As the mother of several combat soldiers in the Israel army reserves, two of whom are starting their third round of reserve duty in the North (in other words they have been away from their wives and families this year for more days than they have been home), I found aspects of Rabbi Kelemen's article "Tshuva after October 7th", deeply disturbing on several levels.
I do agree that there has been something of a religious awakening in many parts of Israeli society in response to the events of the past year.
However, Rabbi Kelemen creates a false dichotomy- he refers to two types of Jews, the "Orthodox" (by which he means Hareidi) who provide Challot, Shabbat candles and moral support, and the "secular" who serve in the army, provide material support, and comprise the bereaved. This presentation totally marginalizes the Dati Jews, who are Shomer Torah U'Mitzvot, serve in the army, and have suffered a disproportionate number of the casualties in Iron Swords. One of my sons lives with his family in a Yishuv in the Shomron. Of their community of 100 families, over half of the husbands are currently serving in active reserve duty, while an additional 20% (mainly those who have already "aged out" of reserves), are serving by guarding their own communities. They don't need Challot or Shabbat candles.. they have their own. What they could use is help with laundry and childcare, as they run their households in the absence of their husbands, and in the long term, *a larger combat force* so that 70% of the adult males aren't away from home at a given time.
One would think that the O-U and its affiliate organizations would identify with those Orthodox Jews who both serve in the army, and maintain an Orthodox lifestyle. It is deeply disturbing that this does not seem to be the case. Even the organization highlighted in the article "Kesher Yehudi" is a Hareidi initiative, for secular/Hareidi (not "religious" but Hareidi-- see their Hebrew website) dialogue.
As Eliyahu Hanavi said in a different context עד־מָתַ֞י אַתֶּ֣ם פֹּסְחִים֘ עַל־שְׁתֵּ֣י הַסְּעִפִּים֒ There is no room for neutrality here. The O-U can no longer pretend that in wartime there is a single "Orthodox" community in Israel, when one sub-community carries a disproportionate defense burden, and the other part considers giving out Shabbat candles to be a serious contribution to the war effort.
This is so perfectly written. It's a busha that we Dati Leumi are completely ignored by articles like this. Our husbands and sons are away in miluim, we are baking our own challah and lighting our own Shabbat candles and attending funerals and shiva houses, and our communities are falling apart emotionally.
Outstanding note and very powerful as an אמא of our heroes. In this current crisis, I cannot remain silent that other eligible young men are purposely not filling in for your kids (and my mishpakha as well).
However, current MO rabbis seek validation of their existence from חרדי rabbunim. This is the Ner Israel side of the Jewish Action magazine. Its organizational brother, Aish, has similar attitudes but keeps them under wraps.
Chabad is no different.
I know that one will say ‘but I know Chabad and Aish guys in צה״ל!’ With rare exceptions, their ‘conversions’ occurred after they met, not before. Their inner schools actively discourage those pursuing army service. Even Chofetz Chain bans Israeli flags.
Oh, they're still closely connected, and the RCA is connected to both of them as well. But they're all separate organizations, although the RCA has formal ties to the OU and YU's ties to the two are more informal.
I think YU caught on years ago that the charedi world doesn't like it. The OU still pretends otherwise.
Thank you for writing this letter to the OU, and for calling out the obfuscation. The modus operandi of today's journalism is to rewrite the narrative in a way that suits your outlook, regardless of the factuality of that narrative. This proposed narrative of achdus is disingenuous: the Charedi culture does not encourage nor desire achdus. There were many anglo Charedi shuls that made no mention of the war nor nary a tefillah for the soldiers on Yom Kippur (from firsthand reports). In general, there is no sense in that world of the need to share in the war burden, of the need to even acknowledge that there might be a place for Charedim in the defense of the country. I don't know how this will change, but as we come up on a year I pray that it does.
Jewish Action, while containing interesting articles from a variety of viewpoints, is ultimately a political magazine published by the OU. They (and Rabbi Hauer as their spokesman) would never print anything that would alienate the yeshiva world in the US. It's that simple.
Look, a little while back Hauer, in admitting that his family is not directly affected by the war (living as they do in the US), stated that his sons face neither draft nor losing their exemption as yeshiva students, thus equating the two. That told me I had to know about his worldview.
(It's also a good thing to bear in mind what the difference between the Executive VP and the President is, staffing of the OU, and other matters.)
The OU has never really made peace with the fact that it's mostly a Modern Orthodox organization. That may or may not be a bad thing, but it's reflected in the things they've been writing about "achdus" for years, and the way they don't acknowledge real problems.
You remind me of something I once witnessed another Exec. VP of the OU say, at an OU convention. I was in the back of the room, among a bunch of rabbanim made very upset by his remarks, and they said, "Nu, he's a Chaim Berlin graduate."
The Israeli Charedi world as a whole can’t survive a change as big as giyus, so they’re going to fight it and we can expect extremely defensive statements from them. It’s sad and pathetic, but are we going to change them by condemning them over it? Very unlikely. At the same time, does Am Yisrael gain significantly through their learning, even if we disagree with many of their premises? In my opinion, it definitely does. So what’s the purpose of this attack?
I believe we can achieve more by being mechazek the voices working for constructive change and looking for realistic partial solutions.
1. Doubtful that that will bring about the change you want, although it will damage the Charedi community.
2. I’m disappointed that you take such a cup-half-empty view and can’t see the gains that the Charedim bring to the Jewish world. I’m sure that if you applied your considerable talents to identifying them, you most certainly would.
What of what they do *as charedim* contribute to the Jewish world? That is, what is it that they couldn't do as people who *also* contribute to society that they currently do contributes?
