I am not sure what your point is. A kashrus organization noticed a potential kashrus issue, and developed a solution. There is something wrong with that? Also, the letter is dated from three months ago, and no one was running to shelters then.
Well, The Lakewood's KCL Hashgocha allows all pots and utensils to go out to Shabbos jobs with no Mashgiach, only Non-Jews. The Aida should learn from the KCL many other kashrus leniencies.
There's a war in Israel so now we don't have to eat kosher? I'm starting to think the Satmar Rebbe was right. Maybe its true. Zionism is not about Israel, its about secularizing the Jewish nation.
3:49 You are one sick, vile piece of scum! "The Satmar Rebbe was right?" Was he right when he predicted in 1967 that "there wouldn't a moisid in Israel in 20 years" ? Was he right when he said that the miracles in the 1967 war were by the Satan? Or Was he right when he told his followers in 1943 that Hitler would never come to Hungary? Was he right when he advised his followers who held visas to Palestine not to take advantage of it? Was he right when he wrote that the Gedoilei Yisrael, like the Gerer Rebbe, The Belzer Rebbe, Rav Shach who had parties in the Knesset were "Meenim & Apikorsim" So tell us how "was he right?"
You scribbled: "Maybe its true. Zionism is not about Israel, its about secularizing the Jewish nation."
How did Zionism "secularize the Jewish nation?" This Jewish nation is the home of 7 1/2 million of our brothers and sisters! Just last month The Zionist Government granted 800 million shekel to Moisdois Ha'Torah, so how is this secularizing the Jewish nation? There is not one case in 78 years of the Jewish State that they stopped anyone from learning Torah! In fact those stopping Bochrim from learning Torah are the Chardeidim who send out their students to protest! A Chardeie Gadol ordered Schools closed so they could vote in a Local mayoral election.
I think everyone here agrees that the comments section is just as entertaining as the blog itself. Could it be that DIN writes all the comments himself to make the blog even more entertaining?
Tell us Naftuli Who witnessed these ג' שְׁבוּעוֹת ? When did it take place? Where exactly did it take place? Why didn't the Rambam mention it in his entire Mishna Torah? Why didn't the Shulchan Aruch mention it? Why didn't Rashi mention it, why didn't Tosfois, why didn't the Rosh, Rif, Ran, Maharsha (who elaborates on all the aggadatehs) none of the Rishonim talk about it? Why did Ezra ask the Jews of Baval to go up to Eretz Yisrael in clear violation of the ג' שְׁבוּעוֹת?? If this was such a great event, why didn't Shlomo Hamelech write it explicitly, why did he hide it in three random pesukim?
Stop repeating and regurgitating Satmar Crappola! Read the sidebar before repeating nonsense that has been refuted and debunked a million times!
We, the majority of the Jewish people, now live in Israel, what do you want us to do? Surrender to the Ayatollahs? You farkitah meshiginar! Did you stop and think what living under the Arabs would be? They are constantly killing each other, I cannot imagine what they would do with us? Why did the Gra, the Baal Shem Tov, want to make Aliyah? Why did the Ramban, and more recently, the chazon Ish, the Steipler, Rav Shach, the Gerer, the Belzer, the Kloizinberger, the Brisker actually make Aliyah? You Shiteh Shebeolam! This conversation is over! Go live in Ramallah or Jenin!
Yay diN repeating the same old nonsense. You sound like a massive am haaretz both in yedios and in svaros. I have no patience to answer your “questions” especially since you don’t care about the answer.
B”h we have guidance from rabbanim such as the satmar rebbe rav shach brisker rav chazon ish and all the other rabbanim you mentioned that explain to us the evils of Zionism
8:07 Your rabbanim that you mentioned are all dead, yet the State of Israel is a vibrant country and was recently included in a worldwide poll that Israelis are among the happiest in the world. Rav Shach may have screamed against Zionism but established a political party that sat in the Zionist Knesset, he was also pro the Oslo accords that brought about the 1st intifada, he was also for giving back parts of Eretz Yisrael, though that is an "Issur De'orissah violating והארץ לא תמכר לצמיתות כי לי הארץ As far as the Chazon Ish, during his lifetime he couldn't get more than 500 bochrim to be learning steady, while the Zionist Entity has over 100,000 at any given time.
The Brisker Rav came to Israel with his entire family intact and lost no one of his immediate family in the Holocaust, it was very easy for him to preach to survivors whose wives, husbands, parents and children were brutally murdered, to say that he was against a State! The Satmar Rav's original plan was to make Aliyah and he actually did as did his daughter, but when Holocausr Survivors of Satmar arrived they yelled at him for telling them that "Hitler would never come to Hungary" The Satmar Rav himself was saved by a Zionist!
Din 8:27 what does Aliyah have to do with Zionism ?? You don’t know basics.
And you’re so busy with your little Zionist nonsense that you think the state is supporting Torah. And to compare to the Chazon ish?? Are you retarted?? (We know the answer) You’re a sick soul.
Go run along with your Zionist religion and enjoy you’re own version of moshiach I feel bad for you when moshiach really does come and you see what you could have been zoiche to for now bye bye keep stocking those hell coals
Hey Sickiemeister You ask "what does Aliyah have to do with Zionism ??" If you don't what Zionism even means, why do you keep blabbering narishkeiting? Zionism means believing that "Every Jew has a Right to Be In the Homeland that God gifted us" All the Gedoilim that made Aliyah came for that reason!!! Helllllllllllowwwwwwwww! A Homeland! A Jewish Homeland!!! You scribble like a maniac "state is supporting Torah" That's nonsense?? Granting Torah Moisdois 800 million Shekel is nonsense? You sick demented creature! Move to Ramallah or Jenin!
Din you were wrong about the brisker rav. He wife and 3 of his children were murdered by the nazis. Ps he also wasn't an anti Zionist like satmar, his anti Zionism was much different and doesn't exist now.
No clue how she (his daughter died) assuming shot. But even if you are correct and it was a fire a (in the brisk ghetto in 42 is clearly murdered in the holocaust. https://www.geni.com/people/Gittel-Soloveitchik/6000000007630722060
Well you control the conversation, calling me names is bla bla. It clearly says that if we are messing with the שלש שבועות or רש"י says even only trying to do something about it, the Holocaust will happen במסכת כתובות (דף קיא, עמוד א), מובא המקור לביטוי המצמרר הזה כחלק מתיאור "שלוש השבועות" שהשביע הקדוש ברוך הוא את עם ישראל ואת אומות העולם [1, 2]. לפי הגמרא, רבי אלעזר מסביר שאם עם ישראל לא יעמוד בשבועות הללו (כמו האיסור לעלות בחומה או למרוד באומות), הקדוש ברוך הוא אומר: "אני מתיר את בשרכם כצבאות וכאילות השדה" [1, 3]. המשמעות: הפקרות: כשם שצבאות ואילות הם חיות בר שדמן מותר לכל והן ניצודות ללא הגנה, כך יהיה דמם של ישראל מופקר בידי רודפיהם [3, 4]. העדר דין: הביטוי מסמל מצב שבו אין שמירה אלוהית, והגויים יכולים לפגוע ביהודים באין מפריע [2, 4].
Naftuli Did you actually read what you copied and pasted? I don't think so! You may have living under a rock or in a cave, but we the "hamoin Am" know that the Holocaust happened BEFORE the State was established, and no one went up כחומה!
And what does לעלות בחומה even mean? 100 people? 1,000 people? 2,000 people? 2 people? The Ramban write unequivaclyy that there is a Mitzvas De'Oriisah of Yishuv Eretz Yisrael, so how is that going to happen? Does he just mean one family? Stop pasting stuff you have no idea about!
You pasted: למרוד באומות What does that mean exactly? Because the United Nations presented a paper supporting a State for Jews in 1947, the "United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine,! " Take your garbage to another site that will believe your ama-ratzis!
