Is Chabad Sacrificing Their Youth In The Quest For Outreach

To the group

YYA sinks to a new low by suggesting a commonality between those who criticize Chabad and those who support Neturei Karta. The differences should be manifest, but YYA is a talented wordsmith, and he may have fooled some into sharing his point of view, so let me debunk his theory. NK posits that Zionism is the root of all evil. Fine, but they never advance any cogent arguments to that point. They simply regurgitate this nonsensical mantra. In contrast, critics of Chabad clearly articulate our issues; the belief that the Rebbe is a deity, that he was a Novi, that he is Moshiach, that the Torah laws are no longer obligatory. The second major divide is that Neturei Karta calls for the elimination of the State of Israel. Having been labeled the “most strident anti-Lubavicher”, I can categorically state that I wish no harm to Chabad. In fact, I encourage all their activities and would like to see them grow exponentially. My problem is with Chabad theology which is not a valid representation of Judaism. Unlike the coward YYA who hides in his bunker when challenged I will respond to any challenges against my position.

yankel > both are true

And this is not new. RJBS writes in the 1950s (under previous rebbe) that he can’t balance 3 things – (1) brilliance of Baal Hatanya; (2) ignorance of popular chabad literature (3) the heroism of the shluchim going and saving Jewish neshomos in all places

We know that even Mordechai was demoted in the Sanhedrin after he got involved in communal affairs.

To Shimon Katz

Your point is well taken. We all agree that Chabad does, or at least tries to do, much good. The term “low benefit kiruv” was an unfortunate choice.

To yankel berel

As is often the case, you hit the nail on its head. No one is challenging the fact that Chabad serves a valuable function(s). We’re just calling into question its dubious religious beliefs. Liars like YYA will only look at the former, because he can’t, as the expression goes, “handle the truth.”

Shimon – Watch out for Dr. Qwerty, he is the “pit bull” of the coffee room on anything connected with Chabad. Don’t try to engage him in debate, it’s a complete waste of time.

To Shimon Katz

I will be most happy to respond to your post. Let’s consider point number four. This opinion has been expressed by Rabbi Manis Friedman. He believes that Mitzvahs are optional. He rejects calling them commandments. In his “opinion” G-d has “needs” and when we perform His Mitzvahs, we are fulfilling those needs, but we’re under no obligation to do so. He further stated that no Jew today, no matter what sin he commits can be punished, because of the long, bitter exile. I personally saw the videos in which he made those claims. To see it yourself look up Rav Aharon Feldman calls Manis Friedman a Kofer. Obviously, he was not censured by Chabad and so we can assume that they agree with him. As for the Rebbe being a deity. Dr. Berger, in his book, stated that 8 senior Rabbis from Chabad’s flagship Yeshiva, Oholei Torah, declared that the Rebbe is “god clothed in human form.” To what extent this is accepted in CH I can’t say, but it’s out there. One Lubavicher on YWN wrote to me, “In 1962 the Rebbe announced that he’s “god clothed in human form.” Rav Moshe didn’t protest and so we see that he accepted it. I responded that no one on the LES ever heard such insanity so why would Rav Moshe say anything. More on this point. There is a YouTube video of Rabbi Shlomo Cunin, who is chief Chabad Rabbi of California, stating that the Rebbe runs the world and “HE” will take us out of Galus. The date of the video is Dec 10, 2008. Finally. the question of the Rebbe being a Novi. This is universally accepted by Chabad. I will share what is being disseminated by Chabad to unwitting Russian Jews. Usually, these cards are in Russian, but this one was in English. “Baruch Hashem. We must publicize to all people of the generation that we have merited that G-d Almighty has chosen and appointed a man, a person possessing free choice… to be your judges and your advisors as well as the prophet of the generation. This includes publicizing the main prophecy the prophecy of immediately to redemption and at this very moment, behold this one (Moshiach) comes.” Obviously, the Rebbe’s picture is on the card and at the bottom we get the Yechi invocation. There’s a reason that YYA is fighting so hard to suppress these facts. He’s their shill and he’s desperately afraid that this information will come out. But he knows it’s all true. That’s why I call him a liar. Just like someone who has testimony and refuses to testify is called a sinner. Please feel free to ask me or the others like Yankel Berel any questions you might have. Everything is out there. We have no reason to attack Chabad. In fact, we don’t attack them. We praise the good things they do, but there’s an idolatrous element to their religious beliefs and it must be called out. I would ask you one question, “Do you have any interactions with Chabad? I live in a community where there are about 30 Chabad Rabbis, so I have extensive dealings with them. Plus, I have their reading materials, (unfortunately most are in Russian) but enough are in English for me to get a full picture of their religion. Watch how YYA tries to counter what I’ve written. He’s more fanatic in his defense of Chabad than the Lubavichers. Sadly, for him, if he says I’m lying there are plenty of others on YWN who will confirm whatever I’ve said. As YYA noted, my name is Yaakov, but unlike that Yaakov I don’t lie.

