Feed aggregator

LISTEN:

A deepening internal crisis within the Chassidishe Agudas Yisroel faction of the Yahadut Hatorah party is threatening to reshape the party ahead of the upcoming Knesset election, with senior figures now openly raising the possibility of running together with Degel HaTorah without Ger — or potentially forming a separate electoral bloc.

The turmoil erupted over a Ger demand to remove former MK Moshe Shimon Roth, the representative of Sanz, from the fifth position on the Agudas Yisroel slate.

A senior Agudas Yisroel official told Matzav.com Monday evening that amid the escalating confrontation with Ger, the possibility of joining Degel HaTorah without Ger is no longer being ruled out. Another possibility being considered is for the other factions to run as a separate bloc.

“Ger does not represent us,” the senior official said.

The comments came after a meeting of the Agudas Yisroel Moetzes broke down Monday evening over Ger’s demand that Roth not be approved for the fifth slot on the party’s electoral list.

Roth, who represents Sanz, was himself present at the meeting and was reportedly stunned to discover during the discussion that Ger was seeking to have him removed from the position.

At the heart of the confrontation is Ger’s demand that whoever occupies the fifth slot be committed to voting in accordance with the decisions of the Central Faction, which represents Ger within Agudas Yisroel.

Sanz has refused to make such a commitment. During the previous Knesset, Roth voted on some issues in accordance with instructions from the Sanzer Rebbe, rather than automatically following the position of Ger’s Central Faction.

The dispute is now having repercussions beyond the fight over the fifth slot.

Shlomei Emunim and Machzikei HaDas have informed Degel HaTorah’s negotiating teams that, for the time being, the signing of the agreement for a joint Degel HaTorah-Agudas Yisroel run should be delayed because of what transpired at the Moetzes meeting.

Figures in both Shlomei Emunim and Belz have also expressed support for Meir Porush’s position that the fifth spot should remain with Sanz rather than be transferred to Ger.

The upheaval comes as Degel HaTorah and Agudas Yisroel have been working to finalize a new agreement governing their joint electoral framework.

Under the emerging agreement, if the Knesset is dissolved during the first year and a half of its term, the agreement would remain in effect for the subsequent Knesset election as well.

The agreement is also expected to establish a unified position on the draft issue, with the parties supporting legislation providing exemptions for bnei yeshivos without sanctions. The faction would refuse to support other legislation until the status of full-time Torah learners is formally resolved, and its representatives would not accept government positions before the law is enacted.

The latest confrontation, however, has now cast uncertainty over whether all of Agudas Yisroel’s constituent factions will remain together for the election.

What began as a dispute over Sanz’s fifth-place position has thus escalated into a potentially far-reaching battle over Ger’s role and influence within Agudas Yisroel — and could ultimately affect the structure of the broader chareidi slate for the 26th Knesset.

{Matzav.com}

Benny Begin, son of Likud founder and Prime Minister Menachem Begin, issued a blistering attack on Israeli Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu, accusing him of bearing ultimate responsibility for the failures surrounding the October 7 massacre and urging Israelis to express their judgment in the upcoming election.

Begin, who permanently left Likud about five years ago, published the remarks after Netanyahu said that senior security officials did not wake him during the night preceding the October 7 attack.

“You kept quiet and you lied too?!” Begin wrote.

Turning to the question of responsibility for the failures that preceded the massacre, Begin noted that both the IDF and Shin Bet operate under the authority of the government.

“It is self-evident that all members of the government bear responsibility for the terrible failure, special responsibility rests with the members of the Ministerial Committee on National Security, and the ultimate responsibility rests with the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. What is unclear here?” he wrote.

Begin then reflected on his decades-long political history, noting that he cast his first Knesset ballot 65 years ago, long before Likud itself was established.

“I voted for the Knesset for the first time 65 years ago. I placed the letter Chet in the ballot box for the Herut movement (Likud had not yet been established). Since then I have grown old and have seen quite a bit, but such ugliness as this government injects into our public life, such wretchedness in the leadership of the country, have never existed,” Begin wrote.

He concluded by pointing directly to the upcoming election, scheduled for Tuesday, October 27.

“The conclusion will come on the upcoming civic day, Tuesday, 16 Cheshvan, October 27. ‘Come out in droves,’” Begin wrote.

{Matzav.com}

Degel HaTorah has adopted a significantly tougher position on the yeshiva draft issue, joining Agudas Yisroel in demanding that all bnei yeshivos receive exemptions from IDF service without any sanctions, according to the new agreement governing the parties’ joint United Torah Judaism slate.

The agreement explicitly establishes that United Torah Judaism’s position in future coalition negotiations will be that any ben yeshiva should be exempt from military service, with no personal or other sanctions imposed as a condition of that exemption.

The provision represents a significant shift for Degel HaTorah. Until now, the party had participated in negotiations over proposed draft legislation that included personal sanctions, as part of efforts to formulate a law that could withstand judicial scrutiny.

Under the new agreement, United Torah Judaism will also refuse to support legislation in the Knesset until a law is enacted formally regulating the status of full-time Torah learners whose Torah is their occupation. Exceptions will be permitted only when authorized by the Gedolei Yisroel.

The agreement goes further by tying senior government and Knesset positions to passage of the legislation. Until the status of bnei yeshivos is resolved in law, United Torah Judaism representatives will not serve as ministers, deputy ministers or chairmen of Knesset committees.

The agreement between Agudas Yisroel and Degel HaTorah also establishes a joint leadership body that will address major issues facing the faction in the Knesset, including the status of Torah learners, education, and matters involving religion and state.

The two parties will hold regular joint faction meetings, with decisions required to be reached by consensus rather than through a majority vote.

Ministers and deputy ministers representing the faction will be invited to all such meetings, as will candidates placed through the 12th position on the United Torah Judaism electoral slate.

If Agudas Yisroel and Degel HaTorah are unable to resolve a disagreement between themselves, the dispute will be referred to an arbitration panel for a final decision.

{Matzav.com}

With tens of thousands of Breslover chassidim and other Jews preparing to travel to Uman for Rosh Hashanah, extensive renovations and infrastructure improvements have been completed at the city’s central Breslover Kloiz in preparation for the massive annual gathering.

The Kloiz, the largest and primary Breslover shul in Uman, has undergone a significant overhaul aimed at allowing the thousands of visitors to daven and learn with greater comfort and yishuv hadaas throughout the days of the annual Rosh Hashanah kibbutz.

In the Ashkenazi Kloiz, the largest davening hall in Uman, construction of the gallery walls extending to the ceiling has been completed. The project also addressed a longstanding problem involving pigeons that would fly through the main hall during davening. Special screens have now been installed on all the windows, allowing them to remain open for ventilation without birds entering the building.

A new ceiling was also installed beneath the gallery on the western side of the main hall. At the same time, the lighting system underwent a major upgrade, with new fixtures installed throughout the Kloiz.

The Sephardic Kloiz has received an extensive renovation as well. A new ceiling was installed above the main hall, together with a modern lighting system and new chandeliers.

Three spacious new shtiblach were constructed on the eastern side of the Sephardic Kloiz. They will be used for Shacharis, Mincha and Maariv during the week and will serve as quiet learning areas during the remaining hours of the day. The new learning area has also been furnished with bookcases stocked with seforim.

To accommodate the enormous crowds expected during Rosh Hashanah, new high-powered air-conditioning units were installed in the Sephardic Kloiz to improve cooling throughout the facility.

A new coffee station has also been built near the shtiblach and will operate throughout the days of the Rosh Hashanah gathering.

The entrance plaza to the Kloiz has undergone its own transformation. New asphalt was laid across the area, while the entrance walls were covered with new stonework.

A prominent new sign at the front identifies the building as “The Great Synagogue of the Breslover Chassidim in Uman — The Kloiz.” The sign also pays tribute to Rav Yechiel Michel Dorfman, who founded and built the facility with extraordinary dedication.

The medical clinic located in the Kloiz courtyard has meanwhile been substantially renovated and expanded to provide additional treatment space and ensure that adequate medical care is available should it be necessary during the massive gathering.

Those involved in the project expressed the hope “that we will not need this place and that there will be as few people as possible to treat.”

Additional seating and learning areas have been established throughout the complex. A computer room offering filtered internet access, which has been operated by Ichud Breslov in Uman in recent years, will also continue to be available.

The improvements were carried out by Ichud Breslov in Uman as part of its preparations to accommodate the tens of thousands of visitors expected for Rosh Hashanah, with the goal of enabling them to focus on davening and learning without unnecessary distractions.

Rav Nosson Tzemach, gabbai of the tziyun of Rav Nachman of Breslov, welcomed the completion of the work.

“We are privileged to see the masses streaming to the tziyun of our holy Rebbe. The investment in the Kloiz, located close to the tziyun, is intended to provide an appropriate response for the tens of thousands of mispallelim, so that they can pour out their hearts and engage in Torah with yishuv hadaas and an expansive heart, as is proper and fitting for the days of the holy Rosh Hashanah kibbutz,” he said.

