משמח את המקום, משמח את הבריות – הרב חיים גרינימן זצ”ל

‘השתדל להיות אי”ש’ – אחר מטתו של הגאון רבי חיים שאול גריינמן זצוק”ל

ד”ר יעקב אלטמן , כ”ו בניסן תשע”ה 15/04/15

משנתו ההשקפתית של ר’ חיים וחוגו רחוקה ונוגדת חזיתית את התפיסה התורנית מיסודו של הרב קוק והרב ריינעס וממשיכיהם.

בין שתי השיטות מפרידה תהום די עמוקה, ואני הכותב מצדד בבהירות בדרכו של ה’מזרחי’. עם זאת, איננו רשאים בענין זה להתעלם ממיגוון פניה של הגדלות הרוחנית. הווה אומר, כל אחת משתי תפיסות העולם עשויה להוציא מתוכה אישים מפוארים, המצטיינים בצדדים שונים של גדלות הנפש.

‘ר’ חיים’ כפי כינויו השגור בפי רבים, הלך לעולמו לפני כשבוע. היה אחיינו של החזון אי”ש ולמד תורה מפיו עד להיותו בן 30. מאז נפטר החזון איש מצטייר ר’ חיים כממשיך דרכו המובהק. לימודו בעיון הוא בסגנונו של החזו”א, דהיינו עיון מאומץ עד כלות בשקלא וטריא התלמודית ופסיקה הלכה למעשה ישירות מהגמרא, עם שימוש מצומצם יחסית בספרי ראשונים. ראש הישיבה ב’תפרח’ היה בזמנו מתבטא ע”ד החידוד “ר’ חיים מביא לעולם כל שנה , ספר וילד”. שכן לר’ חיים שבעה עשרה צאצאים, וספרי ‘חידושים ובאורים’ על הש”ס כולו.

במסגרת סקירה זו לא נחזור על דברים המצויים לכל דורש בכלי התקשורת, על דרכו המיוחדת בעבודת התפילה ובהלכה, ואודות פקחותו הנדירה ועצתו בכל תחומי החיים, ממנה נהנו רבבות מכל קהל עדת ישראל לאורך כחמישים שנה.

מִזה כחודשיים ימים יצא בגבעת שמואל ספר זכרון לחיליק דז’בינסקי ז”ל. במאמרי בספר זה ציינתי לאירוע בו היה שותף ר’ חיים, בזה”ל: “לפני עשרות שנים בימי השבעה לאבי יהונתן אליעזר ז”ל באו לבקרני אנשים שונים, רבים מהם נמנים על החברה החרדית. איש איש ופסוקו בידו, “ה’ נתן וה’ לקח” וכדומה. אחד מהם “יצא מן הכלל וכפר בעיקר” הזה, היה זה הרב חיים גרינימן שליט”א [היום מזקני חכמי התורה בציבור החרדי] שהתעניינותו נסבה לתאונת הדרכים בה נהרג אבי, ובקש לדעת את הפרטים המדויקים של אירוע התאונה, אותם פרטים שסבבו בראשי שוב ושוב מתוך כאב ותהיָה”.

נתוודעתי לר’ חיים ברציפות יחסית כ 10 שנים בהיותו בין הגילאים 45- 55, והרי כמה רשמים שנחרתו בנשמתי. ר’ חיים נטה לעסוק בכל עת בהכרעות והחלטות קשות, הן בגיבוש פסקי הלכה בספריו, הן בהלכה למעשה לפונים אליו, הן במענה לשאלות וספקות שהעלו לפניו המונים שצבאו על ביתו, לבטים שבענייני כספים, הקמת מוסדות, פקוח נפש רפואי וספק פקוח נפש, שלום בית, משברים אישיותיים, חינוך, ומה לא. למיטב הבנתי, סבר ר’ חיים שמוֹתר האדם הוא יכולתו להכריע לפי דרכה של תורה בין שני צדדים הנראים שקולים זה לזה. כח ההכרעה שלו נבע ועלה מתוך רצינות תהומית, ועם זאת חף לחלוטין מכּל בלבול, חולשה וחיטוטי מצפון. כמה טהרת הרצון ושלמות פנימית צריך אדם בכדי להשיג מעלה נעלה כזו.