Dear Dr. Yaakov (qwerty613) and Yankel Berel.

My personal interaction with Chabad is primarily through learning the Seforim of the Lubavitcher Rebbe זצ״ל (Mainly the Maamorim, as well as the collected Sichos on the Moadim or by subject שערי אמונה etc.), as well as of all the generations of Chassidus Chabad. I am not a “Chabadnik” myself, but I learn the Seforim like any Sefer Chassidus, and there is a wealth of profound ideas and inspiration there. I have also heard shiurim from Rav Yoel Cahan ז״ל, who was in charge of writing most of the Maamorim, as well as יבדל״ח Rav Yitchok Meir Morgenstern שליט״א, who isn’t Chabad but draws extensively on Chabad sources. I have never seen or heard anything in any of these sources that suggests any deviation from Orthodox Jewish belief or practice.

Obviously, I am aware of the “Meshichist” movement. (Which affects much or most of Chabad, but not all of them, and comes in different gradations.) Naming a specific individual as Moshiach is factually wrong and dangerous, but not inherently כפירה. The “Dvar Malchus” was edited by hard-core Meshichists, not by the normal editing staff of the “Likutey Sichos” and twisted in many places to support their claims. Most of the material was published after the Rebbe זצ״ל was no longer able to edit Sichos, something they took full advantage of. This is despite their claim to the contrary, based on the first few pamphlets they published that were in fact edited. For this reason, many Chabadniks do not consider these “Sichos” to be “canonical” or even reliable. I did take the trouble to go find a hard copy of Dvar Malchus (which I don’t have in my house) and check out the Sicha mentioned by Yankel Berel, (hence the delay in response), and it is a classic example of such manipulation. It is deliberately parsed in such a way as to blur the distinction (specifically made in the beginning of the part about Nevua) the Rebbe himself makes between “Ruach Hakodesh” in the sense normative Judaism does believe still exists, (and belief in which some hold to be included in the general belief in Nevua, which is the takeaway from the first quote of the Rambam as interpreted by the Rebbe, which can be debated but definitely isn’t any sort of Kefirah) and bona fide Nevua which the Rambam in Iggeres Teiman (quoted inside) explicitly DOES say STOPPED COMPLETELY and will return only at or close to the advent of the final Geula.

As far as item #1. Anecdotally, I have visited “Kehot” in Crown Heights from time to time to buy Seforim, and sometimes shmuzed with the people who work there. On one such occasion, the guy at the counter mentioned with disgust the “Atzmut Mahutniks”, (the group I assume you are referring to) who he claimed number no more than several hundred people, and are based primarily in Tzfat, but as I have mentioned, I never met any such person face to face in real life. לצורך העניין and to save time, forgive me for assuming in advance that you are concerned about popular misconceptions of either the “Atzmus Mahus” sicha, or about “Hiskashrus”. (The latter isn’t even a Chabad issue per se, but more on that later.) In order to discuss this (very serious) issue, I need to understand more about where you are coming from. Are you familiar with the Tanya and the later Seforim of Chabad? With Sifrei Chassidus in general? Have you learned “Litvish” sources on inyanei Kabbalah such as Nefesh Hachaim, the works of Rav Yitzchok Aizik Chaver זצ״ל, the works of Ramchal זצ״ל? Do you accept the legitimacy of Chassidus altogether? What about the Chabad Rebbes of previous generations? [The answers to those questions affects the amount of background necessary to provide as opposed to simply marei mekomos, and the “Litvish” mekubalim use different terminology to refer to the same concepts Chassidim also believe in, which can create confusion if you are familiar with one system but not the other.]