I do think there are things, but that’s not relevant to my point, which is that attacking them will bring little if any benefit to the situation, while diminishing the gains that they bring to Am Yisrael.
1. As Rav Slifkin says we should definitely cut funding bli kesher.
2. The Haredi world is stronger and more resilient than you give them credit. I can totally see them making army service part of their way of live. Like hesder yeshivot on steroids.
3. More importantly, gradual change only happens from both external and internal pressure. Every single Haredi Rabbi and student needs to realise how the rest of Israel feels about their decision not to serve. We need them to be embarrassed before they start changing.
4. It sounds like you're admitting that it would be the right thing to do for Haredim to serve, but since we'll never convince them, we should just stop complaining and pretend we're totally cool with them and their behaviour. On a purely emotional (irrational) perspective, I can't imagine a deeper and more pathetic humiliation than getting spat on by the Haredi community and then faking a smile and pretending they're in the right for the sake of "achdut".
2. You're entitled to your opinion, but I think it's highly fanciful.
3. I agree that they need to realise how people feel, but if it's perceived as an attack seeking to take them down (which it is) then they will understandably double-down. Opening channels of communication, however, is a valuable exercise.
4. In terms of being spat on, there are outrageous and insulting Charedi statements that are being made which should be roundly condemned and attacked. Avoiding the draft, however, is not intended as an attack on us, it's about them seeking to maintain their lifestyle and survive. We can say their hashkafa is erroneous, we can say it's a distortion of Judaism, we can say that it's hurting us, we can stop offering them our support, but if the intention is to (figuratively) go to war against them in order to get them to change (or disappear), which is what Rabbi Slifkin seems to be promoting, then it is counterproductive and damaging for the Jewish people.
"As Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky demonstrates in his excellent article about milchemes mitzvah, participation in the current war is not merely invaluable but halachically obligatory..." I encourage everyone to read the article https://jewishaction.com/religion/jewish-law/whats-the-truth-about-milchemet-mitzvah/ - and look up the sources he botched. He missed a basic Rambam, which I found afterward in a footnote (#12) as an afterthought - this is not just an afterthought but a basic mareh makom in the sugya and to decide based on a girsa question and a question he has (which has answers) isn't so honest.
Also that Ramban about urim vetumim is a big mareh makom and he mostly ignores it, and even botches it somehow. Unless, of course, I'm the one missing something. I encourage everyone to look up the Ramban themselves.
That said, I'm not saying it isn't a milchemes mitzvah but his article is far from a shining light in the sugya IMO.
"That said, I'm not saying it isn't a milchemes mitzvah..."
But you did say "I'm not saying".
"He missed a basic Rambam"
It's not a basic Rambam. A basic Rambam would be a clear halacha in the משנה תורה. You're not even citing a הלכה in the main body of the ספר המצות! Instead you're citing a passing descriptive (i.e. not prescriptive) statement kvetched out by some Johnny-come-lately tyro. In order to kvetch it, you'd have to ignore centuries of מלחמת מצוה preceding שאול, and you'd have to ignore contemporary גדולי הדור whose Charedi credentials are/were unimpeachable who said it is a מלחמת מצוה.
"but a basic mareh makom in the sugya"
It's not basic, nor is it a מראה מקום. Unless you want to kvetch away all the מסורה. If you take the statement as prescriptive instead of descriptive, you're degrading the רמב"ם and mocking גדולי ישראל.
"Unless, of course, I'm the one missing something."
Yeah, you're missing something. You're taking one minor statement from the רמב"ם and ignoring all other sources. That's not how you learn. The basic commentators on the רבמ"ם attempt to find the sources for the רמב"ם and explain why he paskens the way he does when there is no single clear source for his psak. Here, the kvetchers pretend there is only the רמב"ם and don't bother to place it in the context of the wider tradition.
I'm not going to have a whole halachic argument in social media (I probably should've kept quiet originally) but you can email me - davidschulmannn@gmail.com
I looked up the footnote. It's pretty extensive and demonstrates pretty clearly that the Rambam isn't saying what you're implying.
Contrary to yeshivish (or even Talmudic) thought, not every single point of view has to be reconciled with every other one. The Rambam nods sometimes too, and kal v'chomer later editors did.
Tell you what, send your email to גדולי ישראל who agree Israel's wars are a מלחמת מצוה.
I consider the misuse of this phrase of the Rambam not worthy of discussion- it approaches crackpot nonsense. Because it goes against גדולי ישראל and the מסורה of learning.
and מלחמת מצוה אינו צריך ליטול בה רשות בית דין אלא יוצא מעצמו
it is more than obvious that a מלך is required. Otherwise the Rambam would say אין נלחמים תחלה and אלא יוצאים מעצמן.
Here are the quotes from R Herzog:
וא"ת הלא גם מלך אין לנו, אומר אני שכל שלא ניתנת לו המלכות לעולם אין צריך שיהיה מבית דוד, ומלך שלא מבית דוד אינו טעון משיחה בשמן המשח , ה והמלך אין כוחו אלא מן העם, שנבחר ע"י העם. וכן יש לנו לאמר שהעם כולו... יש לו הסמכות של המלך בנוגע לעניני האומה. וכיון שהרוב הגדול והמכריע מכריז על מלחמה זו הרי זה כצו המלך, ויש בידו לכוף
(תחוקה לישראל על פי התורה, כרך א' עמ 129)
דעתי, שקנינו בכיבוש מלחמה שאעפ"י שאין מוציאין למלחמת
הרשות אלא על פי בי"ד של שבעים ואחד, ואף למלחמת מצוה אין מוציאין אלא עפ"י
מלך ישראל (רמב"ם הל' מלכים ה,ב), הרי כבר הכריע קודמי, הגאון החסיד ז"ל במשפט
כהן (סי' קמד טו א), ובזה כיון לדעת המאירי ז"ל (סנהדרין נב,ב), שבזמן שאין לא מלך
I consider the misuse of "גדולי ישראל and the מסורה of learning" coming from people who don't give a hoot about what the gedolim have to say not worthy of discussion- it approaches crackpot nonsense
Shavu’a tov umo’adim le-simchah. Please make sure to condense your comments and write a letter to the editor yourself which I am sure will be published.