מכאן לפלא בהתנהלותו. שכנו בו בר’ חיים זוג הפכים. מחד גיסא היה נתון יום יום תחת לחצן של שאלות חיים ומוות ומחלות שהובאו בפניו לקבלת הנחיה דחופה, ובכלל כמות בלתי נדליית של בני אדם היו ממתינים בתור ליד ביתו, וגם בלכתו בדרך מבית מדרשו אך טוב וחסד ‘ירדפוהו’. מאידך גיסא, כשהייתי משוחח עימו היו בו שקט ושלווה ונינוחות המזכירה ילד בן 5 המשחק בארגז חול שאין לו אלא את הרגע הרגוע. הצירוף הזה הוא עד היום הזה, חידה בעיני. יש באורח חיים זה מדת אמונה מופלגת עם כוחות נפש ושכל בריאים עד בלי די. כל מי שדיבר עם ר’ חיים 2 דקות או 10 דקות, זכה במשב רוח אבהי חמים שליווה אותו שנים אחר כך. בעת הפגישה חשתָּ כאילו אתה בנו יחידו. החיוך ה’שובבי’ שהיה משוך על פניו, היה בו האצלַת מדת הרחמים לכל בריה. וכמאמר החסיד בס’ חובות הלבבות “החסיד אבלו בלבו וצהלתו על פניו”.

תחילת היכרותי עימו, בחנוכה בהיותי בכתה י”א, אז שמעתי את שמעו ונסעתי לביתו. שאלתיו האם לעזוב את הישיבה התיכונית ולעבור לישיבה גבוהה. תשובתו במשפט אחד: “תבוא אלי בפורים אחרי שתשתה את היין” [קרי, כשהחלטתך תהיה שלמה]. תשובותיו הן לא פעם בנות שתיים עד ארבע מילים, הוא יורה אותן תיכף לסיום שאלתך המורכבת, ואחרי חמש עשרה שנים אתה סוף סוף מבין כמה חכמה וראיית הנולד היו מקופלות במילים ספורות אלו. המהירות בה היה סוקר ר’ חיים את כל הרכיבים הנוגעים לשאלה שהובאה בפניו, כמעט ואיננה נתפסת.

דומני, מי שראה את פניו של ר’ חיים, פנים שרצינות חמורה משוקעת בהן ופיקחות משמחת נשפכת מהן, לעולם לא יהיה טפש בדרכי חייו. וכמו שמצינו בגמרא עירובין י”ג: “אמר רבי: האי דמחדדנא מחבראי – דחזיתיה לרבי מאיר מאחוריה, ואילו חזיתיה מקמיה – הוה מחדדנא טפי. דכתיב, והיו עיניך ראות את מוריך”.

מחזה מפעים היה ההספק העצום של האיש הזה. הוא חלש על מערכות רבות במקביל, מוסדות, פסיקות הלכתיות לגופים ציבוריים, קשרים עם רופאים, סוגיות סבוכות בתלמוד, השתתפות בשמחות ובימי אבל, ‘כלל ופרט וכלל’, ולא נתן מנוחה לעיניו, והטרידוהו באמצע הארוחה ובאמצע הלילה, בחול ובשבת, ובהיותו בחיק משפחתו “הקטנה”.

עליו יש לומר בפרפראזה “אדם אחד שעושה אלף דברים, מצאתי”. מי שהתוודע ל”אורחות ר’ חיים” לא יכול להשתחרר מרושם חזק המוטבע בו, הרושם שמלאך מכה בו ואומר לו “גדַל”. דהיינו, עד שלא פגשת בר’ חיים היו שאיפותיך בינוניות ולכל היותר לגובה ההרים והעננים. אולם, משפגשת בר’ חיים אשר התנהל כגוף אחד המונה מאות אנשים, נגלו לפניך בבת אחת יכולותיך שלך החבויות היטב תחת אבק ההרגל והשטחיות. מעתה נפשך שלך לא תוכל לנוח ולהסתפק בעולם קטן- ותשים בשמיִם קִנך. מעכשיו תחל להאמין בעצמך, ועד יום מותך.

בשולי סקירתנו המצומצמת, אציין שני זכרונות קצרים מלפני למעלה מ 35 שנה. האחד: לר’ חיים נודע שאחד מראשי הישיבות המוכר לו, קנה עופות קפואים עבור תלמידי הישיבה, ו’שילם’ במודע בשיק חסר כיסוי, למען לא ייפסק קול תורה מהישיבה. ר’ חיים אמר לו “סגור את הישיבה, עליך לבחור, או או”. השני: בחור ישיבה מתלבט כרוני, בעל צדדי אופי נאורוטיים, נתפס לספקות בכמה מעיקרי האמונה. הוא ניגש לר’ חיים ובפיו טענה: “אני זקוק דחוף להוכחות, לתחושת וודאות בנושאים אמוניים. הלא יבוא משיח בקרוב, ואיך אוכל לעמוד בפניו כשיסודות התורה מעורערים אצלי?? “. ר’ חיים עונה במשפט אחד “המשיח יודע שאתה איש מאמין, ושהכל זה רק עצבּים”.