Item # 4. I have yet to see anything from the Rebbe himself remotely close to suggesting any leniency or “optionality” in any area of Halacha. Everyone knows that R’ Shlomo Carlebach parted ways with Chabad because the Rebbe refused to permit any relaxing of Halachic restrictions, even for Kiruv, even thing many MO fudge לכתחילה. As far as Rabbi Friedman is concerned, personally, I am not a fan of “YouTube Rabbis” in general, not just Chabad but any of them. The medium doesn’t exactly lend itself to serious discussion of anything, and it becomes more theater than Shiur. I don’t feel any need to be מתרץ anyone in Chabad other than the Lubavitcher Rebbe זצ״ל himself.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Shimon Katz – Just a quick heads up. Rabbi Manis Friedman is Dr. Qwerty’s favorite topic, for some reason even more than the “Atzmut Mahutniks” you mentioned. The thing that turned Qwerty against me in an almost obsessive way is that I had the gall to suggest to him that he should try to contact Rabbi Friedman and talk to him before Paskening that he is a Kofer. Just ask the Rabbi what he meant. To him all of Chabad boils down to that one stupid video on YouTube. Nothing else they or even the Rebbe himself said or did counts, only “Manis Friedman”.

To YYA

When you were asked a question, by YB non-political and yours truly, you adamantly refused to answer, but I have no problem responding to your query. At no time did I ever say that “every” Lubavicher is an idolater and a Kofer. The Chabad Rabbis in the shul I attend, (the congregants, with a few exceptions,) aren’t Chabad are definitely not idolaters or Kofrim. You know, for someone who writes well, you’re kind of stupid. Checkmate dude.

To Shimon Katz

YYA, the Chabad “sicko”phant, gave you another warning, that you shouldn’t accept any “Loshon Hora” from me about Manis the Kofer. I assume you saw the video in which Manis stated that no Jew, no matter what sin he commits can be punished today. He thus gave a blanket Heter for any Jew to violate Shabbos, eat pork on Yom Kippur etc. In addition, YYA left out a critical point, “I’m not the one who declared Manis a Kofer, that was Rabbi Aharon Feldman, a recognized Gadol who said it. (that’s in the video) YYA said that he isn’t interested in Rabbi Feldman’s opinion. This makes sense given how slavishly the “sicko’phant defends Chabad. Rabbi Feldman has consistently called out Chabad. And he knows whereof he speaks.

@shimonkatz

I myself remember the utterances of the habad rebbi re the nevua in 1992

This was published ‘bizman emet’ when their rebbi was fully cognizant and fully functional

this was 6-7 months before his stroke

it was published in dvar malhut which came out weekly and was THE official mouthpiece for their leaders torah , net.

Net – meaning only his torah was published . No added commentary . No news . No opinions. Nothing.

this was – at the time, fully reliable as the mouthpiece of his torah .

there were no ‘factions’ or differences of opinion re the veracity of dvar malhut .

@shimonkatz

you mention about the varying degrees of messianism within habad

let me point out a very important point

missed by many

for a good long few years – from the early nineties until the so called ‘disappearance’ of their leader

the accepted position BY ALL THEIR RABANIM AND MASHP’IM was that

it is an INCORPORATED PART OF THE IKAREI EMUNA that their leader CANNOT die

by virtue that an established navi [r menachem mendel] prophesised in a prophesy equal to none other than all established nevi’im of tanach [!]

that mashiach is none other than aforementioned r menachem mendel

and that aforementioned r menachem mendel

will be the one who will lead all jews out of galut

and that aforementioned r menachem mendel

will build the bet hamikdash we waited for ,for 2000 years

that nevu’a is impossible to be changed as we know from rambam that nevua letova CANNOT be changed

so much so that rambam uses that inflexibleness as proof to classify a navi as navi sheker

thereby condemning him to mitah bebet din ….

this was the established halachik opinion in habad for years

wall to wall !!

when their leader ‘disappeared’ , then the fissures started appearing

group one , headed by r yoel kahn , made a uturn

we were mistaken all those years they admitted

very nice ….

but they themselves were mistaken , not in a minor halachk detail …

in major principles of judaism …

in ikarei emuna !!

in my eyes this was a major lesson about their methodology

how they arrive a conclusions re ikarei emuna …..

have no time now to further expand … but hope to continue some other time bln .

