Sunday, January 16, 2022

Rav Goren in the Jewish observer vol 8 pages 12-20

JO1972 V8 N09.Compressed by yadmoshe

14 comments :

  1. The Jewish Observer article can also be found here:
    https://agudathisrael.org/wp-content/uploads/1973/01/JO1973-V8-N10.pdf


    I seem to remember that the person who wrote the article as "Ezriel Toshavi" [Ezriel Toshavi observes the Israeli scene for readers of J.O.] was actually Rabbi Nisson Wolpin z"l, the editor of the JO, who used that name as his nom de plume (pen name).

    Can anybody confirm that?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have a copy of this, and the follow up, and it is a junk
    article, and the writer reveals the bias
    and hatred which pre-exists , and
    confirms that it is a political set-up rather than anything rational. Let us look at a few examples:







    1) The final paragraph tells how Rav Sonnenfeld allegedly
    fasted when Rav Kook was designated as Chief Rabbi! This alone undermines the whole argument
    made by the Jewish Obscuranter –and by others on this blog.



    It is attacking Rav Kook, who had a pre-state position of
    chief Rabbi. Now the same article which
    is praising Rav Elyashiv, Rav Auerbach, rav Feinstein forgets that these
    rabbonim were great admirers of Rav Kook – with Rav Elyashiv himself serving
    the successor , Rav Herzog, serving himself as Chief Rabbi of Ramle, and
    earning a salary (and pension) form the same government that the article is
    slamming. So according to this article,
    these rabbis are also tainted, and the decisions in all the previous Government
    batei din are as worthless as it alleged this one was, since they all had
    government salaries (bribes) That includes also, Rav Yosef, who became chief
    rabbi, but was also a dayan in this case.







    2) the article makes good mention of the 1967 victory in Jerusalem where Rav Goren
    blew the shofar. The author is who
    exactly? He is a nobody, and ignoramus. Rav Goren, lehavdil, was a Gaon, who
    wrote an entire book on the subject of Har habayit from a halachic perspective
    as well as a geographic one. The same rav
    Goren wrote many halachos on war, something that has not been done in great
    detail for thousands of years. However,
    the fact of 1967 being mentioned shows that
    we are dealing with a Satmar-Neturei karta influenced piece. The satmar dog is wagging the Agudah
    tail.



    (Neturei Karta being the ones who denied the holocaust in
    the Tehran
    denial conference).



    So the article is written by Neturei-karta friendly kapos,
    who were Arafat’s minister of Judaism for his proposed shoah rule.



    All along I have said that 1967 was a great embarrassment to
    hareidim in general, but I didn’t have satmar in mind.







    3) The suggestion of political influence - interesting that they mention Moshe Dayan – a
    man who persecuted Goren in the army, and jailed him a number of times. On one
    occasion, Dayan wanted to remove any mention of Hashem in K-l Male Rachamim, memorial
    prayer, and Goren opposed him, and was thrown in jail by Dayan. On this occasion, he threatened to do away
    with only religious marriages and bring the option of secular marriages, which again Goren opposed. So Goren was not taking orders from Dayan, he
    was fighting him all along!











    The article claims that Dayan Abramsky was head of the
    London Beth din in 1972, however, Wikipedia says he “ headed the London Beth Din rabbinical court
    for 17 years, before retiring to Jerusalem in 1951” (Incidentally, Dayan Abramsky was famous in England
    for banning conversion for marriage, and was machmir on these cases.)











    The article also implies that Rav Ovadia Yosef was
    threatened by the Ashkenazim for offering his hand of friendship to Rav
    Goren! Ovadia Yosef produced more Teshuvot probably
    than any other person mentioned. Yet he
    was threatened , and would have shared the same fate had he or anyone else been
    more supportive.











    So the evidence from this article supports the thesis that
    it was a political opposition, to maintain the Aguda’s power base, against the
    independence of the Rabbanut, and against any real authority that the Rabbanut
    should have on the general Israeli population.







    The follow up article also scores some own goals, most
    notably it reveals that Borkovsky had signed a letter admitting he had lapsed
    into Christianity.

    ReplyDelete
  3. he is the rasha that wrote a denigrating article on rav Soloveitchik' passing, and then later admitted it was a "mistake".

    ReplyDelete
  4. Amazing interview with rabbi Ovadia Yosef when newly elected as Rishon leTzion - initially he sided with R Goren to review the evidence and make a new psak:








    "Reasons for leniency








    What is your honor's opinion regarding the issue of bastards and those disqualified for marriage?