“משנתו” של ר’ חיים היא המשנה במס’ אבות פרק ו’: “רבי מאיר אומר כל העוסק בתורה לשמה זוכה לדברים הרבה ולא עוד אלא שכל העולם כלו כדי הוא לו… משמח את המקום משמח את הבריות ומלבשתו ענוה ויראה, ומכשרתו להיות צדיק וחסיד וישר ונאמן, ומרחקתו מן החטא ומקרבתו לידי זכות, ונהנין ממנה עצה ותושיה בינה וגבורה …ונעשה כמעין המתגבר וכנהר שאינו פוסק, והוי צנוע וארך רוח ומוחל על עלבונו, ומגדלתו ומרוממתו על כל המעשים”. חבל חבל על דאבדין.

מאתר ערוץ שבע, כאן.

Holocaust Education Is Very Often COUNTERPRODUCTIVE…

Be Harrison Ford, not Woody Allen

I just googled “combating antisemitism” and got 7.5 million results. Apparently a lot of people are thinking about this. And well they should, given that Jew-hatred is rising sharply everywhere in the world, especially in the West. The old-style “paleo” antisemitism is going strong almost everywhere, Muslims have added some of the older European themes to their Koranic and anti-Israel narratives, and the Left is taking its obsessive anti-Zionism to new heights. Meanwhile, Right and Left are coming full circle to tell neo-Nazi stories about Rothschild and Soros (as if Soros is a friend of the Jews!)

So while all this is happening, everyone is in a tizzy about “combating” it. For example, the European Union has a basketful of programs to do so, led by a “coordinator on combating antisemitism,” and including a working definition, Holocaust remembrance observances, a program to monitor and report on it, special legislation making it illegal, and of course above all, education. At the same time they are pumping Euros into subversive NGOs in Israel and financing illegal Palestinian construction in Judea and Samaria, but that is another story.

Everybody wants to get into the act. The US Department of State (the one that still refuses to put “Israel” on the American passports of people born in Jerusalem) has a “Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism” to, er, monitor and combat it. Jewish federations, Hadassah, Chabad, B’nai B’rith, the Union for Reform Judaism, Germany, the UK Labour Party, and countless other rights organizations, religious groups, political parties, and national governments are doing it. Even some people at the UN have joined in.

How do you combat Jew-hatred? Most of those fighting it seem to think that the answer is education: the theory seems to be that if you teach people about the horrors of the Holocaust and the moral evil of bigotry, they will stop hating Jews. A great deal of resources are expended on doing this, but antisemitic incidents keep increasing.

Which is not surprising, since the theory is ridiculous. Jew-haters love to hear about the Holocaust. For one thing, it reinforces their beliefs to know that they are not alone. It gives them a warm feeling to think that a major nation led by a charismatic figure actually tried to carry out a genocide they would heartily approve of. Ridding the world of Jews isn’t just an impossible dream, they realize; someone almost succeeded! It also provides ammunition for demonstrations and Twitter campaigns: without Holocaust education, who would know to shout “Jews to the gas” at football/soccer games? And how better to exacerbate hatred of Jews than by accusing them of fabricating the Holocaust for financial gain?

Of course it is absolutely essential to preserve the historical memory of the Holocaust out of respect for the victims, as well as to teach Jews or other peoples threatened with genocide to take the threats seriously. But while Holocaust education is necessary for these reasons, it doesn’t reduce Jew-hatred – it facilitates it.

Telling people “not to hate,” and explaining that bigotry is wrong is of very marginal utility. Nobody in the West thinks that hating an ethnic group is morally good, but that doesn’t change their feelings. And in the Muslim world, hating Jews is an indispensable part of their culture. Even if people can be conditioned to reject prejudice against individuals, there seems to be no moral stricture against irrational hatred of the Jewish state, which is both a form of Jew-hatred itself and an excuse for other forms of it.

Probably the least helpful kind of “education” is that which lists the accomplishments of Jews: so many Nobel Prizes, great composers, performers, artists, scientists, writers. Look how good they have been for society, runs the argument. It should be clear that this simply feeds the envy of the Jew-hater, something that is almost always part of his psyche. It also is evidence (not that evidence is needed in the mind of the Jew-hater) for the correctness of the theory that there is an massive Jewish conspiracy, even a secret ruling class. Of course the Jews can control the world, they are so smart!

