Talk:Religious Zionism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Translation, please[edit]

"Religious Zionists are often called 'Kippot Sruggot' because of the knitted skull caps that they wear."

Could somebody please toss in a quick translation of 'Kippot Sruggot'? - 23 Novemver 2005

'Kippot Struggot' in Hebrew literally means "knitted skull caps" - Harel, Dec 13, 2005

Non-Orthodox Religious Zionism[edit]

The jewish religion is inherently Zionist, all orthodox jews even those that do not fall under the title of Religious Zionist are "Zionists" as they desire a jewish state in the jewish land. "Religious Zionists" are only such bassed on their view of how the modern state and the secular zionist movement fits into the Orthodox jewish religion. --yisraeldov 17:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There should some discussion of Religious Zionism based in non-Orthodox interpretations of Judaism. For example, many Conservative Jews have a view of Zionism that is also grounded in religion. While few Jews, regardless of affiliation, would argue that Zionism is not a part of being Jewish, it is clear that this article deals with the idea of Zionsim being a religious responsibility. Ergo, it is incomplete without covering the Jewish movements that also stress Religious Zionism.

I do not accept that Judaism is inherently Zionist. All orthodox Jews await the day when all jewish people will live in the Land of Israel under the Kingdom of a Jewish king, but for many, this settlement is not equated with a modern concept of "statehood"(flag,anthem,etc) Nationalism defines a group by national indentity closely linked with land, Judaism defines the group by Torah, the land is a tool in the fullfilment of Torah, not a defining element.

Well, that depends on how you define Zionism. Wikipedia itself defines Zionism as "a political movement and ideology that supports a homeland for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel, where the Jewish nation originated over 3,200 years ago." To simplify: Judaism says that Israel is where Jews belong. This belief is called Zionism. Therefore Judaism is Zionist. Ayinyud 13:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not all Orthodox Judaism is Zionist at all. The Orthodox (not modern Orthodox) Bais Yaakov that I attended did not march in the Israeli Day parade, or celebrate Israel's independence day, specifically because it does not believe that a modern secular state in Israel has anything to do with Judaism, though they look forward to an eventual return to Israel with the coming of Messiah. Judaism is not monolithically Zionist. Oh, and what about Satmer <dare I mention Neturei Karta>?

You are not differentiating between political and other forms of Zionism. Most (but not all) Haredim are opposed to political Zionism, but are supportive of the inherent Zionism present in Judaism. They do not call their beliefs concerning Eretz Yisrael Zionism, yet its fits the definition (see above). Ayin/Yud 09:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure anyone can have this discussion without citing the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) and which Rabbis use which Scriptures to justify their (various) stand(s). I suggest you stop treating this subject(s) as a political movement and begin to recognize it is a religious one... and, for the participants, a damned serious one. Paleocon44 (talk) 08:41, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page move[edit]

I propose a move to Religious Zionism. It is a more straightforward, more commonly used term, and it is also more accurate, as it is more of an ideology (hence, -ism) than a movement. --DLandTALK 04:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Go for it! Ayinyud 07:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Orthodox Judaism[edit]

Welcome Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism. Please join if you are interested. Thank you. IZAK 09:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Meir Kahane[edit]

I removed Meir Kahane because he claimed to be Haredi and he lived in Matersdorf. While his ideas certainly influenced many in the religious ZIonist camp, he himself was not a religious zionist leader. His brother, Nachman, however, was a religious zionist leader. --Jayrav 16:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding: “I removed Meir Kahane because he claimed to be Haredi and he lived in Matersdorf.”

First off I would like to say that I am unaware of Rav Meir Kahane verbally or in writing expressing himself as being Chareidi – now, that may simply be my ignorance nonetheless there is no argument here. As is known, there is no conflict between being Chareidi and a Religious Zionist is as evident amongst the Chardalim, there is then there is no reason to say the titles are exclusive and irreconcilable. Rav Kahane’s raison d’être was to promulgate a Zionism that was fully injected with Torah-true values. He has written “Zionism, the establishment of the State of Israel, the return of millions of Jews home, the miraculous victories of the few over the many Arabs, the liberation of Judea, Samaria (the West Bank), Gaza, and the Golan, the return of Jewish sovereignty over the Holy City and Temple Mount are all parts of the Divine pledge and its fulfillment.” If labeling Zionism a Divine pledge is not the proclamation of a Religious Zionist, then I do not know what is. Respectfully, I will refrain from making the appropriate changes until this matter is discussed further. -- BrooklynHabiru 13:24, 30 May 2007