.
.

Dear Dr. Yaakov and Yankel Berel,

OK, now I have a somewhat better picture of what you are driving at, although my personal take on this is a bit different.

First of all, I agree, and said so in my previous post, that there are large numbers of Chabadniks who believe things that are wrong, mainly WRT “Meshichism”. The Nevua stuff is essentially a corollary of the Moshiach part. (IMHO the original Sicha was not meant to refer to Nevua in the Halachic sense, which would require explicitly saying some prediction IN HASHEM’S NAME, something neither the Rayatz זצ״ל or the last Rebbe זצ״ל ever remotely claimed to do. To say someone is ראוי to be a Novi, that his Ruach Hakodesh is close to Nevuah etc. is dangerous but not Kefirah.) However, the hard-core Kefirah and Avoda Zarah Chevra that THEY THEMSELVES mockingly refer to as “Atzmut Mahutniks” and THEY THEMSELVES repeatedly attempted to (physically) kick out of 770, are FAR SMALLER in number.

My assertion that the “Atzmut Mahutniks” number several hundred at most is not a random guess. A relative of mine worked as a Shochet in a meat plant under the Hashgacha of Rav Bistritzky ז״ל from Tzfas, who was one of the biggest fighters against the “Atzmut Mahutniks” (they attempted to physically assault him more than once), and he heard from the Rov that their numbers are no more than 300. I don’t know if there are more or less of them today, but I have never encountered any of them in real life.

אגב, I never saw the video of Rabbi Friedman, and I don’t use YouTube. If you can refer me to a downloadable version I would appreciate it.

But that isn’t what “Chassidus Chabad” is all about. On the one hand you have 540 volumes of Chiddushei Torah spanning over 200 years, including the enormous breadth and depth of the last Rebbe זצ״ל contribution, and on the other hand you have some social media performers and confused Baalei Teshuvah?

לא חיליק ידענא ולא ביליק ידענא, מתניתא ידענא I have learned many of the works of all of the Rebbes of Chabad, including the last Rebbe זצ״ל, and I have never encountered anything remotely resembling “Mitzvos being optional” or anything of the sort. In fact, a very interesting ספר has been published by several important משפיעים from Yerushalayim called יהדות ללא פשרות, which collects hundreds of letters and Sichos of the Rebbe זצ״ל that spell out in no uncertain terms the centrality of Halacha and the fact that no deviations are allowed, even for purposes of outreach. If you are seriously interested in this subject, it would be worth your while to get a copy of that Sefer.

To 25TQ9lm5B

So, it was the Rebbe himself who made that guarantee, and since he’s a Novi it obviously came true. So, explain how Menachem Mendel Litzan was able to kill himself, explain the murder of Rabbi Kogan and the Mumbai massacres. The answer is simple; the Rebbe wasn’t a Novi and so his promises, including that he’s Moshiach and he will save every Jew, mean absolutely nothing.

To Shimon Katz

Go to Musings of a Litvish Yid May 25, 2025 and you’ll see the video in which Rabbi Feldman calls Manis a Kofer for stating that no Jew today can be punished no matter what sin he commits. As for Friedman’s statement that Mitzvahs are optional. AFAIK that’s a Youtube video when he was interviewed and challenged by Rabbi Efren Goldberg. I can assure you that I don’t make things up. That’s why the “sicko’phant is so afraid of me, it’s because he knows I’m telling the truth. I see that you’re somewhat interested in the truth and so I laud you. One point for you to consider, “Why hasn’t the Chabad leadership called out the crazies?” The answer is simple, “Shtikah Kihodaah.” The fact that there’s a treasure trove of great Torah from Chabad doesn’t change the facts that YB and I are presenting. If you enjoy the Rebbe’s Torah, by all means study it. And people who like Chabad should avail themselves of Chabad hospitality but make no mistake their religion is not Judaism.