So how do we “combat antisemitism?” We can’t, directly. But we can combat antisemites. This is especially clear for the kind of Jew-hatred that expresses itself as hatred of Israel. Recently Israel allowed herself to be humiliated by Hamas, which burned thousands of acres of her fields and forests, and then launched the most intense rocket bombardment in Israel’s history. Our response, bombing unoccupied military targets, was tactically significant but psychologically impotent. The Jew-haters were gratified, because the Jews lived up to the stereotype: powerful and controlling, and yet at the same time weaklings who are afraid to fight.

Suppose Israel had mounted a massive, “disproportionate” response. Perhaps we would have had to deal with legal and diplomatic attacks, as we have after previous conflicts. Perhaps there would have been strategic concerns, such as the possibility of a multi-front war. But from the psychological point of view, it would be a victory. The Jew strikes back! The Jew-haters wouldn’t stop hating us, but they would be the losers. Jew-hatred would be less attractive, because nobody wants to be a loser.

Continue reading…

From Abu Yehuda, here.

Please Let the ‘Palestinians’ Leave Israel!

INTO THE FRAY: The imperative for incentivized Arab migration

Once inconceivable, the dismantling of UNRWA; the naturalization of stateless Palestinian residents in Arab countries; and the emigration of Palestinians from Judea-Samaria & Gaza are slowly emerging as realistic outcomes.

 

Dr. Martin Sherman, 25/01/19

“Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth” –Sherlock Holmes, in “The Sign of the Four”.

Over a quarter-century ago (in 1992), I warned of the consequences — for both Jew and Arab — if Israel were to evacuate Gaza.

I cautioned: “…the inevitable implications of Israeli withdrawal can be ignored only at great peril to Israelis and Arabs alike”, observing:“…no measure whether the total [Israeli] annexation or total [Israeli] withdrawal can be reconciled with either Israel’s security needs or the welfare of the Arab population there.

Accordingly, I concluded that the only viable and durable policy was the resettlement and rehabilitation of the non-belligerent Gazans elsewhere — and I underscored: “this was not a call for a forcibly imposed racist “transfer” by Israel, but rather…a humane and historically imperative enterprise”.

Confusing economic enhancement with “ethnic cleansing”

Today, after a more than a decade-and-a-half of bloody confrontations, including three large scale military engagements — imposed on Israel to protect its civilian population from predicted assaults — and a fourth appearing increasingly inevitable; with the Gazans awash in untreated sewage, with their sources of drinking water polluted, and with perennial power outages, my predictions appear to have turned out to be lamentably precise.

Perversely, earlier this month I was excoriated for…being proven right — and my fact-based professional assessment as a political scientist that, because of the overtly unremitting enmity of the Gazans towards the Jewish state: “Eventually there will either be Arabs in Gaza or Jews in the Negev. In the long run, there will not be both”, was denounced as a call for ethnic cleansing.

Of course, my detractors conveniently ignore that, time and time again, I have called for providing generous relocation grants to help the hapless non-belligerent Gazans find more prosperous and secure lives for themselves elsewhere, in third party countries, outside the “circle of violence”; and to extricate themselves from the stranglehold of the cruel, corrupt cliques who have led them astray from debacle to disaster for decades.

Confusing an unequivocal call for economic enhancement with one for “ethnic cleansing”, they apparently believe — in their “infinite benevolence and wisdom” — that compelling the Gazans to languish in their current conditions is somehow more humane.

But, more on these wildly unfounded recriminations against me perhaps in a future column.

A tripartite plan

Several years after my 1992 article, I extended the idea of incentivized emigration to the Arab population in Judea-Samaria (a.k.a. the “West Bank”) and in 2004 I formulated a tripartite plan (The Humanitarian Paradigm) for the comprehensive resolution — or rather the dissolution of the “Palestinian problem”, which include the following components:

The first was the dismantling of UNRWA (the United Nations Relief and Works Agency), an anomalous UN entity, charged with dealing exclusively with the Palestinian-Arab diaspora (a.k.a. Palestinian “refugees”), displaced by the 1948 and 1967 wars with Israel. As I pointed out back then, because of its anomalous definition of who is considered a “refugee” (which extends to the descendants of those originally displaced), and its anomalous mandate (which precludes resettling them anywhere but in the country from which they were displaced), UNRWA is an organization which (a) perpetuates (rather than resolves) the predicament of the stateless Palestinian “refugees”; (b) perpetuates (rather than dissipates) the Palestinian-Arab narrative of “return” to pre-1948 Israel. Accordingly, the continued existence of UNRWA is an insurmountable obstacle to any resolution of the “Palestinian problem” — and hence its dismantling — or at least, radical restructuring — is an imperative precondition for progress toward any such resolution.

