At the request of many who search for practical guidance on living in or visiting Eretz Yisroel, we will post here an English translation of a Yiddish book written several years ago by Rabbi Meir Weinberger, rav of the Satmar kehillah of Antwerp. Rabbi Weinberger has spent many years delivering shiurim on Vayoel Moshe, and has published a commentary on it entitled Or Ki Tov.
The title of the book is “Guard Your Feet” based on a verse in Koheles 4:17, “Guard your feet when you go to the House of G-d.” Eretz Yisroel is G-d’s house, and when there one must exercise extra care over where he goes and what words leave his mouth.
We will IYH be adding new chapters at the bottom of this post.
Note: references are to Vayoel Moshe, for example 2:157 means Maamar Yishuv Eretz Yisroel, Siman 157.
Introduction
Darkness covers the earth: in our holy land, in the palace of the king, there exists a heretical state, whose entire purpose is to destroy and uproot the foundations of our emunah, which are implanted in the hearts of every Jew, and to uproot all the mitzvos of the Torah handed down generation after generation, all the way back to Moshe at Sinai. But Hashem granted us a counterweight: the Satmar Rebbe, who with the power of his Torah and holiness was able to re-establish the Jewish faith and save Jews from falling into Zionism. In his speeches he guided Jews on the right path, and he left us his Daas Torah in the form of a book, Vayoel Moshe, the foundational text against Zionism, from which a clear Torah answer to every halachic question can be derived. Those who study Vayoel Moshe carefully will find the correct Torah approach to all doubtful and difficult situations that may arise.
The Rebbe dedicated several chapters to the issue of traveling to Eretz Yisrael and the pitfalls and dangers associated with it. In fact, he concludes one of these chapters (Maamar Yishuv Eretz Yisrael 157) by saying, “Who knows, perhaps if the Rishonim were among us today, if they would forbid traveling to any place under the jurisdiction of those representatives of the Samech Mem.” But many people today, even among the Rebbe’s communities, are lacking clarity on this issue, since not all have studied Vayoel Moshe in depth, and thus they don’t realize what shailos are involved. Hence it has become like a totally permitted act in their eyes, with no precautions necessary, to live in or visit Eretz Yisroel, whether for the purpose of visiting the graves of tzaddikim, visiting family members or the like. Actually there are several very serious questions that arise, involving the foundations of our faith.
Therefore, due to popular demand, I have put together this booklet based on the shiurim that I delivered, with the goal to bring the fundamentals of this subject together in one place, so that people will know how to conduct themselves in all these situations based on the Torah, and not to be drawn after the spirit of the times. May Hashem help that my words enter the hearts of the readers, and may Jews be spared stumbling in these sins.
And may the zechus of the Rebbe protect all those who search for the truth so that they should be able to withstand these trials, not wavering from the path of the Torah and emunah. And may the eyes of the Jewish people be opened to recognize the truth and to stay far from the sinners and anything connected to them. And may we all merit to serve Hashem Yisborach and come closer to him. May our prayers be answered, may Hashem bring us happiness the balance out the days that we have suffered, and may we soon be zocheh to see the true yeshua of the entire Jewish people, when the kingdom of shomayim is revealed, bimheira biyameinu amein.
Friday of the Parsha containing the words, “Do not go with them” (Balak) 5772 (2012), Meir Weinberger, Khal Yetev Lev Satmar, Antwerp
Chapter One: The various prohibitions involved in travel to Eretz Yisroel and speaking about subjects relating to the State of Israel.
The first thing one must understand is that the very existence of the state is heresy (2:153). Not because its leaders, privately, are heretics, but the actual state itself is heresy for two reasons:
- Because having a state before the coming of moshiach is a heretical concept, because the fundamental reason for the oath that Hashem placed upon the Jewish people not to force the end of exile is because they have to have faith in the way Hashem runs the world (1:45). The geulah cannot come any way other than through Hashem himself, without any action by human beings. If someone takes action to force the end of exile, he is showing that he does not believe in this. Therefore, having a state before the coming of moshiach is denying the belief in Divine providence.
- Because the state was founded with the purpose of uprooting our entire Torah and Emunah in Hashem. It’s not a government that happens to have leaders who are sinners or heretics, but rather the actual state has the goal of uprooting Torah and Emunah (2:153). All their actions starting from the founding of their movement, and later when they established the state, when they secularized most of the Jewish world, show that this was the goal (1:104 and 2:136). They themselves stated at the beginning that that was their goal in making a state (2:141, paragraph 4).
Even if that had not been their goal, and indeed even if the state were run based on the laws of the Torah, by observant Jews, it would still be heresy because of the first reason (1:85), but since the goal is also kfirah, it is a double kfirah. It is kfirah for two reasons, kfirah on the worst level. As the Rebbe said, that such a denial of the existence of Hashem, to this extent, has not existed since the creation of the world (Hakdama, paragraph starting “Amnam Zos”).
