- This topic has 553 replies, 30 voices, and was last updated 1 day, 9 hours ago by .
-
Posts
-
“The only person in habad who kept to this mesora, the rosh yeshiva in torah vada’at in brooklyn, was murdered in his own home….”
“Those redifot had as a direct result that the RY died in his home.
After the RY’s petira, the rebbi of habad publicly disavowed any responsibility for the RY’s demise”This is a blood libel. I will respond, not to Yankel, but to set the record straight for others who may read this:
A Lubavitcher bochur was angry at Rabbi Rivkin and took matters into his own hands. He made a scary phone call to Rabbi Rivkin’s son-in-law and stuffed his lock with woodchips.
The son-in-law, a long-time opponent of Lubavitch, wrote a news story claiming that Lubavitch has a “terror brigade” to enforce what the Rebbe wants.
Afterward, the Rebbe spoke publicly and completely disavowed the bochur’s actions, stating clearly that he went against everything Lubavitch stands for and does not represent the Rebbe in any way. The Rebbe also criticized the article’s author for blaming an entire community for the actions of an individual.
The Forward then retracted the article and apologized for blaming Lubavitch for the vandalism.
That was the end of the incident.
The sicha is recorded (you can listen to it). It took place in Shevat 5735.
Rabbi Rivkin passed away at 84, two years after the incident, and the Rebbe came out to participate in the levaya.
Could you answer the following please –
Is it true that rabbi Rivkin’s ashkavte devei rebbi is not considered ‘acceptable reading material’ in habad mosdot ? Y or N ?
Is it true that rabbi rivkin was niftar after falling from the stairs in his own home as a result of the redifot he suffered because he declined to join your maham shilo in putting this politician in herem ? Y or N ?
After you answer – honestly of course – should we talk about blood libels …..
.
.Btw. — you totally ignored the substance of my post …….
.
.Menachem ignored the main thrust of my post.
I clearly wrote there that we should not use this story to throw mud.
—
A repost of my post
We should not use this story to throw mud.
We should however learn from this about the possibility within habad of someone implying that the leader of habad could be mistaken .
This RY implied it and ended up paying with his life.
The RY obviously held the rebbi from habad in high esteem .
Otherwise he would not be his hasid and attend all those public events with his rebbi.
Nevertheless , as a talmid haham who was higi’a lehora’a , in his opinion at least , said politician was not deserving to be put in herem .
He was not disrespectful.
He just held that his rebbi happened to be mistaken in this one instance , which is perfectly acceptable according to Jewish halacha and tradition.
So he abstained from the herem.
.
.
.
.First Menachem might be ‘too busy’ to answer.
Or ‘not in the mood’.
Then he seems to be a serial victim, nebach.
He might be ‘offended’.
Or the victim of ‘blood libels’.
He has all the specific answers at the ready – to all the specific questions.
Thats beyond doubt.
That goes without saying.
Just one problem . For some mysterious reason he is not sharing them with us.
That mysterious reason has nothing to do with the ‘palatability’ of his ‘secret’ , but ready and available answers ….
.
.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.