The second component was the launch of an international campaign to induce the Arab countries to desist from what is essentially a policy of ethnic discrimination against the Palestinian diaspora, resident in them for decades, and to grant its members citizenship —rather than keeping them in a perpetual state of stateless “refugees”, as a political weapon with which to bludgeon Israel. To date, any such move is prohibited by the mandate of the Arab League.

A tripartite plan (cont.)

The reasoning behind this prohibition was made clear in a 2004 LA Times interview with Hisham Youssef, then-spokesman for the 22-nation Arab League, who admitted that Palestinians live “in very bad conditions,” but maintained that the official policy on denying Palestinians citizenship in the counties of decades-long residence is meant “to preserve their Palestinian identity.” According to Youssef: “If every Palestinian who sought refuge in a certain country was integrated and accommodated into that country, there won’t be any reason for them to return to Palestine.”

The significance of this is clear.

The nations comprising the Arab League are prepared to subordinate the improvement of the dire humanitarian conditions of the Palestinians, resident throughout the Arab world, to the political goal of preserving the “Right of Return,”

The nations comprising the Arab League are prepared to subordinate the improvement of the dire humanitarian conditions of the Palestinians, resident throughout the Arab world, to the political goal of preserving the “Right of Return” — i.e. using them as a pawn to effect the elimination of Israel as the nation-state of the Jews.

It is to the annulment of this pernicious policy that international pressure must be directed.

The third and arguably the most controversial — element was to offer the non-belligerent Arab residents in Judea-Samaria generous relocation grants to provide them and their families an opportunity to seek a better and safer future in third-party host-nations, than that which almost inevitably awaits them — if they stay where they are.

Atomization & de-politicization

To overcome potential resistance to accepting the relocation/rehabilitation grants, I stipulated two elements regarding the manner in which the funding activity is to be carried out: (a) the atomization of implementation of the grant payments; (b) the de-politicization of the context in which they are made.

(a) Atomization: This implies that the envisaged compensation will be offered directly to individual family heads/breadwinners — not through any Arab collective (whether state or sub-state organization), who may have a vested interest in impeding its payment. Accordingly, no agreement with any Arab collective is required for the implementation of payment to the recipients — merely the accumulated consent of fate-stricken individuals, striving to improve their lot.

(b) De-politicization: The incentivized emigration initiative is not cast as a political endeavor but rather a humanitarian one. This reflects a sober recognition that, after decades of effort, involving the expenditure of huge political capital and economic resources, there is no political formula for the resolution of the conflict. Accordingly, efforts should be channeled into dissipating the humanitarian predicament of the Palestinian-Arabs, which the insoluble political impasse has precipitated.

These two elements – direct payments to individuals and the downplaying of the political nature of the relocation/rehabilitation grants and the emphasis on the humanitarian component are designed to circumvent—or at least attenuate — any claims that acceptance of the funds would in some way entail an affront to — real or imagined — national sentiments.

Once inconceivable, now slowly materializing

For many years, advocating these three elements — the dismantling (or at least the radical restructuring) of UNRWA; the naturalization of the Palestinian diaspora resident in Arab countries as citizens; and the emigration of Palestinian-Arabs from Judea-Samaria and Gaza — seemed hopelessly unrealistic.

However today, all three are slowly but inexorably materializing before our eyes in a manner that would have appeared inconceivable only a few years ago.

Of course, a major catalyst for this nascent metamorphosis has been the Trump administration.

The US administration has — despite hitherto unexplained and inexplicable Israeli reluctance — exposed the fraudulent fiasco of UNRWA. As its erstwhile biggest benefactor, the US has retracted all funding from the organization. But more importantly, it has focused a glaring spotlight on the myth of the “Palestinian refugees” and the spectacularly inflated number of such alleged “refugees” — which even include those who have long acquired citizenship of some other country!

This salutary US initiative has the potential to rescind the recognition of the bulk of the Palestinian diaspora as “refugees”. Thus, even if they continue to receive international aid to help ameliorate their humanitarian situation, this will not be as potential returnees to their alleged homeland in Israel.

Once the Palestinian diaspora is stripped of its fraudulent refugee status, the door is then open to settling them in third party countries other than their claimed homeland,  and to their naturalization as citizens of these counties.

Naturalization of the Palestinian diaspora in countries of residence

In this regard, the Trump administration has reportedly undertaken an important initiative — see herehere; and here. According to these reports, President Trump has informed several Arab countries that, at the start of 2019, he will disclose a citizenship plan for Palestinian refugees living in those countries.

President Trump has informed several Arab countries that, at the start of 2019, he will disclose a citizenship plan for Palestinian refugees living in those countries.

