Sunday, September 1, 2019

The Three Oaths dilemma dividing Jewish Zionists from anti-Zionists

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22302

The Talmud cites three oaths which G-d administered: “One oath was that Israel would not make Aliyah 'as a wall'; and one oath was that G-d adjured Israel not to rebel against the nations; and one oath was that G-d adjured the nations not to persecute Israel too much” (Ketuvot 111a).
Of these three oaths, therefore, two apply to Israel and one to the other nations.
These Three Oaths are the basis for the ostensibly religious Jewish opposition to Zionism: the very essence of Zionism was that Jews from the world over return to Israel, ascending to the Land of Israel “as a wall”, together, united, using military force when necessary.
This compels the question: Does Zionism indeed violate G-d’s will? Do these Three Oaths constitute halakhah (Jewish religious law) in practice?

37 comments :

  1. For loads of astounding info on this topic just scroll though this post http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2018/06/anti-zionism-or-anti-semitism-in.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. אבל כבר חזה לנו הרמב"ם באגרת תימן (שאותה ציווה להפיץ בכל קהילות ישראל), את הדברים הבאים




    ולפי שידע שלמה ע"ה ברוח הקודש שהאומה הזאת בארץ זמן גלותה תפצר להתנועע בלא

    עתה הראויה, ויאבדו בשביל זה ויבואו עליהם צרות, והזהיר מלעשות זה, והשביע

    האומה על דרך משל (הפסוק בשה"ש), ואמר: "השבעתי אתכם בנות ירושלים בצבאות

    או באילות השדה אם תעירו ואם תעוררו את האהבה עד שתחפץ


    ".וא

    תם אחינו אהובינו, קבלו עליכם שבועתו, ואל תעירו את האהבה עד שתחפץ


    (דהיינו הנמשלבמסכת כתובות קיא ע"א). וכו' (עיי"ש שם עוד)

    ReplyDelete
  3. https://www.printfriendly.com/p/g/B7izR3

    ReplyDelete
  4. A) you guys argue with him all the time
    B) this is , as he says, derech mashal, and only is referring to calculating the end, eg by astrology (which you guys do all the time).
    C) in Halacha of the Mt, he doesn't bring 3 oaths, but only the restriction of calculating the end.
    D) in the same mishneh Torah he brings that it's permitted to live anywhere in the world, except for Egypt.
    E) in hilchot rodef it's a mitzva to defend yourself, hence idf is a mitzva not aveira.
    F) in moreh nevuchim he says the 6000 year deadline is not binding.

    G)in letter to Marseilles he says that 2nd temple was destroyed because we did not engage in rational war studies.

    H) he says first learn a trade then buy house, then get married. Rav Shach and friends destroyed a generation by ignoring Rambam. And opposing secular studies.

    OK, I've said enough, Kol tuv , chodesh tov.

    ReplyDelete
  5. In his sefer, your rebbe badly mangles the Rambam into something he did not say.
    You pretending here that 12 century Yemen is the same historical situation as 1850 speaks to the greater problem that transcends the halachic debate. Your rebbe clearly loses that debate, based on misunderstanding the Rambam and discarding so many rishonim about the halacha, but it's really besides the point. The application of the 3 oaths to the situation of the zionists is ahistorical nonsense for various reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Remember also the assur of transvestite cross dressing, which chassidim incorporated, men cross dressing like women, with buttons on the left. A toevah, lo tilbash.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Kalonymus Anonymus • 5 months ago


    No oaths, according to Ezra Ch2


    1
    Now these are the children of the province, that went up out of the
    captivity of those that had been carried away, whom Nebuchadnezzar the
    king of Babylon had carried away unto Babylon, and that returned unto
    Jerusalem and Judah, every one unto his city;


    ב אֲשֶׁר-בָּאוּ עִם-זְרֻבָּבֶל, יֵשׁוּעַ נְחֶמְיָה שְׂרָיָה
    רְעֵלָיָה מָרְדֳּכַי בִּלְשָׁן מִסְפָּר בִּגְוַי--רְחוּם בַּעֲנָה:
    מִסְפַּר, אַנְשֵׁי עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל. {ס}


    2 who came with Zerubbabel, Jeshua, Nehemiah, Seraiah, Reelaiah,
    Mordecai, Bilshan, Mispar, Bigvai, Rehum, Baanah. The number of the men
    of the people of Israel: {S}


    The
    Talmudic oaths refer to the first exile, and the return was proof that
    they had elapsed. There were no new oaths taken at the 2nd exile, and
    even if there was some remnant of them, the arizal said they elapsed
    after 1000 years.
    Hence, satmar = reform.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Zerubavel and friends, including Mordecai, came en masse from bavel to Israel. end of game. Satmar is sheker.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Shoiteh !they do like the halacha and old minhag

