"With regard to his first reason, that John Hagee is part of a movement that supports Jews only because they want to see them converted, I consulted an expert on Hagee. He told me that this is “patently false, and can only come from people who live in their own bubbles and make assumptions about everything outside, rather than bothering to learn the truth.” ... (Conversely, the number of people who get turned off from Judaism by the various selfish antics of the charedi community is considerable.)"
I consulted an expert on Slifkin and he told me that only bitter ex-charedim think that.
Shaul and "Expert" it seems you have nothing substantive to comment. You are demonstrating that opposition to Rabbi Slifkin is not based on a well thought-out position.
To the contrary, there are many substantive comments here, while the actual post is more of Slifkin's usual hot garbage. Of course, never mind the fact that he silences all substantive criticism by banning the critics.
I don't see any banned commenters on this post, but you seem a good candidate. Rabbi Slifkin does not silence criticism, on the contrary witness all the debate on this blog, respectful and otherwise. He should and occasionally does ban people for engaging in hate speech and ad hominem attacks.
Well of course you don't see banned commenters, because they're...banned. The only person who engages in hate speech is Slifkin, who does so obsessively
I agree with this. All of this comes from Slifkin's own personal trauma, he is just lashing out like a 2-year old having a tantrum. none of it is a reflection of a well-thought-out position.
I might be late for this party, but slifkins expert is right.
Hagee really does not want to convert jews: at all.
He believes in the so called "two covenant theology" (in opposition to the replacement theology), which sttes that Jesus' death is for the goyim, but torah still for the jews.
However, we should note that hagee is an outsider with this opinion: even among the most fanatical pro zionist evangelicals
This is incorrect. I can state that there were at least several members at large of an Agudah shul, including a big gvir that the Agudah is "machshiv", that were very unimpressed. Will they stop identifying with Agudah? No. However, the gvir was very impressed with how Rabbi Hauer handled everything with nobility, including Rabbi Hauer's message about achdus following the event.
No disagreement. My point was that it was claimed that only people bitter would look negatively on the decision. I said that members in good standing looked negatively on the decision.
I am not saying these members in good standing have the right to their own opinions. That is a different discussion. I was simply disagreeing with the assertion that nobody would look negatively on the decision.
Lots of sociological speculation in the rabbi's post, but no data. Only an appeal to an unnamed 'expert' on the pastor with whom the rabbi consulted. The rabbi claims to be anti charedi but reminds us of nothing more than a bitter, cold Litvak from back in the day. Lots of divineness, no love to be found here, certainly not ahavat chinom such as demonstrated by the chayalim and the populace. The Rosh Yeshiva didn't participate in the rally. Rabbi Slifkin, a public figure with a voice, refuses to participate in the achdus while our nation and people are fighting for our lives. He lost the plot. When the ferocious unabated anger? Is this righteous indignation - or something personal? It's not too late to repent.
"Is this righteous indignation - or something personal?"
It's definitely self-righteous indignation, and is very personal. I would know, I am an expert on Slifkin. I also have many inside sources that tell me the same thing. Not that we need inside sources or experts, it's extremely apparent.
You don't need an expert. You can just look at the history of Hagee's statements themselves. The Rosh Yeshiva got it wrong; Rabbi Slifkin got it right.
As is slicky Slifkins way, he embellishes things to suit his purposes.
Examples:
R' Feldman wrote:
"I originally supported the rally because I felt it was necessary to influence Congress to continue sending arms to Israel and to stop Congress from forcing a cease-fire."
But Slifkin says:
"He makes it clear that he acknowledges that rallies can have a powerful impact; it was only this particular type of rally that was problematic. Had the rally been of a different nature, it would have been an invaluable way to influence Congress to continue sending arms to Israel and not to force a cease-fire..."
R' Feldman did not say he thought the rally is "invaluable". He wrote he thought it would influence Congress. Slifkin blows up R' Feldman's own view of the extent of the effectiveness of the rally. "Invaluable" means something much more than intended.
Another example:
R' Feldman wrote: "A Christian pastor was set to address the crowd. He is the head of an evangelic Christian denomination which believes that Jews need to be supported so that they eventually convert to Christianity."
But Slifkin wrote:
"With regard to his first reason, that John Hagee is part of a movement that supports Jews only because they want to see them converted"
Notice that word "only". It changes things! R' Feldman didn't take it that far. He gave a reason for their Israeli support; he did not say they cannot have any other considerations.
Another example:
R' Feldman wrote:
"...and it would have (this, from an advertisement) a massive chant by the attendees of “Never Again!”— implying that the physical might of the army—not Hashem—will protect the Jewish people."
Slicky wrote:
"And while Rav Feldman claims that the phrase “Never Again!” is secular, it is simply a vow to make every effort to prevent such things from happening; and it was popularized by none other than Rabbi Meir Kahane who, whatever else his failings, certainly was not secular."
Once again we see reading comprehension issues. R' Feldman didn't say it was "secular". Slifkin did. R' Feldman discussed the implication. Remember that word: Implication. R' Kahane being frum is irrelevant. R' Feldman maintains that there is a mistake in the message, even for religious people.
These examples and many more are TYPICAL of Slifkin here and everywhere. It is a reason also , I think, why his books are not truly scholarly. What he writes is persuasive...he pushes his ideas without enough care for facts.
u guys are a bunch of clueless bitter nasty boomers speculating about stuff you have no clue about. I live here and am part of hardi culture and most of you guys are way off including nosson slifkin
To all those claiming that my comments are just the rantings of a charedi-hater - here is a recording of R. Beryl Whitman, a maggid shiur in the Mir, about Rav Feldman's letter:
Furthermore I found out they would be selling kosher food at the rally. This implies that we get our nourishment from food and not from HKBH R”L. I felt it was not good for a Ben Torah to be exposed to such Kefirah.
Thanks, David. Now please inform me which parts of your comment were sincere, and which were ironic. Did they in fact sell kosher food at he rally? Do u in fact feel that selling such food implies that we do not get nourishment from God (I guess your "RL" indicates irony). Is it "not good" (ironic?) for a "Ben Torah" (ironic?) to be exposed to such kefira (ironic?)?
I suggest u make your points using plain speech, not enrobed in layers of irony.
Excellent response. Moreover, why then according to R. Feldman is it ok for his UTJ representatives in the Knesset to respectfully stand (though ח"ו not sing) for Hatikva and have excellent relationships with every President of the State of Israel? Does R. Feldman not have any hakarat hatov for all of the Talmud Torah and Yeshivot funded by what he calls Secular Zionism?!
It's not a good point at all. Voting in Israeli elections is seen as legitimate since the state has coercive authority in either case and the question is just who gets to do the coercing. Just like we vote in any other country's elections even if we reject many aspects of the culture. At any rate, it certainly isn't some new invention by R Feldman that there's a difference between voting and participating in public events.
At least the Satmar Rebbe is honest about the draft for Charedim in Israel
In response to the upcoming visit to the US by prominent Chasidic rebbes to protest against the Israeli government the Satmar Rebbe said the following at a dinner last Saturday night.
There is a very big question. How can they make a demonstration [against the Israeli government] in front of the non-Jews when they themselves are part of the government and taking money from the government? Why should the non-Jew understand? The Charedi is benefiting from government budgets, is part of the government and has MKs in the government, why should he be any different then a chiloni? This is exactly what the government is asking from the Charedim, to share the burden. The non-Jew can understand that those God fearing Jews who don't participate and have nothing to do with the government and get no government money have a right to not be drafted as well and therefore a demonstration is worthwhile.
