Rabbi Cohen's positions are really not in the mainstream of Jewish community. For those who are familiar with him, the sentiments expressed in the video are par for the course with respect to his often controversial views.
So wait, saying less than nice things about Zionism is similar to saying Holocaust victims deserved it?
The relevant controversial view concerning his position on Israel for which his remarks are par for the course is:
Cohen ended his speech to the conference with a prayer “that the underlying cause of strife and bloodshed in the Middle East, namely the state known as Israel, be totally and peacefully dissolved”.
I would like to hear opinions of forum members, on what he says, without flaming if possible.
Really? Do you honestly expect anyone to believe that is what you were talking about?
Of course. I reasonably expect that those who watched the video would then ask themselves the logical question, given what was in the video, what is germane to that video in the article? They would then see that he has some history of holding anti-Zionist positions. In other words, there's nothing novel about the video.
While of course you are correct that there is nothing new in what he says, I have not seen a thread on this on the forum.
As I understand it, Judaism and Zionism are completely different things and although now a majority of religious Jews have accepted Zionism, in the beginning it was almost totally opposed by Judaism which believed it was in opposition to the moral principles and ethics of Judaism. Indeed some leading Palestinian Jews were even murdered by Zionist terrorists for opposing Zionism.
I have not heard him before. He sounds a good man. He also makes the correct statement that we should not confuse Jews with Zionism or Zionism with Judaism.
While of course you are correct that there is nothing new in what he says, I have not seen a thread on this on the forum.
.
The marked part is clearly wrong.
Let me elaborate; Judaism, like every religion, is heavily relying on interpretations, and different people would choose to interpret it differently.
Some of the ultra-orthodox Jews have (and some still do) believed that Zionism is wrong because Israel should not be reestablished until the "Messiah" returns.
To suggest however that those were "almost all of Judaism" is very ignorant of history, as those folks were really in the minority of the minorities, and today there are way more people who follow such a belief than there were back then when Israel was reestablished as the Jewish homeland.
Of course. I reasonably expect that those who watched the video would then ask themselves the logical question, given what was in the video, what is germane to that video in the article? They would then see that he has some history of holding anti-Zionist positions. In other words, there's nothing novel about the video.
Then we have heard different histories. I have never gone looking for information on this but have come across it 2 or 3 times when looking at other things and each time I have heard of it being overwhelming opposed by Judaism....and never mind the Messiah, as I have heard it if the Jews were to be returned to Israel, it was to be by peaceful means.
You cited an article on him taking a position about the Holocaust fully expecting and wanting people to read all of it. Basically you were saying "this guy's a total psycho who thinks Holocaust victims got what they deserved" and therefore we should just discount anything else he says.
You know, you could try being just a little more abstruse. The notion that you decided to cite an article all about him taking a controversial position on the Holocaust only because you wanted people to pay attention to one paragraph is such a transparent excuse that it is just insulting that you think any objective, intelligent individual will buy it. Let us have some honesty for once in this forum. You cited an article on him taking a position about the Holocaust fully expecting and wanting people to read all of it. Basically you were saying "this guy's a total psycho who thinks Holocaust victims got what they deserved" and therefore we should just discount anything else he says.
That you were called on it very quickly and told how absurd that tactic was does not mean you can wiggle out of it by claiming you didn't expect anyone to look at anything but one paragraph.
Well clearly that is false, Judaism in its majority was very supportive of Zionism and indeed one of the main sects in the Zionist movement was the Religious Zionism.
Without the popularity and support for Zionism amongst the religious Jews, Zionism would probably not be possible.
Jews of 19th century Germany* founded the reform movement, rejecting the idea of a Jewish nation and proclaiming themselves "Germans of the Mosaic faith." The reform movement of those days was a compromise between total apostasy (assimilation)* and orthodoxy. Orthodox Jews often confounded Reform Judaism with assimilationism, but they are not the same.
Anti-Zionism of Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Judaism
The rabbinical authorities had led the Jewish communities of the world for nearly 2,000 years. The rise of Zionism was a distinct threat to their authority and their teachings. Moreover, the prominence of secular Jews in the movement and the emphasis on settlement in Palestine meant that the center of Judaism would move away from the Yeshiva seminaries and the synagogue. Zionism was supposed to be forcing the hand of Providence and to be contrary to the teachings of Orthodox Judaism in regard to the coming of the Messiah and the providential work of God in bringing about the restoration. Apparently, these views were held only among the Ashkenazy Jews of Western Europe. At no no time did Sephardic Jewish leaders proclaim themselves opposed to Zionism or settlement in Palestine.
Resolved: That we totally disapprove of any attempt for the establishment of a Jewish state. Such attempts show a misunderstanding of Israel's mission, which forms the narrow political and national field has been expanded to the promotion among the whole human race of the broad and universalistic religion first proclaimed by the Jewish prophets….
-big snip
Central Conference of Reform (American) Rabbis – 1897One year after the appearance of Herzl's the Jewish State, the Central Conference of Reform Rabbis in 1897 felt compelled to clearly state its rejection of Zionism. They would annually restate their rejection of Herzl and Zionism until the 1940's when the horror of the Holocaust could not be denied.
...