Significantly, Palestinian sources told the news outlet: “Trump informed several Arab countries that the plan will include Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon.” According to these sources: “the big surprise will be that these countries have already agreed to naturalize Palestinian refugees.” Moreover, it was reported that senior US officials are expected to seriously raise an American initiative with several Arab countries — including stipulation of the tools to implement it, the number of refugees, the required expenses, and the logistics demanded from hosting countries for supervising the process of “naturalization of refugees”.

It is difficult to overstate the significance of such an initiative, which coincides precisely with the second element in the foregoing tripartite plan. For, it has the potential to remove the ominous overhang of a five million strong (and counting) Palestinian diaspora that threatens to inundate the Jewish state and nullify its ability to function as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

As such, the Israeli government and all pro-Zionist entities should strive to ensure its implementation.

Emigration: The preferred option of the Palestinians?

As for the third element of the tripartite plan, emigration of the Palestinian population to third-party countries, there is rapidly accumulating evidence that emigration is emerging as an increasingly sought-after option. Indeed, earlier this month, Israeli mainstream media highlighted the desire to leave Gaza in order to seek a better life elsewhere. For example, the popular website, YNet News, ran a piece entitled, Gaza suffers from brain drain as young professionals look for better life, with the Hebrew version appearing a few days previously, headlined The flight from Gaza: What Hamas is trying to conceal from the media. Likewise, the KAN Channel ran a program reporting very similar realities (January 13).

These items come on the heels of a spate of previous articles that describe the widespread clamor among Gazans to find alternative places of abode — see for example For Young Palestinians, There’s Only One Way Out of Gaza (Haaretz) ; Thousands Abandon Blockaded Strip as Egypt Opens Crossing  (Alaraby); As Egypt Opens Gaza Border, A Harsh Reality is Laid Bare (Haaretz); and How Turkey Has Become the Palestinian Promised Land (Haaretz).

The Ynetnews piece describes the fervor to leave: “Leaving Gaza is expensive, particularly for the residents of the impoverished coastal enclave…The demand is high, and the waiting list to leave is long…Those wishing to cut short their wait must pay for a place on a special list, which is run by a private firm in Gaza…The price for a place on this special list is $1,500 — a fortune for the average resident of Gaza…”

It would appear then, that the only thing preventing a mass Exodus from Gaza is…money. Which is precisely what the tripartite plan proposes providing.

Let their people go: A slogan for April’s elections?

There is, of course, little reason to believe that, if Israel were to leave Judea-Samaria, what happened in Gaza would not happen there. After all, the preponderance of professional opinion appears to hold that, if the IDF were to evacuate Judea-Samaria, it would likely fall to elements very similar to those that seized power in Gaza — and the area would quickly be transformed into a mega-Gaza-like entity, on the fringes of Greater Tel Aviv — with all the attendant perils that would entail.

Sadly, however, despite its clear strategic and ethical advantages over other policy proposals, few in the Israeli political system have dared to adopt incentivized emigration as part of their platform. The notable exception is Moshe Feiglin and his Zehut party –and, to a certain extent, Bezalel Smotrich, the newly elected head of the National Union faction in the Jewish Home Party, previously headed by Education Minister Naftali Bennett.

It is, however, time for the idea of incentivized emigration to be embraced by the mainstream parties as the only viable policy paradigm that can ensure the continued survival of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. It is time for the mainstream to adopt an election slogan that sounds a clarion call to “Let their people go”.

Martin Sherman is the founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies.

From INN, here.

האמונה היא למעלה מהדעת או שמא *למטה* מהדעת? – ביאור יחסי אמונה ושכל

מתוך ספר מדרש שמואל על ברייתא קנין תורה:

[הקנין] הכ”ג באמונת חכמים…

וגם אפשר שרמז שענין האמונה בו יתברך שלא יכניס האדם את עצמו להשיגה בדרך חקירת השכל כי בזה ילאה למצא הפתח רק האמנתו תהיה כדרך אמונת החכמים שהיא אמונת אומן מקובלת איש מפי איש עד למשה מסיני ובזה תהיה האמונה שקועה בלבו כי בדרך השגה מחקריית אי אפשר לו להשיגה כמאמר החכם אלו ידעתיו הייתיו וכו’.

אך מדוע אי אפשר להשיגה בחקירה שכלית? וא”כ, האם אין זה מגרע את החקירה השכלית או את האמונה בעצמה? לתשובה תמציתית ומתומצתת על השאלות הללו ודומיהם, אני ממליץ ליהודים טובים להרשם לרשימת התפוצה במייל, ולבקש את “המדריך” הקצר נגד אתאיזם ומחשבות כפירה.