    ReplyDelete
  10. Reb Yehoshuah Leib Diskind ZTVK"L was the Greatest leader and he opposed Zionisim and so did his son REB Yitzcok Yerucham Diskind together with RebYosef Chaim Sonnenfeld the fathers/Founders of the Eidah Charedisand Both of His talmidim The Rogotchever Goan a talmid muvhak from his days in Lomzah and Reb Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld his talmid Muvhak in yerushliam

    ReplyDelete
  11. Reb Yehoshuah Leib Diskind ZTVK"L was the Greatest leader and he opposed Zionisim and so did his son REB Yitzcok Yerucham Diskind together with RebYosef Chaim Sonnenfeld the fathers/Founders of the Eidah Charedisand Both of His talmidim The Rogotchever Goan a talmid muvhak from his days in Lomzah and Reb Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld his talmid Muvhak in yerushliam

    ReplyDelete
  12. https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#sent?projector=1

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yes, sabbatean Halacha, like tel Aviv goy parade

    ReplyDelete
  14. https://www.yhe.center/bible-gaonim




    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oWIBhuTtNmdn0wHRLie4ZsxGHxvid0HL/view

    ReplyDelete
  15. How come you are up so early? In NY?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Rav diskin was a fierce misnagid. He reconciled with chassidim, because he found the secularists a more deserving opponent. He transferred his hatred for frum chassidim to seculars, and then anyone connected with Zionism.
    But others, like Rav salant were more moderate, eg with Rav pines and the phoney herem. He lifted the herem

    ReplyDelete
  17. http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2013/05/r-david-friedman-of-karlin-ban-on.html

    ReplyDelete
  18. Reform - opposes the Rif, the Rambam, shulchan Aruch.

    ReplyDelete
  19. “These Three Oaths are the basis for the ostensibly religious Jewish opposition to Zionism:”
    Kethoboth 110b:
    “Mishnah. [a man] may compel all [his household] to go up [with him] to the Land of Israel., but none may be compelled to leave it. all [one's household] may be compelled to go up...R. Zera was evading Rab Judah because he desired to go up to the Land of Israel while Rab Judah had expressed [the following view:]. Whoever goes up from Babylon to the Land of Israel transgresses a positive commandment...”
    This is right before the 3 oaths. Can we change the topic? This week’s parsha שפטים:
    “When you approach a town to attack it, you shall offer it terms of peace וקראת אליה לשלום. If it responds peaceably and lets you in, all the people present there shall serve you at forced labor. If it does not surrender to you, but would join battle with you, you shall lay siege to it; and when the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, you shall put all its males to the sword. You may, however, take as your booty the women, the children, the livestock, and everything in the town—all its spoil—and enjoy the use of the spoil of your enemy, which the Lord your God gives you. Thus you shall deal with all towns that lie very far from you, towns that do not belong to nations hereabout. In the towns of the latter peoples, however, which the Lord your God is giving you as a heritage, you shall not let a soul remain alive. No, you must proscribe כי החרם תחרימם them—the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you, lest they lead you into doing all the abhorrent things ככל תועבתם that they have done for their gods and you stand guilty before the Lord your God.” (Deuteronomy 20:10-18).
    God commands us “No, you must proscribe כי החרם תחרימם them—the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you, lest they lead you into doing all the abhorrent things ככל תועבתם that they have done for their gods and you stand guilty before the Lord your God.”
    Hertz Chumash p. 833: “In the execution of His righteous purposes, Almighty God is guided by one supreme aim, namely, the elevation of human character.”

    ReplyDelete
  20. Reading between the lines a bit here, it would seem that Berel you are trying to explain to me that DT is not a follower of Satmar, but rather a follower of Edah Charedis, and therefore DT is not beholden to the very weak arguments made by the Satmar Rebbe in his sefer. That is fair enough of a point, but at the same time, DT has been pushing the 3 oaths line of argument here. And in addition to that, "So and so held this way, therefore it's true" is not a good argument by you, either.
    Meanwhile by the logic pushed by DT it would suggest that the several rabbanim you cite here were themselves in violation of the oaths by choosing to immigrate to Palestine.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Yes they came al pi navi Prophets (ezrah Necemyah Mordechai and Esther )

    Exactly the way it should be

    ReplyDelete
  22. What evidence do you have they were neviim? Where in their books, which are Ketuvim/Megillot, do they speak in Nevuah? Esther doesn't even mention G-d's name.