Making progress at least reaching out to external publications. Next step: reach out to Jews on the fence, Jews that need chizuk, Jews that need the intellectual Ammo to talk truth to Friends and power. Rabbi , the invitation here is to use your obvious kishronos to aid the war effort in a less crabbed and narrow manner. We all know you can do it and you obviously don’t lack conviction and confidence. Diaspora Jews need your voice. Chazak chazak.
The very fact that to be a religious Jew in Israel means that one must be part of one of those two categories: dati leumi and charedi, makes me very grateful to live in England.
Plenty of Torah Im Derech Eretz in Israel. Many schools- my own kids' included- and shuls were founded by prominent figures in German Orthodoxy. The Horev school actually says "Torah Im Derech Eretz" over its front door. I daven in a shul founded by Isaac Breuer himself, and know many of his descendants personally. Were you really unaware of this?
Except that Rav Hirsch zts''l, Rav Salomon Breuer zts''l, and Rav Schwab zts''l were all against the entire idea of a Jewish state in the golus. Additionally, in Israel, there is a choice between your children being forced to serve in the army, or learn full time, neither are which are in keeping with Torah Im Derech Eretz.
Yes, but is that philosophy actually represented in any discernable way the broader culture? I think the answer is no. Nuance is not very popular is Israel, unfortunately . . .
I'd care. Me and my brothers all do miluim and we all feel the lack of manpower in the army. Joining the workforce is a good start but not good enough.
Two points: 1: If this current war is indeed a milchemes mitzva, what is the justification for the vast majority of world Jewry not participating? 2: While the actions in Gaza in the days immediately following October 7th certainly should be categorized as rescuing the Jewish people from their enemies, it is unclear for how long that categorization remains in effect.
Regarding your last point, see what the Bach says about milchemes mitzvah in orach chaim 249 (admittedly a novel application of the term...) and also chazon ish orach chaim 114,3. It's also arguable that Meiri on the sugya in sota would say that Hamas' and Hezballah's agendas cause any war with them to always be a milchemes mitzvah (I think it's a possibility that Meiri was following Rambam in his understanding, as he often does, against the lechem mishne, the problem with the latter being that the ikar is chaser min hasefer, but of course that's debatable).
Regarding your first point, seemingly the "shofet" in charge is the one who decides who is necessary for the war, there were never any wars that literally everyone went to, the mishna in sota is presumably just saying that there are no excuses to not go, but not that literally everyone went (ayain sefer shoftim), so while it would be admirable for people in chutz laaretz to come join the war effort, it doesn't seem practical for the Israeli government to force them to join (and the government does give peturim to people they decide will be harmful to the war effort, be it for physical or emotional reasons. Someone recently tried to make the argument to me that the since the government does exempt much of the charedi community, or at least they did until recently, that technically means that they shouldn't have a halachic obligation to go. However, that would change once the government does send out draft notices to them and telling them to not show up would seemingly be against halacha according to this line of thinking, besides the issue that even without a halachic obligation, the charedi lack of desire to serve and defend their people is... arguably problematic (yeah, I'm being diplomatic...) see the reactions of shevet Efra'im when they weren't called to fight in Gidon's and Yiftach's time, halevai that all of klal yisroel would demonstrate such a desire to fight for klal yisroel against their enemies)
Like it or not, the shofet or melech is the person in charge. Not the gadol hador. Yiftach was a shofet, Shimshon was a shofet, Rechavam was a melech, Menashe was a melech, Herod was a melech. Not Hillel HaZaken.
Oh yes, the guy who said that idol-worshipping Menashe is a good precedent for a Jewish state. And this is what chareidim are supposed to listen to? The mind boggles.
Just like they were expected to rally behind Shimshon despite his flaws. If menashe went to war he'd have the right to summon soldiers to the front despite his רשעות. Same for when the חשמונאים went downhill.
"It's not about how Rav Dov would describe himself."
You can't just go ahead and invent categories without evidence or logic. You said he's a שופט without any evidence. And yet you admit, though implicitly, that he himself would not describe himself as a שופט. In other words, דעת תורה makes no claims that Rav Lando is a שופט, but you do. Where do you get the חוצפה to describe Rav Lando without permission? Are you דעת תורה?
"It's about who is the religious leader of Torah Jews."
Another invented category. You just assume that a שופט must be a religious leader.
In any case, Rav Lando is not the sole leader of Torah Jews.
"The Torah Jews never accepted them in that capacity."
You're making up qualifications.
In any case, they have accepted in most capacities. Including going to war. Otherwise why hasn't Rav Lando instructed his party to leave the coalition?
What's this halachik geder "Torah jews"? The question is if they have authority, not what the average bnei brakian or kaplanist thinks about the government
That just shows that non-religious kings have certain powers and should be shown respect. Not that they have the right to make all the religious decisions in the country. Let's see, if they told us to shut down all the yeshivas and turn them into colleges, would we have to listen to them? Maybe you would say yes. Telling yeshiva bochurim to leave yeshiva and join the army is the same thing. So milchemes mitzvah has nothing to do with this, since the non-religious "shofet" has no jurisdiction on us in religious matters, milchemes miztvah is not mechayev either-just as it's not mechayev people in chu"l.
