The periodical Or Hatzafon, published by Belz in Yerushalayim, that recently incurred the wrath of the Satmar Chassidim for daring to say that the previous Belzer Rov was correct in changing his approach to Zionism and the State of Israel, and that, ultimately, this was always the Belzer approach, even when it seemed different pre-ww2, at least as far as looking out for the welfare of our fellow Yidden. Read on.
Or Hatzafon Ceshvan 5771-Belz on State of Israel
7 comments:
Hirshel
the Belzer Rov had this Ahavas Yisroel approach since a yungerman, his father RYD called certain people this is my "Arons Tzadikim" . It is a mistake to say that his philosophy, started after the shoah.For some odd reason, the current Belzer Rebbe also like to explain his uncles view, as post shoah. Growing up by Belzer chasidim I heard enough that this was his view since a youngster. I guess he was pure Neshoma, and could not see no impurities on a other Jewish Soul.
That's false.
The Rav was against the Medina before the Holocaust. It was the accepted SHITA among the Chasidisha Rebbes especially Belz. I don't see what Ahavas Yisroel has to do here. And the truth is that Reb Aharon Ztz"l changed his mind after the holocaust like he clearly answered to his nephew -the Skverer Rebbe Ztz"l- via his brother the Bilgureyer Rav, that the Medina is in "some way" a yeshua for klal yisroel, because it gave refugee to so many Jews after the Holocaust. And the main part is that he clearly admitted that he changed his view.
The question is on Satmar. First of all why did the Satmar Rav only confront the Belzer Rav at the bechiros of 1955 when the Rav was week and already blind. The S"R was in Israel 1952 by the bechiros and the B' Rav wrote his own letter saying that it's a Choiv Kodosh to go to the bechiros and the S"R knew that he shouldn't confront him only later as I said did he confront him when he thought that the Rav is week and he'll change his mind under pressure.
It is also worth to note about the Satmar version on the contents of what the S"R spoke then to the B"R versus the Belzer version (they printed it in Moshe Roye Nemon on th Beirach Moshe). The question is if everything went so good for the Satmarer Rav, then why was he so depressed when he came home? it's said they they literally had to console him.
There's so much to talk and say about it and how the Satmarer can't come to themselves from this. I just wanted to note one other point. It's known that the Satmarer Rav said in his speach the Shabbos after they met, that the S"M can save a Tzadik from doing sin for many years just to get him do one major sin. He quoted that Aharon made the Eigel and so on. It's known that the Belzer Rav then said that whoever of his followers listened to this speech has to ask him Mechila, and it's said that the Satmarer Rav then said that he didn't have him in mind.
Both if you have the papers that leaked out in 1955, the Rav quoted that satmarer rav said that he looked thru the entire Torah and couldn't find a bigger sin than going to the bechiros. Then he said whoever tells his people to go to the Bechiros, is a Choita Umachte Es Hurabim. So the Belzer Rav said; I tell my people to go to the Bechiros so according to the Satmarer Rav I'm a Choita Umachte therefore whoever of my followers listened to his speech must ask for my mechila. And he stood there while those who were present by the S"R speech asked him for mechila and he clearly told everyone 3 times Moichel Moichel Moichel.
such garbage, there is and was not any wittness who came foward to produce and claim he heared any of these "ahavas yisroel" statments by the belz rav before the war.
every single story of the such is from after the war.
and yes the belz rav did change after the war, this is fact, belz of today has no problem with the changes reb aron made, (but yet still dont like to addmit to it), and the satmers say he changed by the influence of based on what berish urtner or others.
Bobov Chosid
"such garbage, there is and was not any wittness who came foward to produce and claim he heared any of these "ahavas yisroel" statments by the belz rav before the war."
How do you know that he held his Ahavas Yisroel views after the war,I assume you did not hear youself, you just heard it from chasidim, The same chasidim will testify that they heard it before the war.
How about the Rachmistrivker Rebbe from BP testifying in the name of his FIL the old Skverer that was in Belz ?
Anon
you have a strong question,
but I don't think SR rather went to argue later in 1955 since he was weaker.
He was as weak all the years, his mind was sharp till the last Shabos, I never ever heard from nobody that the saw a difference.
Don't forget he was not that old by the petira, he was just weak from his unique lifestyle.
The Skvere Rebbe used to argue intensively with the Satmarer Ruv. They loved each others very much but every time the Satmarer Ruv made sure to bring up the conversation of Tziyones and that was it. There's a famous story that the SR gaboim asked him not to bring up the conversation, he said that he's not the one who brings it up rather does the Skvere Rebbe, but he promised from his side not to bring it up.
The next time the Skverer Rebbe came to visit him. The Satmarer Ruv asked how he was feeling and the Skvere Rebbe answered Nisht Bishleimes, the Satmarer Ruv started arguing nothing is Bishleimes how can things be Bishleimes when there are the Tzionisten? and so the conversation became heated and they started arguing.
When the Skverer Rebbe left the gaboim asked the Stmr Rav how come he didn't do what he promised so he answered, you see that he started the conversation!!
Since he came home from EY in 1955 they never met!!
Anon
"They loved each others very much"
How do you know?
all your stories are babe masious
Post a Comment