Rav Nosson Ben Nun, chairman of Ichud Breslov in Uman, said crews had spent months working around the clock to complete the preparations.

“The dedicated teams of Ichud Breslov worked day and night for many long months to complete all the preparations ahead of the kibbutz. The goal that stood before our eyes throughout the entire process was one thing — the honor of our holy Rebbe and the honor of the tens of thousands traveling to Uman, so that they can engage in Torah and tefillah in comfort and without any distractions,” he said.

{Matzav.com}

This coming Shabbos, the first day of Rosh Hashanah 5787, the sound of the shofar will be absent from virtually every shul around the world. The shofar will be sounded only on Sunday, the second day of Rosh Hashanah. But in the Old City of Yerushalayim, one unusual minyan led by Rav Yisrael Ariel plans to blow the shofar on Shabbos itself.

Asked during a Kikar HaShabbat studio discussion whether he intends to do so again this year, Rav Ariel replied simply: “This year? With God’s help, why not?”

The unusual practice has reopened a centuries-old halachic debate and revived a fierce controversy that divided Yerushalayim approximately 145 years ago: Is it permissible — or perhaps even obligatory — under certain circumstances to blow the shofar when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbos?

The issue carries an additional emotional dimension because of a longstanding observation regarding difficult events that occurred in years when the first day of Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbos. Kikar HaShabbat host Yossi Abdu pointed to tragedies ranging from the destruction of the two Batei Mikdash and the anti-Jewish massacres in Spain in 1391 to the 1929 Chevron massacre, the Meron disaster and the October 7 massacre in 5784.

For some, the absence of the shofar on the Yom Hadin therefore carries an ominous historical association in addition to its halachic significance.

Against that backdrop, Abdu convened three rabbonim representing sharply different approaches to the issue. Rav Yisrael Ariel, head of the Temple Institute and Yeshivat HaMikdash and author of the extensive work “Shofar and Lulav on Shabbos,” presented the case for reviving the practice. Rav Avraham Maimon, author of “Derech Ha’atarim,” defended the prevailing halachic tradition against such a change. Rav Yosef Chaim Ohev Tzion, author of “Atah Basi” and “Yoma D’Atzarta,” addressed the question from the perspective of Kabbalah and what spiritually takes the place of the shofar when it cannot be sounded.

Rav Ariel summarized his position unequivocally: “There is a Torah commandment to blow on Shabbos on Rosh Hashanah… We are actually renewing a halacha that is nearly two thousand years old.”

Rav Maimon responded with the fundamental objection: “Who gives us the authority to decide between the Rishonim?”

Rav Ohev Tzion offered a different approach entirely: “The spiritual rectification accomplished through these mitzvos on this day… occurs on its own through the sanctity of Shabbos.”

The generally accepted halacha throughout the Jewish world, as codified in Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 588:5), is that the shofar is not sounded when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbos. Rav Ariel represents a minority view that understands Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai’s enactment as permitting the shofar to be sounded before a qualifying bais din even today.

Why is the shofar ordinarily not blown on Shabbos? Sounding a shofar is not, on a Torah level, one of the prohibited forms of work. The Gemara in Rosh Hashanah 29b teaches: “When the festival of Rosh Hashanah occurred on Shabbos, in the Mikdash they would blow, but not in the rest of the country.”

The concern is that although everyone is obligated to hear shofar, not everyone knows how to blow one properly. Chazal feared that a person might carry a shofar four amos through a reshus harabbim to bring it to an expert for instruction, thereby violating a Torah prohibition. The same basic concern underlies rabbinic restrictions involving Megillah, the arba minim and several other mitzvos.

Following the destruction of the Bais Hamikdash, Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai instituted that the shofar could be sounded wherever there was a bais din. The entire dispute revolves around what kind of bais din qualifies: Must it consist of formally ordained judges in the ancient sense of semichah, or can an established contemporary bais din suffice? Some opinions potentially allow even a court consisting of three judges.

Rav Ariel traced the debate to Yavneh following the Churban, when Roman restrictions prevented Jews from entering Yerushalayim and the leading chachamim gathered in Yavneh. Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, he said, instructed the surrounding communities: “We will blow on Shabbos. From all the cities they will come here to hear the blowing.”

According to Rav Ariel, Yavneh offered two important advantages. Its bais din could establish with certainty that Rosh Hashanah had begun, and it could ensure that people did not individually carry their shofaros. “No one will bring a shofar… and they gained that they would not carry and would fulfill the mitzvah properly,” he explained.

Rav Ariel further argued that an enactment established by the Sanhedrin possesses permanent authority. He cited the Rambam’s introduction to the Mishnah: “These are the laws established by the prophets and sages in each and every generation, as a fence and safeguard for the Torah. As it is written: ‘And you shall safeguard My charge!’ — ‘Make a safeguard for My safeguard’… They may not be transgressed in any manner… and even prophets cannot permit them.”

Perhaps the most significant precedent invoked by those who favor blowing is that of the Rif, Rav Yitzchak Alfasi. The Ramban records that the Rif did not believe fully ordained judges were necessary and that his students therefore blew shofar before him whenever Rosh Hashanah occurred on Shabbos.

“Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi, author of the Halachos, held… that we do not require expert, ordained judges. Rather, ‘any bais din’ refers to the bais din of his city… Therefore, his students would blow before him throughout his life on Rosh Hashanah that occurred on Shabbos. And so we received from the elders of Spain, the people of his place.”

The significance of that precedent is heightened by the Rif’s stature. The Rambam famously instructed his student Rav Shmuel ibn Tibbon, “Your hand should not depart from the Rif,” while Rav Zerachiah Halevi referred to the Rif’s work as “the small Talmud.”

Nevertheless, the Ramban and Ritva noted that the Jewish world did not ultimately adopt the Rif’s practice, while the Rosh observed that even major students of the Rif did not follow his position in practice. The Rosh himself required a particularly distinguished bais din, describing it as a “prominent bais din, great in its generation.”

That creates the central tension in the dispute: Does a documented practice of one of the greatest Rishonim outweigh centuries of subsequent halachic practice to the contrary?

Rav Ariel argued, “You cannot bring proof from someone who did not do something. You can bring proof from one who did.”

Rav Maimon countered that centuries of universal nonobservance cannot simply be dismissed as silence. In his view, that history itself represents a binding tradition of psak.

The Rambam, meanwhile, writes in Hilchos Shofar 2:9 that ideally the necessary bais din must possess classical semichah: “In this time, when the Mikdash has been destroyed, any place where there is an established bais din, provided that it is ordained in Eretz Yisroel, they blow there on Shabbos.”

Rashi, as well as other Geonim and Rishonim, differ regarding the need for semichah. Rav Ariel, however, sees room for leniency even within the Rambam’s own wording, which later states: “In this time… if the first day occurred on Shabbos and there was no bais din in the place fit to blow [on Shabbos], they blow only on the second day.”

Rav Ariel understands that wording as indicating that where there is a bais din “fit to blow,” the mitzvah may still apply even without full ancient semichah. He also cited the Kesef Mishneh: “Now that everyone establishes [the month] according to calculation, and we observe two days, the matter is certain for us.”

Rav Ariel further maintained that his approach cannot be dismissed as the opinion of a lone authority. He listed 23 Rishonim and Acharonim whom he believes provide support for the underlying position, among them the Rif, Rabbeinu Chananel, Rashi, Tosafos, the Ran, Ramban, Rashba, Rabbeinu Manoach, Sefer HaChinuch, Meiri, Rabbeinu Yerucham, Bartenura, Rosh and Bais Yosef.

Some of those very authorities, however, are also central to Rav Maimon’s case against changing the accepted practice. The Ramban, Rashba and Rosh, for example, discuss the theoretical basis of the Rif’s position while also noting that the Jewish world did not follow it.

The disagreement, therefore, is not necessarily over what those sources say, but what practical conclusion should be drawn from them. Rav Ariel sees evidence that a bais din without classical semichah can theoretically qualify. Rav Maimon sees the subsequent refusal to implement that position as decisive.

Another component of Rav Ariel’s argument is that today there is no uncertainty about which day is Rosh Hashanah. He cited the Rambam in Hilchos Kiddush HaChodesh 5:1: “When there is no Sanhedrin in Eretz Yisroel, the months are not established and the years are not made leap years except according to the calculation that we use today. And this matter is a halacha transmitted to Moshe at Sinai: When there is a Sanhedrin, they establish according to sighting, and when there is no Sanhedrin, they establish according to this calculation that we use today and do not require sighting.”

The Rambam later writes: “That which we calculate today, each person in his city, and say that Rosh Chodesh is on this day and Yom Tov is on this day… we rely only on the calculation of the people of Eretz Yisroel. Our calculation is merely to reveal the matter.”

Rav Ariel argues that the modern fixed calendar therefore eliminates an element of uncertainty that existed in earlier generations.

An ancient piyut provides another intriguing piece of evidence. Attributed to Rav Elazar HaKalir and Rav Nachman HaChaver, it describes a shofar being tied to a post on Rosh Hashanah that fell on Shabbos.