Oleh bechoma means like a wall. Look at ancient siege towers and that seems to be the pshat. Meaning coming into ey as an armed force. Rav chaim Zimmerman uses this to explain why the state of israel is not under the 3 oaths because it came from within ey
You never answered this challenge - not that you will ever admit when you are wrong: There is reyd about how something can be halacha even though the Rambam was not moineh. And nisht yeden dvar pushet issur is brought in Shulchan Aruch either
Wow! Here we have a Gaon Oilon that calls himself "Kuf Yud Alef" that is lecturing us on halacha, telling us that "though the Rambam" and the "shulcan Aruch" don't mention something so important it is nevertheless a halacha! Wow! Tell it to all the Gedoilim and Poiskim who made Aliyah! I'll tell you a halacha that is not mentioned in the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch........."Don't be an idiot"
The sixth argument is the famous argument about the three
oaths, one of which is that G-d beswore klal-Yisrael not to storm
and come up to eretz-Yisrael before the time. Many answers and explanations were written in relation to this oath. Most of them
are drush and homiletical interpretations according to the conceptions of different subjective points of view. In all these writings,
did not find an objective, logical, halachic explanation of the exact
definition of this oath shelo yaalu bechoma not to storm and
come up to eretz-Yisrael before the time. However, the clear
halachic aspects of this oath refer only to when the Jews are in
galut, outside of eretz-Yisrael; they cannot storm and enter eretz-
Yisrael by force or by war, since when the Arabs are in eretz-Yisrael and the Jews start to conquer them from bases in chutz-laaretz (outside of eretz-Yisrael) the probability is that the Jews will
not win bederech-hateva, in a natural way according to the oath.
However, if the Jews are fighting or conquering land when they are
in eretz-Yisrael, then, according to the Torah, the probability is
that the Jews will win. All the sources and the logical understanding of this halacha shelo yaalu bechoma pertain only when the Jews are outside of eretz-Yisrael, as will be explained.
The Zohar Hakodesh says since Yishmael was circumcized
when he was thirteen years old, even though eretz-Yisrael is given
to Yisrael, the children of Avraham-avinu, who have the mitzva of brit-mila on the eighth day after birth, Yishmael still had a zchut.
And when eretz-Yisrael is empty of Jews then the children of
Yishmael will prevail in the land. Because they were circumcized
they had the zchut to be in eretz-Yisrael. So long as there were no Jews there, they will prevent the Jews from coming back to their
place. However, as soon as the Jews are in eretz-Yisrael, the zchut
of Yishmael in the land is terminated. If Yishmael will wage war against the Jews while the Jews are in eretz-Yisrael the bnei-Yishmael will lose, and the Jews will remain in eretz-Yisrael. And even if other nations as for example, Edom, will help the bnei-Yishmael in their war and fight against Yisrael, they will not win, and the rule of eretz-Yisrael will remain in the hands of Yisrael. This Zohar is in
Parshat Vaeira and its prediction is being realized in our time, even
though the prediction of the Zohar was written long ago. This is
the sod and the pshat of the oath. The whole halacha relating to
this subject in Talmud and Chazal, becomes evidently clear.
By this differentiation between the status of Yisrael when they
are in chutz-laaretz to their status when they are in eretz-Yisrael, a great difficulty in the words of the Ramban, which perplexed
many generations, is solved. The Ramban writes, in his hasagot on
the Rambam in Sefer Hamitzvot, that one of the taryag-mitzvot is
that we are obliged to inherit the land, and not to leave it to other
nations, or to leave it abandoned and desolate, because it says
vevarashtam el haaretz veyeshavtem bo.
The Ramban explains these words to mean that we are commanded to conquer the land and live in it. This precept is determined for all generations and for all times. It is a mitzva to live in
eretz-Yisrael in every generation. Even in times of galut, this
mitzva of yerusha, which means conquering the land, and yeshiva,
which means living and settling in the land, is valid. The Megilat
Esther, one of the great commentaries on the Sefer Hamitzvot.
asks on the Ramban, how is it possible that this mitzva of kibush
eretz-Yisrael, conquering eretz-Yisrael by force, prevails at any
time, even in the time of galut since there is an oath shelo vaalu
bechomal With this contradiction, the Megilat Esther remains
perplexed in understanding the Ramban.
We see here a very interesting fact, that the argument against the
atchalta-degeula and Medinat-Yisrael, in relation to the oath, was
already asked as a question on the words of the Ramban, and it
remained a dilemma for generations. However, according to the
differentiation stated above, there is no contradiction at all
between the oath and the mitzva of kibush according to the
Ramban.
According to the Ramban just mentioned, there is a mitzva of
the Torah to live and settle in eretz-Yisrael. It says in the Torah,
"veyarashta, veyashavta" According to Chazal and all the rishonim, yerusha means conquering eretz-Yisrael, and yeshiva means
settling in eretz-Yisrael. The Ramban holds that Yisrael is obliged
to fulfill this mitzva constantly. Its fulfillment is not limited to a
specific time, the time of the coming of the Mashiach, but this
mitzva obliges Yisrael continuously to conquer eretz-Yisrael and
settle in eretz-Yisrael. But the question arises, how is it possible
that the mitzva of yerusha and yeshiva should prevail in our time,
or in the time of the Ramban, since there is an oath shelo yaalu bechoma not to storm and come up to eretz-Yisrael before the
time?
To solve this difficulty, it is important to explain a few concepts
of halacha. In Torah and Reason, 1 explained the difference
between hechsher-mitzva and kiyum-mitzva. Hechsher-mitzva
means the preparation, the stages by which a mitzva can be realized. For example, making a sukka is a hechsher-mitzva, sitting in
a sukka is a kiyum-hamitzva.
The Torah writes in the language of hechsher-mitzva, since the
Torah gives commands to man as to what to do.
The Torah
pedagogically speaks to klal-Yisrael in the language of creating the
means to fulfill and realize the mitzvot. For example, the Torah
says veasu lahem tzitzit and they should make tzitzit on the
edges of the garment for the generations. The kiyum-hamitzva is
not to make the tzitzit, but to wear the tzitzit. The bracha that we
make every morning when we put on the tzitzit is on the wearing of
the tzitzit and not on the making of the tzitzit; to make the tzitzit is
a hechsher-mitzva. The Torah says, Chag hasukkot taaseh lach —
you should celebrate the holiday and make sukkot. The mitzva is
not to make the sukka; that is only a hechsher-mitzva. The kiyum-
hamitzva, which means the fulfillment of the mitzva, is to be in the
sukka. Or, when the Torah says, "Som tasim alecha melech" —
you should make upon yourself a king, the mitzva is not nomina-
ting the king. That is only a hechsher-mitzva. The kiyum-mitzva is
to be ruled by a melech. Or, when the pasuk says that before
Pesach you should destroy the dough from your house, the mitzva
is not to have chametz. But the “destroying” of chametz is only a
hechsher-mitzva. And so, in every mitzva, the Torah speaks in the
language of hechsher-mitzva. Since the Torah gave the people new
commands which were unfamiliar to them, the Torah told them
the hechsher-mitzva because this is in accordance with the halacha
of dibra Torah kelashon bnei adam. This means that the words of
the Torah are given in a language which fits man’s understanding.
This principle that the Torah speaks in the language of hechsher-
mitzva is a great erudition of the psukim of the Torah and solves
many difficulties.
There are many differences between hechsher-mitzva and
kiyum-hamitzva. For example, if a man puts on tefillin, every
minute during the day that he wears the tefillin, he is mekayem a
mitzva. Or if a man gives tzdaka, every time he gives the tzdaka, he
is mekayem a mitzva. If a man sits on yom-tov Sukkot in the
sukka, he is mekayem a mitzva. But if a man will make two sukkot,
or write two pairs of tefillin, and he needs only one pair of tefillin
and one sukka, on the second pair and on the second sukka, there
is no hechsher-mitzva at all, since he does not need them. There is
no determined time for hechsher-mitzva. It could be before a
kiyum-hamitzva or after a kiyum-hamitzva for a next mitzva. For
example, if a man was mekayem the mitzva of tefillin or the mitzva
of sukka, and then for some reason, he does not have his tefillin or
his sukka, then there is a hechsher-mitzva of sukka and tefillin.
Secondly, when it says in the Torah “ Veyarashta veyashavta" —
you should conquer the land and settle there, the conquering of the
land is only a hechsher-mitzva. The kiyum-hamitzva is to live in
eretz-Yisrael. The mitzva is not kibush eretz-Yisrael — which
means conquering eretz-Yisrael, but yeshivat eretz-Yisrael, which
means living in eretz-Yisrael. (The student should keep this principle in his mind because many erred on this subject, and thought
that kibush is a kiyum-hamitzva. This is wrong; kibush, which is
expressed in the word yerusha, is only a hechsher mitzva. The
mitzva is yeshiva, sitting in eretz-Yisrael. I also discussed the proof
for this halacha in another place, and indicated that this is the
meaning of the Rashbatz (Siman 3) and of the Avnei Nezer, Yoreh
Deah (Siman 454).