Hebrew Wiki[edit]

If anyone is interested in further work, here are 113 Religious Zionist Rabbis on the Hebrew Wiki

http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%98%D7%92%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%94:%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%99_%D7%94%D7%A6%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%94%D7%93%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%AA

And many entires about religious Zionism

http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%98%D7%92%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%94:%D7%A6%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%AA

Enjoy--Jayrav 16:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History and organizations[edit]

Most of this section of the article is a duplicate of the Mizrakhi (Religious Zionism) article, which is a stub. Wouldn't it be better to eliminate this redundancy? Any preferences on whether to eliminate the stub, at least until someone is prepared to expand it, or to delete most of it's duplication in this article? --Rich Janis 10:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Religious Zionist texts[edit]

Jayjg, I disagree with your wholesale removal of the section "Notable religious Zionist texts" and its contents. If these aren't relevant texts, what would be? Hertz1888 16:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to whom are they "Notable religious Zionist texts? The claim that these particular texts are important ones is original research; you need to find a secondary sources making that claim. Kahane's works in particular are only important in the development of the ideology of Kahanism, not Religious Zionism. Jayjg (talk) 17:05, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would still leave three other books. I suppose you could change the title, dropping the word "notable". I would simply like to see some basic, relevant books listed, and do not intend otherwise to be a party to this discussion. Your real debate is with BrooklynHabiru, who hopefully will be heard from soon. All the best. Hertz1888 18:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding: “Kahane's works in particular are only important in the development of the ideology of Kahanism, not Religious Zionism.”

This would be true if “Kahanism” (a term often employed as some sort of slur against other right wing Religious Zionist movements) were not an element or stream within Religious Zionism itself, however that is not the case. Sentiments that have been expressed by Rav Kahane are now being echoed by other Religious Zionist leaders (some of whom are on the list of “Notable religious Zionist figures” such as Effie Eitam and Baruch Marzel). To assert that he was a Religious Zionist is not “new research”, as such consequently his Sefer ‘Ohr HaRa’ayon’ is in fact a Religious Zionist text, which itself deals with the theological justifications of Religious Zionism. Perhaps the true issue was the use of the term “notable”, as Hertz1888 suggests it may have been too subjective and as such his advice seems to have been implemented. Respectfully, I will refrain from making the appropriate changes until this matter is discussed further. -- BrooklynHabiru 13:47, 30 May 2007

Zion (disambiguation)[edit]

There are other forms of Zionism. And "Zion" is associated. We need to WP:DAB. --Ludvikus (talk) 11:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Combination of Zionism and Judaism[edit]

The statement that religious Zionism combines Zionism and Judaism is propaganda. It implies that secular Zionists, EG Ben Gurion were not Jewish, or that Zionism is not intrinsically a part of Judaism, and that there is only one sort of legitimate "Judaism." In Hebrew propaganda of religious Zionists, the word used is "Yahadut" and this is a direct translation. I am changing it to "religious Judaism." I hope that is OK. [[Mewnews (talk) 11:08, 7 October 2008 (UTC)]][reply]

Ideology[edit]

This entire section is problematic, since not all religious Zionists believe in land of Israel etc. (eg Rabbi Melchior) and since this was not always the ideology of religious Zionism. Another problem is that Rabbi Kalischer was not part of the more modern religious Zionist movement but of an older generation and therefore references to him are confusing. His idea was different from that of later religious Zionists Rabbis Berlin, Reines and Mohilewer (Mohilever) need to be mentioned in this context. A good understanding of the subject can be gained from Parallels Meet, by Ehud Luz. [[Mewnews (talk) 11:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)]][reply]

Hebrew Education[edit]

The struggle for modernization of Jewish education was a part of the Mizrachi program and needs to be mentioned IMO. [[[User:Mewnews|Mewnews]] (talk) 11:19, 7 October 2008 (UTC)}[reply]

Proposed new content on "Criticism of Religious Zionism"[edit]