Rav Ohev Tzion cited an interpretation attributed to researcher David Henshke suggesting that tying the shofar to a post could eliminate the concern of carrying altogether. “If I tie the shofar to a post, I can blow without a bais din,” he argued.

Rav Ariel revealed that such a method was actually attempted: “In the first year, they tied it to a post.”

But he rejected the suggestion that this could replace the requirement for a bais din. Pointing to the account of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai in Yavneh, Rav Ariel said that after the official blowing, shofaros could be heard throughout the courtyards. “Even though the bais din blew, with a rope or without a rope, everyone in the courtyards blew and blew. This is not the basic Torah law; it is an additional hiddur mitzvah.”

Asked whether one could therefore simply tie a shofar to a post and blow without a bais din, Rav Ariel answered: “No, that nullifies it.”

The controversy is hardly new. Some 145 years ago, Rav Akiva Yosef Schlesinger, author of Lev HaIvri, launched a campaign in 1881 to restore shofar blowing on Shabbos in Yerushalayim.

Rav Schlesinger’s argument rested on several points: that Chazal’s decree had never applied to Yerushalayim in the same way, that “Mikdash” could include the entire Old City, and that Yerushalayim lacked the 600,000 people he believed necessary to qualify as a Torah-level reshus harabbim.

Rav Shmuel Salant initially offered support, but intense communal opposition ultimately forced Rav Schlesinger to conduct that year’s blowing privately, in what was described as a “modest place.”

He did not abandon the campaign. Over subsequent decades, Rav Schlesinger published articles and attempted to bring Yerushalayim’s various batei din together behind the proposal. The Rishon LeTzion, Rav Yaakov Shaul Elyashar, reportedly declared: “If the Ashkenazim blow — we will blow as well.”

At one point, Rav Schlesinger visited Rav Salant while the latter was ill in bed. Despite his condition, Rav Salant dressed in his honor and produced sources supporting the permissive position. His poor health, however, prevented him from leading such a dramatic communal change, and the opportunity disappeared.

Rav Maimon raised another historical question: If this approach was correct, why was shofar blowing on Shabbos not restored during Rav Yaakov Berab’s attempt to renew semichah in Tzfas during the 16th century?

Rav Ariel answered that the effort to restore semichah became engulfed in controversy. Maharalbach opposed it, Rav Yaakov Berab fled to Damascus, and the entire project collapsed before the shofar question could be addressed.

“We cannot bring proof from why they did not. They wanted to do many things; they did not have time. Because of the dispute, the whole thing sank,” Rav Ariel said.

He added that Rav Yosef Karo, author of the Kesef Mishneh and himself among those who received the renewed semichah in Tzfas, wrote that when the date of the festival is known with certainty, an established bais din can qualify for blowing.

The Yerushalayim effort was also derailed by an unusual personal dispute. Rav Schlesinger had received a mailing list from Rav Shmuel Salant and the Aderes to invite members of the community. But the head of the chevra kadisha reportedly bore a grudge against him over an earlier controversial ruling allowing Jewish refugees fleeing conscription into the Czar’s army to take second wives.

Rav Schlesinger’s reasoning was that in the jurisdiction of the Bais Yosef, the ban of Rabbeinu Gershom did not carry the same force: “It is the place of Maran, the Bais Yosef… and he does not accept the ban of Rabbeinu Gershom; he is not concerned for it.”

According to the account, the chevra kadisha official retaliated by campaigning against the proposed shofar gathering. “He knocked on all the doors: Don’t come, don’t come,” ultimately helping derail the plan.

Rav Schlesinger had envisioned something far larger than a private minyan. His proposal called for a major gathering at the Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai shul, complete with police and ushers, with tickets sold and the proceeds given to widows and orphans.

The Rishon LeTzion objected to monetizing the gathering, writing, “It cannot be accepted… they will say it is for money,” and raising an additional issue of shvus.

Rav Schlesinger’s determination was reportedly strengthened by a heartbreaking letter describing the pogroms against Russian Jewry, which reached him just as he was considering abandoning his campaign.

Opposition remained intense, led in part by Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld, whose concern centered on undermining enactments of Chazal. Criticism arrived from abroad as well. Rav Shimon Sofer of Erlau, a grandson of the Chasam Sofer, wrote in Hisorerus Teshuvah that the proposed ruling should not be relied upon, adding pointedly: “One who loves mitzvos will not be satisfied with mitzvos.”

One particularly dramatic episode is recorded in Orach Dovid. Rav Schlesinger went to immerse in a mikvah before blowing the shofar. When he emerged, he discovered that opponents had invalidated his shofar on grounds of muktzah. His son hurried to obtain another one.

Outside the shul, Rav Sonnenfeld — despite being a leading opponent of the practice — reportedly stood close enough to listen to the blowing through the wall while deliberately remaining outside so his presence would not be interpreted as approval.

Returning to the present-day debate, Rav Ariel argued that the widespread existence of eiruvin fundamentally changes the practical reality underlying Chazal’s concern about carrying.

“In this time, when there is an enactment of an eiruv, the mitzvah returns to its place,” he declared. “Nullifying the mitzvah of blowing shofar today, when the public carries machzorim and talleisim and Kiddush necessities through the streets to the shul, while only the shofar, which is the primary mitzvah of the day, is not carried — this is nothing but a degradation of the mitzvah and a disgrace to the Torah.”

Rav Ariel went further, applying to those who refrain from the mitzvah the verse “Because he has despised the word of Hashem and violated His commandment,” while invoking regarding those who perform it the declaration, “Cursed is he who does not uphold the words of this Torah,” followed by the people answering amen.

Rav Ariel summarized his broader argument by declaring: “We are actually renewing a halacha that is nearly two thousand years old, from Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai… There is a Torah commandment to blow on Shabbos on Rosh Hashanah.”

In his view, someone who blows under the appropriate circumstances fulfills not one but three mitzvos. Citing the Rambam in Hilchos Mamrim 1:1, he argued that observing Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai’s enactment also fulfills the Torah obligations to heed the rulings of the bais din.

The Rambam writes: “The Great Bais Din in Yerushalayim is the foundation of the Oral Torah… as it is written, ‘According to the Torah that they teach you’ — this is a positive commandment… Whoever does not act according to their instruction violates a negative commandment, as it says, ‘Do not deviate from anything they tell you, right or left’… and the decrees, enactments and customs… it is a positive commandment to listen to them.”

“Thus, you fulfill three mitzvos,” Rav Ariel said — the mitzvah of shofar itself, the commandment of lo sasur, and the obligation of v’asisa k’chol asher yorucha.

The discussion also touched on whether a shofar could be sounded on the site of the Bais Hamikdash without a bais din based on the Talmudic principle that rabbinic shvus restrictions do not apply in the Mikdash.

Rav Ariel argued that according to his reading of the Rambam, the entire walled Old City of Yerushalayim can be included in the relevant definition of Mikdash, while most Rishonim limit it to Har Habayis itself.

He also distinguished ordinary shofar blowing from the manner in which it would be performed at the Mikdash: “With trumpets and the sound of the shofar, shout before the King, Hashem… When you blow the shofar on Har Habayis today, you need to blow with trumpets as well.”

Rav Ariel said that several years ago, when Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbos, both shofar and trumpets were indeed sounded together on Har Habayis.

He presented another potentially lenient position, arguing that Rishonim including Rashi and Rabbeinu Chananel permit blowing even in the presence of an “ad hoc” bais din, rather than requiring a permanent court.

Rav Maimon disputed that interpretation, maintaining that those sources must be understood within the broader disagreement over precisely what constitutes the necessary bais din.

Rav Ariel also sought to demonstrate that blowing on Shabbos continued as an actual practice in Eretz Yisroel for centuries. He traced the Yeshiva of Eretz Yisroel as it moved from Yerushalayim to Ramle, Teveria and Damascus, arguing that its members continued the practice even during the Rambam’s era.

He cited accounts from Rav Binyamin of Tudela, Rabbeinu Manoach and a letter from the Cairo Genizah. According to those sources, when the Babylonian Reish Galusa demanded that the practice stop, local leaders refused, and “the heads of the yeshiva stood firm in observing the mitzvah according to the custom of Eretz Yisroel.”

Rav Ariel attributed the eventual disappearance of the custom not to a decisive halachic ruling, but to historical upheaval. The Crusaders massacred Jewish communities and destroyed shuls, he said, after which immigrants from France arrived with a different practice.

Quoting Rabbeinu Tam, Rav Ariel remarked: “‘Minhag’ contains the letters of ‘Gehinnom’; if fools practiced it, the wise did not.”

Rav Maimon then pressed him on an apparent implication of his position: If an eiruv eliminates the concern about carrying, why require a bais din at all?

Rav Ariel answered that he did not want to rewrite the enactment itself because of the broader danger of religious reform: “We do not want to change the enactment, lest there be reform; they will say we have completely deteriorated.”

Rav Ariel also recounted a conversation with Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach to argue that the absence of a practice does not necessarily establish a prohibition. He said he once asked Rav Shlomo Zalman why a seven-branched Menorah was not actually lit at the site of the Mikdash. Rather than cite a specific prohibition, Rav Shlomo Zalman referred him to the Chief Rabbinate.