Thirdly, the statement of the oath, sheloh yaalu bechoma —
they should not storm, means only not to storm from outside of
eretz-Yisrael. The language of “yaalu” — they will go up, or “aliya”
going up, means only from chutz-laaretz to eretz-Yisrael. Every
place, without exception, in Talmud, Chazal, or Midrash, whenever anybody came to eretz-Yisrael, the Chazal used the language
of “alah” which means he came up to eretz-Yisrael. When anyone
left eretz-Yisrael, Chazal always used the language “yorad,” which
means he came down from eretz-Yisrael to chutz-laaretz. This expression of aliya and yerida, going up when one comes to
eretz-Yisrael and going down when one leaves eretz-Yisrael, is
explicitly clear in the Talmud Bavli and in the Talmud Yerushalmi.
Moreover, the Talmud itself emphasizes this fact.
The Mishna in Kiddushin says: Asara yochsin alu meBavel —
ten classes of people went up from Bavel ... The Gemara asks on
the Mishna: Why is it particularly taught, “went up from Bavel?”
Let him state, “migrated to eretz-Yisrael”? The Gemara answers:
“He thereby tells us something in passing. As it was taught: Then
shall you arise and get you up unto the place which the L-rd thy
G-d shall choose.”’ This teaches that the beit-hamikdash is higher
than the rest of eretz-Yisrael, and eretz-Yisrael is higher than all
other countries. As for the beit-hamikdash being higher than the
rest of eretz-Yisrael, it is well, as it is written, “If there arise ...
matters of controversy within thy gates, then shall ye arise and go
up.” But how do we know that eretz-Yisrael is higher than all other
countries? Because it is written, “Therefore behold, the days come,
says G-d, that they shall no more say, ‘As the L-rd liveth who
brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt’; but ‘as
the L-rd liveth who brought up and who led the seed of the house
of Israel out of the north country, and from all other countries
from where I had driven them.’”
We see that the Gemara points out here explicitly that aliya
means coming from chutz-laaretz up to eretz-Yisrael. Indeed,
there are many clear examples of this. The Gemara says in Brachot: Ki-she-varad Chanina hen Achiya Reh Yehoshua legola —
which means that Reb Chanina, the nephew of Rabbi Yehoshua,
“went down” to Bavel. Another example, the Mishna says in
Yevamot: “Rabbi Akiva says Ki-she-yoradti lenehardah — which
means he “went down” from eretz-Yisrael to Bavel.
From these examples and the above definitions, the difficulty in
the Ramban which says that the mitzva of kibush prevails even in
our time against the oath, dissolves. The oath, shelo yaalu
bechoma means explicitly that we cannot storm eretz-Yisrael from
chutz-laaretz. But when the Jews are in eretz-Yisrael, there is
surely a hechsher-mitzva of kibush-haaretz, conquering the land of Israel. However, another question arises: How can the Jews be
in eretz-Yisrael without the aliya “bechoma?” The answer is very
simple. If many Jews came to eretz-Yisrael individually, or by
permission of the nations, then once they are there, there is a
mitzva of kibush and the establishment of a Jewish government in
eretz-Yisrael. There was never an oath upon the people who were
in eretz-Yisrael. Since kibush is a hechsher-mitzva, the hechsher-
mitzva can be done after they are in eretz-Yisrael. That is why the
Ramban says that the mitzva of kibush can be realized even today.
It is astonishing that the Ramban on Shir Hashirim says that by
the approval of the nations the Jews will enter into eretz-Yisrael.
Here it is in accordance with the Ramban’s halacha, that since the
nations would allow the Jews to enter eretz-Yisrael, then they can
make the kibush afterwards. And since kibush is only a hechsher-
mitzva it can be after the yeshiva, the settlement of Jews in eretz-
Yisrael. The order is not determined since it is only a hechsher-
mitzva for the mitzva of yeshiva, which is its fullest realization is
not only to settle in eretz-Yisrael, but to possess fully eretz-Yisrael
with its own government and rulership.
The Mitzva of Kibush is When Yisrael is in Eretz-Yisrael
When the Jews are in eretz-Yisrael, they are obliged by the
mitzva of kibush (conquering), which is designated in the Torah
under the word ‘veyarashta,’ and which according to the Ramban
means that when the Jews are in eretz-Yisrael, they are not sup-
posed to give up their possession of the land even if they have to go
to war. This is the mitzva of kibush-haaretz according to the
Ramban. The definition of sheloh yaalu bechoma eliminates all
the arguments and justifications of those who quote this oath to
disqualify the Jewish possession, conquest, and government of
eretz-Yisrael. Once and for all, if anyone is a halacha-man, let him
try to refute this definition of shelo yaalu bechoma!
Furthermore, I discovered that my entire chidush is clearly and
explicitly defined in Midrash. As is known to any Talmudical
student, the halacha uses a precise language defined logically. But
the Midrash, which is usually more explicit, quotes in Shir Hashirim the same oath by the following words: shelo yaalu bechoma
min hagola — which means the Jews should not storm eretz-Yis-
rael from the galut.
We see here clearly that in order for one who
may not be a halacha-man and may not know the definition of the
word “yaalu”, the Midrash made the effort to state explicitly that
the word “aliya” means min hagola, from the galut, since the
Midrash is written for everybody. (See Rashi in Shabbat 30b.)
The words of the Zohar stated above are not only a statement of
the Kabbala and sod part of the Torah, but correspond exactly to
the halacha of shelo yaalu bechoma.
This Zohar. in relation to this halacha, is the source for the
solution to the great difficulty about which all the meforshim are
perplexed, to find the root of this oath and its foundation in
halacha. (See the sefer Avnei Nezer.) However, I will not elaborate here. We learn from here clearly the explanation of the Ramban
that the mitzva of kibush eretz-Yisrael prevails even today, for the people who are in eretz-Yisrael. But the mitzva of the Torah,
veyarashta veyashavta. which means to conquer eretz-Yisrael, and
to settle in eretz-Yisrael — now, in the time of galut, has to be
reversed. First, there has to be veyashavta, you should be in
eretz-Yisrael; second, there has to be veyarashta, conquering eretz-
Yisrael. The order is not restrictively determined, since veyarashta,
which means conquering, is a hechsher-mitzva and can be either
before or after the mitzva of veyashavta. It is interesting that the
atchalta-degeula in our time actually happened according to this
halacha (as I explained the pshat of the Ramban). First, through
the hashgacha-pratit the Jews came up to eretz-Yisrael, little by
little. Then, they founded the medina which was established with the approval of the United Nations, as the Ramban predicted that
the Jews will have eretz-Yisrael with the consent of the nations of
the world. Then, by means of two wars, the Jews conquered the
shtachim which belong to them according to the Torah.
But what is astonishing and incredible is that David-hamelech in
Tehilim predicted exactly this state of affairs and the atchalta of
the geula in the special order in which it happened a few thousand
years later. Tehilim 69 describes the troubles that the Jews will have to suffer in the galut. It is almost a condensation of the entire
Megila of Aicha. It begins: “Save me, O G-d, for the waters are
come into my soul. 1 sink in deep mire, where there is no standing, I
am come into deep waters and the flood overwhelms me. I am
weary with crying, my throat is dried. My eyes fail while I wait
for my G-d...” After it describes the sufferings and troubles of the
Jews in the galut, David-hamelech assures that the end will be.
“G-d will help Zion, and He will rebuild the cities of Yehuda,
veyashvu sham veraishuha — which means they will settle there
and they will conquer. In the entire Tanach, it is always written
first yerusha and then yeshiva. But here in the prediction of the
future geula, David-hamelech writes first the word yeshiva, living
in eretz-Yisrael and then yerusha. conquering eretz-Yisrael. This is
the only place in Tanach where the order is reversed. The Navie
saw a long time ago, exactly what will happen, as one sees it after
the fact.
1: The Brisker Rav lost his wife and 3 children in the Holocaust. He did not come to Israel with his family intact. 2: You still have not addressed my main point: This letter is from Kislev, long before "millions of Jews were running to shelters." Unless somehow you are of the opinion that kashrus organizations should have stopped functioning on October 7.
So your sources are liars! The Brisker's wife and children died in a fire in Europe NOT in the Holocaust! I'ts ok to rewrite history but then just add "I made this up to fit into my agenda"
Numerous sources say the brisker ravs family was murdered only quoting leftist haaretz because no way a charadi doctored it. https://web.archive.org/web/20220527054806/https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/2015-10-11/ty-article/this-day-lithuanian-prodigy-passes-away/0000017f-db07-df62-a9ff-dfd7854a0000
The Brisker Rav, Rav Yitzchok Zev (Velvel) Soloveitchik, lost his wife and several children in a fire, not in the Holocaust. 🔥 What actually happened? Multiple reliable Brisker family traditions and biographical accounts record that: His wife, Rebbetzin Alte Hendl, and several of their children died in a tragic house fire in Brisk (Brest-Litovsk) before World War II. This event occurred in the 1930s, and it profoundly affected the Rav for the rest of his life. The Rav and the surviving children later fled Brisk during the war, escaping first to Warsaw and then to Vilna, and eventually to Eretz Yisrael. 🕯️ Why the confusion? Because the Brisker Rav lived through the Holocaust and lost many students and community members, some people mistakenly assume his immediate family perished then. But his wife and the children who died did so earlier, in the fire.