I am proposing to add new content to this article. The proposed content is at Talk:Criticism of Judaism/Proposed section on Middle East land-ownership conflict. Any comments on the proposal should be added to the on-going discussion at Talk:Criticism of Judaism#Proposal for new section: "Critics claim that Judaism's precepts have led to unfair land-ownership practices and expulsion of peoples in the Middle East" so the discussion is not spread over two places. The discussion could be moved here, but be sure to put a notification in Talk:Criticism of Judaism first. Thanks. --Noleander (talk) 14:09, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellaneous[edit]

My first post - hope it's OK to create section for Misc. I wanted to comment that the word justifies/justified (search for them at the top) seems inherently defensive or at least presents an opinion. I would recommend "...that encourages the Zionist efforts to build a Jewish state..." and "...who supported Zionism according Jewish law and urged...", or something along those lines (proposed?). Raanon (talk) 08:55, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ideology history[edit]

Perhaps missing would be details linking the roots of the ideology to circa 800BCE nationalist-religious tradition, i.e. in the Torah? There is mention in the belief that the land was given by YHWH as promised, but no details. 76.10.128.192 (talk) 16:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Religious Zionism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Zionist vs Religious Jews[edit]

Hello User 1l2l3k. I don't know what your background is. However being a former ("Ultra") Orthodox Jew myself, I can assure you that your edit was incorrect. There are many, many religious Jews who do not believe Jews have a God-given right to always live in the Land of Israel. There are hundreds of thousands of religious Jews, very Orthodox ones, who disagree with that view. So please do not change that text again. For the record, this is about this edit. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Religious_Zionism&diff=872899243&oldid=872853006 --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 20:28, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point, so I'm ok with your revert. --1l2l3k (talk) 20:40, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orthodox oppositionto religious zionism[edit]

Undid revision 1063828697 by Meir Hakoton (talk) interpretation in a book by Yaakov Shapiro is not relevant since he's not a "gadol" by any stretch of imagination, undue weight, the controversial topic of three oaths and their interpretations are better discussed elsewhere, specially in Haredim and Zionism with opinions that really matter

1) This undo of a revision is really an ad hominem explanation, which is not an appropriate standard for Wikipedia. 2) It also implies that all sources need to be certified by that editor as subjectively a "gadol" 3) The source is an academic book written by a duly ordained Orthodox Rabbi who is a leading expert on the subject of the Orthodox rejection of Zionism. Removing the title Rabbi from his name does not invalidate his Rabbinical ordination and credentials. 4) The author of the source is the most well known English speaking writer and lecturer on the subject and has written a 1300 page book with approbations from noted "Gedolim" 5) He is a fellow at an International think tank in Washington DC (ICMES) 6) The author's discussion was based on an array of Torah authorities (Gedolim) 6) I wrote edit in progress so that I can cite other sources and and 45 minutes later it was undone. 7) The topic of the Three oaths is relevant and is discussed 3 paragraphs earlier. Meir Hakoton (talk) 18:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Meir Hakoton[reply]

Agree with Meir. The opinions of gedolim are important but there is no reason they can't be cited via a reliable secondary source. In fact it is even better to have an independent, but still expert, source as it is more likely to provide a wider and more analytic view. Zerotalk 01:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article claims the purported reasons Religious Jews were against Zionism as a strawman argument. I am trying to explain the reason that they themselves gave. I think the relevance is clear and within the context of the article.Meir Hakoton (talk) 03:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Meir Hakoton[reply]

This article is specifically about religious Zionism, not opposition to it, which is already properly discussed in Haredim and Zionism, as I explained to you before, or in the article on the Three Oaths for that matter, or an entire section dedicated to Jewish anti-Zionism! If you want to add content on religious anti-Zionism, do it in one of those places, assuming it doesn't take away too much of your Torah learning. This article is not the place to include all the lenghty quotes, criticism and rebuttals, even more so when this is such a complex issue where even the biggest gedolim couldn't fully agree, specially nowadays after Israel became an effective reality with six and a half million Jews living there, and as a consequence you have post-1948 pragmatic approaches among Haredi leaders like Rav Aharon Kotler, Maran Ovadia Yosef or the Lubavitcher Rebbe on one hand, while uncompromising positions on the other like the Satmer. Then of course you have people outside acceptable discourse like Neturei Karta and Yaakov Shapiro who are experts in performing chillul Hashem by supporting the Iranian regime or making public lectures with antisemites and enemies of Israel like Gilad Atzmon (who is even dispised by many pro-Palestinian activists in Britain)... but those are outside mainstream kosher Judaism, so we should be careful not to give them undue weight even in those articles that discuss the complex relationship between Zionism and the Haredi world. Just to clarify, I'm not saying there is no place in Wikipedia to give the reader an overview of this debate, but definitely it has no place inside an article that deals exclusively with religious Zionism, such as this one.--Dur Godiva (talk) 16:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Despite this, many Jews did not embrace Zionism before the 1930s, and certain religious groups opposed it then, as some groups still do now, on the grounds that an attempt to re-establish Jewish rule in Israel by human agency was blasphemous. Hastening salvation and the coming of the Messiah was considered religiously forbidden, and Zionism was seen as a sign of disbelief in God's power, and therefore, a rebellion against God.

