Another story from COL this time about the mivtzoim done at the Kotel. Anyone who has been there has witnessed the wonderful work these guys do. (Click on the link for more photos)
On Thursday, 14th of Tamuz, a ceremony of the 17th Maccabiah took place at the Western Well in the presence of 3,500 Jewish athletes from all over the world. Just before the closing ceremony of the Maccabiah, the athletes chose to visit the Western wall, remnant of the Beis Hamikdash, and for many of them this was the first visit to the Kosel and their excitement was visible.
Rabbi Yosef Halperin, shliach and Chabad booth director at the Kosel greeted the athletes with a staff of volunteers, young men and bochrim, students of the Tsemach Tsedek Colel and of Maayanot in Yerushalayim. These activists immediately got to work to make sure to lay teffilin to all of these thousands of athletes. The visitors were glad to find "Chabad also here at the Kosel, just like in our state and city". A few dozen of them laid teffilin for the first time and thereby eliminated their categorization as a 'karkafta' (a head that had never donned tefillin).
go shluchim !!!
ReplyDelete3,500 athletes, and a few dozen put on Tefillin. AE are your figures correct?
ReplyDeleteThis is the type of activity that makes Chabad great. This is what the Rebbe wants Yasher koyach!
ReplyDeleteAccording to halacha anonyomous comments are highly questionable. People should really sign their names to missives, especially about community issues.
ReplyDeleteHowever, considering that we live in a community that represses a free exhange of ideas and opinons,and considering that the PTB see themselves as sacred cows whose actions cannot be questioned, many people are intimidated into anonymity. I empathise and understand this but, only to a point.
Some of you who will not identify yourselves should ask yourselves if you have a back bone. Ask yourselves if you feel passionately enough about an issue, and if you truly stand for something, then why do you hide behind a keyboard?
An adult has to stand for principles and draw red lines beyond that he will not venture lest he becoms a sell-out. Those of you who know the truth yet have sold out to the system, because either you want to be feel like you are part of the inner circle, or because you are getting advantages from the system, are really living a lie. What kind of a life is it if you go against your own principles? How many of you here on this blog write strong opinions about things and then put a phony smile on your face when you socialize and pretend you have opinons that are different to what you truly believe in your hearts? And if you live that way, isn't that a sad way to live?
What is one of the differences between adulthood and childhood? Isn't it the ability to make moral choices, to take responsibility for one's actions, and to accept the consequences?
Isn't standing fast for a principle in the face of receiving dissaproval a sign of strong and good character? And aren't Torah principles worth standing up for?
And if Torah principles are not worth defending, then what is?
What is important in life?
For all those bloggers and rabbis in Melb who say the rebbe was against protesting publicly, here is a compilation from a Chabad site of the true views of the rebbe.
ReplyDeleteI think apologoes to rabbi oliver are in order.
WE MAY NOT HIDE THE REBBE’S VIEW!
A compilation of sichos and horaos of the Rebbe
about the obligation to protest
By Shai Gefen
As Chassidim, we know that the Rebbe’s view is what decides how we ought to conduct ourselves. As the Disengagement Plan is in high gear, there are still people trying to quiet the voice of protest, claiming that other approaches must be taken, that we should not express a clear, sharp, and direct protest about this suicidal process.
The Rebbe’s view on this topic was published, as per the Rebbe’s instructions, in a book called, Daas Torah B’Inyanei Eretz HaKodesh, by Rabbi Sholom Dovber Volpe, as well as in the series of s’farim called, Karati V’Ein Oneh.
It’s no secret that the Rebbe’s view detracting from “spreading the wellsprings outward.” The Rebbe referred to this a number of times, saying that he was protesting even though he knew it had adverse effects, but inyanei shleimus ha’Aretz and pikuach nefesh superseded everything else.
This was also the case in 5750, when the Rebbe prevented the establishment of a government that (merely) spoke about concessions, despite the great loss Chabad suffered as a result. This is the way it was then, and the way it has been throughout the years, when the Rebbe firmly led the battle for shleimus ha’Aretz.
The bottom line is what the Rebbe said (in response to a question from Tzach) – that the Chabad houses ought to openly deal with inyanei shleimus ha’Aretz in the name of Chabad. To help those who are confused about what the Rebbe actually held, we bring the following excerpts:
“WITHHOLDING SALARY FROM A LUBAVITCHER TEACHER BECAUSE I PROTEST ABOUT SHLEIMUS HA’ARETZ”
Although this is the protest of an individual, since it takes place in the presence of other Jews, it will certainly be heard via telephone in a number of places. And since people will hear this, they will surely react...
