Talk:Hardal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The "see also" and "categories" are nor displaying even though they appear when one wants to edit the page.--Jayrav 04:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC) I fixed it but lost footnote format.--Jayrav 04:24, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] First beginnings

Right now, the entire article is unsourced and completely qualifies as OR. However, I am afraid that this is the only way to start this article. I feel quite certain that every religious person who is slightly familiar with the Hardal world will agree with all that I wrote. Now, the section on Leadership needs to be expanded. Does Rav Yisrael Meir Lau belong to the Hardal leadership? I think so, and actually I think most of Israel's current and past Chief Rabbis belong to it, with the notable exception of Rav Ovadia Yosef (who holds against reciting the tefilah for the medinah). --Daniel575 | (talk) 19:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Good job on creating the article, kudos. I don't think it's OR from what I read (not all). I think Lau doesn't qualify as Hardal... the Hardal are those more in the region of Tkuma and Efi Eitam. Amoruso 22:30, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Nice. Unfortunately, since nothing is sourced, it's all OR. Nonetheless, the subject is worthy of an article explaining the phenomena, of course, expansions are welcomed as always. --Shuki 23:11, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

The Hebrew Wiki has sources, but in Hebrew. --Jayrav 05:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

It's ok to use them in this case. Amoruso 07:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rav Ovadia Yosef: Hardal or not?

I already foresee a big discussion starting about this, due to his importance. I say that he is not. As a side note and full OR: it seems that the Shas and Lubavitch attitudes towards the State are completely identical. Both seem to support a "new kind of Zionism" which includes replacing this state with a Torah-based state, which will seek to have a "greater Israel" - but, emphasizing, that this state is not the means through which that goal will be achieved. Thus, both Shas and Lubavitch strongly support the state and oppose land withdrawals - but do not say any prayers for the state.

Praying for the state?

Initially, he ruled that one should say the tefilah for the medinah. However, soon after, he reversed this ruling. My understanding, based on personal knowledge from friends who are Shasnikim, is that no follower of Rav Yosef says any tefilah for the medinah.

Land withdrawals

Shas supports land-for-peace arrangements. But only when there is an agreement. Not unilateral, such as last year's disengagement. See http://meria.idc.ac.il/news/2006/06April10news.html "As a non-Zionist force, Shas does not rule out the possibility of territorial concessions." (=scientific article) I propose that there should perhaps be a new article specifically on the issue of Sephardic Haredim. --Daniel575 | (talk) 19:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I think he's not at all. Shas in its entirety isn't. Hardal doesn't mean zionist Haredi, it means haredim involved in the same aspect of religious zionism, i.e right wing map, or even more extreme. Mordechai Eliyahu is the best example to Hardal. Amoruso 22:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I most certainly agree. He doesn't say any prayers for the state and he agrees to land-for-peace arrangements. Hardalim would not consider either of those things (well, some of the extreme-right ones do refuse to pray for the state now - but that has wholly different reasons). However, I am sure some right-wing R-Z will show up here and claim that the Satmar Rebbe was Hardal, let alone they will claim that about Rav Yosef. So I figured I might as well bring up the issue myself. --Daniel575 | (talk) 22:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Exactly... but I don't think Shas is ANTI zionist though since they're so active in politics and everything. that's why I think hardal doesn't deal with zionism that much but more about right wing map zionism. Amoruso 22:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, indeed. See my above comparison of Lubavitch and Shas. They seem to have very identical views. I think Rav Shapiro does also qualify as Hardal. Most, if not all of the "Sanhedrin" (see Modern attempts to revive the Sanhedrin) also qualifies as Hardal. Rav Eliyahu's shul (oops, I mean, beit knesset) is only 300 meters away from my home. I can say that 90% there wear a knitted kippah, colored clothing, and no jacket and hat. He himself does. --Daniel575 | (talk) 22:59, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Rav Ovadia is definitely haredi, not hardal. We tend to associate haredi only with streimel wearing ashkenazim, but white-shirted, black pants sepharadim do not serve in the army, and do not have tv's.--Shuki 23:15, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
As for land withdrawals, the famous 'land for safety' ruling by Rav Ovadia, it was unique to its time and has since been retracted by him as irrelevant. --Shuki 23:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, because there is no partner for bilateral agreements. He would only agree if there was a viable plan for it, with a certain guarantee that it would work. That is absolutely not the case in the current situation. --Daniel575 | (talk) 02:13, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Important books in Hardal philosophy Eim HaBanim Semeichah

