Neville Chaim Berlin,
“Untrue. He admitted on one of these threads to the belief that Moshiach will be the Rebbe.”
I don’t recall that, but it’s possible. I haven’t been following the ins and outs of all the threads too closely.
“He [seemingly] defended those who believe the Rebbe is alive at the front of 770 after another poster explicitly defended it.”
I didn’t read the “so what” as a defense, but more of a “I’m not responsible for what others believe and do”, which I disagree with. Many people here are arguing that belief in the Rebbe being the Moshiach with deity-like powers or even a deity mamash is a mainstream belief within Chabad, and that some Lubavitchers only make a feint of objection because they know the beliefs are unacceptable to other frum Jews and therefore try to hide the beliefs. I prefer to take what Menachem Shmei is writing at face value, and if I wanted to dive into the theological debates, what I’d wonder is – if indeed the mainstream majority of Chabad thinks these “crazies” are wrong, and even falling into avoda zara, at what point do they make a real break and clearly define their shita? And Menachem’s other point that our disagreement is mainly on understanding the terminology of chassidus… if so, the crazies are also seemingly “misunderstanding” the lingo and hence falling into kefira. How then does Chabad insure that things are taught correctly?
Perhaps more in support of your position, Menachem Shmei tried to draw a distinction between “meshichism” and “elokism” by noting that the “yechi” litany does not contain “boreinu”. I don’t think this helps, because avoda zara is not limited to just thinking that something other than Hashem created us. In fact, the original avoda zara acknowledged Hashem as the original Creator, but held that Hashem gave power and control to other beings, who could then be petitioned or praised independently. That and ascribing powers to people or things that do not have such powers.
“If Lubavitchers put Rebbe pictures on all house walls, and the house serves as the shul, then there’s going to be one on the eastern wall.” … That wasn’t Yserbius’ point, clearly.” … “In any case, people seem to be meikel when davening in their own homes (i.e. I’ve never seen anyone leave their eastern wall undecorated on purpose)”
Even in smaller Chabad houses, it’s not like davening in someone’s living room. They set up a room as a functional shul, with an aron kodesh, bima, amud, mechitza, etc. So no, I would not expect pictures to be on the wall at the front of that room. If a picture of the Lubavitcher Rebbe was placed there at the front, with the aron kodesh and amud, it would be a deliberate act and a statement with clear theological ramifications. Yserbius123 obviously thought that, because he brought it up with hyperbolic flair. I thought that, and Menachem Shmei obviously thought that based on his responses. So I’m not sure that it’s me who’s missing the point.
Yes in a normal living room setup there’s likely pictures on the wall, but the room was not intentionally set up for davening. When I daven at home I stand close to the wall and davka not directly in front of a picture or mirror. When I’m at someone else’s house, it’s harder, but I try to not be directly in front of pictures.