Moetzes On WZO

-

 The Moetzes of Agudas Yisrael released a statement today in which they forbid participation in the WZO elections. (See below.) While we here at the blog are not into voting, (see previous posts on the topic,) we still found this development highly disturbing. We believe that it is quite clear what happened here.

This is not, and never has been, within the role of the moetzes. The role of the Agudah is not to decide between Rabbanim and Roshei Yeshivos. When great Rabbanim and Roshei Yeshivos who are part of the communities Agudah represents disagree as to what the Halacha or proper hashkafa is in a given situation, and especially when members of the Moetzes itself disagree - even if most of them supported this statement, then the opinion of the disagreeing Rabbanim has full validity and it is not the role of the Agudah to quash their opinion. Yiddishkeit is not supposed to be run with threats and coercion and the silencing of dissenting opinions. (Just speak to any Rav who holds that it is permitted... In fact, the same is true in any case, such as Indian hair wigs, where any Rav who holds not like "them" is terrorized. We will not discuss who the "them" is, but there is a reason this post is on Fixing Lakewood...) The concept of a universal psak does not exist anymore - definitely not when there a number of great Rabbanim who hold this opinion, even were they to be the minority. (Which is hard to know, as the current, toxic environment has the tendency to quiet people.)

The role of the Moetzes is twofold. The main role is to provide Torah guidance to the Agudah. In this function, the Moetzes decides how to deal with matters on a klal level - something which is by definition not within the purview of individual Rabbanim.

The second role of the Moetzes is to lead the tzibur with public statements, protests, and takanos on matters which are noy controversial and simply require a public Rabbinic declaration.

The statement released today, which does not even have unanimous consent within the Moetzes itself, (and made ample use of political intrigue, subtle threats, etc. bringing to mind the political arena and royal courts of old,) is a huge departure from the role of the Moetzes and jeopardizes the integrity and acceptance of the institution of the Moetzes in general.

We hope to expand this post with the help of our readers, but we felt it was important to get something out there quickly, even at the expense of thoroughness and polished writing.




Comments

  1. AnonymousMarch 25, 2025 at 10:57 PM

    By definition, Fundamentalism and Radicalism are intolerant of other viewpoints & stifle other opinions. They slowly but surely end up bullying, cancelling and terrorizing those that do not see things exactly the way they do and that don't fall in line.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousMarch 27, 2025 at 6:54 AM

      They claim that Eretz Hakodesh telling everyone the reasons to vote for them is equal to calling them Amalek.

      The existence of another opinion is an affront to them.

      But we need to turn the mirror on ourselves. Do we not often do the same thing? How do we deal with people of a different political belief to us?

      Delete
  2. AnonymousMarch 26, 2025 at 5:04 AM

    From conversations with Gedolei Yisroel, it seems that the mattirim are more worried about machlokes than supporting EH, and that is why the loudest voices seem to have won this fight.

    In Eretz Yisroel this is also true, where nobody wants to make a machlokes against Reb Dov, even if they are of a different opinion.

    The same is true regarding this Kol Kore.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Comments ,ideas ,questions are welcomed

Popular posts from this blog

A collection of Rabbanim supporting the heter (Re Laskin kehuna)

-
Image
A recent major example of Lakewood leadership messing things up yet again, based on what we have personally verified with numerous Rabbanim - including Rabbi Forcheimer - is that whatever the famous tumultmacher, Chaim Tzvi Gorelick (to quote Rabbi Forcheimer "troublemaker") says, R' Malkiel accepts as to quote Rabbi Forcheimer "Torah Misinai". He is going around trying to create this narrative that the Beis Din was corrupt etc. etc. A big part of their tactics is to give this impression that the entire heter is the product of certain individuals etc. that they would like to, and wrongly feel that they can disgustingly attack and try to cause צער to. These people are experienced, expert מערכה wagers, and they are professionals in setting the public narrative. While it is not our place to weigh in on any new information that may have been uncovered in the past year, one thing is for certain is that it does not a corrupt Beis Din create. It is also quite clear in ...
Read more

UPDATED: Laskin Kehuna - A Year And A Half Later

-
Below are the two letters that have recently been published regarding the Laskin kehuna question. (The supporting letter, although dated a few months ago, was first authorized for release in response to the opposing proclamation. Either way, the content is what matters in this case.) The question is how to square the two. While throughout history, we always find poskim arguing vehemently with each other, and we sometimes find some poskim speaking out strongly against a minor Rav; we do not find that many names (albeit some of them inconsequential, and only there add signatures,) should sign against a major Beis Din (which is mesader an average of 3 gittin a week,) with big poskim on the Beis Din and so many major poskim supporting the psak and the Beis Din. (See previous post on the topic with more signatories. https://fixinglakewood.blogspot.com/2025/02/a-collection-of-rabbanim-supporting.html) Especially about a case which already went to another Beis Din, and from there to additiona...
Read more