Rav Maimon’s response was that the dispute is not primarily about whether the sources cited by Rav Ariel exist, but whether contemporary rabbonim have the authority to derive a new practical ruling from them after generations of poskim acted otherwise.

“There were giants of the world in Yerushalayim… no one thought of this,” he said.

For Rav Maimon, the long history of refraining from blowing, together with the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch, the established tradition of Yerushalayim and the position of Rav Yechiel Michel Tukachinsky, carries decisive weight.

“Who gives us the authority to decide between the Rishonim?” he asked.

The panel also discussed what happens bedieved if someone does blow shofar on Shabbos. Rav Maimon cited the position of Rav Akiva Eiger and the Avnei Nezer that such a person can fulfill the Torah mitzvah despite simultaneously violating a rabbinic shvus. The Chelkas Yoav takes the opposing view that the rabbinic prohibition prevents the Torah mitzvah from being fulfilled at all.

Rav Ariel rejected that conclusion: “It is impossible to uproot the Torah mitzvah.”

Rav Ohev Tzion then shifted the discussion from the practical halachic dispute to the spiritual question underlying it: If the shofar serves to mitigate judgment, what protects Klal Yisroel when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbos and the shofar is not sounded?

Citing the responsa Torah Lishmah, attributed to the Ben Ish Chai, he offered a clear answer: “The spiritual rectification accomplished through these mitzvos… occurs on its own through the sanctity of Shabbos, and we do not need to accomplish it ourselves.”

According to the tradition of the mekubalim, the physical absence of the shofar can be addressed through kavanos. The Rashash instructed that these intentions be performed silently, while Rav Sasson Persiado, author of Pesach Einayim, formulated a shortened tefillah. Rabbeinu Yosef Chaim, in Sod Yesharim, instructed a person to mentally envision the sequence of the tekios as though they were actually being sounded.

Rav Ohev Tzion also cited Rav Meir Simcha of Dvinsk, the Meshech Chochmah, who suggested that surrendering the mitzvah of shofar out of obedience to Chazal is itself a profound spiritual act of self-sacrifice.

“The very fact that we do not blow… is itself an extraordinary spiritual Akeidah,” he wrote.

The concept was summarized during the discussion in stark terms: “We know that we are entering danger; there is no greater Akeidah than this.”

To illustrate the spiritual power of Shabbos, Rav Ohev Tzion cited a mashal from Rav Yaakov Ettlinger, the Aruch LaNer. A minister who sinned was saved from punishment through the pleas of his beloved first wife, while a second wife whom he had mistreated was unable to obtain mercy for him.

The message, Rav Ohev Tzion explained, is that Shabbos is the “spouse” of Klal Yisroel. When Rosh Hashanah occurs on Shabbos, Shabbos itself serves as an advocate for the Jewish people — giving particular significance to meticulous Shemiras Shabbos.

Rav Ohev Tzion connected that teaching to the October 7 massacre, which occurred on Shabbos, a day on which the sanctity of Shabbos itself was terribly violated.

A final mystical explanation was cited in the name of Rav Dovid Modina of Italy: “In Heaven above they blow the shofar… there is no shvus there,” suggesting that the mitzvah is, so to speak, carried out in the Heavenly realm.

Rav Ariel was openly skeptical of that explanation.

“Are there people who know what happens in Heaven? Mitzvos are meant to be done!” he responded.

Abdu also presented the question to mekubal Rav Shaked Bohadana, who said: “The halachic and accepted answer, according to the Arizal and the Rashash, states unequivocally that one does not blow the shofar when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbos.”

The practice of the chachamim of Yeshivas Beis El is to concentrate on all the kavanos associated with the sitting tekios following Krias HaTorah, without actually sounding the shofar. This practice is recorded by the Rashash’s grandson Rav Refael Sharabi in Divrei Shalom and by the Rashash himself in Nahar Shalom.

The spiritual completion, according to this approach, takes place on the second day of Rosh Hashanah, when the elements absent on the first day are completed together with the spiritual work of the second day.

The panel also discussed the parallel issue of taking a lulav when the first day of Sukkos falls on Shabbos. Tosafos distinguishes between shofar, which mitigates judgment, and lulav, which does not serve the same function.

Rav Ariel also cited the Yerushalmi, where the permission to carry a lulav on Shabbos serves as a precedent for other cases, including bringing a knife for a bris milah or obtaining matzah from a neighbor.

Rav Ariel himself takes a lulav when the relevant day falls on Shabbos. Rav Ohev Tzion noted that Rav Dov Lior, Rav Ovadia Yosef and Rav Chaim Kanievsky opposed doing so — “Heaven forbid, they should not take a lulav on Shabbos until Mashiach comes” — while Rav Nachum Eliezer Rabinovitch permitted it.

The discussion eventually expanded into another contentious halachic question: whether Jews may ascend Har Habayis.

Rav Ohev Tzion noted that Rav Yitzchak Yosef, during his weekly shiur for Parshas Ki Savo, cited a responsum of Rav Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook as prohibiting such ascents. Rav Ohev Tzion spoke in glowing terms of Rav Kook, describing him as “the rabbi of all the people of the Diaspora… who was a genius and holy.”

He also mentioned Rav Moshe Feinstein and other stringent poskim who prohibited ascending Har Habayis, adding that the Ohr LeTzion ruled that even a soldier who must enter for a legitimate purpose should first immerse in a mikvah.

Rav Ariel disputed the characterization of Rav Kook’s position.

“Where did Rav Kook write that?” he asked.

According to Rav Ariel, Rav Kook instead envisioned the eventual establishment of a Sanhedrin on Har Habayis, with police officers and litigants immersing before ascending to appear before it.

“He did not prohibit it, did not prohibit it,” Rav Ariel insisted.

Rav Ariel also cited the case of Sir Moses Montefiore, who entered the Dome of the Rock. Despite controversy surrounding that visit, Rav Shmuel Salant subsequently received Montefiore warmly and respectfully.

Rav Ariel further claimed that the Chief Rabbinate Council, during the tenures of Rav Yisrael Meir Lau and Rav Eliyahu Bakshi-Doron, adopted a decision supporting the establishment of a shul on Har Habayis, which he viewed as evidence that prayer there could be permitted.

Abdu noted, however, that while Rav Mordechai Eliyahu had proposed a theoretical framework for constructing a shul on Har Habayis — an idea also discussed by the Chief Rabbinate Council during Rav Bakshi-Doron’s tenure — these poskim nevertheless prohibited ordinary individuals from ascending Har Habayis under present circumstances.

Rav Maimon defended that distinction, noting that major poskim including Rav Ovadia Yosef and the Steipler clearly prohibited ascending Har Habayis, though he acknowledged that he would need to review some of the specific sources cited during the discussion.

Rav Ariel concluded this portion of the debate with a personal recollection from the Six-Day War.

“I merited, through the kindness of Hashem, to be among the paratroopers who liberated Har Habayis, and I guarded the place of the Kodesh HaKodashim while tamei,” he said.

Rav Ariel explained that he relied on a principle he attributed to Rav Shimon bar Yochai: “When you perform the mitzvah of conquest, you do it while tamei… during construction, during conquest, you do it while tamei.”

He distinguished between entering in a state of tumah as part of conquest or essential construction and doing so once the Mikdash is functioning normally. “Once they finish, whoever enters, his life is subject to kares,” he said.

Toward the conclusion of the discussion, Abdu returned to the original question and asked about the position of leading poskim of recent generations, including Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, Rav Ovadia Yosef and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank.

Rav Maimon gave a straightforward response: “All the poskim of the recent generations maintain that we do not blow shofar on Shabbos.”

Rav Ariel did not dispute that this has been the prevailing practice. He maintained, however, that the absence of a practice does not by itself constitute halachic proof that the practice is forbidden.

In practical terms, virtually every shul in Eretz Yisroel and throughout the world will follow the established halacha this Shabbos and will not sound the shofar. The tekios will instead be heard on Sunday, the second day of Rosh Hashanah.

Rav Ariel’s minyan in the Old City will be an exception. He said davening at the Temple Institute’s shul will begin at 7:30 a.m., with the shofar expected to be sounded at approximately 10:30 a.m. When Rosh Hashanah last fell on Shabbos, in 5784, approximately 150 people reportedly attended the minyan.

For those following the conventional practice, Rav Ohev Tzion and Rav Bohadana offered the approach of the mekubalim: particular care with Shemiras Shabbos, viewing Shabbos as the advocate of Klal Yisroel, and silently contemplating the sequence of the tekios while reciting the shofar verses during Mussaf.

And what of the ominous Talmudic statement, “Any year in which they do not blow at its beginning…” — does a Rosh Hashanah without shofar necessarily portend a difficult year?

According to the Ran, citing the Baal Halachos Gedolos, the answer is no. The warning does not refer to a year in which Rosh Hashanah falls naturally on Shabbos and the shofar is omitted in accordance with halacha. Rather, it concerns the exceptional circumstance in which the Jewish community was supposed to blow the shofar but failed to do so because of circumstances beyond its control.