Now I knew that all my life growing up, and clearly remember the older Holocaust Survivors saying that the Brisker Rav was against a State because he and his entire family managed to escape, if he had lost family, he would have an entire different SHIT"ah! I'm surprised that you quote Mishpacha magazine, the magazine that Rav Kornfeld and Rav Feldman banned!
I am from a Brisker family that grew up in Midwood, the reid was as DIN related that his family was burned in a fire. It is interesting to note that practically all anti-Zionist rabbis lost no one in the Holocaust, the Satmar Rebbes' family were saved, and the Chazon Ish was in Israel during the Holocaust, lost no one, On the other hand the Kloizenberger Rebbe, who lost a wife and 11 children, was pro the State! As Din has mentioned many times that those who were not affected were against a State but those who lost immediate family were all for a State!
1: According to this article, they were killed by the Nazis. Do you have a source for your version? https://mishpacha.com/time-frame 2L Please address my main point: The letter from the Eida is from Kislev, not from now.
The Brisker Rav, Rav Yitzchok Zev (Velvel) Soloveitchik, lost his wife and several children in a fire, not in the Holocaust. 🔥 What actually happened? Multiple reliable Brisker family traditions and biographical accounts record that: His wife, Rebbetzin Alte Hendl, and several of their children died in a tragic house fire in Brisk (Brest-Litovsk) before World War II. This event occurred in the 1930s, and it profoundly affected the Rav for the rest of his life. The Rav and the surviving children later fled Brisk during the war, escaping first to Warsaw and then to Vilna, and eventually to Eretz Yisrael. 🕯️ Why the confusion? Because the Brisker Rav lived through the Holocaust and lost many students and community members, some people mistakenly assume his immediate family perished then. But his wife and the children who died did so earlier, in the fire.
Now I knew that all my life growing up, and clearly remember the older Holocaust Survivors saying that the Brisker Rav was against a State because he and his entire family managed to escape, if he had lost family, he would have an entire different SHIT"ah! I'm surprised that you quote Mishpacha magazine, the magazine that Rav Kornfeld and Rav Feldman banned!
Every of many published accounts states the Brisker Rov’s Rebbitzen Hendel was murdered beyodayim by the cursed Nazis ymach shmom! R’ Yechiel Michel Feinstein said that his wife Lifsha referred to her mother as Hy”d. R’ Berel who was the last relative to see his mother alive said that his mother was shlepped with other Yidden to the outskirts of Brisk to be shot by the Nazis ym”s! So here you have it folks! DIN would have you believe the gantz Soloveitchik mishpocho is covering up the figment of his imagination “house fire” for a future somehow conspiracy against Tzionim. Tell it to the Marines!
The Brisker Rav, Rav Yitzchok Zev (Velvel) Soloveitchik, lost his wife and several children in a fire, not in the Holocaust. 🔥 What actually happened? Multiple reliable Brisker family traditions and biographical accounts record that: His wife, Rebbetzin Alte Hendl, and several of their children died in a tragic house fire in Brisk (Brest-Litovsk) before World War II. This event occurred in the 1930s, and it profoundly affected the Rav for the rest of his life. The Rav and the surviving children later fled Brisk during the war, escaping first to Warsaw and then to Vilna, and eventually to Eretz Yisrael. 🕯️ Why the confusion? Because the Brisker Rav lived through the Holocaust and lost many students and community members, some people mistakenly assume his immediate family perished then. But his wife and the children who died did so earlier, in the fire.
Now I knew that all my life growing up, and clearly remember the older Holocaust Survivors saying that the Brisker Rav was against a State because he and his entire family managed to escape, if he had lost family, he would have an entire different SHIT"ah! I'm surprised that you quote Mishpacha magazine, the magazine that Rav Kornfeld and Rav Feldman banned!
DIN - i have no idea which version of how they were niftar is correct, but i looked on chatgpt as well. see conversation below (but yes, it looks like they ARE quoting mishpacha magazine): did the brisker rav's wife and children die in the holocaust?
Yes. Sadly, part of the family of the Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik (the Brisker Rav) was murdered in the The Holocaust.
Here is what happened:
When World War II began and the Nazis invaded Poland in 1939, the Brisker Rav fled from Brisk (today Brest, Belarus).
He managed to escape together with several of his children and eventually reached Eretz Yisrael in 1941.
However, his wife Rebbetzin Alte (Hindel) Auerbach and three of their younger children were left behind in Brisk and were murdered by the Nazis.
The children who were killed were:
A 15-year-old daughter (Gittel)
Two young sons, about 4 and 5 years old.
Several of his other children did survive, escaping separately and later joining him. Many of them became well-known rabbanim and roshei yeshiva in Jerusalem (for example, Rav Yosef Dov “Berel” Soloveitchik and Rav Meshulam Dovid Soloveitchik).
So the answer is:
Yes — his wife and three of his children were murdered in the Holocaust.
Other children survived and continued the Brisk dynasty.
If you want, I can also tell you a remarkable (and heartbreaking) story about the last time the Brisker Rav saw his wife before she was killed—it’s often quoted in biographies of him.
someone else quoted chatgpt as saying that they did not. rather, they were killed in a fire in the 1930's. which one is true?
The correct historical account is that his wife and three of his children were murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust, not in a fire in the 1930s.
What reliable sources say
During the Nazi invasion of Poland in 1939, the Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik fled Brisk with several of his children and eventually reached Eretz Yisrael.
His wife, Rebbetzin Alte Hindel Auerbach, and three of their children remained behind in Brisk and were murdered by the Nazis.
The children included a 15-year-old daughter (Gittel) and two young sons (about 4 and 5 years old).
Some of the Rav’s other children escaped separately and later joined him, and they rebuilt the Brisk yeshiva in Jerusalem.
Where the “fire” story may come from
There are a few possible reasons someone might claim that:
Confusion with other tragedies in the family Two of the Brisker Rav’s children did die earlier in childhood (one in 1919 and another in 1932), but not in a house fire.
Mix-up with other Brisk-related stories Stories about fires in Brisk or tragedies affecting other rabbinic families sometimes get incorrectly attached to the Brisker Rav’s family.
AI hallucination or mistaken retelling Sometimes AI tools or second-hand summaries incorrectly invent details like a “fire.”
✅ Conclusion:
The accepted historical record is that the Brisker Rav’s wife and three children were killed by the Nazis during the Holocaust in Brisk, not in a fire in the 1930s.
I would go with the version of my CHatGPT because as you know I'm a grandfather, and am old enough to remember Holocaust survivors all saying that his wife and some of his children were killed in a fire! i also checked in the Yad Vashem Archives and his wife is not mentioned as a victim of the Holocaust! Either way I'm closing this discussion, and I stand by my Eida Haganavim story that they are busy with narishkeitin while Jewish Children are fighting on all fronts! Pass me the Kugel Pot! Please?
I am not sure what your point is. A kashrus organization noticed a potential kashrus issue, and developed a solution. There is something wrong with that?
ReplyDeleteAlso, the letter is dated from three months ago, and no one was running to shelters then.
It is obvious from your clueless reply that you don't live in Israel
DeleteWell, The Lakewood's KCL Hashgocha allows all pots and utensils to go out to Shabbos jobs with no Mashgiach, only Non-Jews. The Aida should learn from the KCL many other kashrus leniencies.
ReplyDeleteThere's a war in Israel so now we don't have to eat kosher?
ReplyDeleteI'm starting to think the Satmar Rebbe was right. Maybe its true. Zionism is not about Israel, its about secularizing the Jewish nation.
3:49
DeleteYou are one sick, vile piece of scum!
"The Satmar Rebbe was right?"
Was he right when he predicted in 1967 that "there wouldn't a moisid in Israel in 20 years" ?
Was he right when he said that the miracles in the 1967 war were by the Satan?
Or
Was he right when he told his followers in 1943 that Hitler would never come to Hungary?
Was he right when he advised his followers who held visas to Palestine not to take advantage of it?
