Joining Chabad

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Rants Joining Chabad

Viewing 47 posts - 451 through 497 (of 497 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1708951

    samthenylic
    Participant

    Stop delving into WHO or WHERE Moshiach is! No Torah and no Yiras Shamaim will come of it. Better learn a few blatt gemara, or say some Tehillim. Much more will be accomplished that way!
    Nobody will be won over to the other side anyway, so why waste your time with Divrei Havala?

    #1709005

    RSo
    Participant

    Anyusername: “In your words you can say the abarbanel is arguing with rashi”

    You’ve gotten it wrong again. The Abarbanel is quoting a Yerushalmi whose veracity, he points out, is seen as problematic by a number of meforshim. So he explains how that Yerushalmi need not be problematic.

    One of the points he mentions is that according to the Yerushalmi this “moshiach” would have to return from the dead. So he writes that that is not a problem as in Sanhedrin there is also a way of learning (as Rashi says) that moshiach is Doniel who has died.

    Nowhere that I saw even hint that one can say that a different dead person is moshiach – not according to the Bavli or according to the Yerushalmi.

    One major point: even were there to be a clear source saying that one can choose someone who is dead and believe that he is moshiach, that wouldn’t stop us saying that your rebbe CAN’T be moshiach. There were too many problems with him, not the least of which is the atzmus sicha. We said this when he was alive and ALL of lubavich were claiming that moshiach HAD TO be someone alive.

    #1709006

    RSo
    Participant

    sam: “Nobody will be won over to the other side anyway, so why waste your time with Divrei Havala?”

    That’s a good question, but there is an equally good answer.

    There are a lot of people who “believe” that the lubavicher rebbe is moshiach because they have been force-fed and brainwashed to believe it by all the crazy claims made by lubavichers. It may be too late for them, but putting forward the ludicrousness, falseness and danger of this view may prevent others falling into the spiritual pit.

    #1709022

    RSo
    Participant

    LMT: “The Lubavitcher Rebbe spent ten years in Berlin and Sarbonne”

    The Sorbonne is a prestigious university in Paris, and until it was proven the the lubavicher rebbe did not attend it, it was a standard lubavich claim that he attended there. Research has shown that he attended a polytechnic in Paris and not the Sorbonne.

    And that is why, BBO, I wondered whether he had indeed attended Schrodinger’s lectures. Much of their “history” is made up.

    It makes no difference to me whether he attended Schrodinger’s lectures or didn’t, or whether he enjoyed them or didn’t. I am just extremely reticent to believe any of their claims.

    #1709272

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    I wonder what is must have been like for Chabadskers in their 40’s and 50’s, who got used to the idea of “Every generation has a living moshiach” to suddenly have to drop everything and switch to “dead people can be moshiach” or “Dead people are still living”. Like serious ouch time.

    I do question how successful Chabad is being “mekareiv” other frum Jews. Back when the Rebbe was living they got many normal frum Jews to say “maybe the Rebbe is moshiach”. Now it only appeals to die-hards. The best they can do is sell the Rebbe as a tzaddik whose kever is worth going to.

    #1709434

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    RSo
    were arguing on a specific topic here whether moshiach can be from the dead other then doniel.
    you said no i said yes.

    so hears how you can look at it
    according to rashi no
    according to abbarbanel yes

    who said rashi and abbarbanel have to agree?
    who said that rashi learnt the same thing in the yerushalmi it could be he argues with the abbarbanel, and learns the story a different way (there are a few ways to learn that story).
    you seem pretty adamant to say that rashi and abarbanel agree.

    the abarbanel is trying to explain a story that no on was able to explain, and he learnt it from this gemoro that it could make sense – that from the fact that the gemoro says doniel can be moshiach, he says so to we can use that same logic for our story (remember this goes against rashi that says only doniel)

    #1709473

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    The Rambam clearly didn’t learn that gemara as halacha lemaaseh. The Abarbanel isn’t a poseik. So unless you have someone on the stature of the Rambam saying moshiach can come from the dead, any gemara hava aminas are irrelevant.