Now, you can disagree with his point regarding those who don't take government money, but his point regarding those who do take money is very hard to refute. If you participate in the government and take money then you also need to contribute, the government is not simply a cash machine.
"Now, you can disagree with his point regarding those who don't take government money, but his point regarding those who do take money is very hard to refute. If you participate in the government and take money then you also need to contribute, the government is not simply a cash machine."
If vote in an election, and your elected representatives manage to pass laws, you get the benefits of those laws. That's how democracy generally works. And unless you believe in repealing the 16th amendment in the US and implementing a flat tax, some people are going to give more than they get. You're welcome to make an argument for why charedim in Israel are somehow uniquely parasitic, but you haven't done so here.
As an aside, I'll just note that it's deeply ironic that you make this argument in the comments section of a blog post where the author excoriates people thousands of miles away for not going to march on his behalf.
"The Eidah doesn't participate" is a gross understatement. They distribute flyers and pishkevela stating clearly that voting is heretical (and no exception for gimmel, sorry).
IMO, this stance is much more consistent then condemning the government on one hand, but lobbying to maximize benefits on the other.
It may be consistent but that doesn't make it normal. Normal behavior is to lobby to maximize benefits while condemning the government about stuff for which you think it deserves condemnation, which is what every party in every democracy all over the world does. It's not normal to shoot yourself in the foot and refuse to participate.
But the Haredi parties (at least gimmel) don't just oppose a policy or a set of policies. They borrow freely from Satmar ideology in claiming that the state of Israel is irredeemable at it's core, but on the other hand lobby to maximize financial benefits. It is akin to one selling his soul to the devil (per the Haredi principles).
Out of curiosity - why are you posting under an alias?
No they don't. Where did you see them say or imply that the state is irredeemable at its core? It is probably just your own misunderstanding. Maybe they said that about secularism or Modern Orthodoxy but they do not hold of Satmar opinions by any means.
Hagee has a lot of ideas that most of us would call bizarre. Most are pretty irrelevant to us, but not his anti-Catholic ideas. There are many multiples more Catholics in the world than there are Protestant Christian Zionists.
"Voting in Israeli elections is seen as legitimate". There is a split among the Charedim on this issue. The Eidah doesn't participate. The participation started back when the the much of the non-Eidah Charedi leadership was much more sympathetic to Zionism.
oh thats not true. it was a debate back then too and no less than the anti-zionist brisker rav gave his haskama on it. and this was not in order to gain government funding bc he did not allow taking government funding from zionists rather he held that ppl living in the country can have reprensentation and that does not amount to participating in zionism.
I'm not claiming that anti-zionists all say not to vote. In fact, I believe that some anti-zionists vote precisely because the Knesset is no different from the Polish parliament and by refusing to vote, you give it greater legitimacy. My point was that 1) Some do see voting as support for the state and refuse. 2) At the time, many Charedim who supported participation were positive on the establishment of the state, not just tolerant.
Nov 21, 2023·edited Nov 21, 2023Liked by Natan Slifkin
Charedim love to say "secular Zionism." Of course, it's a lie: They don't approve of any Zionism, even the most religious forms. Use of "secular" is a sneaky way of avoiding that fact.
I think a lot of this stems from the fact that many in the charedi world- and we've seen this in these comments a lot- have a hard time grasping that they are not the entirety of the Jewish people. The vast majority of Jews have no problem with Zionism, or its flag and anthem.
I turned on the livestream and saw Van Jones and said, "Oh, the Communist." I don't like Van Jones, never did. I find Chuck Schumer loathsome. (He spoke at one of my graduations, as it happens.) I am very disappointed in Deborah Lipstadt and what she's become. But you know what? I know why every one of them was there, I appreciate that they were there (and the same for those who weren't on the stage), and appreciate every word they said, even those I might not have agreed with. Because there are millions of Jews in the world and only one of them (me) has my exact views.
Well, they may grasp it on some level, but not all. Or at least they feel the others don't count.
The ability of people not to grasp real numbers is well-known. Polls are taken in which Satmars assume that the United States is 1/3rd Jewish. Recent polls of non-Jews reveal that many think there are a billion Jews in the world. If you live in Lakewood, sure, you may be aware on some level that there are other kinds of Jews, but it may not really sink in.
Anecdotally, I have a friend who did teach for America in inner city Baltimore, and his students thought that America was about 40% black, as opposed to the 12% that it actually is.
Rabbi Norman Lamm Z”L once said at a lecture at YU that the Belzer Rebbe had said that there are only around 1,000,000 Jews in the world (this is probably sometime around 40-50 years ago). Rabbi Lamm then said he had an opportunity to ask the Belzer Rebbe “bihn ich oych nisht a yid” (am I also not a Jew?). He said the Belzer Rebbe responded to “Ihr fregt mir tzee harbeh a frahgeh” (you are asking me too difficult a question).
Chareidim's antipathy towards Zionism stems from Zionism's tie to secularism. Even religious Zionism has this problem, but chareidim are much more friendly with the ones that emphasize religion and distance themselves from secularism.
The reason might be emunat chachamim. The fact remains that the vast majority of rabbis opposed zionism and the idea of a jewish state before messiah (with few exceptions like my bosnian countryman rabbi yosef alkalai, nachmanides and others).
The reason behind galut was traditionally given as this: jews sinned and have been punished and humiliated by Hashem to live in galut until they wash the sins away and become worthy of eretz yisrael again. If you are kabbalistically inclined, you may add that jews must live scattered throughout the world, so that they liberate all the nitzotzot (from the primordial broken vessels) that have been scattered throughout all continents.
If jews could just have said: "you know what, screw galut! Lets make a state on our own! With or without messiah! With or without a majoirty observant jewish population (which is given as a condition in devarim chapter 30 for the jews to return again after the exile)!"- then galut looses any logic and the jews suffered pointlessly.
Not to mention, we are suggesting that the vast majority of gedolim around the world just misunderstood this crucial issue for over 2000 years. "Why didn't all or most jews return to eretz yisrael when Caliph Umar allowed them to do that! Or Salahuddin? Or Sultan Bayezid II?! Or the Sassaninans?! For example, what were these gaonim in babylon doing in their academies?!"
The key issue I had was his assertion that "the program had two elements which pikuach nefesh does not override". According to what I was taught, there are only three things that Pikuach Nefesh does not override - and I did not see any of the three in the rally program. Your points about how the rally was not intended to promote secular Zionism, but rather Zionism, is also right on point. His trotting out the long-disproven allegation about Hatikva (the original wording of which did not even include the words he finds objectionable) as false proof would be almost funny, but for the influence he and the Moetzes have on a large swath of Judaism.
Overall, I thought this was pretty pathetic - but I will at least give him credit for presenting his reasoning rather than hiding behind the "We're Daas Torah, so don't you dare even think of asking why" shield of the Fakewood leadership.
No, that the term "Chofshi" was included by the original author, Naftali Hertz Imber, to imply free from G-d. Given that the original wording was "lashuv el eretz avoteinu", not "lihiyot am chofshi b'artzeinu", the allegation is demonstrably false.