Since there are teachers who need to receive a salary, and therefore need aid and various kinds of support, they made it so that these teachers have a difficult time receiving their salaries, or only part of their salaries, because I protest that they should not give back an inch of land to the Arabs…
His goal is seemingly to cause me to stop talking about this, but he is doing this despite the fact that he knows that it won’t be effective, and he will not accomplish anything by withholding money. How does he know that I am not frightened by this? Since this isn’t the first time this has happened…
(Shabbos Parshas BaMidbar 5739)
THE SITUATION ISN’T HOPELESS AND WE MUST PROTEST
May the protest help so that at least they “fulfilled their obligation” with the withdrawal and downfall we had until now. If they will be satisfied with this, it will force them to rectify the previous withdrawals and downfalls. As for those who claim that it’s hopeless, and what can be done, let it be known that we live in a world in which nothing is hopeless, even regarding matters of material concerns.
If they stand strong, they will get back everything that belongs to the Jewish people according to Torah, in ways of pleasantness and ways of peace, and in ways permissible while in Galus.
(Shabbos Parshas BaMidbar 5739)
“IF THERE WAS A SHARP PROTEST, IT WOULD ULTIMATELY SUCCEED”
In my opinion, the main thing [to be done] now regarding the security situation is to protest in the sharpest manner possible against concessions to all the pressure pertaining to the security situation, which ultimately means that there is no limit to concessions.
Another important point, in my opinion, perhaps because I am too optimistic, is that if this protest was non-stop and exceedingly sharp, as the situation demands, it would ultimately succeed, and in the near future.
(24 Shvat 5741)
PROTEST AGAINST GIVING AWAY LAND, EVEN IF IT INTERFERES WITH SPREADING THE WELLSPRINGS
This is the only way to know whether it is permissible to give away land or not: If, when they give the land, “the land will be easy for them to conquer” or not!
The question about giving away land depends on nothing else – not on receiving money for yeshivos, receiving honor, or that it will interfere with spreading the wellsprings and mivtzaim. The only question is: Will the land be easy to conquer?
(VaYakhel-P’kudei 5740)
I WILL NOT CHANGE MY APPROACH; I WILL NOT BE QUIET REGARDING DANGER TO LIFE
I hold of the educational approach that when speaking about something having to do with danger to life, you may not be quiet, even when you know that while you speak (or tomorrow, or some time later), so-and-so will relate lashon ha’ra to so-and-so.
It won’t bother me, and therefore I am not one of those that it harms. What hurts is that afterwards, a Jew comes and says things that never happened. This is not about the prohibition of, “lo sichanem” (do not allow the goy to reside in the land) or the like, but pikuach nefesh!
So that people should not err, they said and reiterated and wrote and printed and publicized and asked that all who are interested should publicize this – that in Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, Hilchos Shabbos, siman 329, it speaks clearly about this. Yet despite this, it has no effect; he didn’t “get” it, since he is bribed!
As I said before, this is what I learned in my childhood. I don’t say I take pleasure in this, and it’s exactly the same feeling when they speak of me honorably as when they speak the opposite way, but I’m not going to change! I’m not about to change the approach which was paved for me by my father [R’ Levi Yitzchok] and teacher and father-in-law [Rebbe Rayatz], which is to ignore that which is the opposite of honor, and to ignore even a decree of the nations of the world!
(20 Av 5739)
RELIGIOUS JEWS GATHER AND DON’T SPEAK AGAINST GIVING AWAY LAND?!
When many dozens of Jews who are all religious convene, all of whom review the sidra each week, including the weeks when it talks about the real borders of Eretz Yisroel – additionally, some of them read the newspapers and know what the state of the world is now – and this gathering is for the purpose of strengthening Torah and Judaism, then how is it possible that they spend three days together and spoke about all the important matters, and they made good resolutions, but when it comes to something associated with danger to life to more than a few dozen Jews, they didn’t mention it?
And nobody speaks up!
I told him – you can ask him: There is a din in Shulchan Aruch that one who is silent or one who waits until they come and ask him about pikuach nefesh, the Shulchan Aruch says that “one who [waits until he] is asked is disgraceful.” He also knows about this din too! This is not proper according to Shulchan Aruch! “Do not stand by your friend’s blood,” means, according to Shulchan Aruch, that even when there is a doubt, or a shadow of a doubt, or even a thousandth of a doubt, that perhaps protesting may help, then he must protest!