Like I said, I am just going on what I have read. You say in post 9 that only some 'ultra orthodox' Jews did not believe in zionism and that does not concur with what I have read.
I didn't mean that the only ones who were opposing the creation of the state were ultra-orthodox, but that the majority of them were.
Let me elaborate; Judaism, like every religion, is heavily relying on interpretations, and different people would choose to interpret it differently.
Some of the ultra-orthodox Jews have (and some still do) believed that Zionism is wrong because Israel should not be reestablished until the "Messiah" returns.
The non-ultra-orthodox example you've referred to is even of a smaller minority than the ultra-orthodox one.
Basically my point is that such voices were very weak back then, and while they are also weak today they are certainly bigger, like the holocaust-denying anti-Israeli Neturei Karta organization.
Your comment however that "Nearly all of Judaism was opposing the creation of Israel" was indeed a false comment.
Another big problem of religious Jews with Zionism is that Zionists were largely secular Jews, and in some cases were atheist in their point of view.
-snip
The first Rabbis who supported Zionism were Rabbi Yehuda Shlomo Alkalai and Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Kalischer. They argued that the change in the status of Western Europe's Jews following emancipation was the first step toward redemption (גאולה) and that therefore one must hasten the messianic salvation by a natural salvation — whose main pillars are the Kibbutz Galuyot ("Gathering of the Exiles"), the return to Eretz Israel, agricultural work (עבודת אדמה) and the revival of the everyday use of the Hebrew language.
Really :doh Here is what you said
You wrote that only some of the Ultra Orthodox Jews believed Zionism was wrong. No one else.
Ok, Reform Judaism, Orthodox Judaism and Ultra Orthodox Judaism were against Zionism.
Zionism was predominantly secular. Herzl himself, had so little interest in Judaism that he tried to organise the entire Jewish population where he lived to be converted to Catholicism. Labour Zionists seemed to have little interest in religion.
Your favourite source
Religious Zionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The way that is put 'the first Rabbi's who supported Zionism', certainly implies that Zionism was certainly not initiated by Judaism
and further that it was not at first accepted by Judaism.
Judah ben Solomon Chai Alkalai (1798 – October 1878) was a Sephardic rabbi in Zemun (in present day Serbia) and one of pioneers of modern Zionism.
Zvi (Zwi) Hirsch Kalischer (March 24, 1795 - October 16, 1874) was an Orthodox German rabbi and one of Zionism's early pioneers in Germany.
Is it heck.I said: "Some of the ultra-orthodox Jews have (and some still do) believed that Zionism is wrong because Israel should not be reestablished until the "Messiah" returns."
I did not say, as you claim, that "Only some of the ultra-orthodox Jews have (and some still do) believed that Zionism is wrong because Israel should not be reestablished until the "Messiah" returns."
To claim that I did say so is, as you can see from the quote you've used, a manipulation of my words.
Now as I said, I didn't mean that the only ones who were opposing the creation of the state were ultra-orthodox, but that the majority of them were, that's why I was referring to the Ultra-Orthodox and not mentioning other groups. At no part did I use the word "only" to describe the ultra-orthodox as the only ones to oppose the Zionist movement's idea.
That's also a wrong statement.
Some of them were, some weren't.
The majority of those who did however came from those groups (specifically the ultra-orthodox), and even they were a minority amongst their own groups.
You have not been able to deny the sources I gave. I have said that I have heard that Zionism was only popular in Easter Europe and Russia but even there people prefered to emigrate to Western Europe, the UK or the USA.The leadership was predominately secular.
You'd do hard to argue that the majority of those who have supported the movement were predominately secular.
As I said, the religious Jews who have opposed Zionism during that era were a minority amongst the minority of the minorities.
They were the first Rabbis to preach on Zionism, but they've done so long before Herzl was even born.
As you can see;
Judah Alkalai - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is it heck.
You did not use the term only. However by denying that there was major rejection of Zionism by Judaism and claiming that 'some ultra orthodox' did you did by implication. It may be that this is another problem caused by English not being your first language but to an English speaking person what you said was the same as if you had put in the word only.
Well I gave you Israel souces which say different. Zionism was secular.
You have not been able to deny the sources I gave.
I have said that I have heard that Zionism was only popular in Easter Europe and Russia but even there people prefered to emigrate to Western Europe, the UK or the USA.
true I can see that one Prussian and one Serbian Rabbi's were in favour of Zionism from the beginning. Eastern Europe as I said. Two people does not remove the quotes I provided on the rejection to Zionism of organised Judaism.
You have not proved your point. I am confident I am correct and am not going to waste any more time on this with you.
As there seems to be much misunderstanding with regard to my two-sentence reply, I will dissect it:
The article provides a sample of positions Rabbi Cohen holds. Those positions are not consistent with mainstream thought in the Jewish community.
"par for the course" means typical, usual, etc.
"...with respect to his controversial views..." indicates anew that his views are not in the mainstream for the Jewish community (the point of the first sentence) in general, otherwise they would not be controversial.
In the end, the overarching point is that Rabbi Cohen's views are strictly his own opinion. He does not speak for the Jewish people. His sentiments have little bearing on how the majority of the world's Jewish people view, among other things, the historic Israeli-Arab dispute.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?