To yankel berel

I’ll just add one point. Until Gimmel Tammuz it was universally agreed in CH that Moshiach can’t come from the dead. When the Rebbe died, they did a 180 and followed the Gemara which said that Moshiach can come from the dead. However, a significant percentage of Lubavichers never changed their original view and so they maintain that the Rebbe never died just like “Yaakov Lo Mes.” Shakespeare wrote, “Vanity thy name is woman.” “Insanity thy name is Chabad.”

Dr. Qwerty and Yankel Berel – I am somewhat amused watching your conversation with Shimon Katz. What is he being מחדש to you that I wasn’t? Before Dr. Qwerty was accusing the Rebbe himself of doing horrible things for the basest of motives, and Yankel Berel was seemingly pretty much OK with that, now both of you are מודה במקצת even לגבי the Chassidim, certainly לגבי the Rebbe. So did I just misread you? Did something change your mind? Or is something else going on? “Davening six days a week in a Chabad shul” is way more Kesher with Chabad than I have (on the למעשה level), and certainly doesn’t go together with considering them Kofrim ח״ו. Neither of you would ever daven in a Conservative place of worship, let alone a church. If you REALLY AND TRULY believe them to consider Mitzvos optional, then their Shul is Conservative ח״ו. If you REALLY AND TRULY believe them to “deify” the Rebbe then… So you apparently don’t REALLY AND TRULY believe these things. At any rate, what is the “secret sauce” Shimon is feeding you?

Dr Yaakov said,

“One point for you to consider, “Why hasn’t the Chabad leadership called out the crazies?” The answer is simple, “Shtikah Kihodaah.”

With all due respect, and bearing in mind the limited extent of my knowledge of Chabad internal politics, I’m not at all certain that the answer is so simple. We need to determine several things:

1. Who is the “Chabad leadership” today? What percentage of Chabad listens to them?

2. Do they have a functional command and control structure at the global level?

3. What is the threshold of deviation that must be crossed to be considered “crazies” who need “calling out”? Are we talking about “Atzmut Mahutniks” or stam “Meshichists”?

4. Are the crazies too violent or genuinely too crazy to get under control?

As mentioned, I am aware of the case of Rav Bistritzky ז״ל from Tzfas who did “call out” the “Atzmut Mahutniks”, with the support of other Chabad Rabbonim, only to be physically assaulted and have threats made to his life. So at least some of the “crazies” are in fact crazy to the point of being dangerous. The recent physical violence inside 770 would support this.

As far as items number 1 and 2, some of the most respected and influential figures within Chabad have passed away in the last several years, including Rav Yoel Kahan ז״ל, Rav Ashkenazi of K’far Chabad, Reb Leibel Groner and all of the “Mazkirim”. Which further complicates matters.

If you know more about this than I do, feel free to correct me or provide additional information that might answer the above questions.

Back to Dr. Yaakov!

“If you enjoy the Rebbe’s Torah, by all means study it. And people who like Chabad should avail themselves of Chabad hospitality but make no mistake their religion is not Judaism.”

Please don’t get me wrong, and I respect your desire to seek the truth, however I am confused as to where you stand at this point. Would you approve of believing and practicing Orthodox Jews availing themselves to the hospitality of Christian missionaries? Or any “religion that is not Judaism”? Would the literature of such a religion be called “Torah” and be acceptable reading material for Jews? If you consider Chabad itself to be inherently “idolatrous” or “Kefirah” to the point of “their religion is not Judaism” then there is absolutely no hetter whatsoever to use anything at all from their teachings, services, Shechita and Kashrus, etc. None. Zero. Scorched earth. Some extreme Misnagdim actually said things like that. Obviously I don’t agree with that, and apparently to some extent you don’t either, because I don’t see you following that line of reasoning in any of your posts, so where do you draw the line and why?