ניתן גם לשלוח שאלות בהמשך על מה שקראתם.

Zionism Is Nothing New! Following Are Some Examples…

From the introduction of Vayoel Moshe 20#, English translation from “True Torah Jews” (with additional footnotes):

Why the Three Oaths are not brought or explained at length in the poskim

The central idea of the Three Oaths prohibition is not covered in Jewish legal works in as much detail as other laws that apply to everyday life and in every generation. It is similar to the laws of produce that must be left for the poor during the harvest, regarding which the Tur (Yoreh Deah 332) writes that he decided not to include them in his code since they do not apply nowadays in countries with a majority non-Jewish population. Although it was certainly possible that at some point in time there would be places where Jews own fields and most of the population is Jewish, as it is the case now in many places in Eretz Yisroel, since this situation did not exist in the Tur’s time, he did not wish to write at length about these laws. The Tur goes a step further at the beginning of Yoreh Deah 331, regarding Terumos and Maasros, and says that since these laws do not apply outside Eretz Yisroel, he did not wish to write about them at length, even though in that case the laws certainly applied in Eretz Yisroel at the time of the Tur. For that is the general rule: the poskim found it necessary to discuss only laws that applied in their time and place.

It appears to me that this is the reason why the poskim made it their practice to discuss only the laws that applied in their time and place. For while the holy Torah is longer than the earth, people’s minds are limited, and cannot grasp the level of complete knowledge needed even in the areas that are applicable at all times. The poskim, therefore, chose not to emphasize things that were not practically applicable in their times, in order not to fall short in the subjects that were necessary to know in that era.

Similarly, we find in Bava Metzia 114b that Rabba bar Avuha said to Eliyahu Hanavi: “I don’t even know four orders of the Mishnah well, and you expect me to know all six?” Rashi explains that Rabba bar Avuha did not put time into studying Zeraim and Taharos, since they do not apply outside of Eretz Yisroel.

Furthermore, the Responsa Lechem Rav says that in places where the government does not allow Jews to rule their own civil disputes, even great Torah scholars cannot display expertise in the Torah’s monetary laws, as they do not study them for practical purposes.

The concept of the awakening of a movement to violate the Oaths is something that did not occur from the time of Ben Koziva until the Rambam’s time, a period of about one thousand years. After that it did not surface until the time of Shabbesai Tzvi, and from the time of Shabbesai Tzvi until our time it did not emerge and become relevant. Consequently, many centuries have passed during which it never occurred to anyone to violate these oaths; due to practical considerations, it effectively became a non-issue. Because of this, it was categorized among the halachos that are not applicable to the times, and the poskim throughout these generations saw no need to elaborate on the laws of the Three Oaths.

However, one who carefully studies the words of those poskim, the Rishonim and the leading Acharonim, who do discuss these halachos, will find these ideas presented in a clear and unequivocal manner.

Not to address the halacha yet, let’s first talk about the facts. While he is not entitled to his own halacha (see here regarding the “Elu Va’elu” misquote), he is most certainly not entitled to his own facts.

Anyone even casually conversant in Jewish history knows this is false. Sophomoric Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum never heard of Mar Zutra… Sefer “Aloh Na’aleh” edited by Mordechai Tzion goes into a few blatant examples on p. 15.

And there’s a whole book about this: “The Other Zions – The Lost Histories of Jewish Nations” by Eric Maroney.

Here’s a review by “Channeling Jewish History“:

“Few people realize that Jews have had politically independent states outside of the land traditionally associated with Jewish political independence, or the area roughly equivalent to the State of Israel”.

SUNDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2017

So begins Eric Maroney’s ever fascinating book The Other Zions.
Maroney provides an important overview of Jewish history in various locations and time periods, focusing on Jews who formed their own autonomous or independent entities throughout history.
This is a refreshing read for one who wants to a break from the emotionally taxing and towering literature about Jewish persecution.
Maroney’s book is about tough Jews, clever Jews, the heroes, the rogues and all those in between.
As a young boy I remember reading Monroe Rosenthal and Isaac Mozeson’s Wars of the Jews and how it fired my imagination at the time. Maroney’s book is aptly subtitled “the lost histories of jewish nations”, because many of the stories recounted within are virtually unknown.
Attending school and reading the required literature familiarized me with the classic stories of Jewish loss and bravery; Hanukkah, Purim etc. but who knew that in the early part of the 6th century, a Jewish King named Yosef Dhu Nuwas ruled what is today Saudi Arabia. Who would have imagined that this Jewish king, upon hearing of the persecution of Jews in Christian-dominated lands appointed himself the Jewish avenger and destroyed Churches and persecuted Christians (ironically, it was Dhu Nuwas’s massacre of Christians at Najran that would seal his fate and would nearly erase the Jewish presence in Arabia replacing it with Christianity before both were subsumed by the rising tide of Islam).
It is instructive to note that virtually all of the entities discussed in Maroney’s work were founded by people who were not ethnically Jewish, but rather proselytes to Judaism (perhaps forms of Judaisms in the plural would a more proper way to put it).
The first such state was the Aramaic-speaking land of Adiabene. Its Jewish character was taken on shortly before the destruction of the Second Jewish Commonwealth (to which Adiebene sent supplies and fighters).
This is followed by a description of the enduring myth of the Ten Lost Tribes and their possible locations.
Maroney seems to prefer working with material and sources that are as provenanced as possible. This seems to be why he neglects to discuss the Pashtun tribesman of Afghanistan. This fiercely independent ethnic population has long been rumored to be of Israelite descent (see here).
Chapter 3 discusses the fascinating and complicated history of the Beta Israel- Jews of Ethiopia.
Chapter 4 discusses the kingdom of the Khazars and the various truths and myths surrounding this very controversial subject. Recently a Hebrew University professor named Shaul Stampfer claimed that the entire story is a myth see here.
However, Maroney provides a sober and concise history of this mysterious kingdom citing various documents and traditions that leave the reader with little doubt as to the actual existence of such an entity.
This is followed in Chapter 5 by a fascinating look into Medieval Arabia and the Jewish Himyarite Kingdom that once existed there.
In Chapter 6 Maroney discusses the Kingdom of Adiebene in detail.
Chapter 7 deals with the North African Berber Jews and their semi-legendary leader Qahina.
In this chapter, Maroney as his scholarly manner does not engage in the citation of folklore that may be legendary in nature. One such tradition from North Africa comes to mind.
Rabbi Ya’akov Toledano was an Israeli Rabbi of North African extraction who wrote various works including a book called Ner Ha-ma’arav (Light of the Maghreb) on the history of Moroccan Jewry. The book can be read in its entirety online here. It is worth citing one interesting passage from the book.
Toledano cites an ancient tradition namely that the first Jews of North Africa were members of the “Ten Lost Tribes”. It was members of the tribe of Efraim who settled in the town of Ifrane (allegedly named after/by the Ephraimites) on the Atlas mountain range in southern Morocco. According to this tradition they grew in numbers and in power until they ruled over other non-Jewish tribes in the area. Their first king, according to this tradition, was named Abraham Ha-efrati (literally, from the tribe of Ephraim) and the mantle of kingship was passed on to his descendants for many generations afterward. The legend continues that when Ezra the scribe summoned the Jews of this region to join him in reconstructing the Second Jewish Commonwealth, they refused and they were punished as a result with the gradual loss of their power and prestige (interestingly, similar legends regarding refusal and punishment are recounted in the stories of other Jewish Diasporas, most famously among the Jews of Yemen and medieval Ashkenaz). Their final downfall came when they were vanquished by one of their long time foes who forced the royal family to change their royal moniker from “Efrati” to “Afariat”. This surname is common among many Jews who stem from that area.
Maroney also omits any mention of the fascinating Zenobia, queen of Palmyra. This audacious woman who defied the might of Rome may have been a proselyte or of Jewish extraction, see here.
Surprisingly, no mention is made of the Edomites either. The Edomites are an ancient people that dwelled in Transjordan. During the Hellenic period they are referred to as Idumeans. The Hasmonean monarch, John Hyrcanus famously forcibly converted this nation to Judaism (some scholars claim that the Idumeans were in fact descendants of the Israelite settlers; the tribes of Reuben, Gad and part of Manasseh that had famously petitioned Moses for permission to settle there) and they continued to dwell in their ancestral lands under some sort of autonomous arrangement. This fierce people would eventually aid the Jewish zealots in their revolt against Rome sending, according to Josephus, 20,000 troops under the leadership of commanders bearing typical Jewish biblical names.
And finally, in chapter 8, we get to the somewhat bizarre former Jewish Autonomous Republic of Birobidzhan.
Birobidzhan was a Stalinist experiment to offset the attraction of the Zionists and provide those Jews who wanted to exercise their right of self-determination to do that within the parameters of the “soviet paradise”.
Chapter 9 is entitled “Who is a Jew” and it raises important and interesting points regarding who is was and even who ought to be a Jew. The people who made up the other Zions long ceased to exist (with the exception of the Beta Israel), however their memory endures and it is of little doubt that it was the existence of these other Zions that provided inspiration to scores of Jews living in far-flung corners of the world from ancient times until the founding of the State of Israel.