Rabbi Feldman never made that allegation in this letter. If you disagree with his actual allegation, explain your reasoning, rather than putting words in his mouth.
You are correct that he did not state that explicitly here - but that is the commonly-cited reason for the Chareidi objection to Hatikva. He did obliquely reference it, though, in his paragraph where he states that "It became clear from the program that the rally was going to be a celebration of secular Zionism. Secular Zionism is a rejection of the Jewish faith. It supplants God and Torah as the basis of the Jewish people, for which it substitutes a common land and language. There can be no greater evidence of this than the anthem Hatikva which states that the hope of Jews for two millenia has been “to be a free nation in our land”—not a nation of God and Torah. This anthem was scheduled to begin the program."
I'd say that that's a pretty clear reference to the Chareidi view on what "chofshi" refers to, no?
Not all. He said that that it means "the hope of Jews for two millenia has been “to be a free nation in our land”—not a nation of God and Torah. This anthem was scheduled to begin the program."
And you said "His trotting out the long-disproven allegation about Hatikva ", which is simply false.
Why must you make up something to criticize him? I know that Slifkin likes inventing things with which to slander his enemies, but must his supporters do so as well?
I will reply once more only - I have kept things civil, but will not stand for your accusations of lying.
Earlier in the paragraph, he cites the rejection of G-d as a goal of secular Zionism. He then says that there can be no greater evidence of this than the verses of Hatikva, specifically noting the line in question as proof of his (incorrect and misleading) allegation. While he did not explicitly cite the exact words I used, his mention of those two points is a pretty clear reference to it.
Now please go call someone else a liar - I'm done with you.
Interesting, but that seems to be a bit of a stretch, to be honest. None of the participants (at least the Jewish ones) were being asked to identify with Hagee's comments, so i don't see how that would be the issue. As to identifying with Zionism - R' Feldman specifically noted the issue as being "secular Zionism", which, as noted in RDNS's original comment, is a red herring - Zionism was something that was definitely a point, but not the secular variety thereof.
As such, it doesn't seem to me that that this was the reason.
Many very religious people's understanding of the ספירות ,
as part of G-d's essence, raises questions of G-d viewed as with Chistianity,שיתוף. Consisting of parts despite denials to the contrary.!,Noone dealing with that.
This explanation is laughable. Rav Feldman only discovered on the morning of the rally that this would be the type of event that include the singing of Hatikvah and speeches from prominent officials of the State of Israel?! That’s not remotely believable.
Everybody (or at least everybody with some knowledge of Ner Yisroel) knows that the real reason he began to oppose it the morning of is because the night before, the Lakewood roshei yeshiva issued their own letter condemning it. Rav Feldman has long been embarrassed by the general perception in the yeshiva world that Ner is more liberal/worldly than BMG and similar institutions. So once Lakewood was opposed, he rushed to get on the bandwagon...
That would fit perfectly with what happened with him and my books. He thought that the ban on my books was a very very bad idea, but when he started getting accused of going against the Gedolim, he rushed to get on the banwagon.
The term "banwagon" signifies the compulsive practice of banning individuals on online forums or social media platforms, especially those who express dissenting opinions or challenge prevailing views within a group. This behavior often results in the creation of virtual echo chambers, limiting diversity of thought and discouraging open dialogue.
Sarah swiftly hopped on the banwagon, systematically removing anyone who dared to question the group's consensus, effectively transforming the online space into an exclusive echo chamber.
Mere Yisroel in the 1960's had an arrangement with Loyola University to give Ner Yisroel Beit Medrash students credit for Talmudic studies. With this the student attend Loyola University, a Catholiic University, and receive an MA in education without getting a BA.
I don't that applies here, though. There is no R Elyashiv involved here. Just multiple American rabbis all on the same plane I think. It could be that there is a pecking order here that I'm not getting, but I don't think so.
Thanks to the “threading” of the comments. As in all internet discussion groups/comment sections/etc, replies to a specific comment don’t just appear at random, they appear in a “thread”.
Typically, replies to a particular comment will appear directly underneath it (often indented, as on this site). A “reply” to a “reply” will be indented twice, etc.
So replies underneath a comment at the same level of indentation reflect replies to the same comment. This is called “threading” (and that is what makes it possible to follow a discussion on the internet).
Nonetheless, I see many comments and responses whose position gets shifted, making it hard to tell the sequence. To make 1-self clear, I believe it is a good idea to specify whom u r addressing. I like that Meta, formerly known as Facebook, does that automatically when u "reply" to a comment.
As far as I know R Feldman is actually one of the biggest kanoyim against zionism on the moetzes. This doesn't ring true. It may have been for pragmatic reasons, but I doubt that appearing more left wing than lakewood was one of them.
When R Feldman writes, "Even though joining with secular groups is forbidden even for a mitzvah"...in what way is this forbidden? What is his source for this? And second question: Is he insecure of the value, appeal and draw of Torah that exposure to secular groups would sway his religious faithful?
Difficult to recognise anything that is based on Torah. Some sources would help explain the positions in the letter.
So what are Agudah doing to help Acheinu? Nothing. We're just carrying on as normal with our davening and learning.
My daughter has experienced untold Chessed in her community in Givat Shmuel, with so many husbands, fathers and sons away from home for the last few weeks.
So thanks to the ex-sem girl who came to help with the little ones when the Ganim were closed.
Thanks to the people who cooked meals.
And thanks to the teenage boys from Ezra Youth Movement who came round to take down the Succah, as my son-in-law is called up.
"Agudath Israel met last week with Congressman Ted Lieu (CA-36) to discuss the war in Israel.
The congressman spoke out very strongly against calls for a ceasefire, and strongly condemned domestic antisemitism and the killing of Paul Kessler, a Jewish man, that took place at a pro-Palestinian rally in LA. The meeting also led to tangible results – during the meeting, one of the participants suggested that Congress view the 40 minute Israeli video featuring the brutality of Hamas’ October 7th attacks. Rep. Lieu immediately authored a letter to Secretary Blinken asking him to arrange a screening for members of Congress and the media. That screening took place this morning with over 100 members of Congress in attendance."
It's truly amazing to watch you contort yourself so as preserve your nutty theories.
"That's the lay leadership."
Meaning what? That all those initiatives are being done against the wishes of the moetzes? Then why didn't they release a letter against them like they did with the rally?
"The whole point is that there is a disconnect between the lay leadership and the rabbinic leadership."
You really shouldn't believe random online letters from @AnonymousAgudahGuy about supposed brewing crises in the charedi world. Not everything on the internet is reliable.
"Meanwhile, you seem quite obsessed with discrediting me."
Could be. Then again, I haven't been running a blog for a decade and a half composing endless missives about what an existential threat you are,. By any measure, you're a whole lot more obsessed with charedi society than I am with you.
"I don't. I have inside info, alongside communications from many, many people."
I have even more inside info than you do, and they tell me the anonymous writer retracted and is undergoing a teshuva which requires 40 days of fasting and rolling in the snow. They tell me that he is just waiting for it to snow.
right. you have "many, many" who tell you that there is mass outrage on the haredi street about 4 ppl on the moetzes's letter. i take it that these are the same "many, many" sources y0u mentioned a while back who told you that there is mass fraud going on in haredi businesses
Even though Ezra youth movement looks very “religious Zionist” it had its origins in Agudas Yisrael in Frankfurt. After it broke with with Agudas Yisrael shortly afterwards, it affiliated with Poalei Agudas Yisrael for nearly 60 years until the 1980s.