To Yankel Berel

Let’s take a closer look at YYA’s latest post. He asked, “What is Shimon Katz being Mechadesh that I wasn’t?” With this YYA is saying that he endorses the positions of Shimon Katz. This means that he agrees that that the Rebbe isn’t Moshiach or a Novi. Of course, now that YYA has joined the team the insults will end. Let’s develop the subject of the Rebbe being Moshiach. According to actual Jews, the person who will be Moshiach will be the one who meets the criteria set forth by Rambam. Chabad follows a different system. They hold that G-d told the Rebbe that he’s Moshiach. I’ll explain. I asked the Rabbi of the Chabad shul I attend when this Moshiach business started and he told me, “When the Rebbe took over in 1951, he announced he’s Moshiach.” Then I asked him why Chabad thinks the Rebbe is a Novi and he told me that when the Rebbe was three years old, he had a dream in which Hashem told him he’s a Novi and he had a vision of himself sitting on a throne with millions of people bowing down to him. Now that YYA has joined the fold of real Jews he can add some clarifying points. Isn’t it great to work together?

Gutte Voch Dr. Yaakov Qwerty!

So now ברוך השם I am back to being a Kosher Jew in your book. Thank you for at least being openminded enough to recalculate when you realize something has gone too far. Mind you, I never said anything about the Lubavitcher Rebbe זצ״ל being Moshiach or a Novi. Read all of my posts going back to almost a year ago, you will find absolutely nothing of the sort. The only think I said that Shimon didn’t, (he actually almost did, but in a roundabout way), was that if you or anyone else has טענות on Rabbi Friedman, you should contact him. How about if Shimon himself contacts him, and confronts him with the contents of the Sefer he mentioned, where the Lubavitcher Rebbe basically demolishes any הוה אמינא of the line of thinking that Rabbi Friedman may or may not have been going with? I would be very curious as to how such a scenario would play out. Nobody can claim to be a card carrying Lubavitcher AND go against explicit instructions of the Rebbe. So he would have to answer SOMETHING, and based on that it would לכאורה be possible to determine where Rabbi Friedman is really holding. Think about it: If you frame any question as a challenge to Chabad philosophy per se, or even if you just identify yourself as someone who questions his whole outlook, you immediately put him in defensive mode, and therefore any answers given could be questionable. (Which is what you and Yankel rejected any possibility of questioning Rabbi Friedman.) But if you frame the whole thing as “OK, I hear what you say, but how then can we understand Z, Y, and Z that the Rebbe זצ״ל says HERE (presenting him with the Sefer, which דרך אגב, it sounds like it was compiled in response to krumkeit of the sort we are concerned about here…) In other words, tell him “you are A-OK (לצורך העניין), but please tell me Pshat what the Rebbe really meant”. If someone, maybe Shimon, could pull this off convincingly enough, then IMHO it would be possible to determine from Rabbi Friedman’s reaction where he really is holding.

What do you, Yankel Berel, and Shimon Katz think of this line of reasoning?

As far as what you heard from the Chabad Rabbi:

“I asked the Rabbi of the Chabad shul I attend when this Moshiach business started and he told me, “When the Rebbe took over in 1951, he announced he’s Moshiach.” Then I asked him why Chabad thinks the Rebbe is a Novi and he told me that when the Rebbe was three years old, he had a dream in which Hashem told him he’s a Novi and he had a vision of himself sitting on a throne with millions of people bowing down to him.”

I have read lots of Chabad Seforim, from the Rebbes and also from Chassidim, and I have seen even some hard-core Meshichist material in flyers and pamphlets etc. floating around my neighborhood (although I never buy any Sefer who’s author is clearly a Meshichist). I have yet to see anything remotely resembling either of those stories. If you see this Rabbi regularly, could you please ask him for מראי מקומות where this stuff comes from? Shimon seems to be quite well versed in Chabad sources, did he ever hear such a thing? אגב, even people who actually have real clairvoyant dreams, for whatever reason משמים Hashem chooses to give them, at age three or at any age, are not automatically Neviim, according to any Shittah, so you could ask him that too.

Is Chabad Kiruv a Failure?

When we consider the high % of Jews who intermarry with non-Jews,
and also consider the low % of Secular Jews who become Baalei Teshuvah,
we cannot ignore the possibility that Chabad kiruv a failure,
and might not be worth the great time and money Chabad has spent on it.

Viewed from this perspective,
we cannot ignore the possibility that ALL kiruv a failure!