Religious Jews also disapproved of the Zionists because many were secular Jews or atheists, taking their cue from Marxism. Socialist Zionism envisaged the movement as a tool for building an advanced socialist society in the land of Israel, while solving the problem of antisemitism. The early kibbutz was a communal settlement that focused on national goals, unencumbered by religion and precepts of Jewish law such as kashrut. Socialist Zionists were one of the results of a long process of modernization within the Jewish communities of Europe, known as the Haskalah, or Jewish Enlightenment. These 2 excerpts from the article (which provide no sources) are stating with certainty a POV of the reasons Religious Jews opposed zionism. If this is not the place to discuss Religious Jews opposition to Zionism, then thee 2 passages should be removed as well as it is asserting a POV without a source on the subject.

Furthermore, you have repeatedly made personal attacks on me and one of the sources I quoted.

I will address both. 

Saying that RabbiItalic text Yaakov Shapiro (yes, just because you disagree with him, doesn't take away his Rabbinical ordination) is outside mainstream Kosher Judaism and comparing him to Neturei Karta - which he isn't part of nor had any affiliation with - is a personal attack based on your opinion. It is also completely false. He is a student of top "mainstream Yeshivas." He received his Rabbinical Ordination in Lakewood, and has served as an Orthodox pulpit Rabbi for over 30 years.  His books are highly regarded in the Yeshiva world with many approbations from leading Roshei Yeshiva. And has been asked to lecture on the subject to audiences that number in the tens of thousands.

Also, you said he is an expert in performing chillul Hashem. This is the gravest sin in Judaism. Have you ever studied the laws of Chillul Hashem to make that determination? Would you know where to look if you wanted to study that topic? That is a personal attack and inappropriate. You also said he supports the Iranian regime. What is your source for that? I'll help you. There isn't any.

So saying his opinions don't matter or that he is outside mainstream Kosher Judaism or that he is an expert in performing the gravest sin in our religion, or making up his support for an Iranian regime are all personal, and false.

There was also twice that you mentioned that I was engaged in Bitul Torah - another grave sin - for writing Torah outlooks on wikipedia. Apparently writing Torah is bitul Torah and erasing it is not? I take that insult very personally. You also claimed that "And for that you have an entire article called Haredim and Zionism (where you already added this content with the help of some good old bitul torah)" I have never added any content to that article so why would you say that I did?Meir Hakoton (talk) 19:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Meir Hakoton[reply]

