Talk:Shomer Emunim

Reasons for SE's anti-Zionism

It is incorrect to say that TA and SE (Toldos Aharon and Shomer Emunim) are anti-Zionist because the "live in Jerusalem and have seen the destuction that Zionists have brought" (or some similar language). Even if the Zionists had been universally known as humanitarians and had established a near-Utopia in the holy Land, TA and SE would be anti-Zionist. They get their positions from the Talmud. That the Zionists have arguably brought destruction and chaos to the Jewish people (and the rest of the world, for that matter) is secondary, and at best evidence against them.

Furthermore, the whole issue of whether Zionism has been distructive to the world is an academic question at best. It is not something to be stated as a matter of fact. (The fact that I agree that Zionism has been destructive is immaterial).

--Meshulam 16:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reb Areleh, zy"a, and the Satmar Rav, zy"a, were not so close. The Satmar Rav, zy"a, was opposed to Reb Arele at first, because of his positions on Chassidus. However, R' Avraham Yitzchak Kahn, zy"a, the previous Toldos Aharon Rebbe, WAS very close with the Satmar Rav and it was from there that the connection between Satmar and TA came about. The present Toldos Aharon Rebbe, shlit"a, was a Talmid of the Satmar Rav, zy"a Itzik18 18:40, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the impression that they were close. Disagreements don't cause perud levavos necessarily. I have even heard stories (unconfirmed, of course) about their relationship. But your information is interesting. I'll admit that I don't know enough about the subject to disagree with you here.--Meshulam 16:08, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SE as a non-European Chassidus.

Second, I don't know how accurate it is to say that SE and TA are different from other groups of Chassidim in that they do not come from a European city. Plenty of Chassidic groups trace themselves to a European dynasty, but are based in some city outside of Europe. The Bostoner Chassidim trace themselves back to the talmidim of the Maggid, but are nonetheless "based" in Boston, MA (USA) (though the Bostoner Rebbe spends much of his time in Har Nof). The Pittsburgher Rebbe has a similar story (though, yet again, there is no Rebbe in Pittsburgh, PA anymore). The Clevelander Rebbe traces himself back to the Maor Einaim (Chernobyl), yet started a Chassidus in Cleveland (and now lives in the holy land).

R' Areleh traces his teachings back to his Rebbeim in the Satmar world. But calling himself the Yerushalayim Rebbe (Jerusalem Rebbe) would be somewhat presumptuous. His is the only group I know of that calls themselves by a name that does not come from the city in which it was founded. (Chabad would have a similar standing but for that fact that today Chabad and Lubavitch are more or less synonymous. At one point the larger family of Chabad Chassidim were not identified with any specific city, though the individual groupings all called themselves by the name of their cities: Bobroisker Rebbe, Liadi Rebbe, Kopuster Rebbe, etc.)

--Meshulam 16:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleveland and Pittsburg both trace back to Nadvorna, not Chernobyl. Perhaps the Clevelander is an einikel of the Meor Einayim, as he is of many other famous Rebbes, however, he is the son of the Stroznitzer Rebbe a scion of Nadvorna. Itzik18 18:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. My mistake. Cleveland traces back to Nodvarno, which traces back to Premishlan. Chernobyl doesn't really enter the picture.--Meshulam 16:12, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ashlag and Dushinsky call themselves by the last name of their Rebbe's and not by the city where they came from. There is also a Mishkenos HaRoim Rebbe in Yerushalayim, and several others with such names not coming from cities.Itzik18 18:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I have never heard of the Mishkenos HaRoim Rebbe. Any more information about him? I also was unaware of the sources for the names Ashlag and Dushinsky. Thank you for updating me. --Meshulam 16:12, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Toldos Aharon of Shomer Emunim?

Why was the name of the article changed from Toldos Aharon to Shomer Emunim? Perhaps two articles should be made, one for Toldos Aharon and one for Shomer Emunim. Itzik18 18:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All three dynasties trace back to the "Shomer Emunim" (called after his book of the same name). I thought that it was better to name the article after R' Aharon, rather than after one of the three groups discussed in the article. As for 2 articles, it would not be practical unless there was more specific information about the Shomer Emunim Rebbe (rathar than his name and that he is R' Aharon's son). But if you're up to the task...