    ReplyDelete
  23. they came because a Pesian King made the Cyrus declaration, the 70 years were over. Even with that, they still faced difficulties , because of the local Neturei karta.
    If you accept the Arizal, and that he has the highest ruach kodesh, he already stated that the 2nd exile oaths had a shelf life of 1000 years. Hence we are 1000 years past that date already.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Presumably this is how they taught you to analyze in your Brisk yeshiva. Wow, should be the 14th middah of exegesis!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Apparently Gerald is smarter than the Rogatchover Gaon, the Aruch Hashulchan, and the Steipler Goan all of who hold that the Three Oaths are applicable today. Can we move on Gerald? As more testimony to Gerald's intellectual shortcomings, the general consensus is that individuals are allowed to come to EY but groups en masse "like a wall" are not. Plus you cannot take the land by force which is a whole separate subject. So the Mishnah you cite, is not appropriate for the conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Yes Berel, Kaonymous is a shoteh and that's the nicest thing you can say about him, so yashar coach to you for judging him lcaf zchus.

    the list of giants that held of the three oaths is very long: includes R' Yaakov Emden, the Maharal, the Rogatchover, the Steipler, the Aruch Hashulchan, the 5th and 6th Lub. rebbes, Ben ish Chai.

    ReplyDelete
  27. No there is nothing wrong with one moving to Palestine , a great mitzvah as a private person.
    but to retake the government of the land we need a Navi

    ReplyDelete
  28. YOU are quite wrong. Nachmanides holds its a mitzva in each generation to take the land. Maimonides holds its a mitzva to build the temple at all times. Raavad even says that kedusha of the temple doesn't hold while it's in desolation.
    And Ezra was not a navi, nor were the people of bayit sheni, hasmonean, or chazal.

    ReplyDelete
  29. The article posted by dt is saying the oaths appear nowhere in Halacha. Further, big hareidi gedolim said its a mitzva to vote in the Knesset - hence mitzva to control Israel now it's in our hands. The gadol hador prior to Rav Feinstein ztl, was Rav henkin ztl, he called anyone opposed to the medina, a rodef!
    That is daas Torah!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Blog Author Gerald Aranoff • a day ago
    “Apparently Gerald is smarter than the Rogatchover Gaon, the Aruch Hashulchan, and the Steipler Goan all of who hold that the Three Oaths are applicable today. Can we move on Gerald? As more testimony to Gerald's intellectual shortcomings, the general consensus is that individuals are allowed to come to EY but groups en masse "like a wall" are not. Plus you cannot take the land by force which is a whole separate subject. So the Mishnah you cite, is not appropriate for the conversation.”
    Wow, the Mishna I cite is the basis why Susan must follow me to Israel and so is the basis of denying her lawsuit against me for deserting/abandoning her. I quote Susan August 14, 1991 court papers:
    “The Defendant continued to insist in the course of that conversation that I would, in fact, accompany him to Israel even though everyone present advised him that I am not accompanying him to Israel and that if he leaves he will be deemed guilty of abandoning me and his six children....Irwin H. Haut, Esq., who was and had been a close friend of the defendant not to rely on the letter from the JIT as representing a contract of employment. Irwin H. Haut recommended that no actions should be taken by the Defendant at the present time on the basis of that letter.”
    Whew, I had a good lawyer, Ian Anderson for about 10 year who advised me what to do while he fought Susan in Court. I paid Ian $250 for an appearance he made to a hearing before the Judge Gerald Garson November 14, 2001 where Susan didn’t show up but telephoned for a month’s delay. Larry Rothbart took the call and called Ian to the phone and the hearing was rescheduled to a month later, December 12, 2001. On December 12, 2001 Judge Gerald Garson fined me $5,000 making the total fines against me $25,000
    I have copies of 6 letters I mailed to Gerald Garson: August 30, 2001 - May 14, 2002. On August 30, 2001 I write: I engaged Ian Anderson to represent me to make oral argument on September 26, 2001.
    Yet Myla Serlin testifies August 1, 2013:
    The Court: And this case was before Judge Garson?
    MS. Serlin: Most of it was before Judge Rigler. Judge Garson was on it for about two months, but it was nothing was decided.”

    ReplyDelete
  31. Apparently you are holier than the arizal, who said they only had 1000 years tokef.

    ReplyDelete
  32. The aruch hashulchan only states we should not rebel against our host nation. The Zionists worked with the British, the un, and league of nations.
    Also, the un recognized the Medina, it was the Arabs who rebelled.
    https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Choshen_Mishpat.2?lang=bi

    ReplyDelete
  33. Indeed, it is davka the anti Zionist hareidi sects that rebel against their host nations, every chance they get, eg opposing national curriculum, vacconations, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Rav Chaim Zimmerman ztl, the ilui and talmid chacham muvhak of Rav Moshe soloveitchik showed how this is all wrong. The land was not taken by force from outside, it was granted by the British and the un.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Rav Chaim ztl who was the greatest of the anti-zionist Gedolim, still considered the Ohr Sameach as the Gadol haDor. teh Ohr Sameach said that after the Balour declaration, there is no fear of the oaths.
    The Or Samech, rav Meir Simcha ztl was the greatest tzaddik , even when he rebuked people messing around with halacha he did it very politely - which shows he was a true angel.. Some of your people are book smart but have very bad middos, anger, hatred and gaavah.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.