Was he right when he wrote that the Gedoilei Yisrael, like the Gerer Rebbe, The Belzer Rebbe, Rav Shach who had parties in the Knesset were "Meenim & Apikorsim"
So tell us how "was he right?"
You scribbled:
"Maybe its true. Zionism is not about Israel, its about secularizing the Jewish nation."
How did Zionism "secularize the Jewish nation?"
This Jewish nation is the home of 7 1/2 million of our brothers and sisters! Just last month The Zionist Government granted 800 million shekel to Moisdois Ha'Torah, so how is this secularizing the Jewish nation?
There is not one case in 78 years of the Jewish State that they stopped anyone from learning Torah!
In fact those stopping Bochrim from learning Torah are the Chardeidim who send out their students to protest!
A Chardeie Gadol ordered Schools closed so they could vote in a Local mayoral election.
3:49
DeleteYou perverted obsessive wretch...
You are clinically, neurologically, and pathologically psychotic.
Your obsessive campaign to keep supporting the Satmar' Rebbes's crazed obsession against Israel is completely and utterly f'd up.
I just had a strange thought:
ReplyDeleteI think everyone here agrees that the comments section is just as entertaining as the blog itself.
Could it be that DIN writes all the comments himself to make the blog even more entertaining?
sounds like matrix glitch
Ketubot 111a (end of 110b–beginning of 111a), in the sugya of “ג׳ שבועות”
ReplyDelete"וְרַבִּי זֵירָא? מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא, דְּאָמַר: ג' שְׁבוּעוֹת הַלָּלוּ לָמָּה? אַחַת — שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲלוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּחוֹמָה, וְאַחַת — שֶׁהִשְׁבִּיעַ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁלֹּא יִמְרְדוּ בָּאֻמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם
, וְאַחַת — שֶׁהִשְׁבִּיעַ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֶת הָאֻמּוֹת שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁתַּעְבְּדוּ בָּהֶן בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל יוֹתֵר מִדַּי
It says clearly in the גמרא the punishment, if we are עובר
Naftuli
DeleteThe גמרא is clearly an aggadeteh!
Tell us Naftuli
Who witnessed these ג' שְׁבוּעוֹת ?
When did it take place?
Where exactly did it take place?
Why didn't the Rambam mention it in his entire Mishna Torah?
Why didn't the Shulchan Aruch mention it?
Why didn't Rashi mention it, why didn't Tosfois, why didn't the Rosh, Rif, Ran, Maharsha (who elaborates on all the aggadatehs) none of the Rishonim talk about it?
Why did Ezra ask the Jews of Baval to go up to Eretz Yisrael in clear violation of the ג' שְׁבוּעוֹת??
If this was such a great event, why didn't Shlomo Hamelech write it explicitly, why did he hide it in three random pesukim?
Stop repeating and regurgitating Satmar Crappola!
Read the sidebar before repeating nonsense that has been refuted and debunked a million times!
We, the majority of the Jewish people, now live in Israel, what do you want us to do? Surrender to the Ayatollahs? You farkitah meshiginar!
Did you stop and think what living under the Arabs would be? They are constantly killing each other, I cannot imagine what they would do with us?
Why did the Gra, the Baal Shem Tov, want to make Aliyah?
Why did the Ramban, and more recently, the chazon Ish, the Steipler, Rav Shach, the Gerer, the Belzer, the Kloizinberger, the Brisker actually make Aliyah?
You Shiteh Shebeolam!
This conversation is over!
Go live in Ramallah or Jenin!
who wants to tell him...
DeleteYay diN repeating the same old nonsense. You sound like a massive am haaretz both in yedios and in svaros. I have no patience to answer your “questions” especially since you don’t care about the answer.
DeleteB”h we have guidance from rabbanim such as the satmar rebbe rav shach brisker rav chazon ish and all the other rabbanim you mentioned that explain to us the evils of Zionism
8:07
DeleteYour rabbanim that you mentioned are all dead, yet the State of Israel is a vibrant country and was recently included in a worldwide poll that Israelis are among the happiest in the world.
Rav Shach may have screamed against Zionism but established a political party that sat in the Zionist Knesset, he was also pro the Oslo accords that brought about the 1st intifada, he was also for giving back parts of Eretz Yisrael, though that is an "Issur De'orissah violating
והארץ לא תמכר לצמיתות כי לי הארץ
As far as the Chazon Ish, during his lifetime he couldn't get more than 500 bochrim to be learning steady, while the Zionist Entity has over 100,000 at any given time.
The Brisker Rav came to Israel with his entire family intact and lost no one of his immediate family in the Holocaust, it was very easy for him to preach to survivors whose wives, husbands, parents and children were brutally murdered, to say that he was against a State!
The Satmar Rav's original plan was to make Aliyah and he actually did as did his daughter, but when Holocausr Survivors of Satmar arrived they yelled at him for telling them that "Hitler would never come to Hungary"
The Satmar Rav himself was saved by a Zionist!
Din 8:27 what does Aliyah have to do with Zionism ?? You don’t know basics.
DeleteAnd you’re so busy with your little Zionist nonsense that you think the state is supporting Torah. And to compare to the Chazon ish?? Are you retarted?? (We know the answer) You’re a sick soul.
Go run along with your Zionist religion and enjoy you’re own version of moshiach I feel bad for you when moshiach really does come and you see what you could have been zoiche to for now bye bye keep stocking those hell coals
Hey Sickiemeister
DeleteYou ask "what does Aliyah have to do with Zionism ??"
If you don't what Zionism even means, why do you keep blabbering narishkeiting?
Zionism means believing that "Every Jew has a Right to Be In the Homeland that God gifted us"
All the Gedoilim that made Aliyah came for that reason!!!
Helllllllllllowwwwwwwww!
A Homeland! A Jewish Homeland!!!
You scribble like a maniac
"state is supporting Torah"
That's nonsense?? Granting Torah Moisdois 800 million Shekel is nonsense? You sick demented creature!
Move to Ramallah or Jenin!
Din you were wrong about the brisker rav. He wife and 3 of his children were murdered by the nazis.
DeletePs he also wasn't an anti Zionist like satmar, his anti Zionism was much different and doesn't exist now.
11:34 The Brisker Rav's wife and children died in a fire in Europe and NOT in the Holocaust!
DeleteNo clue how she (his daughter died) assuming shot. But even if you are correct and it was a fire a (in the brisk ghetto in 42 is clearly murdered in the holocaust.
Deletehttps://www.geni.com/people/Gittel-Soloveitchik/6000000007630722060
Well you control the conversation, calling me names is bla bla.
ReplyDeleteIt clearly says that if we are messing with the שלש שבועות or רש"י says even only trying to do something about it, the Holocaust will happen
במסכת כתובות (דף קיא, עמוד א), מובא המקור לביטוי המצמרר הזה כחלק מתיאור "שלוש השבועות" שהשביע הקדוש ברוך הוא את עם ישראל ואת אומות העולם [1, 2].
לפי הגמרא, רבי אלעזר מסביר שאם עם ישראל לא יעמוד בשבועות הללו (כמו האיסור לעלות בחומה או למרוד באומות), הקדוש ברוך הוא אומר: "אני מתיר את בשרכם כצבאות וכאילות השדה" [1, 3].
המשמעות:
הפקרות: כשם שצבאות ואילות הם חיות בר שדמן מותר לכל והן ניצודות ללא הגנה, כך יהיה דמם של ישראל מופקר בידי רודפיהם [3, 4].
העדר דין: הביטוי מסמל מצב שבו אין שמירה אלוהית, והגויים יכולים לפגוע ביהודים באין מפריע [2, 4].
Naftuli
DeleteDid you actually read what you copied and pasted?
I don't think so!
You may have living under a rock or in a cave, but we the "hamoin Am" know that the Holocaust happened BEFORE the State was established, and no one went up כחומה!
And what does לעלות בחומה even mean?
100 people? 1,000 people? 2,000 people? 2 people?
The Ramban write unequivaclyy that there is a Mitzvas De'Oriisah of Yishuv Eretz Yisrael, so how is that going to happen? Does he just mean one family?
Stop pasting stuff you have no idea about!
You pasted: למרוד באומות
What does that mean exactly?
Because the United Nations presented a paper supporting a State for Jews in 1947, the "United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine,! "
Take your garbage to another site that will believe your ama-ratzis!