First, let me just say that I think your name is really interesting, I have a friend named עתיה, which is also a name in sefer Nehemiah :)
That aside, I am hesitant to continue a conversation with someone who speaks to strangers on the internet in the way that you do. The internet really can bring out the worst middos in people.
However, I have a couple of points to make that may be beneficial to other readers, so I'll write one last response in this conversation.
If a king tells someone to violate the Torah, obviously one is not allowed to listen to him (Rambam hilchos melachim 3,9). I'm not sure why that's relevant for deciding who is needed in a milchemes mitzvah, which is a fulfillment of Torah... One who reads sefer shoftim can see that the shofet in charge decided whom to call to war. Radak's categorizing of Avimelech as a shofet shows that he thought that even a rasha could have such authority. This also goes for the fact that chazal recognized that Eliyahu respected Achav as a king and of course Achav also drafted people for his wars (which, incidentally, chazal said were often won in the zechus of peace among the people, the widespread violation of Torah and avoda zara notwithstanding. Yerushalmi Pe'ah 1,1) and of course, Tosfos, in most of their answers, assume that Achav had all of the rights of a king. See Shmuel a 8, 11-17 for what that includes (hint, "taking your sons for his chariot and horsemen" is on the list).
One can also look at the formulation of the Ramban about whose authority is needed to draft for a war. Righteousness isn't on the list of requirements:
השגות הרמב"ן לספר המצוות לרמב"ם העשין והלאוין שסילק
ויש לי ענין מצוה מסתפק עלי והוא שייראה לי שמצוה על המלך *או על השופט ומי שהעם ברשותו* להוציאם לצבא במלחמת רשות או מצוה להיות שואל באורים ותומים ועל פיהם יתנהג בעניינם והוא אמרו ית' (פנחס כז) ולפני אלעזר הכהן יעמוד ושאל לו במשפט האורים לפני י"י על פיו יצאו ועל פיו יבואו הוא וכל בני ישראל אתו וכל העדה. יצוה ביהושע שהוא המושל הראשון אשר הוא פקיד על העדה שישאל בעניינם באורים ותומים ועל פי משפטם יוציאם ויביאם *וכן בכל השופטים והמלכים לדורות.*
(Additionally, Ramban says in his fourth mitzvas aseh that Rambam left out that the mitzvah of conquering eretz yisroel in order to be able to live here is a milchemes mitzvah that applies in all generations.)
I wish you much success in all of your endeavors that do not involve casting baseless aspersions on others and hope for you to one day see a value in speaking with more kindness to strangers, even if you disagree with them :) chag sameach!
So you concede that the political leadership fulfills the role of a king. And hence, our wars can be considered מלמחת מצוה. So you agree with גדולי ישראל.
You just disagree that Torah scholars are obligated to serve in a מלחמת מצוה.
Thank you for the comments. I am not understanding, though, what you write here. If it is in fact true that there is no obligation on anyone to join the war effort unless they are directed to by whomever is in charge, then it seems clear that chareidim who have not been asked to join would fall under that category.
Of course, this has nothing to do with the larger issue of whether or not chareidim should serve in the army. I just do not understand when people yell "milchemes mitzva" without thinking through the implications.
I did quote such a suggestion, that there would be a technical exemption for charedim as long as the government gives it to them. That brings up two follow up questions, a) should the charedim be satisfied with insisting that they should only follow the technical "din Torah" (see bava metzia 30b), b) what should be their reaction when the government does decide that they are necessary for the war effort? If one assumes that it is a milchemes mitzvah, then their continued refusal to join the army, despite a change in government policy to one that does draft charedim is surely anti halacha.
Just sent the following email:
To the Editor-
As the mother of several combat soldiers in the Israel army reserves, two of whom are starting their third round of reserve duty in the North (in other words they have been away from their wives and families this year for more days than they have been home), I found aspects of Rabbi Kelemen's article "Tshuva after October 7th", deeply disturbing on several levels.
I do agree that there has been something of a religious awakening in many parts of Israeli society in response to the events of the past year.
However, Rabbi Kelemen creates a false dichotomy- he refers to two types of Jews, the "Orthodox" (by which he means Hareidi) who provide Challot, Shabbat candles and moral support, and the "secular" who serve in the army, provide material support, and comprise the bereaved. This presentation totally marginalizes the Dati Jews, who are Shomer Torah U'Mitzvot, serve in the army, and have suffered a disproportionate number of the casualties in Iron Swords. One of my sons lives with his family in a Yishuv in the Shomron. Of their community of 100 families, over half of the husbands are currently serving in active reserve duty, while an additional 20% (mainly those who have already "aged out" of reserves), are serving by guarding their own communities. They don't need Challot or Shabbat candles.. they have their own. What they could use is help with laundry and childcare, as they run their households in the absence of their husbands, and in the long term, *a larger combat force* so that 70% of the adult males aren't away from home at a given time.
One would think that the O-U and its affiliate organizations would identify with those Orthodox Jews who both serve in the army, and maintain an Orthodox lifestyle. It is deeply disturbing that this does not seem to be the case. Even the organization highlighted in the article "Kesher Yehudi" is a Hareidi initiative, for secular/Hareidi (not "religious" but Hareidi-- see their Hebrew website) dialogue.
As Eliyahu Hanavi said in a different context עד־מָתַ֞י אַתֶּ֣ם פֹּסְחִים֘ עַל־שְׁתֵּ֣י הַסְּעִפִּים֒ There is no room for neutrality here. The O-U can no longer pretend that in wartime there is a single "Orthodox" community in Israel, when one sub-community carries a disproportionate defense burden, and the other part considers giving out Shabbat candles to be a serious contribution to the war effort.