I live in Israel, where there are a *lot* of German-descended Jews. Far more than the Hirschians of the UK, Switzerland, and NY combined. And unlike those, they haven't become charedim with a few quaint customs. Many of the great Religious Zionist schools and institutions were founded by yekkes, including the shul I daven in and the school our son attends.
There are still anti-Zionist German Agudists in Israel. Also not all of them dropped the anti-Zionism in 1933. It took many until Kristallnacht to do so. Don’t forget that many German Agudists (as well as austritt orthodox in places where there was an Austritt community) actually preferred the fascist regime as a bulwark against communism. They assumed Hitler and the Nazis would moderate once in power (as did many of the non-nazi German conservatives who brought the nazis into the government).
Of course. Who hired the “Khappers” to make sure only the poor and indigent children, and none of their own or the rabbinical families and yeshiva students children, were forced to convert and serve in the Tsar’s army for 25 years?
RA Feldman was wrong, 'Nuff said. All this post shows, however, is how out of touch NS is, all claims to "secret back channels" to the yeshivah world notwithstanding. He apparently believes RAF's opinion represents either the Moetzes or the American yeshiva world. That's funny. RAF doesn't even represent Ner Israel - the president of the Yeshivah, RB Neuberger, was at the rally himself, as were many, many talmidim from nearby Baltimore. The Yeshivah went en masse to the Washington rallies in 2002 and 1967. RAF is not from the founding Ruderman family or ruling Neuberger family, and doesn't represent the yeshiva's legacy and tradition. No disresepct intended, he is entitled to his pov, but he doesn't represent either the Moetzes or american yeshivah world. Their view is no more represented by him than the Mizrachi world is colored by an MK speculating about nuking the Gaza strip.
He is on the Moeztes and other Moetzes Rabbis said similarly; he definitely represents their thinking. Yes of course he is more Charedi than Ner which has always been Charedi/Yeshivish light. However he is considered such a brilliant TC that they brought in an outsider as a rosh yeshivah instead of trying to keep it in the family. So he is an excellent rep for the Agudah Moetzes and is Ner that strays from the Charedi line.
Not to personalize this, but you constantly post very confidently things that aren't true about Charedim. What part of orthodoxy do you identify with?
What truly fascinates me, is that many readers, particularly those who take the time to post comments, seem to profoundly dislike the author... Seems quite masochistic to me, given no one is forced to read this blog....
Right, so I guess you would be fine if hang billboards all over the country pointing out what a fool you are? After all, I'm not forcing you to read it!
Believe it or not, people don't like having blogs dedicated to making fun of them.
I appreciate Rabbi Feldman's response for its clarity and directness. While it might appear divisive to those outside the chareidi community, it's important to recognize that Rabbi Feldman is maintaining a longstanding and respected religious stance that has been consistently upheld since 1947.
In practical terms, the mutual respect on the ground is palpable. My sister recently shared an inspiring initiative in her neighborhood where religious and non-religious women gather weekly for a shared activity. This isn't about influencing beliefs but rather about building bridges and understanding each other as individuals.
Regarding the topic of military service, my sister mentioned that it hasn't come up in their discussions. Nonetheless, there's a deep sense of gratitude for those who serve. This sentiment hits close to home for us, as we recently lost our cousin, Hayim Katsman. This loss has only deepened our appreciation for the sacrifices made by those in service.
"I hope have clarified the matter and will be happy to address any further questions." Maybe just raise your concerns directly instead of second guessing his intentions
"So then why can’t the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah organize their own rally?! " My point is why not just raise your concerns directly instead of attacking him behind his back. You have created here a platform for some real rechilus.
"With regard to his first reason, that John Hagee is part of a movement that supports Jews only because they want to see them converted, I consulted an expert on Hagee. He told me that this is “patently false, and can only come from people who live in their own bubbles and make assumptions about everything outside, rather than bothering to learn the truth.” ... (Conversely, the number of people who get turned off from Judaism by the various selfish antics of the charedi community is considerable.)"
I consulted an expert on Slifkin and he told me that only bitter ex-charedim think that.
Shaul and "Expert" it seems you have nothing substantive to comment. You are demonstrating that opposition to Rabbi Slifkin is not based on a well thought-out position.
I was responding to an absurd claim in kind.
"You are demonstrating that opposition to Rabbi Slifkin is not based on a well thought-out position."
This is not a well though-out argument.
To the contrary, there are many substantive comments here, while the actual post is more of Slifkin's usual hot garbage. Of course, never mind the fact that he silences all substantive criticism by banning the critics.
I don't see any banned commenters on this post, but you seem a good candidate. Rabbi Slifkin does not silence criticism, on the contrary witness all the debate on this blog, respectful and otherwise. He should and occasionally does ban people for engaging in hate speech and ad hominem attacks.
Well of course you don't see banned commenters, because they're...banned. The only person who engages in hate speech is Slifkin, who does so obsessively
https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/why-do-people-hate-charedim
HEY! What am I, chopped liver?
I agree with this. All of this comes from Slifkin's own personal trauma, he is just lashing out like a 2-year old having a tantrum. none of it is a reflection of a well-thought-out position.
How wrong u r! Slifkin is very thoughtful and well-balanced. He is wrongfully attacked by those who cannot defend their own position.
Oh, they sure can defend their position. They just get banned if they do so. By Natan "I ban all my opposition" Slikfin.
Do you realize how ridiculous you appear? Everyone here can see that it's farcical to claim that "I ban all my opposition."
I might be late for this party, but slifkins expert is right.
Hagee really does not want to convert jews: at all.
He believes in the so called "two covenant theology" (in opposition to the replacement theology), which sttes that Jesus' death is for the goyim, but torah still for the jews.
However, we should note that hagee is an outsider with this opinion: even among the most fanatical pro zionist evangelicals
Correct. Hagee clearly holds a minority view.
This is incorrect. I can state that there were at least several members at large of an Agudah shul, including a big gvir that the Agudah is "machshiv", that were very unimpressed. Will they stop identifying with Agudah? No. However, the gvir was very impressed with how Rabbi Hauer handled everything with nobility, including Rabbi Hauer's message about achdus following the event.
Ach, the Gvir is Daas Balabas. Daas Torah is with gedolim, but of course if you are willing to donate will will tolerate your shtusim.
No disagreement. My point was that it was claimed that only people bitter would look negatively on the decision. I said that members in good standing looked negatively on the decision.
I am not saying these members in good standing have the right to their own opinions. That is a different discussion. I was simply disagreeing with the assertion that nobody would look negatively on the decision.
Yeah I agree with you.
And when Daas Torah is objectively wrong?
*we
Lots of sociological speculation in the rabbi's post, but no data. Only an appeal to an unnamed 'expert' on the pastor with whom the rabbi consulted. The rabbi claims to be anti charedi but reminds us of nothing more than a bitter, cold Litvak from back in the day. Lots of divineness, no love to be found here, certainly not ahavat chinom such as demonstrated by the chayalim and the populace. The Rosh Yeshiva didn't participate in the rally. Rabbi Slifkin, a public figure with a voice, refuses to participate in the achdus while our nation and people are fighting for our lives. He lost the plot. When the ferocious unabated anger? Is this righteous indignation - or something personal? It's not too late to repent.