Oleh bechoma means like a wall. Look at ancient siege towers and that seems to be the pshat. Meaning coming into ey as an armed force. Rav chaim Zimmerman uses this to explain why the state of israel is not under the 3 oaths because it came from within ey
DeleteYou never answered this challenge - not that you will ever admit when you are wrong: There is reyd about how something can be halacha even though the Rambam was not moineh. And nisht yeden dvar pushet issur is brought in Shulchan Aruch either
ReplyDeleteWow! Here we have a Gaon Oilon that calls himself "Kuf Yud Alef" that is lecturing us on halacha, telling us that "though the Rambam" and the "shulcan Aruch" don't mention something so important it is nevertheless a halacha!
DeleteWow! Tell it to all the Gedoilim and Poiskim who made Aliyah!
I'll tell you a halacha that is not mentioned in the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch........."Don't be an idiot"
The sixth argument is the famous argument about the three
ReplyDeleteoaths, one of which is that G-d beswore klal-Yisrael not to storm
and come up to eretz-Yisrael before the time. Many answers and explanations were written in relation to this oath. Most of them
are drush and homiletical interpretations according to the conceptions of different subjective points of view. In all these writings,
did not find an objective, logical, halachic explanation of the exact
definition of this oath shelo yaalu bechoma not to storm and
come up to eretz-Yisrael before the time. However, the clear
halachic aspects of this oath refer only to when the Jews are in
galut, outside of eretz-Yisrael; they cannot storm and enter eretz-
Yisrael by force or by war, since when the Arabs are in eretz-Yisrael and the Jews start to conquer them from bases in chutz-laaretz (outside of eretz-Yisrael) the probability is that the Jews will
not win bederech-hateva, in a natural way according to the oath.
However, if the Jews are fighting or conquering land when they are
in eretz-Yisrael, then, according to the Torah, the probability is
that the Jews will win. All the sources and the logical understanding of this halacha shelo yaalu bechoma pertain only when the Jews are outside of eretz-Yisrael, as will be explained.
The Zohar Hakodesh says since Yishmael was circumcized
when he was thirteen years old, even though eretz-Yisrael is given
to Yisrael, the children of Avraham-avinu, who have the mitzva of brit-mila on the eighth day after birth, Yishmael still had a zchut.
And when eretz-Yisrael is empty of Jews then the children of
Yishmael will prevail in the land. Because they were circumcized
they had the zchut to be in eretz-Yisrael. So long as there were no Jews there, they will prevent the Jews from coming back to their
place. However, as soon as the Jews are in eretz-Yisrael, the zchut
of Yishmael in the land is terminated. If Yishmael will wage war against the Jews while the Jews are in eretz-Yisrael the bnei-Yishmael will lose, and the Jews will remain in eretz-Yisrael. And even if other nations as for example, Edom, will help the bnei-Yishmael in their war and fight against Yisrael, they will not win, and the rule of eretz-Yisrael will remain in the hands of Yisrael. This Zohar is in
Parshat Vaeira and its prediction is being realized in our time, even
though the prediction of the Zohar was written long ago. This is
the sod and the pshat of the oath. The whole halacha relating to
this subject in Talmud and Chazal, becomes evidently clear.
By this differentiation between the status of Yisrael when they
are in chutz-laaretz to their status when they are in eretz-Yisrael, a great difficulty in the words of the Ramban, which perplexed
many generations, is solved. The Ramban writes, in his hasagot on
the Rambam in Sefer Hamitzvot, that one of the taryag-mitzvot is
that we are obliged to inherit the land, and not to leave it to other
nations, or to leave it abandoned and desolate, because it says
vevarashtam el haaretz veyeshavtem bo.
The Ramban explains these words to mean that we are commanded to conquer the land and live in it. This precept is determined for all generations and for all times. It is a mitzva to live in
eretz-Yisrael in every generation. Even in times of galut, this
mitzva of yerusha, which means conquering the land, and yeshiva,
which means living and settling in the land, is valid. The Megilat
Esther, one of the great commentaries on the Sefer Hamitzvot.
asks on the Ramban, how is it possible that this mitzva of kibush
eretz-Yisrael, conquering eretz-Yisrael by force, prevails at any
time, even in the time of galut since there is an oath shelo vaalu
bechomal With this contradiction, the Megilat Esther remains
perplexed in understanding the Ramban.
We see here a very interesting fact, that the argument against the
ReplyDeleteatchalta-degeula and Medinat-Yisrael, in relation to the oath, was
already asked as a question on the words of the Ramban, and it
remained a dilemma for generations. However, according to the
differentiation stated above, there is no contradiction at all
between the oath and the mitzva of kibush according to the
Ramban.
According to the Ramban just mentioned, there is a mitzva of
the Torah to live and settle in eretz-Yisrael. It says in the Torah,
"veyarashta, veyashavta" According to Chazal and all the rishonim, yerusha means conquering eretz-Yisrael, and yeshiva means
settling in eretz-Yisrael. The Ramban holds that Yisrael is obliged
to fulfill this mitzva constantly. Its fulfillment is not limited to a
specific time, the time of the coming of the Mashiach, but this
mitzva obliges Yisrael continuously to conquer eretz-Yisrael and
settle in eretz-Yisrael. But the question arises, how is it possible
that the mitzva of yerusha and yeshiva should prevail in our time,
or in the time of the Ramban, since there is an oath shelo yaalu bechoma not to storm and come up to eretz-Yisrael before the
time?
To solve this difficulty, it is important to explain a few concepts
of halacha. In Torah and Reason, 1 explained the difference
between hechsher-mitzva and kiyum-mitzva. Hechsher-mitzva
means the preparation, the stages by which a mitzva can be realized. For example, making a sukka is a hechsher-mitzva, sitting in
a sukka is a kiyum-hamitzva.
The Torah writes in the language of hechsher-mitzva, since the
Torah gives commands to man as to what to do.
The Torah
ReplyDeletepedagogically speaks to klal-Yisrael in the language of creating the
means to fulfill and realize the mitzvot. For example, the Torah
says veasu lahem tzitzit and they should make tzitzit on the
edges of the garment for the generations. The kiyum-hamitzva is
not to make the tzitzit, but to wear the tzitzit. The bracha that we
make every morning when we put on the tzitzit is on the wearing of
the tzitzit and not on the making of the tzitzit; to make the tzitzit is
a hechsher-mitzva. The Torah says, Chag hasukkot taaseh lach —
you should celebrate the holiday and make sukkot. The mitzva is
not to make the sukka; that is only a hechsher-mitzva. The kiyum-
hamitzva, which means the fulfillment of the mitzva, is to be in the
sukka. Or, when the Torah says, "Som tasim alecha melech" —
you should make upon yourself a king, the mitzva is not nomina-
ting the king. That is only a hechsher-mitzva. The kiyum-mitzva is
to be ruled by a melech. Or, when the pasuk says that before
Pesach you should destroy the dough from your house, the mitzva
is not to have chametz. But the “destroying” of chametz is only a
hechsher-mitzva. And so, in every mitzva, the Torah speaks in the
language of hechsher-mitzva. Since the Torah gave the people new
commands which were unfamiliar to them, the Torah told them
the hechsher-mitzva because this is in accordance with the halacha
of dibra Torah kelashon bnei adam. This means that the words of
the Torah are given in a language which fits man’s understanding.
This principle that the Torah speaks in the language of hechsher-
mitzva is a great erudition of the psukim of the Torah and solves
many difficulties.
There are many differences between hechsher-mitzva and
ReplyDeletekiyum-hamitzva. For example, if a man puts on tefillin, every
minute during the day that he wears the tefillin, he is mekayem a
mitzva. Or if a man gives tzdaka, every time he gives the tzdaka, he
is mekayem a mitzva. If a man sits on yom-tov Sukkot in the
sukka, he is mekayem a mitzva. But if a man will make two sukkot,
or write two pairs of tefillin, and he needs only one pair of tefillin
and one sukka, on the second pair and on the second sukka, there
is no hechsher-mitzva at all, since he does not need them. There is
no determined time for hechsher-mitzva. It could be before a
kiyum-hamitzva or after a kiyum-hamitzva for a next mitzva. For
example, if a man was mekayem the mitzva of tefillin or the mitzva
of sukka, and then for some reason, he does not have his tefillin or
his sukka, then there is a hechsher-mitzva of sukka and tefillin.
Secondly, when it says in the Torah “ Veyarashta veyashavta" —
you should conquer the land and settle there, the conquering of the
land is only a hechsher-mitzva. The kiyum-hamitzva is to live in
eretz-Yisrael. The mitzva is not kibush eretz-Yisrael — which
means conquering eretz-Yisrael, but yeshivat eretz-Yisrael, which
means living in eretz-Yisrael. (The student should keep this principle in his mind because many erred on this subject, and thought
that kibush is a kiyum-hamitzva. This is wrong; kibush, which is
expressed in the word yerusha, is only a hechsher mitzva. The
mitzva is yeshiva, sitting in eretz-Yisrael. I also discussed the proof
for this halacha in another place, and indicated that this is the
meaning of the Rashbatz (Siman 3) and of the Avnei Nezer, Yoreh
Deah (Siman 454).