{Matzav.com}

Amcha Yisrael party chairman Brig. Gen. (res.) Ofer Winter sharply criticized Agudas Yisroel chairman MK Yitzchak Goldknopf over his demand for a military-service exemption without sanctions for every yeshivah bochur, while appearing to signal that those who are genuinely learning Torah could receive exemptions.

Winter issued the comments in response to Goldknopf’s declaration that Agudas Yisroel would demand that the status of bnei yeshivos be resolved without imposing sanctions on those who do not enlist.

“We saw the demands of Agudas Yisroel led by Goldknopf. Enough deceiving the public. There will be no government without regulating the status of those who serve. Our commitment to them is of the utmost importance,” Winter said.

Winter went on to draw a distinction between those who are actually engaged in full-time Torah learning and others within the chareidi community.

“Not everyone who wears black and white is learning Torah. This system harms, first and foremost, those who truly learn Torah,” he said.

Winter said his approach would include greater integration of chareidim into both the IDF and national service, while tying government benefits to an individual’s contribution.

“Chareidim will integrate into the IDF and national service. Whoever contributes to the country will receive. Whoever serves more will receive much more. And whoever does not serve, does not learn, and does not contribute will not enjoy benefits,” he said.

Despite the forceful language, Winter’s latest remarks appeared somewhat more accommodating toward full-time Torah learners than comments he made last week, when he publicly pledged to pursue chareidi enlistment without delays or compromises. His latest statement again appeared to leave open the possibility of exemptions for those who are actually learning Torah.

“I commit to you this evening, with all my colleagues here with me – we intend to bring about the integration of the chareidi public into the IDF without compromises and without delays,” Winter said at the time.

{Matzav.com}

Red Cross representatives are expected to resume visits to security prisoners held in Israeli prisons this week, marking the first such visits since the October 7 attacks, according to a Channel 12 News report.

Israel’s security establishment is preparing for the renewed visits, which could begin as early as Wednesday. Red Cross access to the prisoners has been suspended since the outbreak of the war following October 7.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir sharply criticized the decision, taking aim at the High Court of Justice directive allowing the visits to resume.

“The High Court’s directive to allow visits to Nukhba terrorists for the first time since October 7 constitutes a direct blow to the State of Israel’s security deterrence,” he said.

Ben Gvir argued that tougher conditions imposed on security prisoners have contributed to a reduction in terror attacks, citing figures and an assessment he attributed to the Shin Bet.

“The security reality is clear: There has been a decline of approximately 75% in terrorist attacks, and according to the Shin Bet, this is due, among other things, to the reform of prison conditions for terrorists.”

The National Security Minister went on to level broader criticism at the Supreme Court over its handling of petitions involving security prisoners.

“Unfortunately, the High Court consistently serves as an address for appeals by the enemy,” he said.

How did Shabbos mode come to be—and what problems was it actually designed to solve? Rabbi Shmuel Katz, Rabbinic Coordinator at the cRc, joins Rabbi Yitzchok Hisiger for a fascinating look at the history, halachic challenges, and ingenious solutions behind the Shabbos modes in today’s appliances.

WATCH:

View it in its entirety at: https://www.kashrusawareness.com/post/a-mode-of-its-own 

Listen wherever you get your podcasts!

https://open.spotify.com/show/6Rj5rIndHc886Fblqh8U49 

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/lets-talk-kashrus/id1631553497 

https://24six.app/app/podcast/collection/985

https://mytat.me/o112

https://www.kosher.com/shows/lets-talk-kashrus-73

CLICK HERE to watch more episodes of Let’s Talk Kashrus

______

We invite your questions, comments, or feedback. If there’s a specific kashrus topic you’d like to bring to public attention, feel free to contact us by email: info@kashrusawareness.com

Message or call: 678-8-Kosher

You can also visit our website  www.kashrusawareness.com for a growing list of resources, timely conversations, and to watch episodes of the Let’s Talk Kashrus audio-visual series.

Join a Let’s Talk Kashrus WhatsApp Group for educational content and kashrus updates

Click here to Join a LTK WhatsApp Group

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani says he will attend Friday’s ceremony at Ground Zero marking the 25th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, despite calls from Rudy Giuliani and others for him to stay away from the commemoration.

Giuliani, who was serving as New York City mayor when the World Trade Center was attacked on Sept. 11, 2001, said on Newsmax that he believes Mamdani’s presence would be inappropriate and upsetting to families who lost loved ones that day.

“Having lost friends there and being very close to many of the families, it offends me that he’s coming,” Giuliani said. “The reality is this ceremony is for the families and for America to remember historically.”

The controversy comes days after Mamdani signed executive orders formally declaring Sept. 11 a citywide “Day of Remembrance and Service” and making changes to New York City’s emergency preparedness procedures.

The signing ceremony itself drew criticism after a ceremonial pen was passed to Mamdani’s chief counsel, Ramzi Kassem. Kassem previously represented Ahmed al-Darbi, an al-Qaida operative who pleaded guilty before a U.S. military commission to war-crime charges involving terrorist plots against commercial vessels, including the 2002 bombing of a French oil tanker.

Asked about his plans for Friday, Mamdani said his attention would be directed toward those who died in the attacks, their families and the emergency personnel who responded to the devastation, specifically “the first responders who gave everything.”

“I’m proud to be the mayor of this city. I love this city. I love this country,” Mamdani said.

Mamdani said he wants the anniversary to center on the nearly 3,000 people whose lives were taken on Sept. 11, as well as those who rushed to help New Yorkers amid the catastrophe.

“And what I want this week to be a focus on is on the families whose loved ones were stolen from them 25 years ago in the horrific act of terror of Sept. 11 and a focus also on the first responders who gave everything they could to this city and to the people who came together to try and help their fellow New Yorkers,” Mamdani added.

The mayor declined to engage further with Giuliani’s criticism when questioned about it by reporters.

“I don’t have much more to add,” Mandani said.

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich called Monday night for Israel to expel Britain’s ambassador, as Israeli officials reacted angrily to reports that London is preparing to impose sweeping new economic measures targeting Jewish communities and businesses in Judea and Samaria.

Smotrich urged Israel to act even before the British government formally announces the measures, which are expected on Tuesday.

“The British ambassador should be expelled this evening. We will not be a doormat for an antisemitic government in a country that has been conquered by radical Islam and is trying to save itself from economic and social decline by attacking Jews and the State of Israel. The British Mandate in the Land of Israel is over,” Smotrich said.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir joined the criticism, proposing that Israel retaliate by changing its position on the sovereignty dispute over the Falkland Islands.

“The time has come for the State of Israel to publicly recognize the Falkland Islands as occupied Argentine territory, which the British are violently stealing from the Argentine people. The British are not only occupying the territory, but are also conducting oil drilling there and stealing money from the Argentine people,” he said.

Ben Gvir called on Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu to formally side with Argentina in the long-running territorial dispute and take punitive economic measures against Britain.

“I call on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to recognize Argentina’s sovereignty over the Falkland Islands and impose sanctions on Great Britain for as long as the occupation continues,” added Ben Gvir.

The sharp responses came following a New York Times report that the British government is preparing a substantial expansion of its sanctions policy toward Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. The reported measures could prohibit trade involving products manufactured in those communities and penalize businesses connected to their construction.

According to three officials cited in the report, London is also weighing sanctions against companies that provide assistance for construction in Jewish communities.

Such steps would mark a considerable broadening of Britain’s existing sanctions regime related to Judea and Samaria. Until now, British measures have largely targeted specific individuals rather than imposing wider restrictions on businesses and commerce.

The latest tensions come amid a dispute over Israeli plans for the E1 corridor between Yerushalayim and Ma’ale Adumim. Israel recently published a tender covering seven residential complexes containing 1,234 housing units, part of a larger plan for approximately 3,400 homes that received approval last year.

British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband has called on Israel to cancel the tender, describing the project as “an unacceptable and destructive act” and arguing that development of E1 could jeopardize the possibility of establishing a future Palestinian state.

Miliband has further indicated that the British government is reviewing its wider economic dealings with Israeli-controlled areas of Judea and Samaria. He has said Britain does not want British businesses involved in financing, building or marketing new Jewish communities there.

Reports of the impending restrictions have generated opposition from Israeli officials as well as warnings from Jewish leaders in Britain and some figures within Britain’s governing Labour Party about the ramifications of the policy.

Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said last week that Jerusalem would not leave punitive British action unanswered and warned that reciprocal steps would follow.

“If Britain acts against Israel, Israel will act against Britain,” Sa’ar said in an interview with Ynet.

Britain’s Chief Rabbi, Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis, has also raised concerns about the proposed measures. Rabbi Mirvis recently met with Miliband and urged him to reconsider sanctions and trade restrictions aimed at Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, warning that such policies could damage efforts toward peace while also carrying harmful repercussions for Britain’s Jewish community.