[signed]
Excellent letter! And good point about Kesher Yehudi.
This is so perfectly written. It's a busha that we Dati Leumi are completely ignored by articles like this. Our husbands and sons are away in miluim, we are baking our own challah and lighting our own Shabbat candles and attending funerals and shiva houses, and our communities are falling apart emotionally.
Outstanding note and very powerful as an אמא of our heroes. In this current crisis, I cannot remain silent that other eligible young men are purposely not filling in for your kids (and my mishpakha as well).
However, current MO rabbis seek validation of their existence from חרדי rabbunim. This is the Ner Israel side of the Jewish Action magazine. Its organizational brother, Aish, has similar attitudes but keeps them under wraps.
Chabad is no different.
I know that one will say ‘but I know Chabad and Aish guys in צה״ל!’ With rare exceptions, their ‘conversions’ occurred after they met, not before. Their inner schools actively discourage those pursuing army service. Even Chofetz Chain bans Israeli flags.
To be fair, this is the OU, not YU.
I edited the place I referred to YU to now read O-U.
Things have changed since I left in the 80s. They used to be very tightly affiliated
Oh, they're still closely connected, and the RCA is connected to both of them as well. But they're all separate organizations, although the RCA has formal ties to the OU and YU's ties to the two are more informal.
I think YU caught on years ago that the charedi world doesn't like it. The OU still pretends otherwise.
Thank you for writing this letter to the OU, and for calling out the obfuscation. The modus operandi of today's journalism is to rewrite the narrative in a way that suits your outlook, regardless of the factuality of that narrative. This proposed narrative of achdus is disingenuous: the Charedi culture does not encourage nor desire achdus. There were many anglo Charedi shuls that made no mention of the war nor nary a tefillah for the soldiers on Yom Kippur (from firsthand reports). In general, there is no sense in that world of the need to share in the war burden, of the need to even acknowledge that there might be a place for Charedim in the defense of the country. I don't know how this will change, but as we come up on a year I pray that it does.
Jewish Action, while containing interesting articles from a variety of viewpoints, is ultimately a political magazine published by the OU. They (and Rabbi Hauer as their spokesman) would never print anything that would alienate the yeshiva world in the US. It's that simple.
Not that the yeshiva world thinks much of the OU (except perhaps for its kashrut division) anyway.
Yes, especially as all the ingredients in their "heimishe" brands are OU anyway!
Right, someone from the OU once pointed out to me that no hechsher would function without relying on the others.
Look, a little while back Hauer, in admitting that his family is not directly affected by the war (living as they do in the US), stated that his sons face neither draft nor losing their exemption as yeshiva students, thus equating the two. That told me I had to know about his worldview.
(It's also a good thing to bear in mind what the difference between the Executive VP and the President is, staffing of the OU, and other matters.)
The OU has never really made peace with the fact that it's mostly a Modern Orthodox organization. That may or may not be a bad thing, but it's reflected in the things they've been writing about "achdus" for years, and the way they don't acknowledge real problems.
What do u expect from a ner yisroel grad
You remind me of something I once witnessed another Exec. VP of the OU say, at an OU convention. I was in the back of the room, among a bunch of rabbanim made very upset by his remarks, and they said, "Nu, he's a Chaim Berlin graduate."
Meanwhile, one of the Black Hebrews was killed in action the other day. Not an Israeli citizen, probably not even halakhically Jewish.
A Druze colonel was just killed. *Definitely* not Jewish.
Neither of them spent all his time navel-gazing about whether this was a milchemet mitzvah or not.
Should have made them clean up the remains of their murdered and raped fellow Israelis on 10/7.
Maybe then they’d take off the robes and realize what’s in store for them from the animals in Gaza.
Can’t stand there and pray when your head is cut off.
No patience with them.
Interestingly, it was cleaning up remains that convinced the Zaka people to more closely integrate into State emergency services.
You have told the entire truth here
The Israeli Charedi world as a whole can’t survive a change as big as giyus, so they’re going to fight it and we can expect extremely defensive statements from them. It’s sad and pathetic, but are we going to change them by condemning them over it? Very unlikely. At the same time, does Am Yisrael gain significantly through their learning, even if we disagree with many of their premises? In my opinion, it definitely does. So what’s the purpose of this attack?
I believe we can achieve more by being mechazek the voices working for constructive change and looking for realistic partial solutions.
1. We can cut funding. 2. There is no "significant gain" from their learning, just significant harm.
1. Doubtful that that will bring about the change you want, although it will damage the Charedi community.
2. I’m disappointed that you take such a cup-half-empty view and can’t see the gains that the Charedim bring to the Jewish world. I’m sure that if you applied your considerable talents to identifying them, you most certainly would.
What of what they do *as charedim* contribute to the Jewish world? That is, what is it that they couldn't do as people who *also* contribute to society that they currently do contributes?
I do think there are things, but that’s not relevant to my point, which is that attacking them will bring little if any benefit to the situation, while diminishing the gains that they bring to Am Yisrael.
No, you're changing your own subject.
How so?
1. As Rav Slifkin says we should definitely cut funding bli kesher.
2. The Haredi world is stronger and more resilient than you give them credit. I can totally see them making army service part of their way of live. Like hesder yeshivot on steroids.
3. More importantly, gradual change only happens from both external and internal pressure. Every single Haredi Rabbi and student needs to realise how the rest of Israel feels about their decision not to serve. We need them to be embarrassed before they start changing.