Thirdly, the statement of the oath, sheloh yaalu bechoma —
ReplyDeletethey should not storm, means only not to storm from outside of
eretz-Yisrael. The language of “yaalu” — they will go up, or “aliya”
going up, means only from chutz-laaretz to eretz-Yisrael. Every
place, without exception, in Talmud, Chazal, or Midrash, whenever anybody came to eretz-Yisrael, the Chazal used the language
of “alah” which means he came up to eretz-Yisrael. When anyone
left eretz-Yisrael, Chazal always used the language “yorad,” which
means he came down from eretz-Yisrael to chutz-laaretz. This expression of aliya and yerida, going up when one comes to
eretz-Yisrael and going down when one leaves eretz-Yisrael, is
explicitly clear in the Talmud Bavli and in the Talmud Yerushalmi.
Moreover, the Talmud itself emphasizes this fact.
The Mishna in Kiddushin says: Asara yochsin alu meBavel —
ten classes of people went up from Bavel ... The Gemara asks on
the Mishna: Why is it particularly taught, “went up from Bavel?”
Let him state, “migrated to eretz-Yisrael”? The Gemara answers:
“He thereby tells us something in passing. As it was taught: Then
shall you arise and get you up unto the place which the L-rd thy
G-d shall choose.”’ This teaches that the beit-hamikdash is higher
than the rest of eretz-Yisrael, and eretz-Yisrael is higher than all
other countries. As for the beit-hamikdash being higher than the
rest of eretz-Yisrael, it is well, as it is written, “If there arise ...
matters of controversy within thy gates, then shall ye arise and go
up.” But how do we know that eretz-Yisrael is higher than all other
countries? Because it is written, “Therefore behold, the days come,
says G-d, that they shall no more say, ‘As the L-rd liveth who
brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt’; but ‘as
the L-rd liveth who brought up and who led the seed of the house
of Israel out of the north country, and from all other countries
from where I had driven them.’”
We see that the Gemara points out here explicitly that aliya
means coming from chutz-laaretz up to eretz-Yisrael. Indeed,
there are many clear examples of this. The Gemara says in Brachot: Ki-she-varad Chanina hen Achiya Reh Yehoshua legola —
which means that Reb Chanina, the nephew of Rabbi Yehoshua,
“went down” to Bavel. Another example, the Mishna says in
Yevamot: “Rabbi Akiva says Ki-she-yoradti lenehardah — which
means he “went down” from eretz-Yisrael to Bavel.
From these examples and the above definitions, the difficulty in
ReplyDeletethe Ramban which says that the mitzva of kibush prevails even in
our time against the oath, dissolves. The oath, shelo yaalu
bechoma means explicitly that we cannot storm eretz-Yisrael from
chutz-laaretz. But when the Jews are in eretz-Yisrael, there is
surely a hechsher-mitzva of kibush-haaretz, conquering the land of Israel. However, another question arises: How can the Jews be
in eretz-Yisrael without the aliya “bechoma?” The answer is very
simple. If many Jews came to eretz-Yisrael individually, or by
permission of the nations, then once they are there, there is a
mitzva of kibush and the establishment of a Jewish government in
eretz-Yisrael. There was never an oath upon the people who were
in eretz-Yisrael. Since kibush is a hechsher-mitzva, the hechsher-
mitzva can be done after they are in eretz-Yisrael. That is why the
Ramban says that the mitzva of kibush can be realized even today.
It is astonishing that the Ramban on Shir Hashirim says that by
the approval of the nations the Jews will enter into eretz-Yisrael.
Here it is in accordance with the Ramban’s halacha, that since the
nations would allow the Jews to enter eretz-Yisrael, then they can
make the kibush afterwards. And since kibush is only a hechsher-
mitzva it can be after the yeshiva, the settlement of Jews in eretz-
Yisrael. The order is not determined since it is only a hechsher-
mitzva for the mitzva of yeshiva, which is its fullest realization is
not only to settle in eretz-Yisrael, but to possess fully eretz-Yisrael
with its own government and rulership.
The Mitzva of Kibush is When Yisrael is in Eretz-Yisrael
When the Jews are in eretz-Yisrael, they are obliged by the
mitzva of kibush (conquering), which is designated in the Torah
under the word ‘veyarashta,’ and which according to the Ramban
means that when the Jews are in eretz-Yisrael, they are not sup-
posed to give up their possession of the land even if they have to go
to war. This is the mitzva of kibush-haaretz according to the
Ramban. The definition of sheloh yaalu bechoma eliminates all
the arguments and justifications of those who quote this oath to
disqualify the Jewish possession, conquest, and government of
eretz-Yisrael. Once and for all, if anyone is a halacha-man, let him
try to refute this definition of shelo yaalu bechoma!
Furthermore, I discovered that my entire chidush is clearly and
explicitly defined in Midrash. As is known to any Talmudical
student, the halacha uses a precise language defined logically. But
the Midrash, which is usually more explicit, quotes in Shir Hashirim the same oath by the following words: shelo yaalu bechoma
min hagola — which means the Jews should not storm eretz-Yis-
rael from the galut.
We see here clearly that in order for one who
ReplyDeletemay not be a halacha-man and may not know the definition of the
word “yaalu”, the Midrash made the effort to state explicitly that
the word “aliya” means min hagola, from the galut, since the
Midrash is written for everybody. (See Rashi in Shabbat 30b.)
The words of the Zohar stated above are not only a statement of
the Kabbala and sod part of the Torah, but correspond exactly to
the halacha of shelo yaalu bechoma.
This Zohar. in relation to this halacha, is the source for the
solution to the great difficulty about which all the meforshim are
perplexed, to find the root of this oath and its foundation in
halacha. (See the sefer Avnei Nezer.) However, I will not elaborate here. We learn from here clearly the explanation of the Ramban
that the mitzva of kibush eretz-Yisrael prevails even today, for the people who are in eretz-Yisrael. But the mitzva of the Torah,
veyarashta veyashavta. which means to conquer eretz-Yisrael, and
to settle in eretz-Yisrael — now, in the time of galut, has to be
reversed. First, there has to be veyashavta, you should be in
eretz-Yisrael; second, there has to be veyarashta, conquering eretz-
Yisrael. The order is not restrictively determined, since veyarashta,
which means conquering, is a hechsher-mitzva and can be either
before or after the mitzva of veyashavta. It is interesting that the
atchalta-degeula in our time actually happened according to this
halacha (as I explained the pshat of the Ramban). First, through
the hashgacha-pratit the Jews came up to eretz-Yisrael, little by
little. Then, they founded the medina which was established with the approval of the United Nations, as the Ramban predicted that
the Jews will have eretz-Yisrael with the consent of the nations of
the world. Then, by means of two wars, the Jews conquered the
shtachim which belong to them according to the Torah.
But what is astonishing and incredible is that David-hamelech in
Tehilim predicted exactly this state of affairs and the atchalta of
the geula in the special order in which it happened a few thousand
years later. Tehilim 69 describes the troubles that the Jews will have to suffer in the galut. It is almost a condensation of the entire
Megila of Aicha. It begins: “Save me, O G-d, for the waters are
come into my soul. 1 sink in deep mire, where there is no standing, I
am come into deep waters and the flood overwhelms me. I am
weary with crying, my throat is dried. My eyes fail while I wait
for my G-d...” After it describes the sufferings and troubles of the
Jews in the galut, David-hamelech assures that the end will be.
“G-d will help Zion, and He will rebuild the cities of Yehuda,
veyashvu sham veraishuha — which means they will settle there
and they will conquer. In the entire Tanach, it is always written
first yerusha and then yeshiva. But here in the prediction of the
future geula, David-hamelech writes first the word yeshiva, living
in eretz-Yisrael and then yerusha. conquering eretz-Yisrael. This is
the only place in Tanach where the order is reversed. The Navie
saw a long time ago, exactly what will happen, as one sees it after
the fact.
Huy did you get that from rav chaim Zimmerman. Seems like what I remember him saying?
Delete1: The Brisker Rav lost his wife and 3 children in the Holocaust. He did not come to Israel with his family intact.
ReplyDelete2: You still have not addressed my main point: This letter is from Kislev, long before "millions of Jews were running to shelters."