Yes, making a public lecture with a disgusting antisemite and kofer like Gilad Atzmon because redemption didn't come the way you expected or wanted is the very definition of chillul Hashem. I won't post a link to that disgusting lecture (which was not a debate between the two, but rather an 'alliance' so to speak), you can look it up yourself on Google or Youtube. Ask a big chacham if such a thing is permissible at all. Even though I haven't learned as much Torah as Mr Shapiro and probably never will, I wouldn't trade my Olam Habah for his in a million years, trust me. The same goes for Yeravam ben Nevat and Doeg HaEdomi, both of whom were big talmidei chachamim but are rotting in hell or kaf hakela without having a share of the world to come. At least when I go up to shamaim I won't have to explain myself for making a "shiur" together with an enemy of Israel. The Satmer don't do that either (not that they use Internet or know who's Gilad Atzmon anyway), and they are as anti-Zionist as it gets. But that's besides the point. If you want to add anti-Zionist opinions, do it where it belongs, assuming it's not already there, such as Haredim and Zionism or the article on Anti-Zionism which has pretty much all the ideological objections to Zionism both among Jews and non-Jews, religious and secular, nationalist and cosmopolitan, left-wing and right-wing (make an edit request if you can't do it yourself because of extended-protection). But it doesn't belong in this article.
On a side note, I recommend you to read Eim habanim semeicha. Much like its author, I also used to believe there was a single and authentic Torah perspective when it comes to Zionism and the return to Israel, until I read that book. You shouldn't adopt a position until you hear all the different sides. But whatever is your position, NEVER join forces with Israel's enemies nor give them your approval. That's my humble advice.--Dur Godiva (talk) 05:00, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi it seems you've decided to be the judge and jury of who is evil and an enemy of the Jewish people. What about Ahavas Yisroel? Is that only for heretical Zionists? Saying "because redemption didn't come the way you expected or wanted" shows a lack of understanding of this issue, which is precisely what I'm trying to explain with my edit. Religious Jews opposition to Religious Zionism is NOT because the redemption didn't come the way they wanted. And saying that about Rabbi Shapiro shows you haven't read anything he wrote. So I think many people would benefit from seeing a different Torah perspective which is being shielded by editors quick to erase. As far as hearing the different sides of the issues, I can assure you most of my formal education was exclusively in the religious Zionist camp, and I was fed the same misleading strawman arguments of why Religious Jews were against Zionism (waiting for Moshiach, they didn't like non religious Jews, etc.) so when they taught us the "answers" to these "objections," we thought we knew "both sides." This wikipedia article repeats the strawman arguments without giving the real ones. As far as editing the antizionism or Haredim and antizionism pages(which as you point out are protected pages), those articles are filled with the opinions and sometimes blatant misinformation (eg. twisting a teshuvah of Rav Moshe about flags in shul - which he said should be removed) from religious Zionists pushing the strawman arguments. Even the way Agudas Yisroel is written as Agudat Israel on those pages shows it was written by a religious Zionist. Haredim don't write it that way. Or references to groups opposing only secular Zionism. You can also apologize for falsely claiming that Rabbi Shapiro supported Iranian regime or that I had edited an article that I didn't. Meir Hakoton (talk) 01:15, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A book with a haskama from Rabbi Moshe Shternbuch, Rabbi Yitzchak Tuviah Weiss, and Rabbi Elya Ber Wachtfogel is certainly a relevant source to a discussion about the opinion of Haredi Jews regarding Religious Zionism. I’m sure they themselves have all been accused of making a chillul Hashem and lacking Ahavas Yisrael but they are certainly authorities on the Haredi opinion and they encourage the reading of this book. Our job on wikipedia isn’t to determine who is right. We’re just trying to list all the sides, right or wrong. I don’t see why this author shouldn’t be a legitimate source. EglahArufah (talk) 01:36, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I wonder if Rav Shternbuch knows that Shapiro made a public lecture with Gilad Atzmon. I would REALLY like to explain the Rav who is Atzmon and show him the clip of said lecture. I'm sure Shapiro wouldn't mind that at all. I would like to ask the kevod harav if it's allowed for a rabbi to make a shiur together with an antisemite or a missionary. In any case, you already added Shapiro's material in the article on Haredim and Zionism, it doesn't belong here.--Dur Godiva (talk) 04:54, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I really don’t get what you’re saying. You think because Rabbi Shapiro did something that you disagree with he’s not a valid source? What does that have to do with the ideas in his book? Rabbi Shternbuch gave a haskama on the content of the book. That means he think’s they are legitimate ideas, the personal actions of the author not withstanding. If you think the ideas don’t belong here because you disagree with them that’s another story. I hope you would agree that’s against Wiki policy. 03:52, 13 January 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EglahArufah (talk • contribs)

I'd really love to come up with some type of compromise or consensus over here. If any other editors would like to jump in on the conversation. Perhaps we can go with Dur Godiva's suggestion that he mentioned above. And not include it in the ideology section but rather create a new section called criticism of religious zionism or detractors. Meir Hakoton (talk) 01:58, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no logical reason to discuss opposition within Religious Zionism. 2600:1700:A1C0:6D40:B586:E8D2:25AE:99EF (talk) 09:18, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Religious_Zionism&oldid=1208372368"