{Matzav.com}

Canada is moving ahead with a sweeping new round of retaliatory tariffs on American products beginning Tuesday, escalating its trade confrontation with the United States despite continued pressure from President Donald Trump to reach an agreement.

The Canadian government says the countermeasures will take effect at 12:01 a.m. on Sept. 8 and will apply to $27.6 billion worth of goods imported from the United States.

Depending on the product, the new duties will be 15%, 25% or 50%, with Ottawa matching the corresponding U.S. tariff rates. Among the industries affected are steel and aluminum, dairy products, household appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper, plastics and electronics.

Ottawa announced the retaliation after negotiations with the Trump administration collapsed. Canadian officials said Washington presented new terms that they considered unacceptable and potentially damaging to Canadian workers, businesses and key industries, prompting Canada to suspend the negotiations rather than accept the proposed agreement.

Canada is therefore proceeding with its countermeasures despite repeated warnings from Trump that additional economic consequences could follow if Ottawa and Washington fail to resolve their differences.

The latest dispute intensified after the Trump administration imposed a 50% tariff on $27.6 billion in Canadian products beginning Aug. 22. Canada subsequently announced that it would answer the American duties “dollar for dollar” and “rate for rate.”

Trump applied additional pressure Monday by targeting Canadian aircraft manufacturer Bombardier, saying the company should be prevented from selling its planes in the United States unless it moves manufacturing operations to American soil.

The White House did not immediately provide details about how such a restriction on Bombardier would be carried out, according to Reuters. Trump has previously raised the prospect of additional action against the Canadian aircraft manufacturer, including imposing tariffs on its planes.

The president has also continued taking public jabs at Canada amid the deteriorating trade relationship, including through his decision to rename Lake Ontario “Lake America” for U.S. federal purposes.

Trump directed federal agencies to adopt “Lake America” as the U.S. name for the body of water, and major digital mapping services have since displayed that name to users in the United States. Canadian officials have rejected the change and continue referring to the lake as Lake Ontario.

Trump has also repeatedly directed criticism at Ontario Premier Doug Ford as tensions between the two neighboring countries have mounted.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, meanwhile, has maintained that his government remains prepared to negotiate with Washington, while insisting that Canada will not agree to conditions it considers harmful to its interests.

Ottawa has also unveiled $7.5 billion in new and expanded assistance for Canadian businesses and workers affected by the tariff battle, adding to billions of dollars in previously announced support.

For the moment, however, the retaliatory measures remain on schedule.

Barring an eleventh-hour breakthrough between Washington and Ottawa, Canada’s new tariffs on American goods will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday.

Britain is expected to announce a significant tightening of its policy toward Israel on Tuesday, including restrictions on trade in goods and certain services connected to Israeli communities in Yehuda and Shomron.

British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband is expected to unveil the measures as part of what he has described as a broader “reset” of Britain’s relationship with Israel.

According to a report in The Guardian, the planned restrictions would extend beyond products manufactured in Israeli communities in Yehuda and Shomron and would also cover certain services connected to those areas, including financing and advertising.

Implementing a full ban on the trade of goods could require new legislation to be passed by the British Parliament.

Until now, products originating in Israeli communities in Yehuda and Shomron have not been eligible for the preferential tariff treatment Britain grants to products from Israel. The British government has also advised businesses against conducting economic activity in those areas.

The new policy would go considerably further, transforming some of those government warnings and recommendations into legally enforceable restrictions.

The expected measures come amid British opposition to the E1 construction plan east of Yerushalayim and what British officials have described as an increase in “settler violence” in Yehuda and Shomron.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich responded sharply to reports of the impending measures, calling for Britain’s ambassador to Israel to be expelled “this very evening.”

“We will not be a doormat for an antisemitic government, in a country that has been conquered by radical Islam and is trying to save itself from economic and social decline by attacking the Jews and the State of Israel. The British Mandate in Eretz Yisroel is over,” Smotrich said.

Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu has ordered Israel’s negotiating team dealing with Lebanon to seek information about 11 leaders and members of Lebanon’s Jewish community who were kidnapped and murdered during the 1980s, reopening a decades-old case in which the burial places of 10 of the victims remain unknown.

The Prime Minister’s Office announced last week that the fate of the murdered Jews, and efforts to recover their remains, would be raised as part of Israel’s negotiations with Lebanon. Separate reports indicate that attempts have also begun on the ground to determine where the victims’ bodies may have been left.

Col. (res.) Dr. Jacques Neriah, who was born in Lebanon and has extensively researched the country’s Jewish community, recalled the events surrounding the abductions in an interview with Israel National News. Neriah previously advised Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin during diplomatic negotiations involving Lebanon and Syria and today serves as a senior researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs.

According to Neriah, the Jewish presence in Lebanon stretches back approximately 3,000 years, with communities documented in Sidon, Baalbek, Tripoli and elsewhere. The community grew and changed over the centuries as additional Jewish populations arrived, among them Jews expelled from Spain and, much later, Ashkenazi Jews escaping Nazi persecution. Lebanese Jewry eventually included indigenous Lebanese Jews alongside Jews with roots in Syria and Iraq, descendants of Spanish exiles and European refugees from the Holocaust.

Neriah said that after Britain established the border separating Lebanon from Eretz Yisroel, Lebanese Jews generally remained loyal to the Lebanese government. Curiously, he recalled, the identity cards issued to Lebanese Jews — including his own when he was young — identified their religion as “Israeli.”

That longstanding community began unraveling amid Lebanon’s growing instability.

“The community prospered until the first civil war in 1958. Some of the Jews realized that this was not the place for them. This intensified in 1967 following the Six-Day War and riots, when Kurds and Shiites invaded Jewish areas and attacked them, and many Jews fled, leaving behind property and homes. The Shiites and Kurds took over the homes. This weighed heavily on the Jewish presence in Lebanon, as they felt unwanted and began to emigrate. However, they did not view Israel as their destination and preferred the United States, France and South America.”

As the Jewish population steadily declined, Neriah explained, Hezbollah began emerging as an increasingly powerful force in Lebanon, developing out of the Shiite Amal movement, known as the “Movement of the Deprived.” By 1982, the organization had become deeply involved in fighting Israel’s presence in Lebanon.

Two years later, according to Neriah, Hezbollah sought a way to increase its standing while pressuring Israel to free Shiites being held in Israeli prisons. Its strategy was to kidnap Lebanese Jews and attempt to use their lives as leverage for the prisoners’ release.

By that point, only a fraction of Lebanon’s once-thriving Jewish community remained. In 1984, Hezbollah abducted 11 Jews, among them the president and secretary of the community. Others were ordinary working civilians, including an electrical engineer, a plumber and a clerk. Their captors threatened to kill them unless Israel released Hezbollah prisoners. Rabin later said that accepting such terms was never considered an option.

When it became clear that Israel would not accede to its demands, Hezbollah began killing the hostages. One of those murdered was the father of Dr. Edy Cohen. He is the only victim among the 11 whose burial location is known today.

The killings continued over the following years. By 1987, all 11 abducted Jews had been murdered, with Isaac Sasson reportedly the final victim to be executed.

For Neriah, the story is also deeply personal. He returned to Lebanon in 1985 and visited its Christian-controlled area. During one meeting, Neriah was informed that a man was outside waiting to see him. The visitor was Dr. Eli Hallak, a physician known for treating impoverished residents of Wadi Abu Jamil.

“I said to him, ‘What are you doing here?’ He told me, ‘I’m guarding the Jewish property.’ I told him, ‘Get yourself out of here.’ He said his family was already in France. I told him to join them because he was in danger here. He refused and said we were exaggerating and that he felt safe. A few months later, he was kidnapped, and a year later he was executed. It pains me that I was unable to convince him to leave Lebanon. It weighs on my conscience,” Neriah said.

Even after Hallak was abducted, Neriah said, the doctor provided medical care to Hezbollah members while being held captive. His assistance ultimately did nothing to save his life, and Hezbollah executed him as well.

Netanyahu’s directive has now placed the unresolved fate of the victims back on the agenda, with Israeli negotiators instructed to obtain information about the locations of the 10 bodies that have never been found.

Neriah, however, expressed little optimism that the remains themselves can still be recovered. According to his account, Hezbollah did not bury the murdered Jews in identifiable graves, but instead disposed of their bodies in a garbage dump, making their recovery decades later exceedingly unlikely.

Even if the remains cannot be located, Neriah said there is still value in pressing for information. Details held in Lebanon could potentially provide answers about the victims’ captivity, the circumstances of their deaths and what was done with their bodies afterward.

The Israeli effort has also generated questions in Lebanon. Neriah said Lebanese media outlets have struggled to understand why Israel is pursuing the case, noting that the murdered Jews were Lebanese citizens, not Israelis, and questioning on that basis why their remains should ultimately be brought to Israel.

It is with great sadness that Matzav.com reports the passing of Rebbetzin Sarah Bressler a”h, wife of Rav Chaim Bressler, longtime rosh yeshiva of Yeshiva Bais Moshe of Scranton, Pennsylvania.