4. It sounds like you're admitting that it would be the right thing to do for Haredim to serve, but since we'll never convince them, we should just stop complaining and pretend we're totally cool with them and their behaviour. On a purely emotional (irrational) perspective, I can't imagine a deeper and more pathetic humiliation than getting spat on by the Haredi community and then faking a smile and pretending they're in the right for the sake of "achdut".
2. You're entitled to your opinion, but I think it's highly fanciful.
3. I agree that they need to realise how people feel, but if it's perceived as an attack seeking to take them down (which it is) then they will understandably double-down. Opening channels of communication, however, is a valuable exercise.
4. In terms of being spat on, there are outrageous and insulting Charedi statements that are being made which should be roundly condemned and attacked. Avoiding the draft, however, is not intended as an attack on us, it's about them seeking to maintain their lifestyle and survive. We can say their hashkafa is erroneous, we can say it's a distortion of Judaism, we can say that it's hurting us, we can stop offering them our support, but if the intention is to (figuratively) go to war against them in order to get them to change (or disappear), which is what Rabbi Slifkin seems to be promoting, then it is counterproductive and damaging for the Jewish people.
A Courageous and spot on response to those articles.
"As Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky demonstrates in his excellent article about milchemes mitzvah, participation in the current war is not merely invaluable but halachically obligatory..." I encourage everyone to read the article https://jewishaction.com/religion/jewish-law/whats-the-truth-about-milchemet-mitzvah/ - and look up the sources he botched. He missed a basic Rambam, which I found afterward in a footnote (#12) as an afterthought - this is not just an afterthought but a basic mareh makom in the sugya and to decide based on a girsa question and a question he has (which has answers) isn't so honest.
Also that Ramban about urim vetumim is a big mareh makom and he mostly ignores it, and even botches it somehow. Unless, of course, I'm the one missing something. I encourage everyone to look up the Ramban themselves.
That said, I'm not saying it isn't a milchemes mitzvah but his article is far from a shining light in the sugya IMO.
"That said, I'm not saying it isn't a milchemes mitzvah..."
But you did say "I'm not saying".
"He missed a basic Rambam"
It's not a basic Rambam. A basic Rambam would be a clear halacha in the משנה תורה. You're not even citing a הלכה in the main body of the ספר המצות! Instead you're citing a passing descriptive (i.e. not prescriptive) statement kvetched out by some Johnny-come-lately tyro. In order to kvetch it, you'd have to ignore centuries of מלחמת מצוה preceding שאול, and you'd have to ignore contemporary גדולי הדור whose Charedi credentials are/were unimpeachable who said it is a מלחמת מצוה.
"but a basic mareh makom in the sugya"
It's not basic, nor is it a מראה מקום. Unless you want to kvetch away all the מסורה. If you take the statement as prescriptive instead of descriptive, you're degrading the רמב"ם and mocking גדולי ישראל.
"Unless, of course, I'm the one missing something."
Yeah, you're missing something. You're taking one minor statement from the רמב"ם and ignoring all other sources. That's not how you learn. The basic commentators on the רבמ"ם attempt to find the sources for the רמב"ם and explain why he paskens the way he does when there is no single clear source for his psak. Here, the kvetchers pretend there is only the רמב"ם and don't bother to place it in the context of the wider tradition.
I'm not going to have a whole halachic argument in social media (I probably should've kept quiet originally) but you can email me - davidschulmannn@gmail.com
I looked up the footnote. It's pretty extensive and demonstrates pretty clearly that the Rambam isn't saying what you're implying.
Contrary to yeshivish (or even Talmudic) thought, not every single point of view has to be reconciled with every other one. The Rambam nods sometimes too, and kal v'chomer later editors did.
You can email me as well if you'd like to continue this discussion
Tell you what, send your email to גדולי ישראל who agree Israel's wars are a מלחמת מצוה.
I consider the misuse of this phrase of the Rambam not worthy of discussion- it approaches crackpot nonsense. Because it goes against גדולי ישראל and the מסורה of learning.
Gedolei Yisrael like Rav Herzog, right?
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/the-craziest-war-comment/comment/52039616
"אין המלך נלחם תחלה אלא מלחמת מצוה
and מלחמת מצוה אינו צריך ליטול בה רשות בית דין אלא יוצא מעצמו
it is more than obvious that a מלך is required. Otherwise the Rambam would say אין נלחמים תחלה and אלא יוצאים מעצמן.
Here are the quotes from R Herzog:
וא"ת הלא גם מלך אין לנו, אומר אני שכל שלא ניתנת לו המלכות לעולם אין צריך שיהיה מבית דוד, ומלך שלא מבית דוד אינו טעון משיחה בשמן המשח , ה והמלך אין כוחו אלא מן העם, שנבחר ע"י העם. וכן יש לנו לאמר שהעם כולו... יש לו הסמכות של המלך בנוגע לעניני האומה. וכיון שהרוב הגדול והמכריע מכריז על מלחמה זו הרי זה כצו המלך, ויש בידו לכוף
(תחוקה לישראל על פי התורה, כרך א' עמ 129)
דעתי, שקנינו בכיבוש מלחמה שאעפ"י שאין מוציאין למלחמת
הרשות אלא על פי בי"ד של שבעים ואחד, ואף למלחמת מצוה אין מוציאין אלא עפ"י
מלך ישראל (רמב"ם הל' מלכים ה,ב), הרי כבר הכריע קודמי, הגאון החסיד ז"ל במשפט
כהן (סי' קמד טו א), ובזה כיון לדעת המאירי ז"ל (סנהדרין נב,ב), שבזמן שאין לא מלך
ולא סנהדרין, ראשי הצבור עומדים במקומם.