are you sure about it ? I'm really not sure and I think it belongs in the Haredim and Zionism article. I don't know if Hardal cares for this specific book. I'm pretty sure not since it was published in 1943 and Hardal as a term is VERY RECENT. Amoruso 22:51, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, look at Talk:Haredim and Zionism. Look at what the OU itself (by the person of Rabbi Berel Wein) writes about it: it is non-existent in the Yeshiva world and in the Chassidic world (ie, the Haredi world). Even the OU (which is R-Z) acknowledges that. I also confirm it. As I wrote there, most Haredi shuls would throw it in the trash or at the very least remove it from their bookshelf. Same thing they do with siddurim that have prayers for the state in them (every Haredi shul I know removes such siddurim when they are found, and that includes non-Hasidic shuls). That sefer is most definitely not Haredi. Call it whatever you want, but Haredi it is not. --Daniel575 | (talk) 23:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't think the book is Hardal. The book precedes Hardal. It was written by a Chareidi who died al kiddush Hashem. --Meshulam 01:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Warning: the following comment is not suitable for Zionists with a weak stomach. Not before he got infected with heresy, may the Merciful One save us. Yes, he died al kiddush hashem and I will not personally criticize him for it. I might have done exactly the same, given the circumstances. Nobody can criticize him for going 'off the derech' the way he did, leaving Torah Judaism and joining the heretics. The circumstances were horrible. Nevertheless, we must acknowledge that by writing his book, he gave the Religious Zionists a heter (permit) to continue in their distasteful ways, going after their heretical ideology, led by the Satan. The movement to which he gave a heter is worse than any other movement in the world. If he had given a heter to the Karaites or to the Reform, it would have been better, since the heresy of those movements is less serious than the heresy of the cursed Zionists, may their names and memories be wiped out. Zionists can continue reading here. And I'm going to sleep. As a final note, note that the above is not necessarily my opinion, but rather the way it should be seen according to the holy sefer Vayoel Moshe and the Daas Torah of its writer zy'a. I personally am incapable of having such a strong standpoint and have a slightly milder opinion. The above is merely intended to illustrate the seriousness of the difference of opinion between Eim HaBanim Semeichah and Vayoel Moshe. And finally, it should be noted that the vast majority of the Haredi world greatly praised the Satmar Rebbe when Vayoel Moshe came out. --Daniel575 | (talk) 02:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV in lead

The lead sentence, which states that "Hardal refers to those Orthodox Jews who combine Religious Zionism with a stricter adherence to Halacha than that which is characteristic for average religious Zionist Jews, who classify themselves as modern Orthodox." has some major POV issues in characterizing those who are modern Orthodox as less strict in their adherence to Halacha than those in the Hardal world. Who is the "average religious Zionist Jew", what practices does he observe (or not observe) that make him less strict in his observance, and what evidence is provided to support this thesis? While there are obvious differences in the ways in which Halacha is observed in the Haredi and Modern Orthodox worlds, each group believes that they are scrupulously observing Halacha as they define it. As such, any claim that one exhibits "stricter adherence" is an unsupported POV statement and must be changed. The lead of the Haredi Judaism article which states that it is the "most theologically conservative" branch of Orthodoxy has its own problems, but avoids the explicit judgment that this article makes. Alansohn 00:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Then let's delete the entire article, since that is the basis of the article. Instead of complaining, I propose that you come up with a better way of writing it. What it says is completely factual. And, what practices is the average MO RZ Jew not so strict in? Well:
tznius -> find me one respectable posek who permits women to wear skirts which do not reach the knee with nude legs underneath, or to have the upper arms and elbows uncovered
kashrus -> who in the world would rely on a rabbanut hechsher?
tefiloh -> why is it that average MO RZ shuls are so quiet on weekday mornings, while chareidi shuls are completely full? why are there no MO RZ shtieblach for mincha and maariv?
tzitzis -> find me one posek who permits (for Ashkenazim) to wear their tzitzis in their pants
These are a few examples of things which the average Modern Orthodox Religious Zionist is not very careful with, while Hardalim (kal vachomer chareidim) are careful with these things. And again, if you propose 'changing the lead', then we might as well delete the entire article, since that is what the entire article is founded on. I almost single-handedly wrote this article and even the Zionists here (and I am NOT a Zionist) have not objected to it, which I consider to be a great compliment, since I think I did a pretty good job in starting a decent NPOV article.
More on-topic. The thing is, the entire existence of 'Hardal' is based on a certain level of observance, which is stricter than average MO-RZ and less strict than Haredi. Removing that from the article because it would be 'POV' would be deleting the entire article. Believe me, there is a border to 'NPOV'. And you are crossing it. --Daniel575 | (talk) 08:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Alansohn, you can change the lead into something better if you wish.... I agree there's a problem with the strict issue, but it's hard to write this article. The article was started after a big problem arose in Haredim and Zionism article by Daniel and like he said it was pretty much WP:OR. I thought he did a decent job I have faith in Daniel's good faith but the article can be improved. Amoruso 10:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I will try to fix it based on the Hebrew Wiki. Be patient - this may take a few tries.--Jayrav 14:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Jayrav's first attempt
Hardal (Hebrew: חרד"ל, חרדי לאומי Translit.: Haredi Le-umi Plural: Hardalim Translated: National Haredi) refers to those Orthodox Jews who are more conservative in religious practice and socially withdrawn than most other Religious Zionists. They follow a stricter social vision than that which is characteristic for average religious Zionist Jews, who classify themselves as modern Orthodox. Some, both outside and inside, consider this term as negative or only as an outsider's term. They prefer to be called "Torani community" or "Emmunai community."
I'm sorry, but I cannot agree with this. This is even worse OR, completely OR. The only thing that is correct is that they sometimes refer to themselves as "Torani". --Daniel575 | (talk) 15:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Haredi Judaism is defined in its lead sentence as "the most theologically conservative form of Orthodox Judaism." Haredim and Zionism defines the pro-Zionist group as "a category of Orthodox Jews known as 'Hardalim', who combine Religious Zionism with a stricter adherence to Halacha." Both of these definitions better avoid the POV issues that the current Hardal lead creates. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alansohn (talk • contribs) .