Rebbetzin Bressler, née Falik, spent most of her adult life in Scranton, where she stood faithfully at the side of her husband throughout his decades of harbotzas haTorah. While Rav Bressler devoted himself to building generations of bnei Torah, the Rebbetzin provided the steadfast support that enabled that lifelong undertaking, while becoming a beloved and respected presence in the Scranton community in her own right.

Yeshiva Bais Moshe traces its beginnings to 1965, when Rav Bressler and Rav Yaakov Schnaidman, both talmidim of Rav Aharon Kotler zt”l, set out to establish a new makom Torah in Scranton. The two young talmidei chachomim sought to create a yeshiva that would carry forward the mesorah and derech halimud they had absorbed from their great rebbe.

The undertaking began on a modest scale. Yeshiva Bais Moshe opened with a small group of talmidim in rented quarters, but over the ensuing decades it grew steadily into a major Torah institution. In 1976, the yeshiva acquired the former Mercy Heights Hospital property on Scranton’s South Side, converting the facilities into a bais medrash, classrooms, dormitory, dining room and other facilities needed for the growing yeshiva.

From those humble beginnings emerged an institution that has educated thousands of talmidim, with its alumni going on to serve in chinuch, rabbanus and positions of communal leadership across the Jewish world. The yeshiva transformed Scranton into a flourishing center of Torah, with generations of talmidim carrying its influence far beyond northeastern Pennsylvania.

Behind Rav Bressler throughout that remarkable journey was Rebbetzin Bressler.

For decades, she shared in the sacrifices and responsibilities inherent in building and sustaining a yeshiva far from the major Torah centers of New York and New Jersey. Her home and her life were bound up with the yeshiva, its talmidim and the broader Scranton community. She was a devoted rebbetzin and a pillar of the community, providing the foundation upon which her husband was able to devote himself to his talmidim and to the yeshiva.

Her role took on particular significance because the Bresslers were not merely joining an established Torah community. They were among those who helped build one. Rav Bressler and Rav Schnaidman arrived in Scranton as young talmidim of Rav Aharon Kotler with a vision of establishing a yeshiva in a smaller American city, and the institution they created ultimately became a fixture on the American Torah landscape. Rebbetzin Bressler accompanied and supported that mission from its formative years through decades of extraordinary growth.

After spending the overwhelming majority of her life in Scranton, Rebbetzin Bressler more recently relocated with her husband to Lakewood, New Jersey, where they settled in the A Country Place neighborhood.

Rebbetzin Bressler leaves behind her husband, Rav Chaim Bressler, as well as their distinguished family of children and grandchildren who continue in the path that she and her husband charted, perpetuating their legacy of Torah, yiras Shomayim and dedication to Klal Yisroel.

The levayah will be held tonight, Monday night, at 10 p.m. at the Congregation Sons of Israel Holocaust Memorial Chapel, located at 613 Ramsey Avenue in Lakewood, NJ.

Yehi zichrah baruch.

{Matzav.com}

[Photos below.] By Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer

Yesterday, Sunday, 24 Elul/September 6, Rav Liron Rogovsky was installed as Rav of K’hal Adath Jeshurun–Washington Heights (KAJ/”Breuer’s”) in a magnificent ceremony held in the shul, before an attendance of at least 400 members and guests and a large delegation of very prominent rabbonim.

The sensational Hachtarah event commenced with the KAJ choir singing Mah Tovu, followed by Mincha led by Chazzan R. Ezra Lasdun and Teki’as Shofar by the renowned KAJ Ba’al Tekiah and shofar expert, R. Bentzion Ettlinger, author of the acclaimed sefer, The Shofar. (The German/Yekkish minhag is to blow shofar during Elul after Mincha as well [v. Rema on Shulchan Aruch-Orach Chaim 581:1] and to blow three sets of “Tashrat” each day at Shacharis and Mincha. At KAJ, the Teruah is blown as a continuous “wave” or “siren” sound [which is the opinion of the Ba’al Ha-Itur], rather than as a series of short beeps. This is Minhag Frankfurt, and it is similar to how Yemenite Jews sound the Teruah as well.) Some guests commented afterwards how moved they were to hear this unique shofar blowing, which occurs twice daily at KAJ during Elul.

Following Mincha, Mr. Alan Ettlinger, President of KAJ, spoke about the historic role and impact of KAJ and the significance of the appointment of Rav Rogovsky. This was followed by a host of premier rabbinic speakers who delivered divrei Torah about the event and about the new Rav. Rav Meir Levi, Rav of K’hal Adath Jeshurun-Monsey explained that even though Rav Rogovsky began to serve as Rav of KAJ immediately upon the departure of Rav Yisroel Mantel some three months ago, the concept of a Hachtarah is a kiyum of “Aseh Lecha Rav”, meaning that the Kehillah now accepts upon itself and submits to Rav Rogovsky as its sole halachic authority. Rav Levi, along with the rest of the distinguished speakers, spoke at a smaller shtender in front of the Aron Kodesh, adjacent to the Rav’s shtender, and Rav Levi elaborated that since Rav Rogovsky is now Rav, absolutely no one else is permitted to speak from his shtender; such is the exceptional status of Rav at KAJ, Rav Levi explained.

Rav Yerucham Olshin, Rosh Yeshiva of Beth Medrash Govoha-Lakewood (BMG), spoke next and cited the Chofetz Chaim’s statement that the primary role of a rav is Harbatzas Ha-Torah, teaching and disseminating Torah. Rav Olshin declared that he came as a representative of the entirety of BMG and praised KAJ for providing an exceptionally large component of Torah leadership worldwide, by way of the graduates of KAJ’s yeshiva system, Yeshiva Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch. Rav Asher Dovid May, Rav of Congregation Bais Tefilla of Monsey, spoke next and addressed the unique and iconic roles of the rabbanim of KAJ and of Rav Rogovsky in particular, drawing from the middos of Hashem as manifested by these legendary rabbanim and elaborating on the unique relationship of the Hachtarah with the completion of the Shev D’Nechemta, the seven haftoros of consolation that we just competed. And Rav Tzvi Berkowitz, Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel-Baltimore and rebbe muvhak of Rav Rogovsky, discussed the significance of a tzibbur appointing a rav and the concomitant role of the rav toward the tzibbur – particularly that the rav must be equipped to deal with the diversity of his following and be able to understand the specific needs of each individual – as exemplified by the appointment of Yehoshua to assume leadership after Moshe Rabbeinu.

Rav Rogovsky then ascended to the pulpit, with great fanfare, and explained that every kehillah must yield to the Will of Hashem as the sole factor in making any decision, and that the Torah is how Hashem’s Will is determined – all else is irrelevant. The Rav expounded upon the point that all is in Hashem’s hands, and he painted a very optimistic picture of a prosperous and growth-oriented future for KAJ, as KAJ submits to Hashem’s mandate as formulated in the Torah and as elucidated by Rav Shamshon Raphael Hirsch and Rav Breuer and the successive rabbanim of KAJ. As always, the Rav’s presentation was upbeat and brimming with good spirit and humility, as he thanked the membership for its overwhelmingly warm welcome to him and his family and for its love and support from day one. The Rav declared that the exceptional amount of kindness, enthusiasm and heartfelt care expressed by the kehillah from the very start was of historic proportion, and he most graciously thanked KAJ for making him and his family feel so welcome and for so much positivity.

The KAJ choir sang a selection from Hallel, as well as Yigdal and Adon Olam, at various intervals during the Hachtarah event.

Rav Rogovsky’s new sefer, Iyun Ha-Halacha, packed with close to 300 pages of original chiddushei Torah, was distributed to all attendees, along with a beautiful Yom Kippur Machzor with the commentary of Rav Breuer, courtesy of Feldheim Publishers.

The Hachtarah concluded with an elegant and delicious collation of various foods and beverages, along with live music and dancing. The entire event was absolutely stunning and profoundly inspiring!

One woman who attended the Hachtarah and who relocated to a different neighborhood after the passing of her husband in order to be with her children, told this writer that although she of course treasures living near her children, she misses the unique, close-knit community feeling and kehillah structure of KAJ, and that “Washington Heights is the best place to raise children”, reflective of the wholesome Torah environment pervasive in the community, free of materialistic focus and packed with the values of traditional Yahadus and derech eretz.

It is hoped that with the appointment of Rav Rogovsky as its dynamic new Rav, embodying immense warmth, approachability, resourcefulness and positivity, there will be renewed interest and growth in the KAJ community and in its outstanding Torah institutions.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu declined to comply with a Monday evening deadline imposed by Likud’s internal tribunal requiring him to disclose his proposed reserved candidates for the party’s Knesset slate by 9 p.m., instead announcing after the deadline had passed that the names would be released Tuesday morning.

The Likud tribunal had issued the ultimatum earlier Monday, ordering Netanyahu, who serves as party chairman, to provide the names to members of the Likud Secretariat by the 9 p.m. deadline.

Netanyahu did not do so. About an hour after the deadline expired, he announced that the reserved slots would instead be revealed the following morning.