Heresy is worse than idolatry
Once we understand that the state is a heretical concept, we have to know a foundational idea that is stated in many places in Chazal: that heresy is worse than idolatry (Shabbos 116a: “one being chased by a murderer or a snake may enter an idolatrous temple but not a temple of heresy”). This is mentioned also by the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch. The Rebbe mentions it in many places (1:108 and 2:33). And there are many reasons why heresy is worse than idolatry. Therefore, it follows that all laws in Shulchan Aruch relating to idolatry would apply even more when it comes to heresy.
Practical Prohibitions
There are two fundamental categories of prohibitions: agreeing to heresy, and encouraging the heretics.
Category 1: Agreeing to heresy
There is a halacha in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De’ah 157 that a Jew is not allowed to say that he is a non-Jew, even to save his life, because this may be understood by others to mean that he agrees with their religion, which is idolatry. Now, if agreeing to idolatry is a sin for which one must be killed rather than transgress, all the more so is that true of heresy, which is more severe than idolatry (1:76 in the paragraph starting Umevuar).
Even a partial admission is considered agreement
Agreeing to heresy does not only mean completely agreeing (2: 153 in the paragraph starting Vehinei). Completely agreeing would mean saying that it was the right thing to establish a state before the coming of moshiach. Rather, even a partial admission would also have the status of agreeing to heresy, for example, if saying that in certain aspects, it was necessary to make a state, or in that certain ways the state was beneficial, has improved things. It’s scary to contemplate how easy it is to fall into this trap.
Regarding this, the Rebbe says (2:153), “Agreeing partially to the root of heresy is worse than agreeing to idolatry.” Again, he’s not talking about someone who agrees completely that it was important or correct to make a state. The state may have a thousand things wrong with it in his eyes, but if in one way he holds that it was good, then he’s agreeing partially to the root of heresy and that is worse than agreeing to idolatry. One should rather be killed rather than allow such words to come out his mouth.
Category 2: Giving encouragement to the heretics
The Rebbe cites a halacha (1:114 and 1:115, based on the Midrash Parshas Vayikra) that encouraging sinners is worse than the sin itself, just as helping a sinner is worse than the sin itself (for example, one who shares in stolen goods and therefore does not turn in the thief). Therefore, giving encouragement to heretics is a sin one should rather be killed than transgress (2:153). Anytime one has doubt whether a given comment is considered encouragement, one should realize that he is playing with a question of the most severe sins (1:76, paragraph starting u’chdei, regarding the Maharam Schick, and 2:153). We will give details later. Opportunities to transgress this abound; in Eretz Yisroel, and even in the rest of the world, this is something that comes up on a daily basis. It might be that with a word or two, or even a gesture, one transgresses the most severe prohibitions in the Torah.
Giving encouragement to heretics can be divided into 3 categories (2:153):
- Actions that show respect. Just as the Torah teaches us to stand up for the elderly and Torah scholars, so too it is forbidden to give respect to the heretics, for example, showing respect to someone because he has any kind of position in the state.
- Saying encouraging or supportive words or even gestures.
- Supporting them with money is even more powerful than saying words. Later we will go into detail about various ways this can come up in real life.
All three are considered giving encouragement to heretics, and fall under the rule of “rather be killed than transgress.”
The distinction between agreeing and supporting
In 1:89, the Rebbe explains the difference as follows: “hodaah” (agreeing or admitting) means that the person himself sees something as true and important, and he expresses agreement with it. It’s not just superficial praise; he himself believes in it. Admitting implies that it is uncomfortable to make the admission. For example, although he is opposed to Zionism, he admits that he feels there was a certain benefit in it, although it troubles his conscience to say so.
But “admitting” does not always mean that he really believes what he is saying. Even if he says things that cause the listener to think that he agreed, that’s also called admitting. The prohibition to admit includes anything that gives others the impression that you hold that there was some benefit to founding a state, even in one aspect out of a thousand.
“Chizuk” (encouragement and support), means that although you don’t hold something is good, you encourage someone else who is doing it. For example, the Gemara (Gittin 62a) says that if one sees a Jew working his field during Shmitah and says, “Be strong,” he is aiding a sinner. He didn’t say or imply that he holds that one may work during Shmitah. He is just saying to someone who is working, “Since you’re working anyway, I wish you strength.” Nobody will hear this and think that the speaker agrees with working in Shmitah. But since he gave him a good word, the worker feels encouraged. Another example is giving money. Does giving money to someone always imply that you agree with everything he believes in? Doesn’t it happen sometimes that someone asks you for money and you don’t agree that the cause is important – perhaps you even say so openly – yet you give him something just because he asked? Giving a donation in such a case is “chizuk” but not “hodaah.” And as we said, chizuk can be done with money or with encouragement, and the encouragement can be given either through showing respect, or through words.
Leave a Reply