"Is this righteous indignation - or something personal?"
It's definitely self-righteous indignation, and is very personal. I would know, I am an expert on Slifkin. I also have many inside sources that tell me the same thing. Not that we need inside sources or experts, it's extremely apparent.
Um, there's someone "refusing to participate in the achdus" here, and it ain't R' Slifkin.
Talk about Orwellian. It's anti-achdus to point out how some people are anti-achdus.
wait, then you too are anti achdus. This is an infinite regression.
Reading comprehension!
my bad.
You don't need an expert. You can just look at the history of Hagee's statements themselves. The Rosh Yeshiva got it wrong; Rabbi Slifkin got it right.
As is slicky Slifkins way, he embellishes things to suit his purposes.
Examples:
R' Feldman wrote:
"I originally supported the rally because I felt it was necessary to influence Congress to continue sending arms to Israel and to stop Congress from forcing a cease-fire."
But Slifkin says:
"He makes it clear that he acknowledges that rallies can have a powerful impact; it was only this particular type of rally that was problematic. Had the rally been of a different nature, it would have been an invaluable way to influence Congress to continue sending arms to Israel and not to force a cease-fire..."
R' Feldman did not say he thought the rally is "invaluable". He wrote he thought it would influence Congress. Slifkin blows up R' Feldman's own view of the extent of the effectiveness of the rally. "Invaluable" means something much more than intended.
Another example:
R' Feldman wrote: "A Christian pastor was set to address the crowd. He is the head of an evangelic Christian denomination which believes that Jews need to be supported so that they eventually convert to Christianity."
But Slifkin wrote:
"With regard to his first reason, that John Hagee is part of a movement that supports Jews only because they want to see them converted"
Notice that word "only". It changes things! R' Feldman didn't take it that far. He gave a reason for their Israeli support; he did not say they cannot have any other considerations.
Another example:
R' Feldman wrote:
"...and it would have (this, from an advertisement) a massive chant by the attendees of “Never Again!”— implying that the physical might of the army—not Hashem—will protect the Jewish people."
Slicky wrote:
"And while Rav Feldman claims that the phrase “Never Again!” is secular, it is simply a vow to make every effort to prevent such things from happening; and it was popularized by none other than Rabbi Meir Kahane who, whatever else his failings, certainly was not secular."
Once again we see reading comprehension issues. R' Feldman didn't say it was "secular". Slifkin did. R' Feldman discussed the implication. Remember that word: Implication. R' Kahane being frum is irrelevant. R' Feldman maintains that there is a mistake in the message, even for religious people.
These examples and many more are TYPICAL of Slifkin here and everywhere. It is a reason also , I think, why his books are not truly scholarly. What he writes is persuasive...he pushes his ideas without enough care for facts.
Be warned!
excellent points. I wonder if slifkin can counter this in an intelligible way (without manipulating things)
Don't hold your breath.
"He is the head of an evangelic Christian denomination which believes that Jews need to be supported so that they eventually convert to Christianity."
And that is an objectively false statement.
u guys are a bunch of clueless bitter nasty boomers speculating about stuff you have no clue about. I live here and am part of hardi culture and most of you guys are way off including nosson slifkin
Well, if you say so.
"Boomers"?
Ok, boomer. Google it.
I know what it means. You're just using it wrong.
hardi har
Enlighten us
To all those claiming that my comments are just the rantings of a charedi-hater - here is a recording of R. Beryl Whitman, a maggid shiur in the Mir, about Rav Feldman's letter:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vuRD-kHFwR_GwDvyLnpIn18wOsJfKoMl/view?pli=1
Never heard of him, but he is SO SPOT ON!!! I personally felt so much the same inside, but had no idea how to articulate it. This is excellent.
Furthermore I found out they would be selling kosher food at the rally. This implies that we get our nourishment from food and not from HKBH R”L. I felt it was not good for a Ben Torah to be exposed to such Kefirah.
😂
wow what a brilliant line. i guess to someone spent his life denying the very basic premise of hashgacha it may actually sound witty
Haredi (Banned): when u comment, sincerely or ironically, on the "brilliance" of a "line," please tell us to whose and to which line u refer.
Presumably he was referring to the comment to which he replied.
He was referring to my comment.
Thanks, David. Now please inform me which parts of your comment were sincere, and which were ironic. Did they in fact sell kosher food at he rally? Do u in fact feel that selling such food implies that we do not get nourishment from God (I guess your "RL" indicates irony). Is it "not good" (ironic?) for a "Ben Torah" (ironic?) to be exposed to such kefira (ironic?)?
I suggest u make your points using plain speech, not enrobed in layers of irony.
It was a joke with a point.
Ya, well the point was hidden under many layers. The joke too.
Disagree.
Excellent response. Moreover, why then according to R. Feldman is it ok for his UTJ representatives in the Knesset to respectfully stand (though ח"ו not sing) for Hatikva and have excellent relationships with every President of the State of Israel? Does R. Feldman not have any hakarat hatov for all of the Talmud Torah and Yeshivot funded by what he calls Secular Zionism?!
Good points!
(And the answer is, of course, that they compromise on this principle in order to obtain power/influence/money for their constituents.)
It's not a good point at all. Voting in Israeli elections is seen as legitimate since the state has coercive authority in either case and the question is just who gets to do the coercing. Just like we vote in any other country's elections even if we reject many aspects of the culture. At any rate, it certainly isn't some new invention by R Feldman that there's a difference between voting and participating in public events.
copying from https://jewishworker.blogspot.com/2013/12/at-least-satmar-rebbe-is-honest-about.html . Hat tip to @martybluke
At least the Satmar Rebbe is honest about the draft for Charedim in Israel
In response to the upcoming visit to the US by prominent Chasidic rebbes to protest against the Israeli government the Satmar Rebbe said the following at a dinner last Saturday night.
There is a very big question. How can they make a demonstration [against the Israeli government] in front of the non-Jews when they themselves are part of the government and taking money from the government? Why should the non-Jew understand? The Charedi is benefiting from government budgets, is part of the government and has MKs in the government, why should he be any different then a chiloni? This is exactly what the government is asking from the Charedim, to share the burden. The non-Jew can understand that those God fearing Jews who don't participate and have nothing to do with the government and get no government money have a right to not be drafted as well and therefore a demonstration is worthwhile.
Now, you can disagree with his point regarding those who don't take government money, but his point regarding those who do take money is very hard to refute. If you participate in the government and take money then you also need to contribute, the government is not simply a cash machine.
"Now, you can disagree with his point regarding those who don't take government money, but his point regarding those who do take money is very hard to refute. If you participate in the government and take money then you also need to contribute, the government is not simply a cash machine."
If vote in an election, and your elected representatives manage to pass laws, you get the benefits of those laws. That's how democracy generally works. And unless you believe in repealing the 16th amendment in the US and implementing a flat tax, some people are going to give more than they get. You're welcome to make an argument for why charedim in Israel are somehow uniquely parasitic, but you haven't done so here.
As an aside, I'll just note that it's deeply ironic that you make this argument in the comments section of a blog post where the author excoriates people thousands of miles away for not going to march on his behalf.