Dear Shimon and Yaakov Yosef

To respond to Shimons post [and also some of yya’s concerns] :

1. The Lubavitcher Rebbe himself was controversial . Some chashuve people called him a Heiliger Tzaddik who accomplished enormous good in the world, and left behind a rich legacy in writing, in other media, and in the people he inspired, which continues to generate more good and be mekarev countless Yidden to Hashem and His Torah literally worldwide , as Shimon rightly noted. And other chashuve people called him an apikorus , shallow , a product of years of university studies without yeshiva studies and having an outsized opinion of self . A rasha , a shoteh and a gas ruach . The last three are the descriptions by hazal of someone who is lo higia lehora’a and is moreh . All the above descriptions of him, I myself heard from gdolei hador and big talmidei hahamim.

As you can see in my comments , for myself , I prefer not to dwell on these controversial issues re his personality . But the obvious disrepancies from Judaism, contained within the habad movement [which are due to his influence] have to be called out , again and again , without fail.

I do understand that those who belong to the adherents of the first group of chashuve people would like to ‘use’ the obvious regard he is held , as proof to ‘kasher’ all disrepancies from Judaism , contained within habad theology.

But this is really a non starter , as his personality itself is controversial as noted.

2. WRT individual aspects of Chabad theology ,although as noted that chabad is sitting on a rich spritual yerushah , and one can learn a lot from chabad torah , the matzav basically is “buyer beware”. I sincerely believe that real hard core Kefirah/AZ is not automatically included in their torah , with proof that none of the poskei hador invalidated their gittin vakidushin with their obvious repercussions to the weighty issues of yichus. The Meshichist nonsense, with its attendant ideological flip-flops etc. is (for the vast majority of its adherents) admittedly just nonsense, not כפירה בעיקרי האמונה, but another big flashing warning sign re the torah coming out of habad , which originates from their rebbi .
As did all the ideological nonsense and flip flops !
One can attempt to blame so called ‘rogue’ elements instead. But a careful reality-based assessment will bring any non predisposed observer to the same conclusion . They all originated from the top.

3. As previously mentioned, I am also more concerned with the legacy of their leader because he is THE source of what is going on in habad even nowadays.
Very many people learn their Rebbe’s Seforim and are inspired by them. That’s definitely correct . But the flip side presented above , is also correct .
I do not have to sit in judgement over other people . Baruch hashem for that . But the nonsense and the misrepresentation of Judaism has to be called out.

4. Someone who writes a whole book pushing a certain position can still be seen as an unbiased source of information on followers of the opposite position. Dr Berger has the unswerving haskama of Harav Ahron Feldman Rosh Yeshiva of Baltimore , praising Dr Berger for his courage and accuracy. So I do really pay attention to and take into consideration what Dr. Berger says about Chabad, the same way I would seriously investigate anything else , published with the unswerving haskama of the rosh yeshiva of Baltimore. .

5. Personally, I have enough to do to fix myself before I have time to go around fixing the world, but you and yaakov yosef asked , so am explaining myself .

6. Re Dr qwerty’s posts – unlike some of you – I do not take everything he writes quite so literally , but I must admit that I enjoy his writing style immensely and I do concur with most of what he writes.

7. Hope that clarifies matters .

.

yankel, as you, I acknowledge variety of opinions about L Rebbe with minor comments:

> product of years of university studies without yeshiva studies
whoever said that is probably somewhat biased – several years that L Rebbe spent when he was about 25-30 y.o. in U of Berlin and an engineering studies in Paris were way past his yeshiva years.

overall, criticism coming from people who did not show same level of care about Jews as a whole can be disregarded. Not because they are not knowledgeable in Torah – but because their views do not take into account relevant issues. Maybe a good analogy is a sanhedrin requirement to have
young children to make sure the judge has rahmonus.

I am not sure why yya keeps on including my name re manis freedman’s alleged kfira

I never saw him , never heard of him and therefore never commented about him

I simply have no idea and therefore no opinion about him

.
.

To Shimon Katz

While I happen to agree with the things that Yankel Berel said about the Rebbe, I stayed away from that discussion because I knew it would upset you. If you want to believe that the Rebbe was a Tzaddik, please feel free to do so. I owe you a tremendous debt of Hakaros Hatov for calling out YYA, and I don’t forget the kindnesses that are done for me. Thank you again and please don’t leave the thread.