This is not the place for intricate discussions and you don’t need to ask anyone. The Shulchan Aruch was published in Tzfas by the Beis Yosef, and it has a clear p’sak din, and he does not pasken a law without reason such that you can argue about the reason, but he says the reason: “it will open the land before them.”
(VaYeitzei 5740)
I WILL FIGHT WITH ALL MY STRENGTH SO THAT THE GOVERNMENT FALLS APART
I always fought for a government of Shamir, and just as I did all that I could to ensure that a government led by Shamir would be formed, if they continue this way regarding talks, then I, Menachem Mendel, will be the first to fight with all my strength against Shamir so the government falls!
Until now, only Shimon Peres was against the Shamir government, but if Shamir continues in this direction regarding autonomy talks, then I too will be against Shamir’s government.
If Shamir cannot withstand the pressure of the gentiles, he should openly announce that he cannot withstand the pressure and can no longer be the prime minister!
(10 Shvat 5752)
http://chabad.info/bm/index.php?magazine=ee_&status=goto_id&id=480
Yechi hamelech-no one is saying we should be silent or passive in the face of disengagement.
ReplyDeleteYou missed the point.
We should be vocal and active, but the issue is about the kind of activities we do.
Many of us do not like the tactics used by the local orange activists because they are 1)not the tactics the Rebbe approves of 2) the tactics used are against halacha 3) tactics that turn people off to the message we want to send. 4) tactics that do not educate people about the issue of shalymah haeretz proeprly but polarise people instead.
Wolpe is known to be one of the most fanatical fringe radical Moshiachistin in Chabad. He is no authority on the Rebbe's intentions.
This will not be the first or the last distortion from good old Wolpe!
ReplyDeleteKnesset Investigation of Disengagement Corruption Commences
ReplyDeleteThis Tuesday, 9:30 AM, at The Knesset:
Investigation Commences of Alleged Corruption on the Highest Level of the
Disengagement Process
David Bedein
http://www.israelbehindthenews.com/#schitut
The Israel Parliamentary Knesset Oversight Committee, which oversees all
aspects of Israel Government Accountability, chaired by Member of Knesset Dr
Yuri Shtern, has summoned the Israeli official appointed by the Prime
Minister of Israel to implement the Disengagement to explain a potential
conflict of interest that could bring the disengagement process to an
unexpected halt.
The hearing will take place at the Knesset on Tuesday, July 26th, at 9:30 a
m.
Summons have also gone out for representatives of Israel's State Comptroller
The Office of the Prime Minister, the Israeli Police and the Israel
Ministry of Justice to also appear.
What has been widely reported in the Israeli media is that the head of the
coordination and strategy team in the Prime Minister's Office in charge of
Disengagement, Eival Giladi has also been named as CEO of a massive business
venture for Palestinians in Gaza, known as "The Portland Trust".
Giladi's highly publicized role in the Portland Trust is to raise half a
billion dollars in business loans for business and housing development
programs for Palestinians in Gaza, in order to facilitate the construction
of 150,000 homes that would be replace the housing in 22 Jewish communities
of Katif - the same communities where Giladi is set to oversee their
demolition.
In other words: Giladi stands to profit from ventures that would help
Palestinians who would benefit from the removal of Jews from their homes -
providing Giladi a private financial incentive for him to succeed in his
position.
The logical question to ask would be whether Giladi has signed any kind of
standard civil service agreement with the office of the Prime Minister of
Israel that would constrain Giladi from entering into any potential conflict
of interest in his role public service position.
One month ago, after Israel Resource News Agency in Jerusalem first raised
the possibility of a potential conflict of interest, the spokesman of the
Israel Civil Service Commission told the IMRA news agency in Raanana that
the commission would look into the matter.
Since then, the commission spokesman has not returned any calls in this
regard.
Two weeks ago, the spokesman of the Prime Minister told Makor Rishon, a
weekly newspaper published in Tel Aviv, Israel, that Giladi had indeed
signed an agreement that would obviate any potential conflict of interest.
However, the spokesman was not willing to provide the media with a copy of
the agreement.
Instead, the Prime Minister's spokesman has asked that any requests to
review Giladi's agreement be processed through the new Israel Freedom of
Information Act, a procedure which usually takes several months…well after
the disengagement process has been completed.