(פסקים וכתבים ח"ג , עמ קנג'")"
I consider the misuse of "גדולי ישראל and the מסורה of learning" coming from people who don't give a hoot about what the gedolim have to say not worthy of discussion- it approaches crackpot nonsense
Nah.
A basic Rambam, kvetched by the Johnny-come-lately Rav Herzog 80 years ago, who definitely thought it was clear in the Mishnah Torah https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/the-craziest-war-comment/comment/52039616
Shavu’a tov umo’adim le-simchah. Please make sure to condense your comments and write a letter to the editor yourself which I am sure will be published.
JA publishes a about 3 letters per issue, so don't bet on it.
That is the editor.
Making progress at least reaching out to external publications. Next step: reach out to Jews on the fence, Jews that need chizuk, Jews that need the intellectual Ammo to talk truth to Friends and power. Rabbi , the invitation here is to use your obvious kishronos to aid the war effort in a less crabbed and narrow manner. We all know you can do it and you obviously don’t lack conviction and confidence. Diaspora Jews need your voice. Chazak chazak.
The very fact that to be a religious Jew in Israel means that one must be part of one of those two categories: dati leumi and charedi, makes me very grateful to live in England.
Why, what's wrong with being dati leumi and supporting the Jewis People in a way that you cannot do in England?
Nothing wrong with that for people for whom that is their hashkofo. I don't share that hashkofo.
So what is yours? Not Reform, surely.
Torah Im Derech Eretz
Plenty of Torah Im Derech Eretz in Israel. Many schools- my own kids' included- and shuls were founded by prominent figures in German Orthodoxy. The Horev school actually says "Torah Im Derech Eretz" over its front door. I daven in a shul founded by Isaac Breuer himself, and know many of his descendants personally. Were you really unaware of this?
Except that Rav Hirsch zts''l, Rav Salomon Breuer zts''l, and Rav Schwab zts''l were all against the entire idea of a Jewish state in the golus. Additionally, in Israel, there is a choice between your children being forced to serve in the army, or learn full time, neither are which are in keeping with Torah Im Derech Eretz.
Yes, but is that philosophy actually represented in any discernable way the broader culture? I think the answer is no. Nuance is not very popular is Israel, unfortunately . . .
You can be whatever you want.
I have a mesorah.
So follow it. Making aliyah won't keep you from doing so. (Unless your mesorah is not to make aliyah.) It's a free country.
Tbh if these guys stopped learning in kollel for life and joined the workforce no one would care that they don’t go to the army
I'd care. Me and my brothers all do miluim and we all feel the lack of manpower in the army. Joining the workforce is a good start but not good enough.
I may have connections in the San Francisco Chronicle and Smerconish . Certainly willing to give it a try.
Two points: 1: If this current war is indeed a milchemes mitzva, what is the justification for the vast majority of world Jewry not participating? 2: While the actions in Gaza in the days immediately following October 7th certainly should be categorized as rescuing the Jewish people from their enemies, it is unclear for how long that categorization remains in effect.
Is the IDF accepting 66 year olds as new recruits?
Regarding your last point, see what the Bach says about milchemes mitzvah in orach chaim 249 (admittedly a novel application of the term...) and also chazon ish orach chaim 114,3. It's also arguable that Meiri on the sugya in sota would say that Hamas' and Hezballah's agendas cause any war with them to always be a milchemes mitzvah (I think it's a possibility that Meiri was following Rambam in his understanding, as he often does, against the lechem mishne, the problem with the latter being that the ikar is chaser min hasefer, but of course that's debatable).
Regarding your first point, seemingly the "shofet" in charge is the one who decides who is necessary for the war, there were never any wars that literally everyone went to, the mishna in sota is presumably just saying that there are no excuses to not go, but not that literally everyone went (ayain sefer shoftim), so while it would be admirable for people in chutz laaretz to come join the war effort, it doesn't seem practical for the Israeli government to force them to join (and the government does give peturim to people they decide will be harmful to the war effort, be it for physical or emotional reasons. Someone recently tried to make the argument to me that the since the government does exempt much of the charedi community, or at least they did until recently, that technically means that they shouldn't have a halachic obligation to go. However, that would change once the government does send out draft notices to them and telling them to not show up would seemingly be against halacha according to this line of thinking, besides the issue that even without a halachic obligation, the charedi lack of desire to serve and defend their people is... arguably problematic (yeah, I'm being diplomatic...) see the reactions of shevet Efra'im when they weren't called to fight in Gidon's and Yiftach's time, halevai that all of klal yisroel would demonstrate such a desire to fight for klal yisroel against their enemies)
The Shofet in charge is Rav Dov Landau. Not a collection of kofrim and meshumadim.
Like it or not, the shofet or melech is the person in charge. Not the gadol hador. Yiftach was a shofet, Shimshon was a shofet, Rechavam was a melech, Menashe was a melech, Herod was a melech. Not Hillel HaZaken.
Oh yes, the guy who said that idol-worshipping Menashe is a good precedent for a Jewish state. And this is what chareidim are supposed to listen to? The mind boggles.
You are a liar, or you are dim, or you are both. Serves me right for engaging with you again, Shaul. Obviously you're not worth the effort.
Just like they were expected to rally behind Shimshon despite his flaws. If menashe went to war he'd have the right to summon soldiers to the front despite his רשעות. Same for when the חשמונאים went downhill.
"The Shofet in charge is Rav Dov Landau"
No he isn't. Ask him.
You lost the plot. It's not about how Rav Dov would describe himself. It's about who is the religious leader of Torah Jews.
"It's not about how Rav Dov would describe himself."
