[Avodah] yishuv EY

[SBA]

From: "Mike Miller" <>
 SBA <sba at sba2.com> wrote:
> The VM here (and elsewhere) also discusses (amidst some pilpul on the
> views of the Avnei Nezer) the words of Rav Zeira (Brochos 57) who said 
> that
> he would not move to EY until he is shown a sign from heaven (via a dream)
> that he is free of sin.

> >>Try R. Tzvi Yehuda Kook for a different perspective.

> Huh? He has sources saying that baalei aveireh SHOULD be oleh to EY?
----------------

One should not refrain from one mitzvah just because of other aveiros.
>>

Generally, of course not. But in this case - according to R' Zeira and all
the poskim quoted in VM - a baal aveira is not doing any mitzva by going to 
EY.

Aderaba, as they mention: 'vatovou vetetamu es artzi'.

>>Should one who knows he may not be able to keep shabbos day perfectly
not make kiddush at night?

Hopefully he uses yayin mevushal...

Maybe your question should be:
"Should (or can) one who knows he may not be able to keep shabbos day
perfectly - be motzi others with kiddush at night?"

>>I don't know how many baalei aveira (in the sense that they are
willing and knowingly over aveiros with no attempts to improve
themselves) follow R' Kook, or any Rav.

I was of course not referring to followers of R Kook - and neither is the
VM.  The discussion is about mechalelei shabbos and ochlei nevelos.
(Although the sefer Charedim refers to much lesser aveiros - as I mentioned 
in my
earlier post.)

 >>>OTOH, if is someone who is
nichshal, even regularly, but tries to work on it, or holds "omer
mutar" -- can such a person really be called a baal aveirah?

I am not a posek. But forget about such lomdus.  The discussion is/was
re the early zionists many of whom were from erlich homes and turned
into chotim umachtiim with their only mitzva being:
'lihyos am chofshi be'artzeinu'.

SBA