Meanwhile, the businessman who is the overall investor in the Portland Trust
is Sir Ronald Cohen, the British billionaire who has recently bought a
controlling interest in Bezek, the Israeli communications conglomerate which
holds a monopoly over telephone land lines in Israel.
Sir Ronald Cohen is not only well connected in Israel.
Cohen is also a well known advisor and supporter of Gordon Brown, the
British Chancellor of the Exchequer, the ministry of finance.
The Cohen appointment of Giladi presents yet another potential of conflict
of interest, since the Portland Trust's corporate portfolio openly states
that one of the purposes of the trust is to advance the interests of both
the British government and the European Union.
With the U.K. assuming the chairmanship of the EU for the next six months,
this carries even greater importance.
The Knesset investigation will also have to determine is whether Giladi, an
appointee of the office of the Prime Minister of Israel to implement the
disengagement process, is at the one and the same time also advancing the
diplomatic interests of foreign powers in that same disengagement process.
The Knesset Committee investigation of Giladi may lead to questions about
another key Israeli official's potential conflict of interests - The Prime
Minister's most important advisor, Dov Weisglass.
Weisglass did sign a standard anti-conflict of interest agreement with the
legal advisor of the Office of the Prime Minister of Israel, which committed
Weisglass to not engage in any Palestinian business connections, so long as
he held public office, which our news agency has reviewed.
There is no stipulation that Weisglass cannot resume Palestinian business
connections when he leaves public service.
Since Weisglass's law firm holds a contract for representing casino
development under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority, the
recommendation of the Portland Trust for further casino development inside
the Palestinian Authority would be of particular interest to Weisglass,
should be decide to leave his public position.
In sum, all mainstream Israeli media outlets have publicized Giladi's
parallel appointments to the run the disengagement process for the Prime
Minister office and to run a corporation for Palestinian development when he
will see personal financial stake in this process.
No media in Israel have called into question what seems to be a clear
conflict of interest.
Until now.
All this, with the implementation of the Disengagement scheduled to commence
less than three weeks after the Knesset investigation of corruption on the
highest levels of the Disengagement Process will begin.
The Rebbe's views on Shlaimas HaAretz are well known. I have not seen one comment from even the most critical opponent of the orange people and their tactics that has even suggested that the Rebbe was not against land for peace deals or that he did not encourage protest to express those views.
ReplyDeleteHowever, yechi hamelech and Rabbi Oliver - I have not seen one comment in the entire compilation you have posted saying that the form of protest should be public street marches as you have advoicated and defended!
Quite the contrary, the very first quote mentions: "Although this is the protest of an individual, since it takes place in the presence of other Jews, it will certainly be heard via telephone in a number of places. And since people will hear this, they will surely react..." Note that the Rebbe says the protest takes place "in the presence of other Jews". Please show me where the Rebbe says that protests should take place in the streets - amongst Goyim....
Of course the Rebbe wanted us all to protest - It is the form that this protest should take that has caused the current controveries. The protest that the Rebbe calls for obviously needs to be the most effective and constructive - the street march and rally that took place here in Melbourne may have been exciting for some of our local boys and girls and a few others who were anyhow already committed, but it certainly did not promote the message or increase support for Gush Katif amongst the general community. Quite the contrary.
So the very people who provide us with the undisputed sources of the Rebbes views and pain on the issue of Shlamois HaAretz are actually the very ones who have advocated methods that have harmed dissemination of the Rebbes views.
So rather than belittling and crititicsing those Rabbis and leaders who failed to endorse the rally and condemned street marches as against the derech of the rebbe, there should have been more adherence to the other messages of the Rebbe such as prior consultation with rabbonim and daas Torah and other responsible people who have been proven by the results of the rally that they were indeed correct in opposing it as counter productive.
Let's hope that further action by the orange people will be more consultative and more conducive to the garnishing of general support. Although given the unrepentant one-eyed views expressed by people such as yechi hemelech and Y. Oliver on this site I am afraid, unfortunately, that this will not happen. We are indeed are own worst enemies.....
NON ORANGE!
ReplyDeleteYOU ARE SPOT ON. There would be thousands and thousands against the disengagement if it would be run by level headed people without extreme tactics. Comparing it to the Holocaust and street marches just turned normal people of. Many including myself tried to highlight this fact but the orange people would not listen. I truly agree with you that these avtivists are the biggest enemy of the settlers.
It is also not smart for the Meshiachistim to use this protest to further their own cause!