העורך Editor

A recent sample from Chanaya Weissman’s hard-hitting newsletters…

An excerpt:

A reader shared:

“Found this (below) on an online forum for frum women. She obviously doesn’t understand that it’s intentional but her awareness is commendable nevertheless. Many posters agree with her.”

I am pro serving in the IDF and protecting our country

I don’t agree with the chareidi outlook of letting others take the risk and not helping.

I do acknowledge that there are spiritual concerns but they need to be worked through and neither side is doing a good job of it.

But

What no one seems to want to discuss is that we have a huge problem with the government. The politicians (both the right, and the left) are using the soldiers as political pawns. They are risking soldier lives for Pali lives. Soldiers die because of bad decisions made up top and that is just unacceptable. I feel that it may even override the obligation to serve. My boys are not cannon fodder for them to salvage Israel’s destroyed reputation with the world. I don’t care more about what the UN says than I care about the soldiers. The aid, the Hitnatkut, the negotiating, the protecting “innocent” civilians, the supplying of fuel and resources, the release of thousands of terrorists, and and on and on and on. All the horrific decisions made by the government makes me feel that they lost their right to claim my child for their army. I don’t owe them my boys life if they don’t treasure it the way I do. Idealism is beautiful but only for EY and the jewish people. Not for a weak government who won’t do what needs to be done to protect their people. I don’t owe them that.

I’m conflicted. I believe in protecting the country and our people. I don’t believe in dying for weak corrupt politicians.

Signed a non chareidi mom with teen boys almost at draft age.

My comments:

Not dying as cannon fodder might override the obligation to serve? Whoa! Does the Torah support THAT?!

Yes, it’s a significant step in the right direction. It’s a crack in the brainwashing that we should definitely view as an opportunity. But if it took decades of collaborating with and supporting our enemies, so much needless carnage, and upwards of 20,000 Jewish soldiers maimed and killed in less than two years for nothing just to raise this question, it underscores how deep the kefirah brainwashing still is. I bet they would still react to my articles with extreme hostility. We have our work cut out for us.

Read the rest here…

Read it here…

מבית כולל בית הבחירה – כרמי צור…

Quoting Rabbi Brand’s sefer “Let Us Search Our Ways” p. 11 (emphasis added):

…

When I went to one of the great rabbis of the generation and told him that I strongly challenge the customary sale of chametz because the non-Jew does not truly intend to commit himself, he replied to me: “We also allow Heter Iska even though we know that the other party doesn’t actually conduct any business at all.”

I answered him: “ערבך ערבא צריך (A guarantor requires a guarantor)!”

Behold, Heter Iska is built upon the fact that iska (business partnership) was mentioned in the Gemara, and then they created Heter Iska, where they devised stratagems so that the borrower would pay even if he didn’t profit from the business. And then only the Heter remained without the actual Iska (business), and upon this they built the subsequent notion that it’s possible to make far-fetched stratagems throughout the entire Torah.

And there are those who go in the opposite direction, learning far-fetched Heter Iska from the sale of chametz. And even though the matter actually contradicts itself — for with chametz one needs to obligate the non-Jew to pay even though we know that he certainly won’t pay and doesn’t commit himself to anything, while with Heter Iska the matter is reversed: at the root of the matter the borrower doesn’t need to pay when he hasn’t profited, yet in practice he must pay even though he hasn’t profited. So these two Heterim contradict each other — the only common element between them is that the words of Torah are in our possession to work them and shorten them and expand them according to our will, as it says in the Yom Kippur piyyut: “For behold, like clay in the hand of the potter, when he wishes he expands and when he wishes he contracts,” and here they add: “So too the words of Torah are in our hands” etc.

The main thing is that the page starts with the words of Torah as they were supposed to be, and then we manipulate it according to our own will even though this is exactly the opposite of what the Creator wants. And the main thing is that we give fancy names to the action — this one is called “Iska” and this one is called “Mechira.” It’s like when talking forbidden business on Shabbos, one says “נישט שבת’דיג גערעדט (Not for Shabbos-speaking)”, or נישט לשון הרע’דיג גערעדט (Not for Lashon Hara-speaking)”. No need to elaborate further on this because the heart is torn and broken and cannot express all that is within it.

And see Gemara Shabbos Perek Beis regarding the matter of the three converts where Hillel said to one of them: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow — this is the entire Torah, and the rest is commentary; go and learn.” And Rashi wrote there: “Your friend and your father’s friend do not forsake” – meaning the Holy One Blessed be He is called “Your friend.” So we learn here that one must behave toward the Holy One Blessed be He as we would want others to behave toward us. That is, one must understand what the Creator wishes.

For example, if someone is making a cake and lacks sugar and asks another: “Bring me a bag of sugar,” and he brought him an empty bag without sugar, and the requester claims: “I asked you for a bag with sugar!” He replied: “You told me a bag of sugar, not a bag with sugar, and I brought you a bag.” The requester became angry and said to him: “You need to understand that I didn’t request the bag but the sugar, and the bag is only the means by which the sugar is usually found inside the bag.” Certainly the one who brought it violated the words of our Sages: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow.” So it’s possible to understand how to behave toward the Holy One Blessed be He, and not to take shallow action devoid of all content.

Similarly it is said (Malachi 1:6): “A son honors his father and a servant his master; if then I am a father, where is My honor…?” says the Lord of Hosts to you priests who despise My name. And you say: “How have we despised Your name?” You offer polluted bread upon My altar. And you say: “How have we polluted You?” By saying: “The table of the Lord is contemptible.” When you offer a blind animal for sacrifice, is there no evil? And when you offer the lame and sick, is there no evil? Present it now to your governor; will he accept you or show you favor?” etc. It is clear that the prophet’s complaint was that they didn’t learn to behave toward the Creator of the World as they behave toward an important person, and certainly one must learn not to behave toward the Creator of the World in a way that even toward a simple person one wouldn’t behave.

The rest of the aforementioned sefer is here.

The book “ביום הראשון תשביתו” is against the customary sale of chametz mentioned above, see here.