You can't just go ahead and invent categories without evidence or logic. You said he's a שופט without any evidence. And yet you admit, though implicitly, that he himself would not describe himself as a שופט. In other words, דעת תורה makes no claims that Rav Lando is a שופט, but you do. Where do you get the חוצפה to describe Rav Lando without permission? Are you דעת תורה?
"It's about who is the religious leader of Torah Jews."
Another invented category. You just assume that a שופט must be a religious leader.
In any case, Rav Lando is not the sole leader of Torah Jews.
R Dov!? I assume you don't think chasidim are religious?!
He leads Israel in battle? How is he a national leader?
And the kofrim and meshumadim lead Torah Jews in battle? The Torah Jews never accepted them in that capacity.
"The Torah Jews never accepted them in that capacity."
You're making up qualifications.
In any case, they have accepted in most capacities. Including going to war. Otherwise why hasn't Rav Lando instructed his party to leave the coalition?
Sounds like postmodernism. Torah jews can decide in what capacity they accept the states authority?
What's this halachik geder "Torah jews"? The question is if they have authority, not what the average bnei brakian or kaplanist thinks about the government
ראה מדרש תנחומא בא ז בענין אליהו ואחאב ורש"י בראשית מח,ב
תוספות סנהדרין כ: כל התירוצים חוץ מן האחרון
רד"ק שופטים י,א
ואכמ"ל
That just shows that non-religious kings have certain powers and should be shown respect. Not that they have the right to make all the religious decisions in the country. Let's see, if they told us to shut down all the yeshivas and turn them into colleges, would we have to listen to them? Maybe you would say yes. Telling yeshiva bochurim to leave yeshiva and join the army is the same thing. So milchemes mitzvah has nothing to do with this, since the non-religious "shofet" has no jurisdiction on us in religious matters, milchemes miztvah is not mechayev either-just as it's not mechayev people in chu"l.
First, let me just say that I think your name is really interesting, I have a friend named עתיה, which is also a name in sefer Nehemiah :)
That aside, I am hesitant to continue a conversation with someone who speaks to strangers on the internet in the way that you do. The internet really can bring out the worst middos in people.
However, I have a couple of points to make that may be beneficial to other readers, so I'll write one last response in this conversation.
If a king tells someone to violate the Torah, obviously one is not allowed to listen to him (Rambam hilchos melachim 3,9). I'm not sure why that's relevant for deciding who is needed in a milchemes mitzvah, which is a fulfillment of Torah... One who reads sefer shoftim can see that the shofet in charge decided whom to call to war. Radak's categorizing of Avimelech as a shofet shows that he thought that even a rasha could have such authority. This also goes for the fact that chazal recognized that Eliyahu respected Achav as a king and of course Achav also drafted people for his wars (which, incidentally, chazal said were often won in the zechus of peace among the people, the widespread violation of Torah and avoda zara notwithstanding. Yerushalmi Pe'ah 1,1) and of course, Tosfos, in most of their answers, assume that Achav had all of the rights of a king. See Shmuel a 8, 11-17 for what that includes (hint, "taking your sons for his chariot and horsemen" is on the list).
One can also look at the formulation of the Ramban about whose authority is needed to draft for a war. Righteousness isn't on the list of requirements:
השגות הרמב"ן לספר המצוות לרמב"ם העשין והלאוין שסילק
ויש לי ענין מצוה מסתפק עלי והוא שייראה לי שמצוה על המלך *או על השופט ומי שהעם ברשותו* להוציאם לצבא במלחמת רשות או מצוה להיות שואל באורים ותומים ועל פיהם יתנהג בעניינם והוא אמרו ית' (פנחס כז) ולפני אלעזר הכהן יעמוד ושאל לו במשפט האורים לפני י"י על פיו יצאו ועל פיו יבואו הוא וכל בני ישראל אתו וכל העדה. יצוה ביהושע שהוא המושל הראשון אשר הוא פקיד על העדה שישאל בעניינם באורים ותומים ועל פי משפטם יוציאם ויביאם *וכן בכל השופטים והמלכים לדורות.*
(Additionally, Ramban says in his fourth mitzvas aseh that Rambam left out that the mitzvah of conquering eretz yisroel in order to be able to live here is a milchemes mitzvah that applies in all generations.)
I wish you much success in all of your endeavors that do not involve casting baseless aspersions on others and hope for you to one day see a value in speaking with more kindness to strangers, even if you disagree with them :) chag sameach!
So you concede that the political leadership fulfills the role of a king. And hence, our wars can be considered מלמחת מצוה. So you agree with גדולי ישראל.
You just disagree that Torah scholars are obligated to serve in a מלחמת מצוה.
Thank you for the comments. I am not understanding, though, what you write here. If it is in fact true that there is no obligation on anyone to join the war effort unless they are directed to by whomever is in charge, then it seems clear that chareidim who have not been asked to join would fall under that category.
Of course, this has nothing to do with the larger issue of whether or not chareidim should serve in the army. I just do not understand when people yell "milchemes mitzva" without thinking through the implications.
Well, they've been "asked" to join in that the draft applies to every adult Israeli.
It applies to every adult Israeli who has been sent a draft notice.
Well, that includes charedim. They have to apply for an exemption.
I did quote such a suggestion, that there would be a technical exemption for charedim as long as the government gives it to them. That brings up two follow up questions, a) should the charedim be satisfied with insisting that they should only follow the technical "din Torah" (see bava metzia 30b), b) what should be their reaction when the government does decide that they are necessary for the war effort? If one assumes that it is a milchemes mitzvah, then their continued refusal to join the army, despite a change in government policy to one that does draft charedim is surely anti halacha.
That eventuality can be discussed if it ever comes to fruition.
Rabbi moshe Hauer is a ny grad. Why expect anything different.