'poloitical' reasons, not military reasons, you''ll never find a dissenting voice.
I challenge you to find me military people who say the peace with Egypt was not a good idea.
And yes, this has everything to do with our Lubavitch upbringing. We know who we are, and we know who they are, and they do too, and we arent willing to cut people slack. We are not going to pretend like these people are Gedolim, the same way we dont pretend like Ezra Schochet is. Good jews, yes. Great jews, no.
Shrek 2 | 08.12.05 - 3:17 pm | #
So bottom line is:The only true 'Godol' is/was the Lubavitcher Rebbe and since he has passed away/been concealed for eleven years, Hashem is playing a 'mean' trick on us, leaving us leaderless, eh??.You pass partisan chassidus 101 with flying colours!!!
(If I'm not mistaken, you were the one who said we have to get out of Gaza, no?)..........(btw, what caused you to drag Rav Pam and R'Schochat into this??)
I did not find a lot of Military officials saying that after Israel will relinquish the Gaza strip there will be peace and tranquility. On the contrary, most say that there will be a massive surge in violence after the disengagement. Just ask the Palestinians, they say explicitly that after the disengagement there will be more Quassam rockets and mortars.
The difference between the Egyptians and the Palestinians is that the Palestinians are not going to be satisfied with anything the Israelis offer. They want the whole of Israel as a Palestinian state. By giving in to their demands you are just emboldening them to continue their fight against Israel.
Maskil:As I have said, I don't know, what will be and hopefully whatever happens, will be only for the good of yidden.I can see the disengagement as being a way of minimizing constant friction and as to the future:America,London ,Madrid are examples of what these reshoim can do from far away.Even the military might of the U.S.A has not stopped the 500+ suicide bombers in Iraq.(I know it's not the exact same, but still similar imho)
Btw, I have to commend you on your honesty:You have implicitly agreed in your previous post that the peace with Egypt was a good thing...
I was afraid you would take it that way but I did not intend it to be taken that way. I think that Israel would have been better of with Sinai.
They would have had a bigger buffer zone between the Egyptians and they would have had more oil. There are many more reasons for Israel to have kept the Sinai.
Regardless of what took place with the Egyptians this issue is something altogether different.
Regarding what will take place after the disengagement, why don’t you believe the Arabs? I tend to believe them more than I believe the Israelis, when they say here will be terror usually there is terror.
The only time there was real peace was when Israel did NOT give back land. Only when Israel was perceived to be weak was there terror. The mistake you are making is that you do not understand the Palestinian position.
Another interesting point to note, if the reason for the terror was the Israeli "occupation", why was the PLO terror organization founded in 1964 , three years prior to the “occupation”.
From this alone it is evident that giving up land has nothing to do with peace.
Malach:
Yes, as has been proven, we are now very clearly we leaderless. utterly and completely. how can you claim otherwise. I think many would agree, that like or dislike, the Lubavitcher Rebbe was probably the last great Jewish leader. Be objective here, take a step back and look at the magnitude of his leadership, what he spoke out on and what he was willing to fight for and marshall resources on behalf of.
Second, while I am in favor of withdrawl, I never said I was in favor of Palestinian sovereignty. These people are animals and I find it amazing that we are now going to give them access to the outside world, soon an airport and shipping ports. This is Hamas country!! Its like rewarding a wild dog in your backyard with more room to roam with breaking the dog in a bit. Sharon utterly and completely blew this one, and Team Orange blew it even further by focusing on the poor settlers etc etc.
Finally, re: pam and schochet, my point was that they are both good jews. nothing more. same goes for your pals shtainman and elyashiv. And fyi - it is now completely clear to me why there is no such thing as "if it saves lives, you can give back land". SINCE THE NONJEWS WILL ALWAYS WANT TO KILL US, ESPECIALLY THE ARABS, WE MIGHT AS WELL KEEP THE LAND. ITS DELUSIONAL TO THINK IF WE GIVE THEM LAND THEY WONT KILL US. BECAUSE EVEN WITHOUT ANYLAND FOR US, THEY WILL STILL WANT TO KILL US. WHO ARE WE KIDDING????
B"H
How can you be in favor of withdrawal if you realize what that will lead to? Be consistant. Where is the logic in your comment?
Ariel, imho--there's an outside chance it might work; the IDF can always go back in with one mission only--fighting the enemy--without having to take care of the sitting civilian targets of the settlements.
but yes, Shrek 2, why aren't you opposed?
What I was saying was that to frame this pullout in terms of saving lives ie that by doing this, there will be peace, is ridiculous. We shouldnt be there bc we shouldnt be there, not now and not in '67. Settling Gaza was a mistake. The issue is, could we have perhaps secured concessions from Palestinians that would have made this a long term success...
In my mind, this is how it shouldve taken place:
1) Sharon, at the highest levels informs his EU and US counterparts, of his idea to withdrawl soon.
2) he demands significant financial means to a)compensate the settlers significantly and more importantly b) to develop significant infrsutructure in gaza (perhaps 500M-1B to build roads, hospitals, parks, schools etc - all monitored by the US And EU.
3) He gets the EU and US to agree to a time table the PA would be held accountable to as a sovereign govt regarding attacks from its territory. Past that point, PA would be held fully accountable for anything emenating from their territory.
4) Having secured the above, he announces withdrawl, offering significant ($1M?) compensation to each family and offering them tax free status as "Heros of Israel" for 10 yrs to help them resettle.
I would venture to say, that between the positive recognition by the Govt of the settlers and their sacrifice, to the huge financial committment to rebuilding Gaza by the US/EU which would make Hamas far less significant, this wouldve turned out much better....Thoughts to my plan?
anonymous--it's a nice idea--but a) Labor went in because of 48/56/67, b) the Palestinians never seem to get their act together--spend or promise as you will--they were given say 50,000 M-16's to form "one gun one law" security--gone to the four winds.
Commenting by HaloScan