His decision could set up a confrontation within the party. In response to Netanyahu’s refusal to meet the deadline, the Likud Secretariat may hold a secret ballot on the proposed reserved candidates, potentially allowing members to reject each candidate individually.

In its earlier ruling, the tribunal warned that releasing the names only shortly before the vote “could be interpreted as an improper ambush.”

The tribunal acknowledged that political circumstances could justify departing from the original requirement that Netanyahu’s proposal be released 48 hours before the vote. Nevertheless, it ruled that the names should now be provided to Secretariat members as quickly as possible.

According to reports, Netanyahu has not yet made final decisions regarding all of the candidates he intends to reserve spots for on the Likud slate.

Among the names already reported are Oren Dobronsky, Gideon Sa’ar, Chaim Katz and Yisrael Katz. MK Michel Buskila is also expected to receive a reserved position as part of Likud’s agreement with New Hope.

Other names reportedly under consideration include attorney David Peter, a researcher affiliated with the Kohelet Policy Forum, and Prof. Keren Assayag.

Likud officials believe Netanyahu intended from the outset to postpone his final decisions until as close to the deadline as possible. At the same time, he is reportedly facing pressure from government ministers and members of his family to select candidates who are clearly identified with the political right.

The final list of reserved candidates is expected to be announced Tuesday, the deadline for submitting the party slates.

{Matzav.com}

A delegation of 20 American state lawmakers visiting Shomron pledged to pursue legislation in their home states that would penalize companies and organizations that boycott residents of Yehuda and Shomron because of where they live. The initiative comes amid moves by several European countries targeting Israelis and businesses connected to the region.

The group, made up of state senators and representatives from around the United States, toured Shomron as guests of Shomron Regional Council head Yossi Dagan. The visit came against the backdrop of threatened measures by Ireland and Spain against Israelis living in Yehuda and Shomron.

During the tour, lawmakers said they intend to bring proposals to their respective state legislatures aimed at responding to economic boycotts of the region.

Under the proposed approach, businesses and organizations that refuse to deal with residents or companies in Yehuda and Shomron solely because of their location could face sanctions or other countermeasures in states that adopt the legislation.

The lawmakers were hosted by Yisrael Rappaport at Nof Avi Farm, where they received a briefing on Jewish communities throughout Shomron and were given an overview of conditions in the region.

Leading the delegation was Jason Rapert, founder and president of the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, or NACL, which has developed close ties with Dagan and has promoted legislation relating to Yehuda and Shomron. The visiting lawmakers represented states including Alaska, Georgia, Arkansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Montana, Minnesota, Alabama and Missouri.

Rapert described the anti-boycott initiative as the next phase of NACL’s efforts concerning Yehuda and Shomron.

“Just as we are winning the first battle, of recognizing Judea and Samaria, we are going to win the second battle – stopping the economic war against Israel, and especially against Judea and Samaria. We are with you, and together, with God’s help, we are going to win. We will win,” he said.

Rapert urged the elected officials participating in the trip to use their positions and public influence to push back against economic measures targeting Israel and residents of Yehuda and Shomron.

Mississippi State Senator Kathy Chism said she intends to bring the proposed legislation home and seek its passage in Mississippi.

“I plan to take the legislation back to Mississippi and try to pass something that will help Israel, because they should not be putting these sanctions on them. I support Israel 100%,” she said.

Alabama State Representative Mark Gidley pointed to measures already enacted in his state against those participating in sanctions or boycotts targeting Israel and called for similar action elsewhere.

“I want to encourage every state to do the same thing. I even encourage us to do it at the national level, because Israel is a partner. Israel is our ally in the Middle East,” he said.

Arkansas State Representative Hope Duke similarly called for states to take action against companies that refuse to conduct business with Israel.

“When you have other countries that are sanctioning Israel, we need to do our part. We’ve done things in Arkansas, and we need to continue to do things, and hopefully other states will follow suit in sanctioning companies that refuse to do business with Israel, because Israel is our greatest partner in the Middle East,” she said.

The new push builds on a broader NACL campaign seeking official recognition of Yehuda and Shomron by state governments across the United States. Tennessee has already enacted legislation requiring state documents to use the name “Judea and Samaria” rather than the “West Bank,” while Arizona has approved a resolution addressing the terminology.

Similar legislative efforts have been moving forward in West Virginia and Florida, while measures have also been formally introduced in Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma and Georgia. NACL and allied groups have been working with state lawmakers to turn their positions on Yehuda and Shomron into legislation and government policy.

Dagan thanked the American lawmakers for their efforts and told them their actions were sending a broader message beyond the region itself.

“What you are doing together is like a shofar – a powerful voice for the world. What is happening here in Judea and Samaria is part of history and the Bible, and it is relevant to the entire world. Day after day, you are voting on the right side of history, and I am certain that, with God’s help, we will win,” he said.

In a major political shakeup within the Belz chassidus, Deputy Communications Minister Yisrael Eichler will step aside as the chassidus’s longtime Knesset representative and will be replaced by Elyakim Stark on the United Torah Judaism slate for the 26th Knesset.

The move, which was made with the blessing of the Belzer Rebbe, will not mark Eichler’s departure from the leadership of the Belz political establishment. Eichler will remain chairman of the Machzikei Hadas movement and will continue to lead its activities, while Stark will serve as the movement’s representative in the Knesset.

According to an official announcement from Belz, Eichler and Stark “will continue to work in full and coordinated cooperation.”

The decision confirms a report published Sunday night by Kikar HaShabbat that Belz was preparing to replace Eichler after his many years in the Knesset. Eichler has served, intermittently, as a Knesset member since 2003, representing Belz within Agudas Yisroel and United Torah Judaism.

Under the new arrangement, Eichler will retain his position as chairman of Machzikei Hadas, while Stark will assume responsibility for representing the movement in the Knesset. Kikar HaShabbat reported that Eichler and Stark themselves jointly drafted the announcement about the transition shortly before it was released to the media.

Stark is regarded as one of the younger and more energetic senior figures within Belz, and his stature has risen considerably both inside the chassidus and beyond it in recent years. He is also said to enjoy a particularly close relationship with the Belzer Rebbe’s only son, Rav Aharon Mordechai Rokeach.

Stark currently serves as chairman of the executive committee of Belz. During the most recent municipal elections, he effectively oversaw the chassidus’s entire political operation, giving him considerable experience in political organization and election activity.

The dramatic decision came after reports earlier Monday that Eichler was stunned upon learning that he was being replaced. Despite his surprise, however, Eichler reportedly made clear that he would accept whatever decision was made by the Belzer Rebbe.

Belz sources told Kikar HaShabbat that Eichler was personally hurt by the unexpected development.

“It can be said that Eichler was really hurt by the move. He did not expect it — but as a loyal chassid, he accepts the decision,” the sources said.

Until very recently, according to those sources, the expectation within Belz had been that Eichler would continue serving as the chassidus’s Knesset representative.

“It already seemed settled that Eichler would continue, and now everything has changed. It may be that because of the decision in Degel to remove the veteran and respected MKs, it was decided here as well to bring in fresh blood,” they said.

Netanel Jacobs, who was wounded in a terrorist stabbing attack in Shomron on Monday morning, described from his hospital bed how he fought his attacker with his bare hands, attempted to subdue him and even pursued him as he fled — before realizing that he himself had suffered multiple stab wounds.

Speaking from Beilinson Hospital, where he was being treated following the attack, Jacobs recalled wrestling the terrorist to the ground as he tried to defend himself.

“I fought him, punched him and pushed him. He fell to the ground, and I went down with him,” Jacobs recalled. “We were both lying on the ground. I tried to pick up a rock to throw at his head, but I couldn’t reach it.”

According to Jacobs, the confrontation did not end when the attacker’s knife broke. The terrorist continued trying to stab him using what remained of the weapon.

“He had his knife. The knife broke, and only the blade was left. He tried to keep stabbing me with it,” he said. “I got to him and choked him, and then he managed to escape and ran toward his car.”

Rather than immediately stopping after the terrorist broke free, Jacobs said he grabbed a rock and began pursuing him. It was only at that point that he noticed the extent of his own injuries.

“I chased him with a rock, and then I saw that I was covered in blood and had stab wounds to my head, neck and hand,” he recounted.

Jacobs’ parents, Avdiel and Penina, later said at the hospital that their son was in stable condition, expressing gratitude that he had survived the attack.

“We thank the Creator of the Universe that we merited, on the 25th of Elul, the day the world was created, for our son Netanel to be created anew. His condition is now good and stable, but without the heroism and the miracles, this could easily have ended differently,” they said.

The parents also urged the IDF and Israeli government to respond more forcefully in the wake of the stabbing.

“We must not accept a situation in which, in the State of Israel, an Arab can rise up with the aim of slaughtering and massacring Jews. The IDF and the country’s leaders need to wake up and take truly tough action against every village of murderers from which a terrorist emerges,” they stated.

They called on authorities to “demolish homes, confiscate all the weapons and not make do with routine measures.” They further said the attack underscored what they see as the importance of Jewish farms maintaining a presence across open areas, arguing that such communities help keep terrorists farther away.