Talk:Hardal

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)

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)

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)
 * Please cite the exact source for this quote from the Rebbe zy"a, thank you

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


 * The custom in Yeshivas Chofetz Chaim is to tuck in their tzitzis, however many men who consider themselves to be modern orthodox do not wear a tallis katan at all


 * 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)
 * The level of observance of Hardalim is not less than the average Haredi, it is rather that their hashkafah or world outlook, in reference to Jewish Nationalism before the coming of the Messiah is contrary to the views of Haredi daas Torah.

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 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 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 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)

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)
 * Correct. There is nothing POV about it. All of it is completely true. I know a lot of Hardali families and this is what I see and what they themselves tell me. This section seems to me as being essential for the article. It is the only way to accurately describe the exact position of 'Hardali' in relation to both Haredi and modern-Orthodox. Such a description is necessary for the article. We must compare Hardal characteristics to those of the Haredim and the modern-Orthodox, in order for the article to be of any use. How else is someone to understand just which category of people we are talking about? Next thing, people will imagine that Hardalim are in fact guys in long black coats and hats who are actually Zionists (a VERY rare category and VERY far away from the truth).
 * Let me try to find a few pictures to illustrate the difference for you on this talk page.
 * Hardal
 * http://sdf.shomron.org.il/yishuv/photos/yitzhar/8.jpg regarding kippot, peyot, dress
 * http://sdf.shomron.org.il/yishuv/photos/yitzhar/7.jpg long skirt, but nude feet in sandals
 * http://sdf.shomron.org.il/yishuv/photos/yitzhar/13.jpg distinctive long head covering for married women
 * http://sdf.shomron.org.il/yishuv/photos/yitzhar/28.jpg beard and big kippah, yet not quite 'Haredi'
 * http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/images/settlers_burn_israeli_flag_in_homesh.jpg the state is holy? haha.
 * http://www.kahane.org/gallery/apqpl_MIDEAST_ISRAEL__0CB72.jpg typical Hardal
 * http://www.kahane.org/gallery/parade/1982.jpg typical Hitlerjug.. eh, I mean, Kach
 * http://www.exileimages.co.uk/AndrijaI/Gaza/TD.AI.MID.002.jpg typical Hardalim with a couple of M-O guys mixed in
 * http://www.ruggedelegantliving.com/change/a/images/israel.settler.jpg example of Hardalim who dress like what uninformed outsiders will see as 'Haredi', but what Haredim immediately recognize as 'fake' (though they could be real Sephardic Haredim)
 * http://www.rjews.net/gazeta/Photo/dem-chain/847.jpg it doesn't get more Hardali than this
 * http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2005/032805.jpg in between Hardal and M-O


 * Modern-orthodox
 * http://www.cs.brandeis.edu/~zkessin/Shamron/Shamron-Images/0.jpg pants or a short skirt over pants, elbows not covered
 * http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2005/08/17/gaza-pray-inside.jpg
 * http://aljazeera.net/mritems/images/2002/11/16/1_124740_1_6.jpg
 * http://gallery.phillyburbs.com/photos/276/4.aspx with one bearded (Hardali?) guy mixed in
 * http://www.rjews.net/gazeta/Photo/dem-chain/811.jpg elbows
 * http://www.rjews.net/gazeta/Photo/dem-chain/889.jpg with a couple of Lubavitchers mixed in
 * http://standwithuscampus.com/uploads/Gush%20Katif%20310.jpg boys and girls mixed? no way, with Hardalim
 * Hopefully this will help you (Meshulam) understand the necessity of a section describing the differences between Hardalim and Haredim and Modern-Orthodox. --Chussid 11:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Pictures aren't sources for generalized descriptions of large groups of people/--Meshulam 16:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That's too bad. Do you have any better way? The section goes back in. If you take it out again, I am unfortunately forced to propose the article for deletion, since then it no longer serves any purpose. --Chussid 18:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

There is a similar section in the Hebrew wiki- see link above. Yes, it should stay as a defining characteristic, but it needs to be edited for accuracy. The important reason that it should stay is because of the defining characteristics of Hardal is the following of one of the handbooks on how to dress, how to raise kids, and public modesty. These books are written by Rav Aviner and now by his students and fill two shelves in any Hardal bookstore. Some are actually in checklist form. Either- we follow the list in the Hebrew wiki, or someone who own one of the books to give a footnoted summary.--Jayrav 18:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

