CS: “But when a Rebbe of today is NOT such a tzaddik, by his chassidim’s own admission:
I don’t know who you have been talking to – perhaps to a chossid of that fellow who asked about the tourist sites – but I and my fellow compatriots believe that our Rebbe is a tzaddik of Tanya, and that there are others who are alive and well BH. Maybe not as many as we would like there to be, but there are certainly more that you are giving credit for.
You have always displayed civility, and I have credited you for that, but I can’t always reply in a way you will find civil. I’m not talking about tone – I’m talking about content. So I apologize for what I am about to write.
I know many many of the stories of Chabad about their rebbe, and I have been around for a long time BH. I have also mentioned in other threads that I have close relatives who are Lubavichers, and I know a lot from inside. So here goes: I don’t believe the moifsim, and I don’t think he was a tzaddik, of Tanya or otherwise.
I believe he was very charismatic, and he knew how to “catch” people 60, 70 years ago and revolutionize Jewish life in the States. But something happened and he became obsessed with himself being declared Mashiach and the Nasi Hador (which, as I have mentioned more than once, is a title that he himself, or possibly his father-in-law, invented as applicable nowadays, and which, conveniently he applied to himself). How else could he have come up with the ludicrous and meaningless statement that Beis Mashiach is begamatria 770?
This alienated him quite early on from other chareidishe groups, and led him to hunker down and try to “force” his way by the Mashiach campaigns etc.. Alienating him further, hunkering down further, and so on.
You, of course, won’t agree with what I’m saying, but I know that a very large percentage of the chareidi world, both Chassidish and Litvish, agree with that, and are very sorry that that’s what happened because had he stuck to the original kiruv on which he focused he would have achieved so much more for Torah Jewry.
And as far as his great Torah knowledge, he definitely knew a lot, but the Torah world – again, both Chassidish and Litvish – considers much of what he said “distorted” (I was trying to find a nice word). Just take his “lomdus” for the reason that Lubavichers don’t sleep in the sukkah. Now unlike my Litvishe couterparts I don’t believe that there is anything necessarily wrong with that minhag – many chassidic groups have minhagim that seem wrong to the outsider but actually have sources beharerai kodesh – but your rebbe’s explanation “al pi nigleh” as to why lubavicher chassidim are exempt from sleeping in a sukkah just doesn’t make any sense to anyone who can learn a blatt gemoro.
I have even had lubavich friends (Surprise, surprise!) who will discuss with me all of my complaints and observances about Lubavich but who refuse to discuss the sukkah lomdus… because they know that on a nigleh level it just doesn’t hold water.
The “sukkah lomdus” is possibly the most extreme example, but it is not the only one.
Once again, I apologize if you have taken offence, but I feel I have to point out to you WHY we are so anti so much of what you and some others write.