Unless somehow you are of the opinion that kashrus organizations should have stopped functioning on October 7.
So your sources are liars! The Brisker's wife and children died in a fire in Europe NOT in the Holocaust!
DeleteI'ts ok to rewrite history but then just add "I made this up to fit into my agenda"
Numerous sources say the brisker ravs family was murdered only quoting leftist haaretz because no way a charadi doctored it.
Deletehttps://web.archive.org/web/20220527054806/https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/2015-10-11/ty-article/this-day-lithuanian-prodigy-passes-away/0000017f-db07-df62-a9ff-dfd7854a0000
The burden of proof is on you to show that they died in a fire when all sources religious and secular agree that they were murdered by the nazis
DeleteOk here it is from Chat GPT
DeleteThe Brisker Rav, Rav Yitzchok Zev (Velvel) Soloveitchik, lost his wife and several children in a fire, not in the Holocaust.
🔥 What actually happened?
Multiple reliable Brisker family traditions and biographical accounts record that:
His wife, Rebbetzin Alte Hendl, and several of their children died in a tragic house fire in Brisk (Brest-Litovsk) before World War II.
This event occurred in the 1930s, and it profoundly affected the Rav for the rest of his life.
The Rav and the surviving children later fled Brisk during the war, escaping first to Warsaw and then to Vilna, and eventually to Eretz Yisrael.
🕯️ Why the confusion?
Because the Brisker Rav lived through the Holocaust and lost many students and community members, some people mistakenly assume his immediate family perished then.
But his wife and the children who died did so earlier, in the fire.
Now I knew that all my life growing up, and clearly remember the older Holocaust Survivors saying that the Brisker Rav was against a State because he and his entire family managed to escape, if he had lost family, he would have an entire different SHIT"ah!
I'm surprised that you quote Mishpacha magazine, the magazine that Rav Kornfeld and Rav Feldman banned!
I am from a Brisker family that grew up in Midwood, the reid was as DIN related that his family was burned in a fire. It is interesting to note that practically all anti-Zionist rabbis lost no one in the Holocaust, the Satmar Rebbes' family were saved, and the Chazon Ish was in Israel during the Holocaust, lost no one,
DeleteOn the other hand the Kloizenberger Rebbe, who lost a wife and 11 children, was pro the State!
As Din has mentioned many times that those who were not affected were against a State but those who lost immediate family were all for a State!
1: According to this article, they were killed by the Nazis. Do you have a source for your version?
ReplyDeletehttps://mishpacha.com/time-frame
2L Please address my main point: The letter from the Eida is from Kislev, not from now.
Ok here it is from Chat GPT
DeleteThe Brisker Rav, Rav Yitzchok Zev (Velvel) Soloveitchik, lost his wife and several children in a fire, not in the Holocaust.
🔥 What actually happened?
Multiple reliable Brisker family traditions and biographical accounts record that:
His wife, Rebbetzin Alte Hendl, and several of their children died in a tragic house fire in Brisk (Brest-Litovsk) before World War II.
This event occurred in the 1930s, and it profoundly affected the Rav for the rest of his life.
The Rav and the surviving children later fled Brisk during the war, escaping first to Warsaw and then to Vilna, and eventually to Eretz Yisrael.
🕯️ Why the confusion?
Because the Brisker Rav lived through the Holocaust and lost many students and community members, some people mistakenly assume his immediate family perished then.
But his wife and the children who died did so earlier, in the fire.
Now I knew that all my life growing up, and clearly remember the older Holocaust Survivors saying that the Brisker Rav was against a State because he and his entire family managed to escape, if he had lost family, he would have an entire different SHIT"ah!
I'm surprised that you quote Mishpacha magazine, the magazine that Rav Kornfeld and Rav Feldman banned!
Every of many published accounts states the Brisker Rov’s Rebbitzen Hendel was murdered beyodayim by the cursed Nazis ymach shmom! R’ Yechiel Michel Feinstein said that his wife Lifsha referred to her mother as Hy”d. R’ Berel who was the last relative to see his mother alive said that his mother was shlepped with other Yidden to the outskirts of Brisk to be shot by the Nazis ym”s! So here you have it folks! DIN would have you believe the gantz Soloveitchik mishpocho is covering up the figment of his imagination “house fire” for a future somehow conspiracy against Tzionim. Tell it to the Marines!
ReplyDeleteOk here it is from Chat GPT
DeleteThe Brisker Rav, Rav Yitzchok Zev (Velvel) Soloveitchik, lost his wife and several children in a fire, not in the Holocaust.
🔥 What actually happened?
Multiple reliable Brisker family traditions and biographical accounts record that:
His wife, Rebbetzin Alte Hendl, and several of their children died in a tragic house fire in Brisk (Brest-Litovsk) before World War II.
This event occurred in the 1930s, and it profoundly affected the Rav for the rest of his life.
The Rav and the surviving children later fled Brisk during the war, escaping first to Warsaw and then to Vilna, and eventually to Eretz Yisrael.
🕯️ Why the confusion?
Because the Brisker Rav lived through the Holocaust and lost many students and community members, some people mistakenly assume his immediate family perished then.
But his wife and the children who died did so earlier, in the fire.
Now I knew that all my life growing up, and clearly remember the older Holocaust Survivors saying that the Brisker Rav was against a State because he and his entire family managed to escape, if he had lost family, he would have an entire different SHIT"ah!
I'm surprised that you quote Mishpacha magazine, the magazine that Rav Kornfeld and Rav Feldman banned!
DIN - i have no idea which version of how they were niftar is correct, but i looked on chatgpt as well. see conversation below (but yes, it looks like they ARE quoting mishpacha magazine): did the brisker rav's wife and children die in the holocaust?
ReplyDeleteYes. Sadly, part of the family of the Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik (the Brisker Rav) was murdered in the The Holocaust.
Here is what happened:
When World War II began and the Nazis invaded Poland in 1939, the Brisker Rav fled from Brisk (today Brest, Belarus).
He managed to escape together with several of his children and eventually reached Eretz Yisrael in 1941.
However, his wife Rebbetzin Alte (Hindel) Auerbach and three of their younger children were left behind in Brisk and were murdered by the Nazis.
The children who were killed were:
A 15-year-old daughter (Gittel)
Two young sons, about 4 and 5 years old.
Several of his other children did survive, escaping separately and later joining him. Many of them became well-known rabbanim and roshei yeshiva in Jerusalem (for example, Rav Yosef Dov “Berel” Soloveitchik and Rav Meshulam Dovid Soloveitchik).
So the answer is:
Yes — his wife and three of his children were murdered in the Holocaust.
Other children survived and continued the Brisk dynasty.
If you want, I can also tell you a remarkable (and heartbreaking) story about the last time the Brisker Rav saw his wife before she was killed—it’s often quoted in biographies of him.
someone else quoted chatgpt as saying that they did not. rather, they were killed in a fire in the 1930's. which one is true?
The correct historical account is that his wife and three of his children were murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust, not in a fire in the 1930s.
What reliable sources say
During the Nazi invasion of Poland in 1939, the Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik fled Brisk with several of his children and eventually reached Eretz Yisrael.
His wife, Rebbetzin Alte Hindel Auerbach, and three of their children remained behind in Brisk and were murdered by the Nazis.
The children included a 15-year-old daughter (Gittel) and two young sons (about 4 and 5 years old).
Some of the Rav’s other children escaped separately and later joined him, and they rebuilt the Brisk yeshiva in Jerusalem.
Where the “fire” story may come from
There are a few possible reasons someone might claim that:
Confusion with other tragedies in the family
Two of the Brisker Rav’s children did die earlier in childhood (one in 1919 and another in 1932), but not in a house fire.
Mix-up with other Brisk-related stories
Stories about fires in Brisk or tragedies affecting other rabbinic families sometimes get incorrectly attached to the Brisker Rav’s family.
AI hallucination or mistaken retelling
Sometimes AI tools or second-hand summaries incorrectly invent details like a “fire.”
✅ Conclusion:
The accepted historical record is that the Brisker Rav’s wife and three children were killed by the Nazis during the Holocaust in Brisk, not in a fire in the 1930s.
I would go with the version of my CHatGPT because as you know I'm a grandfather, and am old enough to remember Holocaust survivors all saying that his wife and some of his children were killed in a fire!
Deletei also checked in the Yad Vashem Archives and his wife is not mentioned as a victim of the Holocaust!
Either way I'm closing this discussion, and I stand by my Eida Haganavim story that they are busy with narishkeitin while Jewish Children are fighting on all fronts!
Pass me the Kugel Pot! Please?