As someone who serves, sometimes proudly, I will say that it's clear to me that the Army leaders want Haredim to draft Haredim, but they don't want Haredim in the army. That is to say, they resent Haredim for not serving, but don't want the army to be taken over by people with real Torah values. The basic Torah values for fighting a war are despised by the IDF leaders. Their obsession with pushing women into every unit of the IDF is completely against the Torah idea of kedusha. There are many cases I personally know of where there is an all male combat unit with a female paramedic or doctor. What is the purpose of this? Not combat effectiveness. Until the values of the leaders radically change, I certainly understand Haredi hesitation to serve. I believe the numbers will steadily increase though as the Haredim become more integrated and the IDF increasingly relies on religious soldiers to function.
I would hope that IDF leadership attitudes will improve with time. But I tried to avoid expressing any practical opinion of my own in the article - since I don't even live in Israel, I have no right to an opinion.
But I am interested to hear any more of your thoughts. You've definitely earned that right!
I've written a near 5000 word article on what I believe is wrong with IDF values vs. what I think would be a true Torah army. I really want to believe that the leadership has learned lessons from Oct 7, but the indications are they are still operating on their old assumptions. I don't currently have the answer on how to practically fix the army, though I do want to write some ideas I have in the future.
When we talk about the Chazon Ish's opinion on this matter, we can't just ignore the Chazon Ish's opinion on the very issue at hand, whether yeshiva students should be drafted.
Well apart from hearing stories about him asking Ben Gurion to exempt the few dozen yungeleit who existed at that time, I have no idea what his position on the draft would have been.
We have talmidim who are still alive, I think their opinion should count. At least as much as a written Chazon Ish that doesn't speak directly to the matter, and may or may not have relevance.
Years ago, a friend told me a story that the Chofetz Chaim's son-in-law (R' Mendel Zaks) had told him. For many years, the CC had bitterly opposed children going to a cheder in Radun with secular studies. A few months before he died, the CC saw that the non-secular cheder was pretty much dead and decided that that battle was now over. He told the families that still listened to him that they should transfer their kids to the cheder with secular studies.
R' Zaks asked my friend: "What would have happened if my father-in-law would have died a year earlier and I, standing in his place, would have seen the same circumstances and issued the same instructions? The (frum) people in town would have hanged me from a tree." (I think those are the actual words my friend used)
The point is, if we value the opinion of a particular authority, we can't reliably apply it to new circumstances if that authority isn't around to confirm.
That's an argument against relying on any old authority or ruling in new circumstances, whether orally or in print. It's an argument against relying on this Chazon Ish quoted by Rav Granot as well (to the extent that one believes it even has relevance here).
Yup. That was exactly the point my friend was making.
Now that's not to say that living authorities don't have their own credibility. But if you want to wear the mantel of someone who's dead, you need it in writing.
Every single scenario mentioned never had women in an official military capacity & in uniform .Would never have tolerated it.Would have sooner disbanded their regiments.Any other implication is extreme cherrypicking to suit!
Name them:
Amalek
Yehoshua
King Dovid
So on
That pulls the rug out from under any comparison with aforementioned eras.There isn't any obligatory milchemes in such circumstances.Kallah m'chupasa has zero relevance
The primal obligation of sanctity is premised upon D'vorim 23:10
Therefore until females are dropped out of the IDF cut any such skewed unathentic suppositions.Joining some single-gender low grunt battalion stepped upon& mocked behind their backs by the promiscuous co-ed command ladder,is little better than a suicidal ostrich
This is particularly important because this isn't a zero-sum game: it's apparently now possible to have units that are at least mostly separated. To make your remarkable claim, you'll need serious poskim directly addressing passages like that Chazon Ish and that Rambam and demonstrating why they don't apply in *any* current scenario.
Seriously?Take a walk through Bnei Brak and ask as many eldery jews and jewesses as may suit your fancy how many of their peers were strongly disuaded by the CI from serving in the IDF vs. if any were recommended to go serve
Closer to home there were more than enough eg R'Schlesinger ob"m of Queens,NY who was advised by the CI to close his tzei'ri AI branch of Tel Aviv (after receiveng death threats) & move on to the US
I'm not sure halacha should be decided by surveys or stories. I prefer seeing things in writing from authoritative chochomim. The advantage of this Ramban/Chazon Ish is that they're clearly and unambiguously printed. I'd need something of similar - well, actually greater - substance to change my mind.