To yedl

Thanks for posting the excerpt from that letter. YYA continues to allege that I’m not reliable, but I don’t lie. I take my name of Yaakov very seriously.

To yankel berel

I’ll quote my dear mother A’H. Ein Hartz felt vi di anderer. You’ve supported me so many times on YWN. I consider you a friend even though we don’t know each other.

Square_Root

Your last post was wonderful. Far more frum Jews are going lost than BT’s are being produced so this calls into question whether Kiruv is worth all the money and effort. I don’t think it is. There’s one question that can be asked, “Why pick on Chabad? I don’t think that any of the other mainstream Kiruv organizations have been successful in stemming the tide of assimilation.” The answer to that question is that the Rebbe guaranteed that he was going to save every Jew, while the other organizations never made such ridiculous assertions.

SQUARE_ROOT said:

“Is Chabad Kiruv a Failure?

When we consider the high % of Jews who intermarry with non-Jews,
and also consider the low % of Secular Jews who become Baalei Teshuvah,
we cannot ignore the possibility that Chabad kiruv a failure,
and might not be worth the great time and money Chabad has spent on it.

Viewed from this perspective,
we cannot ignore the possibility that ALL kiruv a failure!”

So, exactly how much time and money is a Jewish Neshama, a בן אברהם יצחק ויעקב, a חלק אלוק ממעל, a בנים אחים ורעים, an אחותי רעייתי תמתי, worth in your humble estimation? What Z’chus exactly is worth more than saving ONE Jew, let alone his/her future descendants, ALL of whom, together with ALL of their Mitzvos UNTIL THE END OF TIME will be “credited” to the eternal “bank account” of whoever was Mekarev them?

Aside from the fact that Kiruv, especially in Eretz Yisroel, is more “successful” than you think, but this isn’t a numbers game. And who could ignore the revolution going on for decades in the former Soviet Bloc nations (led to a large extent by, well you know which group…) where tens of thousands of Jews have returned to their roots and built families of Shomrei Mitzvos? Is this not “worth it”? תמיה תמיה אקרא!

What is more חשוב in Hashem’s View כביכול than bringing back His lost children?

@shimon katz

The התנגדות that you mentioned was in fact (whether you like it or not) directed against the totality of Chabad, with undercurrents of the original Machlokes against Chassidus itself, which is why the other Chassidim didn’t join in. Why should the Litvaks expect to be able to force the (non-Chabad) Chassidim (the majority of voters by all accounts) to toe their line? This was the root of the split in Agudas Yisroel, Chabad was just one of the more high profile triggers. None of this is intended to belittle in any way the Heiliger Tzaddikim and Geonim of the Litvish camp, just to put the Chassidish POV in perspective. Machlokes between Tzaddikim unfortunately has been with us since the time of Yossef HaTzaddik and the Shevatim. It isn’t our business to butt in, as much as there is a Yetzer Hara to do so.
[shimon]
————–

the hitnagdut I mentioned was NOT against the’totality’ of habad . It was against the totality of the late rebbi of habad , rather …

there was no hitnagdut against the early rebbeim of habad .

this is a canard spread by the current habad hasidut and patently baseless . there were no ‘undercurrents’ of machloket against hasidut themselves, either.

this was a macholoket to be had on its own merits … without hiding behind irrelevant earlier issues.

—–

I did not bring the issue of the historical split within aguda here for its own sake , who is right or wrong ….

it could very well be that the hasidim had more voters , thats not the issue

the main issue is that in one of the main arguments of the general hasidim vs rav shach

rav shach has BEEN PROVEN right – hands down .

this should serve as a major point in regard of whose methodology and whose approach is more reliable ….
.
.

@AAQ

product of years of university studies without yeshiva studies …

whoever said that is probably somewhat biased – several years that L Rebbe spent when he was about 25-30 y.o. in U of Berlin and an engineering studies in Paris were way past his yeshiva years.

—-

the facts are — find out for yourself

the late rebbi of habad never attended any yeshiva … even during his yeshiva years ….

he probably learnt either by himself or under his father r levi

so what I wrote was accurate : the only institutions he attended were universities …
.
.
these are the facts .

.
.
.