--Meshulam 16:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But satmar traces back to siget and uhel, but the name of the article is satmar because that's the big one

That's very different. There is no Uhel anymore. And Satmar is not a break-off of Sighet. It is an independent Chassidus (as independent as it can be when the previous Satmar Rebbe is still sometimes called "The Sigheter." Here, we have all three branches in which the Rebbeim are Chassidim of the Shomer Emunim. Why have an article about three branches whose leaders are all Chassidim of Shomer Emunim that is called by the name of one of the three groups (where the other two groups definitely do not go by that name)?

There is an Uheler Rebbe in Monsey

TA vs TAY

Toldos Aharon vs. Toldos Avrohom Yitzchok. Whilst the TA rebbe continues his father and grandfathers' traditions and chassidic way (i.e. the hungarian chassidic teachings and counducts etc.), the T.A.Y. rebbe has changed his customs and ways to those of his rabbi the late rabbi of Vizhnitz zt"l and more recently even unsuccesfuly tried to change the traditional weekday attire of his followers

To What?--Meshulam 20:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Links

These new links... they seem to reflect the beliefs of the writer (Rabbi Elana) rather than R' Areleh. Perhaps they are more fitting elsewhere.--Meshulam 03:16, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be more blunt about this. I am going to delete these links in a couple of days unless someone can demonstrate that they have anything whatsoever to do with the Shomer Emunim. Simply: If the Shomer Emunim were to read these things, he would probably be very distressed. Adding insult to injury by attributing such things to him is unnecessary. To do so on Wikipedia is hitting below the belt. --Meshulam 06:39, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anti Zionism category

I agree that the Toldos Ahron group belongs in such a category history well documents their fights and struggles with the government forces but Shomrei Amunim and Toldos Avrohom Yitschok do not belong in this category therefore the category must be erased from the article.--יודל 14:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are plain WRONG and you KNOW IT. Please GET OUT OF HERE with your dirty Zionist LIES. --Eidah 14:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So u throw me of here?! r u a admin?! Please be aware that the burden to put new thinks inside an article is on u not on me so even if u get rid of me it has no merit--יודל 14:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shomer Emunim has joined the Agudah (Agudas Yisroel, which started out as an anti-Zionist organization, but now participates in Israeli elections... so they're sort of pareve). So if they are virulently anti-Zionist to the extent that they need to be put in some category, they're keeping it to themselves. TAY is anti-Zionist to the Nth degree, and I don't know why there's even a discussion about it. But perhaps something should be mentioned about Shomer Emunim being in the Agudah. --Meshulam 00:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

shomrrei emunim isnt in the aguda, they maybe take some perks by voting and taking part in the aguda politics but they are never officially joined them.--יודל 22:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting the article

The time has come for this article to be split into three separate articles: Shomer Emunim, Toldos Aharon, and Toldos Avrohom Yitzchok. I'm going to get to work on this now. It will take some time to complete. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 11:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have edited the article about Aharon Roth, which needed editing – by the way, it also says something about the fight between Roth and the Satmar Rav back in Satmar in the 1930s – and I'm going to clean up a bit in the three articles about the three Hasidic groups. It seems to me that they all are pretty much the same, rehashing the main article, which imo should be and remain the Shomer Emunim article, even if it is not the biggest group today. I'm also going to add a section “controversies”, as some of them make headlines outside of the Hasidic world, and not always nice ones. Ajnem (talk) 10:49, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

needs updating

Hello, if anyone knowledgeable is following this article it needs to be updated and edited. Updated: e.g. "... Rabbi Aharon's son also opened a second shul in Bnei Brak, and today he divides his time >>>" but he died in 2012/ Edited: e.g. "Grand Rabbi Aharon Roth" is also refered to as Reb Arele, Rabbi Aharon, Rebbe Aharon "Reb Areleh" Roth, "Reb Areleh" Roth, and "R' Areleh" Roth. This might work for those who already know the group well but for those trying to learn about modern Hasidism it is unnecessarily difficult. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 02:05, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

not zionist is Not really true

The son of the Rebbe of Shomrei Emunim signed up to join the Israeli Army. If they are joining the army then I don't think that you can possibly call them Anti-zionists. Here is my source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/398635 146.111.24.240 (talk) 23:10, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]