"The Eidah doesn't participate" is a gross understatement. They distribute flyers and pishkevela stating clearly that voting is heretical (and no exception for gimmel, sorry).
IMO, this stance is much more consistent then condemning the government on one hand, but lobbying to maximize benefits on the other.
The Satmar Rebbe made this point in 2013. https://jewishworker.blogspot.com/2013/12/at-least-satmar-rebbe-is-honest-about.html
thanks - that's the ticket
I'll try to keep this for future reference.
It may be consistent but that doesn't make it normal. Normal behavior is to lobby to maximize benefits while condemning the government about stuff for which you think it deserves condemnation, which is what every party in every democracy all over the world does. It's not normal to shoot yourself in the foot and refuse to participate.
But the Haredi parties (at least gimmel) don't just oppose a policy or a set of policies. They borrow freely from Satmar ideology in claiming that the state of Israel is irredeemable at it's core, but on the other hand lobby to maximize financial benefits. It is akin to one selling his soul to the devil (per the Haredi principles).
Out of curiosity - why are you posting under an alias?
No they don't. Where did you see them say or imply that the state is irredeemable at its core? It is probably just your own misunderstanding. Maybe they said that about secularism or Modern Orthodoxy but they do not hold of Satmar opinions by any means.
Hagee has a lot of ideas that most of us would call bizarre. Most are pretty irrelevant to us, but not his anti-Catholic ideas. There are many multiples more Catholics in the world than there are Protestant Christian Zionists.
And it's immoral - rank bigotry
Yes, but we Jews always have to be the center of the universe. Everything is all about us.
"Voting in Israeli elections is seen as legitimate". There is a split among the Charedim on this issue. The Eidah doesn't participate. The participation started back when the the much of the non-Eidah Charedi leadership was much more sympathetic to Zionism.
oh thats not true. it was a debate back then too and no less than the anti-zionist brisker rav gave his haskama on it. and this was not in order to gain government funding bc he did not allow taking government funding from zionists rather he held that ppl living in the country can have reprensentation and that does not amount to participating in zionism.
I'm not claiming that anti-zionists all say not to vote. In fact, I believe that some anti-zionists vote precisely because the Knesset is no different from the Polish parliament and by refusing to vote, you give it greater legitimacy. My point was that 1) Some do see voting as support for the state and refuse. 2) At the time, many Charedim who supported participation were positive on the establishment of the state, not just tolerant.
David, can you let us know which Charedi Gedolim during the State's establishment were supportive of it and not just tolerant?
Charedi MKs participate in public events all the time. Not to mention voting on legislation and passing regulations.
Also in Europe pre WW2 the Agudah had their party in the goyishe govt..
Maybe non-Jews are more kosher than Jews who are nisht fun unzerer.
"Not to mention voting on legislation and passing regulations."
Right. That's the point.
And if you're, say, a charedi minister of health, you go to hospital ribbon cuttings and the like.
You mean to imply that he is corrupt?
Charedim love to say "secular Zionism." Of course, it's a lie: They don't approve of any Zionism, even the most religious forms. Use of "secular" is a sneaky way of avoiding that fact.
I think a lot of this stems from the fact that many in the charedi world- and we've seen this in these comments a lot- have a hard time grasping that they are not the entirety of the Jewish people. The vast majority of Jews have no problem with Zionism, or its flag and anthem.
I turned on the livestream and saw Van Jones and said, "Oh, the Communist." I don't like Van Jones, never did. I find Chuck Schumer loathsome. (He spoke at one of my graduations, as it happens.) I am very disappointed in Deborah Lipstadt and what she's become. But you know what? I know why every one of them was there, I appreciate that they were there (and the same for those who weren't on the stage), and appreciate every word they said, even those I might not have agreed with. Because there are millions of Jews in the world and only one of them (me) has my exact views.
Well said (though I'm not sure that I agree with the first sentence of your second paragraph)
Well, they may grasp it on some level, but not all. Or at least they feel the others don't count.
The ability of people not to grasp real numbers is well-known. Polls are taken in which Satmars assume that the United States is 1/3rd Jewish. Recent polls of non-Jews reveal that many think there are a billion Jews in the world. If you live in Lakewood, sure, you may be aware on some level that there are other kinds of Jews, but it may not really sink in.
Anecdotally, I have a friend who did teach for America in inner city Baltimore, and his students thought that America was about 40% black, as opposed to the 12% that it actually is.
Same thing, yes.
Rabbi Norman Lamm Z”L once said at a lecture at YU that the Belzer Rebbe had said that there are only around 1,000,000 Jews in the world (this is probably sometime around 40-50 years ago). Rabbi Lamm then said he had an opportunity to ask the Belzer Rebbe “bihn ich oych nisht a yid” (am I also not a Jew?). He said the Belzer Rebbe responded to “Ihr fregt mir tzee harbeh a frahgeh” (you are asking me too difficult a question).
Herman Wouk wrote something similar in 1959: That to the Neurei Karta, there are only a few thousand Jews in the world.
That's bizarre and loathsome if true.
I heard it live from the source in real time. In Rubin Shul on Main Campus
I loved R' Lamm's talks.
Chareidim's antipathy towards Zionism stems from Zionism's tie to secularism. Even religious Zionism has this problem, but chareidim are much more friendly with the ones that emphasize religion and distance themselves from secularism.
Are they now.
Yep, still are.
The reason might be emunat chachamim. The fact remains that the vast majority of rabbis opposed zionism and the idea of a jewish state before messiah (with few exceptions like my bosnian countryman rabbi yosef alkalai, nachmanides and others).
The reason behind galut was traditionally given as this: jews sinned and have been punished and humiliated by Hashem to live in galut until they wash the sins away and become worthy of eretz yisrael again. If you are kabbalistically inclined, you may add that jews must live scattered throughout the world, so that they liberate all the nitzotzot (from the primordial broken vessels) that have been scattered throughout all continents.
If jews could just have said: "you know what, screw galut! Lets make a state on our own! With or without messiah! With or without a majoirty observant jewish population (which is given as a condition in devarim chapter 30 for the jews to return again after the exile)!"- then galut looses any logic and the jews suffered pointlessly.
Not to mention, we are suggesting that the vast majority of gedolim around the world just misunderstood this crucial issue for over 2000 years. "Why didn't all or most jews return to eretz yisrael when Caliph Umar allowed them to do that! Or Salahuddin? Or Sultan Bayezid II?! Or the Sassaninans?! For example, what were these gaonim in babylon doing in their academies?!"
Uh, I dunno. Why did Jews worship a golden calf when Moshe was *right there*?
Thanks for the analysis.
The key issue I had was his assertion that "the program had two elements which pikuach nefesh does not override". According to what I was taught, there are only three things that Pikuach Nefesh does not override - and I did not see any of the three in the rally program. Your points about how the rally was not intended to promote secular Zionism, but rather Zionism, is also right on point. His trotting out the long-disproven allegation about Hatikva (the original wording of which did not even include the words he finds objectionable) as false proof would be almost funny, but for the influence he and the Moetzes have on a large swath of Judaism.
Overall, I thought this was pretty pathetic - but I will at least give him credit for presenting his reasoning rather than hiding behind the "We're Daas Torah, so don't you dare even think of asking why" shield of the Fakewood leadership.
What was disproven about Hatikva? It actually secretly includes the theme of a nation of God and Torah?