There were plenty of male-only units back then.Almost all were. [There were intergrated socialistic units then also, but as they suffered such bad casualty rates, they chose albeit unhappily to end them shortly after Independence]
As someone who serves, sometimes proudly, I will say that it's clear to me that the Army leaders want Haredim to draft Haredim, but they don't want Haredim in the army. That is to say, they resent Haredim for not serving, but don't want the army to be taken over by people with real Torah values. The basic Torah values for fighting a war are despised by the IDF leaders. Their obsession with pushing women into every unit of the IDF is completely against the Torah idea of kedusha. There are many cases I personally know of where there is an all male combat unit with a female paramedic or doctor. What is the purpose of this? Not combat effectiveness. Until the values of the leaders radically change, I certainly understand Haredi hesitation to serve. I believe the numbers will steadily increase though as the Haredim become more integrated and the IDF increasingly relies on religious soldiers to function.
I would hope that IDF leadership attitudes will improve with time. But I tried to avoid expressing any practical opinion of my own in the article - since I don't even live in Israel, I have no right to an opinion.
But I am interested to hear any more of your thoughts. You've definitely earned that right!
I've written a near 5000 word article on what I believe is wrong with IDF values vs. what I think would be a true Torah army. I really want to believe that the leadership has learned lessons from Oct 7, but the indications are they are still operating on their old assumptions. I don't currently have the answer on how to practically fix the army, though I do want to write some ideas I have in the future.
Is it available online?
Aha. I see it is available here: https://substack.com/@truesettler/p-145064734
A fascinating read!
When we talk about the Chazon Ish's opinion on this matter, we can't just ignore the Chazon Ish's opinion on the very issue at hand, whether yeshiva students should be drafted.
Well apart from hearing stories about him asking Ben Gurion to exempt the few dozen yungeleit who existed at that time, I have no idea what his position on the draft would have been.
We have talmidim who are still alive, I think their opinion should count. At least as much as a written Chazon Ish that doesn't speak directly to the matter, and may or may not have relevance.
Years ago, a friend told me a story that the Chofetz Chaim's son-in-law (R' Mendel Zaks) had told him. For many years, the CC had bitterly opposed children going to a cheder in Radun with secular studies. A few months before he died, the CC saw that the non-secular cheder was pretty much dead and decided that that battle was now over. He told the families that still listened to him that they should transfer their kids to the cheder with secular studies.
R' Zaks asked my friend: "What would have happened if my father-in-law would have died a year earlier and I, standing in his place, would have seen the same circumstances and issued the same instructions? The (frum) people in town would have hanged me from a tree." (I think those are the actual words my friend used)
The point is, if we value the opinion of a particular authority, we can't reliably apply it to new circumstances if that authority isn't around to confirm.
That's an argument against relying on any old authority or ruling in new circumstances, whether orally or in print. It's an argument against relying on this Chazon Ish quoted by Rav Granot as well (to the extent that one believes it even has relevance here).
Yup. That was exactly the point my friend was making.
Now that's not to say that living authorities don't have their own credibility. But if you want to wear the mantel of someone who's dead, you need it in writing.
True Settler,
Well put.tehillim 119:63
Problem is the claim "as more join, it will change"is a refrain going on for decades.
The other side has always been far shrewder than yours is.Every step forward has been followed by at least 2 or 3 steps backwards
Every single scenario mentioned never had women in an official military capacity & in uniform .Would never have tolerated it.Would have sooner disbanded their regiments.Any other implication is extreme cherrypicking to suit!
Name them:
Amalek
Yehoshua
King Dovid
So on
That pulls the rug out from under any comparison with aforementioned eras.There isn't any obligatory milchemes in such circumstances.Kallah m'chupasa has zero relevance
The primal obligation of sanctity is premised upon D'vorim 23:10
Therefore until females are dropped out of the IDF cut any such skewed unathentic suppositions.Joining some single-gender low grunt battalion stepped upon& mocked behind their backs by the promiscuous co-ed command ladder,is little better than a suicidal ostrich
Do you have any sources?
This is particularly important because this isn't a zero-sum game: it's apparently now possible to have units that are at least mostly separated. To make your remarkable claim, you'll need serious poskim directly addressing passages like that Chazon Ish and that Rambam and demonstrating why they don't apply in *any* current scenario.
Seriously?Take a walk through Bnei Brak and ask as many eldery jews and jewesses as may suit your fancy how many of their peers were strongly disuaded by the CI from serving in the IDF vs. if any were recommended to go serve
Closer to home there were more than enough eg R'Schlesinger ob"m of Queens,NY who was advised by the CI to close his tzei'ri AI branch of Tel Aviv (after receiveng death threats) & move on to the US
I'm not sure halacha should be decided by surveys or stories. I prefer seeing things in writing from authoritative chochomim. The advantage of this Ramban/Chazon Ish is that they're clearly and unambiguously printed. I'd need something of similar - well, actually greater - substance to change my mind.
There were plenty of male-only units back then.Almost all were. [There were intergrated socialistic units then also, but as they suffered such bad casualty rates, they chose albeit unhappily to end them shortly after Independence]