    "(Intensely): At the time, I offered Rabbi Nissim who was serving as


    head of the appellate court to convene all of the justices to rethink


    the issue in light of the new research conducted by Rabbi Goren.





























    "(With slight anger): But Rabbi Nissim refused my request, despite


    the support of the rest of the justices. My offer still stands, and I am


    ready to sit with my counterpart Rabbi Goren, study the matter and


    publish a ruling."












    What are the chances?










    "(With cautious optimism): It is possible there is a way to release


    them (of their problematic status). If we will find a Talmudic basis, we


    would be more than happy to release them and there is no doubt in my


    mind that those who have barred them (from marriage) would move towards


    leniency if they were to examine the evidence cited by Rabbi Goren.""








    source: https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4438174,00.html


    He later withdrew this offer (due to pressure perhaps?)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Goren never accepted the offer (pressure perhaps?)

    ReplyDelete
  6. really? The counter offer was for both of them to remove themselves from the case, and allow a new board of judges to sit - that was the offer that Goren refused.

    But, we can go back and forth with these claims and counter claims, nobody will change their perception.

    ReplyDelete
  7. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7c6284c31a3034bb281f6931b6380dad6c4a8ce64dc1dc874bdb81a32b793587.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  8. I love how it "Rav Ploni" for everyone else but suddenly it's just "Goren"

    ReplyDelete
  9. Rav nissim standing, immediately to his right , sitting is Rav elyashiv, and at the end of the table (his left, our right) is Rav Obadiah yosef.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I usually write Rav, but when I'm writing someone's name 100 times a day, sometimes I skip titles.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The article makes a number of false statements -
    "without consultation with those who have previously judged ..total disregard for the opinion of ... R Ovadia Yosef"


    Rav Elyashiv had resigned, and had nothing furhter to do with R Goren. Rav Yisraeli had also left - (I understand they still maintained contact in later years).
    Now, Rav Yosef is the key figure, since he was the remaning member of the BD that previously judged. In an interview I posted, just immediately after the election, he said he would sit on a BD with RSG. Later on, he changed and withdrew. So the statement made by JO is false - there ws consutlation, and in fact RSG begged ROY to sit with him - but he bacttracked.


    In any case there was a previous aproach toRav Nissim, and for this election, R Goren had actually backed R Nissim to be Chief Sephardi Rishon L'Zion. Rav Nissim was the incumbent Chief Rav.


    Regarding bartering of promises, there is nothing explicit. Lehavdil, in the Tropper case, there are tapes, there are videos of him saying and doing the most perverted tings, that would make even a secular goy blush.


    Most of the "evidence" is comments by others , secular politicians that they have confidence in RSG. what he said was his philosophy that a Halachic State was possible, and that halacha has the flexibility to solve all problems. That may be an opinion that people can disagree with, but it is not a bribe or perversion. Some people believe in eruvim, whilst others don't. Some people believe in pilegesh but otehrs don't, whilst Some (including Rav Goren) want to end the heter mechirah, but others don't. A Rabbi could say he has a heter for shemitta, and be accepted for a position, but how is that a bribery?

    ReplyDelete
  12. 2 of the pashkevils reproduced in this article, do not actually name any specific person, nor do they mention what grave sin has been committed.

    other points - the JO was unhappy with the means by which R Goren was elected, but the JTA in a search shows that in early 1972, the NRP suggested R goren should be Chief Rabbi, and he initially refrained from standing.

    They also point out their displeasure of R Goren blowing the shofar on Temple mount, because it is a forbidden area. Here is an actual admission of the jealousy and anger of the Hareidim towards:

    Towards Israel and the IDF for liberating Jerusalem.
    Towards R Goren for being part of that apparatus, and moreover for him saying that this was part of the Geulah.
    Here is the problem - if they take the Satmar position, which they largely did, it is a denial of G-d's hashgacha. It leaves them with little wiggle room to have a coherent view of Hashem's appearance in world history. So this whole attack on Rav Goren is just shooting the messenger - Rav Goren was the one who spoke the message that the Hareidim are unwilling to accept - that there is a God in Israel!

    ReplyDelete
  13. It was / is very difficult to get any hakaras hatov from the Hareidi world - they have been controlled by Satmar theology.

    ReplyDelete

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