Chossid: “From the mekoirios brought before its says that the concept of nossi hador is in every generation (no matter how resent)…… And you say “concept of Nossi Hador is not applicable to anyone alive or who was alive for the last thousands…of years”. Very interesting.”
Are you intentionally misunderstanding what I write? Is that the only way that you can pretend to win the argument?
I said CLEARLY (is there a way of making things bold so I don’t have to use capitals?), and I stand by it, that the concept of “Nossi Hador” does not exist and has not existed for at least hundreds of years. I DID NOT SAY that there is something wrong with saying that someone is the greatest tzaddik of his generation or the gadol hador (although I don’t know who is really qualified to make such a statement). IT IS SPECIFICALLY THE CONCEPT OF “NOSSI HADOR” THAT I OBJECT TO, and none of the mekoros quoted cite that concept. Is that clear now?
“If the people you hold of, say otherwise why are they embarrassed to say it publicly? Aderabeh if they think they are right, they should publicize their shita, that no one should make CV”s a mistake of holding of the Rebbe. And Lubavitch.”
There are a number of valid reasons not to mention names of people who have the views that I quote, all of them true in different circumstances.
1. Some people out there don’t like these things being discussed in an open forum.
2. Some people out there don’t think it proper to use the internet period!
3. Some people out there feel that although much of what lubavich stands for today is a perversion of what they used to stand for, and that it has led many lubavichers to stray close to the line of kefirah, to attack them openly might push some over that line. So it’s more prudent to leave them alone and let them believe what they want.
4. Some people out there don’t want to upset relatives, friends and neighbors.
5. Some people out there are scared of a personal backlash from lubavichers who find out their views.
It is for these reasons that I won’t name anyone who has not made a public statement. That’s why I have no problem naming Rav Shach, as he obviously did not care about any of the above.
“The same oibershther that told us to keep 613 and we have a chiyuv to keep them whether you get malkus or not, the same is with the goiyem, they have a chiyuv to keep 7 mitzvahs benei noach. And therefore we should encourage them to keep them.
whether you like it or not.”
I answered that, and you even quoted my answer in your post! There is a chiyuv of arvus to get Yidden to keep the 613 mitzvos. There is NO arvus when it comes to goyim! I other words, paraphrasing what you wrote, the same Oibershter who told us to get Yidden to keep 613 mitzvos DID NOT tell us to get goyim to keep their 7 mitzvos unless we can get them to be mekabel to do so in front of three Jewish chaveirim. See the same Rambam that you quote.
If a ben Noach keeps 7 mitzvos but is not mekabel to keep them in front of three chaveirim, he is still chayav misa. Furthermore, he has to be mekabel to keep them because they are what Hashem told Moshe that they are what the original Bnei Noach kept. Telling a ben Noach, for example, not to kill because it’s wrong, is pointless. It’s all in the next halacha in the Rambam. And certainly telling a ben Noach not to eat eiver min hachai because it’s cruel to animals is plain wrong.
“And just to note, why are you allowed to do business with goyeim, and hang around them for a whole day, and it’s not a problem of arvus, but when you meet a goiy in the street and tell them nicely about the mitzvos Hashem wants them do fulfill, it’s somehow a problem of arvus.??”
Aha! I just realized why you keep on arguing the same thing even though I have answered it. “Arvus” does not mean mixing, as in dealing with goyim. It means mixing as in we are all one people and all are actions are “mixed” together, so every time any Yid does a mitzvah it affects all of us, and same is true with the reverse. So the simple way of explaining arvus is “responsibility”, as in someone who is an areiv, a guarantor of a loan.
We have no arvus for goyim therefore means that we are not responsible for their actions, and whether they keep their mitzvos or not does not affect us either for the good or the bad.