No, that the term "Chofshi" was included by the original author, Naftali Hertz Imber, to imply free from G-d. Given that the original wording was "lashuv el eretz avoteinu", not "lihiyot am chofshi b'artzeinu", the allegation is demonstrably false.
Rabbi Feldman never made that allegation in this letter. If you disagree with his actual allegation, explain your reasoning, rather than putting words in his mouth.
You are correct that he did not state that explicitly here - but that is the commonly-cited reason for the Chareidi objection to Hatikva. He did obliquely reference it, though, in his paragraph where he states that "It became clear from the program that the rally was going to be a celebration of secular Zionism. Secular Zionism is a rejection of the Jewish faith. It supplants God and Torah as the basis of the Jewish people, for which it substitutes a common land and language. There can be no greater evidence of this than the anthem Hatikva which states that the hope of Jews for two millenia has been “to be a free nation in our land”—not a nation of God and Torah. This anthem was scheduled to begin the program."
I'd say that that's a pretty clear reference to the Chareidi view on what "chofshi" refers to, no?
In the 1950's there were elementary assemblies in the Bait Hamedrash singing HaTikvah.
R.M.Feinstein' BM.s
Not all. He said that that it means "the hope of Jews for two millenia has been “to be a free nation in our land”—not a nation of God and Torah. This anthem was scheduled to begin the program."
And you said "His trotting out the long-disproven allegation about Hatikva ", which is simply false.
Why must you make up something to criticize him? I know that Slifkin likes inventing things with which to slander his enemies, but must his supporters do so as well?
I will reply once more only - I have kept things civil, but will not stand for your accusations of lying.
Earlier in the paragraph, he cites the rejection of G-d as a goal of secular Zionism. He then says that there can be no greater evidence of this than the verses of Hatikva, specifically noting the line in question as proof of his (incorrect and misleading) allegation. While he did not explicitly cite the exact words I used, his mention of those two points is a pretty clear reference to it.
Now please go call someone else a liar - I'm done with you.
Interesting, but that seems to be a bit of a stretch, to be honest. None of the participants (at least the Jewish ones) were being asked to identify with Hagee's comments, so i don't see how that would be the issue. As to identifying with Zionism - R' Feldman specifically noted the issue as being "secular Zionism", which, as noted in RDNS's original comment, is a red herring - Zionism was something that was definitely a point, but not the secular variety thereof.
As such, it doesn't seem to me that that this was the reason.
Many very religious people's understanding of the ספירות ,
as part of G-d's essence, raises questions of G-d viewed as with Chistianity,שיתוף. Consisting of parts despite denials to the contrary.!,Noone dealing with that.
This explanation is laughable. Rav Feldman only discovered on the morning of the rally that this would be the type of event that include the singing of Hatikvah and speeches from prominent officials of the State of Israel?! That’s not remotely believable.
Everybody (or at least everybody with some knowledge of Ner Yisroel) knows that the real reason he began to oppose it the morning of is because the night before, the Lakewood roshei yeshiva issued their own letter condemning it. Rav Feldman has long been embarrassed by the general perception in the yeshiva world that Ner is more liberal/worldly than BMG and similar institutions. So once Lakewood was opposed, he rushed to get on the bandwagon...
That would fit perfectly with what happened with him and my books. He thought that the ban on my books was a very very bad idea, but when he started getting accused of going against the Gedolim, he rushed to get on the banwagon.
Banwagon
Noun
/ban-wa-gon/
The term "banwagon" signifies the compulsive practice of banning individuals on online forums or social media platforms, especially those who express dissenting opinions or challenge prevailing views within a group. This behavior often results in the creation of virtual echo chambers, limiting diversity of thought and discouraging open dialogue.
Sarah swiftly hopped on the banwagon, systematically removing anyone who dared to question the group's consensus, effectively transforming the online space into an exclusive echo chamber.
Now do Bananawagon.
Not sure if “banwagon” was a typo or not, but either way, I like it
Mere Yisroel in the 1960's had an arrangement with Loyola University to give Ner Yisroel Beit Medrash students credit for Talmudic studies. With this the student attend Loyola University, a Catholiic University, and receive an MA in education without getting a BA.
I don't that applies here, though. There is no R Elyashiv involved here. Just multiple American rabbis all on the same plane I think. It could be that there is a pecking order here that I'm not getting, but I don't think so.
I like your “username”.
Whose username?
The person I replied to (who else?): “/\\//\\//\”
How am I supposed to know to whom u were responding if u do not address him?
Thanks to the “threading” of the comments. As in all internet discussion groups/comment sections/etc, replies to a specific comment don’t just appear at random, they appear in a “thread”.
Typically, replies to a particular comment will appear directly underneath it (often indented, as on this site). A “reply” to a “reply” will be indented twice, etc.
So replies underneath a comment at the same level of indentation reflect replies to the same comment. This is called “threading” (and that is what makes it possible to follow a discussion on the internet).
Nonetheless, I see many comments and responses whose position gets shifted, making it hard to tell the sequence. To make 1-self clear, I believe it is a good idea to specify whom u r addressing. I like that Meta, formerly known as Facebook, does that automatically when u "reply" to a comment.
You're an odd bird, my dude.
As far as I know R Feldman is actually one of the biggest kanoyim against zionism on the moetzes. This doesn't ring true. It may have been for pragmatic reasons, but I doubt that appearing more left wing than lakewood was one of them.
So you are accusing him of lying?
Yes, like Avrohom re soroh. Chareidi rabbis lie the whole time, when it suits them. As any half-baked lamdan will tell you;
a) Muttar leshanos mipnei hasholom
b) There is, in fact, no prohibition in the torah against lying (unless connected with false testimony)
מדבר שקר תרחק
That's talking about eidus. Go look it up.
Lying is like any other middoh. Under certain circumstances its permitted. Just like anger.
the gemara in Kesuvos certainly doesn't agree with you
Citation?
This is almost as bad as any anti-Semitism I've seen
Why? Yackov lied, no?
What is 'truth'? Anything that leads to greater gilui of Hashem. However you want to put it.
Or so the argument goes.
When R Feldman writes, "Even though joining with secular groups is forbidden even for a mitzvah"...in what way is this forbidden? What is his source for this? And second question: Is he insecure of the value, appeal and draw of Torah that exposure to secular groups would sway his religious faithful?
Rather pathetic and embarrassing letter.
Difficult to recognise anything that is based on Torah. Some sources would help explain the positions in the letter.
So what are Agudah doing to help Acheinu? Nothing. We're just carrying on as normal with our davening and learning.
My daughter has experienced untold Chessed in her community in Givat Shmuel, with so many husbands, fathers and sons away from home for the last few weeks.
So thanks to the ex-sem girl who came to help with the little ones when the Ganim were closed.
Thanks to the people who cooked meals.
And thanks to the teenage boys from Ezra Youth Movement who came round to take down the Succah, as my son-in-law is called up.
"So what are Agudah doing to help Acheinu? Nothing. We're just carrying on as normal with our davening and learning."
https://agudah.org/agudath-israel-discusses-war-in-israel-with-congressman-ted-lieu/
"Agudath Israel met last week with Congressman Ted Lieu (CA-36) to discuss the war in Israel.