Alansohn's first attempt
Hardal (Hebrew: חרד"ל, חרדי לאומי Translit.: Haredi Le-umi Plural: Hardalim Translated: National Haredi) refers to those Orthodox Jews who combine Religious Zionism with the stricter adherence to Halacha characteristic of Haredi Judaism. As such, the 'Hardal' world combines certain aspects of both Religious Zionist as well as Haredi religious philosophy. Alansohn 15:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I cannot agree to that. You claim that comparing them to the low level of observance of MO-RZ is POV, but then you claim that comparing them to the high level of observance of Haredim is ok? I don't understand that line of thinking. I have a better version: --Daniel575 | (talk) 15:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Daniel575's proposal
Hardal (Hebrew: חרד"ל, חרדי לאומי Translit.: Haredi Le-umi Plural: Hardalim Translated: National Haredi) refers to those Orthodox Jews who combine Religious Zionism with certain aspects of both modern Orthodox and Haredi Judaism, as opposed to the majority of religious Zionists, who identify with modern Orthodox only. As such, the 'Hardal' world combines certain aspects of both Religious Zionist as well as Haredi religious philosophy. --Daniel575 | (talk) 15:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    • I think this version is a significant improvement over the existing version (and better than mine). It seems to better capture the essence of the Hebrew Wiki version. Alansohn 16:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Can both of you look at the Hebrew Wiki article as a base line? http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%A8%D7%93%D7%99%D7%9D_%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D

And look at the article by Shlomo fisher? --Jayrav 15:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm taking a look. Will take a closer look tonight. I will add some of those listed as leaders to this article. --Daniel575 | (talk) 16:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

we should also put back the line that they like to be called "Emmunai" both wiki and the Fisher article (as well as people i know :)) make that point.--Jayrav 16:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. But Jay - please don't see this as an insult - please do check your text for typographical errors, since to be honest, you make quite a few. --Daniel575 | (talk) 16:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
no problem, beseder gamur --Jayrav 17:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Quick question: I remember a few years back hearing about Chardal folks and I was told that it stood for Charedi Dati Le'umi. Is it Charedi Le'umi or Ch,Dati,Leumi? Yossiea 18:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not so sure. Some say Chareidi Dati Leumi. Others Chareidi Leumi (this is what the article says now). I actually think it is Chareidi Dati Leumi. --Daniel575 | (talk) 20:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV characteristic section

The POV in it seems to be minor, I would consider sourcing to be more of an issue. If anyone can sources any of it (such as the differences approach to tzinut) we should include it. JoshuaZ 06:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/a/r/Talk%7EHardal_a4a2.html"