It should also be divided into two lists- how they reject the ordinary religious zionist- no TV, no short sleeves, no public mixing of the sexes-They should be easy to find documentation. The second list is how they are still an outgrowth of Merkaz and not part of the Haredi world For this- we can use the translated writings of Rav Zvi Yehudah Kook - army as a great mizvah, rejection of the diaspora, --Jayrav 21:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)hiking in the land and knowledge of its flora and fauna as a mizvah.--Jayrav 18:3--Jayrav 21:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)5, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Finally, we should take out the confusing America word "modern orthodox" - the position more open than Hardal is called "Dati Le'umi" or religious Zionist.--Jayrav 18:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I started the clean-up. I hope to find some documentation within the week. Consider it a construction site for now.--Jayrav 19:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No, not too bad. You can't just ignore WP:V because it annoys you. The rules are the rules. Propose the article fordeletion if you want. --Meshulam 21:00, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Meshulam and Chussid can the two of you stop fighting for opposite extremes and work towards a rational method of verification? Can we work together for a week and at the end of the week, we leave in the differences that can be verified and are ideologically substantive? --Jayrav 21:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, pictures are not acceptable sources for general statements about the Hardal (although if we can independently source any of these claims, it might be nice to ask some of these websites if the they would be willing to release under the GFDL any of these pictures for illustrative purposes). While I think that some of the claimed differences about Hardal may be accurate (I'm not sure, since it actually isn't something I know that much about) they clearly need better sourcing particularly given the controversial nature of this subject. Unfortunately, since the Hardal are not that large a group (compared to the general charedi and dati leumi populations) finding reliable sources about this level of detail may be difficult. However, that is not an excuse not to find such sources. Meanwhile, I will ask around off-wiki and see if anyone I know has any ideas where to source some of these claims. JoshuaZ 22:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Jayrav, I don't edit with an ideology. I edit with the rules of Wikipedia in mind. These edits are unverified, and are therefore unacceptable under Wikipedia's rules. I would say the same thing regardless of the POV that Chussid is trying to push. --Meshulam 00:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Citations Needed
All of the comparison sections (which were originally proposed by the banned user Daniel575, and then reproposed by the banned user Daniel575's sockpuppet Chussid, and which were originally rejected by a consensus) are unsourced. Referring to a book where one Rabbi, allegedly Hardal, writes about what should be the practice is not a source for what actually happens in Hardal. For those statements that do not even cite to a source (even a bad source) a source is doubly needed. I propose deleting the entire section, as we originally agreed to. I think that would be best especially in light of the fact that the sections only major proponent has now been banned (again). Jayrav gave himself a week to fix this page almost two weeks ago. To date, he has failed and I doubt he'll eventually succeed. --Meshulam 18:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Mustard
I took out the reference to mustard. It's true but irelevant info. Yossiea (talk) 15:07, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Chardal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101121042111/http://www.yeshabulletin.com:80/Education.htm to http://www.yeshabulletin.com/Education.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:22, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Chardal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926234137/http://www.vanleer.org.il/Data/UploadedFiles/Files/fundamentalis.doc to http://www.vanleer.org.il/Data/UploadedFiles/Files/fundamentalis.doc
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061208212536/http://www.panim.org.il:80/press/haaretzhamor.htm to http://www.panim.org.il/press/haaretzhamor.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:06, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

This page should be moved back to Chardal and the lead should reflect that Chardal is primary over Hardal, as Google shows
I'm not sure why this page was moved back to Hardal without a discussion by especially since his edit summary says you shouldn't move pages without a discussion. Further it's quite clear that the usage of Chardal is more appropriate than Hardal. Sir Joseph (talk) 22:46, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Why do you think that Chardal is more appropriate? Searching at Google for "hardal haredi" vs "chardal charedi" (haredi added to distinguish from articles about mustard) gave me 3 times more result for spelling without the initial C... &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 10:41, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * , the people using the terms use Chardal not Hardal. Secondly, I did a Google search as well, using Hardal vs. Chardal and Chardal was more popular. I don't like the fact that we are anglicizing the term when the people on the ground uses Chardal. Nobody in Israel pronounces it Hardal and when it's used, they spell it Chardal. It's been like that in Wikipedia for months, and then it was moved to Chardal a few months ago as well. Sir Joseph (talk) 17:17, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The term is a Hebrew abbreviation and the article name is in English, so of course we're anglicizing. I know that words starting with 'ח' are often spelled with Ch, but Haredi Judaism is uses H as the primary spelling. Are you saying that there is a difference in pronunciation between Hardal and Chardal? I assumed the only difference is in anglicized spelling of the same Hebrew word. What's the search you did? You are right and per WP:BRD if you disagree with the WP:BOLD move Precision123 - go ahead and revert and let them gain consensus on the new name. I tend to slightly prefer the new name, but really don't think it's important. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 18:20, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * , I think Chardal is different because the people using it are more "Ch" people than "H" people. I would prefer actually Haredi being moved to Charedi, that is how it's pronounced and we should be using that rather than an "H" or at the very least an H with a stupid dot. But for Chardal, if you do a search, without Haredi, you'll find articles showing that they use the term more than Hardal. I also can't move it back because I am a pagemover so it could be argued that I am using my advanced rights to settle a dispute in my favor. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:49, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

A few reasons to note:

1. I did not change the original name of the article. Rather, I only moved it back to the original spelling of the article. The article was first moved without any discussion in talk.

2. Hardal is the preferred spelling in Haaretz, Yedioth Ahronoth/Ynet, The New York Times, historian Benny Morris, and other prominent sources.

3. The letter heth is most often transliterated as h rather than ch, though exceptions exist for transliterations from Ashkenazi Hebrew, Yiddish, and for other reasons. I retained the alternate spelling (Chardal) in the lede in any case.

I will expand on each of these soon if necessary, but I wanted to give a brief explanation for the time being. Regards, --Precision123 (talk) 20:19, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Comment about a source
Concerning http://e.yeshiva.org.il/ask/printAsk.aspx/1914 .. the following extensive inline comment has been moved into the talk page diff:
 * "technically", there IS still a web page "AT" the URL or "internet address" ("http://www.yeshiva.org.il/ask/eng/print.asp?id=1914"), which is now the [old] "url" field value; but "as of" [the date of insertion of the archiveurl and archivedate fields ... which was] Feb. 16, 2018, the web page at the [old] "url" field value, was seen to RE-DIRECT to some web page that was *** "too new" *** to go with the "accessdate" of "2012-06-28"; hence, it was seen as necessary to insert some "archiveurl" and "archivedate" field values ... as the primary way of seeing where the information that dates back to the "accessdate" of "2012-06-28", ... actually came from. [and when it came from there.]

-- Green  C  03:00, 14 July 2020 (UTC)