The congressman spoke out very strongly against calls for a ceasefire, and strongly condemned domestic antisemitism and the killing of Paul Kessler, a Jewish man, that took place at a pro-Palestinian rally in LA. The meeting also led to tangible results – during the meeting, one of the participants suggested that Congress view the 40 minute Israeli video featuring the brutality of Hamas’ October 7th attacks. Rep. Lieu immediately authored a letter to Secretary Blinken asking him to arrange a screening for members of Congress and the media. That screening took place this morning with over 100 members of Congress in attendance."
See also:
https://agudah.org/dear-amazon-stop-selling-hate/
https://agudah.org/action-alert-pass-u-s-aid-to-israel-now/
https://www.charidy.com/agudahrelief
That's the lay leadership. The whole point is that there is a disconnect between the lay leadership and the rabbinic leadership.
It's truly amazing to watch you contort yourself so as preserve your nutty theories.
"That's the lay leadership."
Meaning what? That all those initiatives are being done against the wishes of the moetzes? Then why didn't they release a letter against them like they did with the rally?
"The whole point is that there is a disconnect between the lay leadership and the rabbinic leadership."
You really shouldn't believe random online letters from @AnonymousAgudahGuy about supposed brewing crises in the charedi world. Not everything on the internet is reliable.
"That all those initiatives are being done against the wishes of the moetzes?"
No, not against, because it doesn't harm charedi culture.
"You really shouldn't believe random online letters"
I don't. I have inside info, alongside communications from many, many people.
Meanwhile, you seem quite obsessed with discrediting me.
"Meanwhile, you seem quite obsessed with discrediting me."
Could be. Then again, I haven't been running a blog for a decade and a half composing endless missives about what an existential threat you are,. By any measure, you're a whole lot more obsessed with charedi society than I am with you.
"I don't. I have inside info, alongside communications from many, many people."
I'm sure. Reams and reams of emails about what a scandal ridden place Lakewood and KJ are. You're so on top of things, you know about crimes which haven't even been committed yet. https://www.rationalistjudaism.com/p/the-problem-of-time/comment/18200784
Shaul - you're the best! Your memory of relevant past posts and comments is truly astounding. Keep up the good work!
I have even more inside info than you do, and they tell me the anonymous writer retracted and is undergoing a teshuva which requires 40 days of fasting and rolling in the snow. They tell me that he is just waiting for it to snow.
right. you have "many, many" who tell you that there is mass outrage on the haredi street about 4 ppl on the moetzes's letter. i take it that these are the same "many, many" sources y0u mentioned a while back who told you that there is mass fraud going on in haredi businesses
Even though Ezra youth movement looks very “religious Zionist” it had its origins in Agudas Yisrael in Frankfurt. After it broke with with Agudas Yisrael shortly afterwards, it affiliated with Poalei Agudas Yisrael for nearly 60 years until the 1980s.
German Agudists dropped the anti-Zionism around, oh, 1933. Except the ones who moved to places apart from Israel.
Washington Heights, the largest kehilla of German Jews in the world, was very anti-Zionist.
I wrote- it's right there- "Except the ones who moved to places apart from Israel."
Yeah, but you implied that most of them dropped their anti-Zionism except for a few holdouts. That was definitely not true.
I live in Israel, where there are a *lot* of German-descended Jews. Far more than the Hirschians of the UK, Switzerland, and NY combined. And unlike those, they haven't become charedim with a few quaint customs. Many of the great Religious Zionist schools and institutions were founded by yekkes, including the shul I daven in and the school our son attends.
There are still anti-Zionist German Agudists in Israel. Also not all of them dropped the anti-Zionism in 1933. It took many until Kristallnacht to do so. Don’t forget that many German Agudists (as well as austritt orthodox in places where there was an Austritt community) actually preferred the fascist regime as a bulwark against communism. They assumed Hitler and the Nazis would moderate once in power (as did many of the non-nazi German conservatives who brought the nazis into the government).
Sure, rich Jews always tolerated the anti-Semitism of the conservatives.
Of course. Who hired the “Khappers” to make sure only the poor and indigent children, and none of their own or the rabbinical families and yeshiva students children, were forced to convert and serve in the Tsar’s army for 25 years?
I was speaking in generalities.
RA Feldman was wrong, 'Nuff said. All this post shows, however, is how out of touch NS is, all claims to "secret back channels" to the yeshivah world notwithstanding. He apparently believes RAF's opinion represents either the Moetzes or the American yeshiva world. That's funny. RAF doesn't even represent Ner Israel - the president of the Yeshivah, RB Neuberger, was at the rally himself, as were many, many talmidim from nearby Baltimore. The Yeshivah went en masse to the Washington rallies in 2002 and 1967. RAF is not from the founding Ruderman family or ruling Neuberger family, and doesn't represent the yeshiva's legacy and tradition. No disresepct intended, he is entitled to his pov, but he doesn't represent either the Moetzes or american yeshivah world. Their view is no more represented by him than the Mizrachi world is colored by an MK speculating about nuking the Gaza strip.
"The Mizrachi world"?
He is on the Moeztes and other Moetzes Rabbis said similarly; he definitely represents their thinking. Yes of course he is more Charedi than Ner which has always been Charedi/Yeshivish light. However he is considered such a brilliant TC that they brought in an outsider as a rosh yeshivah instead of trying to keep it in the family. So he is an excellent rep for the Agudah Moetzes and is Ner that strays from the Charedi line.
Not to personalize this, but you constantly post very confidently things that aren't true about Charedim. What part of orthodoxy do you identify with?
Maybe Ner Yisrael should hire roshei yeshiva who actually agree with their own hashkafa? Just a thought
What truly fascinates me, is that many readers, particularly those who take the time to post comments, seem to profoundly dislike the author... Seems quite masochistic to me, given no one is forced to read this blog....
interestingly often the same people who complain about bitul Torah and say that hishtadlus is meaningless
Right, so I guess you would be fine if hang billboards all over the country pointing out what a fool you are? After all, I'm not forcing you to read it!
Believe it or not, people don't like having blogs dedicated to making fun of them.
Really now. What a hidush!
or the comments...
I appreciate Rabbi Feldman's response for its clarity and directness. While it might appear divisive to those outside the chareidi community, it's important to recognize that Rabbi Feldman is maintaining a longstanding and respected religious stance that has been consistently upheld since 1947.
In practical terms, the mutual respect on the ground is palpable. My sister recently shared an inspiring initiative in her neighborhood where religious and non-religious women gather weekly for a shared activity. This isn't about influencing beliefs but rather about building bridges and understanding each other as individuals.
Regarding the topic of military service, my sister mentioned that it hasn't come up in their discussions. Nonetheless, there's a deep sense of gratitude for those who serve. This sentiment hits close to home for us, as we recently lost our cousin, Hayim Katsman. This loss has only deepened our appreciation for the sacrifices made by those in service.
"I hope have clarified the matter and will be happy to address any further questions." Maybe just raise your concerns directly instead of second guessing his intentions
.
What did I second guess? And I don't have questions. He made his position clear.
"So then why can’t the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah organize their own rally?! " My point is why not just raise your concerns directly instead of attacking him behind his back. You have created here a platform for some real rechilus.
You are correct, I should ask him that question.
But this is not "attacking him behind his back." He made a public statement and this is a public response.
Agreed,even though I highly doubt he has any access to this blog.
Actually he probably reads it.
🙄puh-leeze.