    Nobody was more emphatic about that than the Chabad of my youth. Moshiach has to be alive.

    #1709576

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    @lmt
    In general i stopped answering you because i find most of what you write is plain stupidity and you’re just here to ignite some fires (I’m not saying you don’t have questions, but they way you write is just wrong, and dont deserve an answer even if you wanted one – which you dont)

    But i feel that for this i should reply.

    All of the sudden you see there is such a concept so all you could say is we dont hold of him?
    there was an argument for quite a while on a number of threads that had this question and finally you get an answer so you switch tactics/subjects?

    The difference i see between you and @rso is, that @rso at least argues with the concept at hand, if its relevant or not, you on the other hand give me the impression of stam an am haaretz that argues on random things that have nothing to do with the argument but rather just to ignite a fire.

    I know you or someone else will say something “smart” similar to the things you said before but that’s ok most people that never learned say the same thing during such an argument.

    Same thing regarding “haters” that you guys dont like us calling you.
    during an argument you can say certain things but if your arguing on one thing and someone brings in a total different subject together with mocking at the same time, THATS called a “hater”!

    #1709649

    yehoshuaahron
    Participant

    For whoever List of last names descendants of Dovid Hamelech:
    (Some last names there are descendants because a
    a person with that last is a descendant of one of the
    main families who are part of the list), for example the Altschulers descend from Chajes/Chayut. That’s for
    whoever It was that didn’t understand what the point
    of the hebrew Wikipedia article on The Rebbe’s yichus was.
    Lubavitcher Rebbe – Shalom Shachna Altschuler – Chayut –
    Dovid Hamelech. Anyone with knowledge of genealogy knows
    the Chayut family are eineklach of Dovid Hamelech,
    thats why I didn’t bother to explain it there.

    Abarbanel*
    Adler
    Alter/Rotenberg
    (Ger Chassidim)
    Altshuler
    Ashkenazi
    Auerbach
    Averels/Everels
    Babad/Heschel*
    Bach
    (descendants of Sirkes)
    Bachrach
    Beharier
    Berdugo
    Berlin/Berliner
    Bernstein
    Biederman
    Birnbaum
    Breslav Chassidim, Nakhman
    Burstein
    Caro/Karo
    Charif
    Charlap*
    Chayes/Chayut
    Cohen (various families)
    Dayan*
    Don Yechia/Ibn Yechia*
    Edels
    Ehrenreich
    Ehrlich
    Eichenstein
    (Zditchov Chassidim)
    Elfandari
    Enzel
    Epstein*
    Falman
    Fishel
    Freidensohn
    Frenkel/Frankel*
    Frenkel-Teomim*
    Friedland
    Friedman (Rizhin, Sadagora etc. Chassidim)
    Fuchs
    Ginzburg/Gunzburg
    Glickman
    Goldman
    Gombiner
    Gordon
    Halberstam(ZanzChassidim)
    Yisroel Karduner Halpern
    Meshulam Shraga Feivish Halpern
    Yehuda Leibish Halpern
    Heilprin/Halperin*
    Heller*
    Helman
    Hertzkes
    Heschel/Babad*
    Hillel and the Nesi’im*
    Horowitz/Hurwitz
    (various Chassidim)*
    Ish-Zvi
    Isserles/Isserlin*
    Itinga/Ettinger/Ittingen
    Jaffe/Yoffe* / **
    Kalb
    Kalmankes
    Kalonymus*
    Karo/Caro*
    Katz (Maharal of Prague)
    * / **
    Katzenellenbogen*
    Klauber
    Klausner*
    Klingberg
    Landau
    Lau
    Levinsohn
    Lichtenstadt
    Lichtenstein
    Lifshutz/Lipshitz
    Loeb*
    Loewenstam
    Lowe*
    Lubarsky
    Lukashevesky (Lux)
    Lurie/Luria*
    Maharal of Prague * / **
    Malavski
    Margolioth
    Margulies/Margolis
    /Margaliot*
    Meisels*
    Mintzberg
    Mirels
    Mirkes
    Morgenstern
    (Kotzk Chassidim)
    Moskowitz
    Yisroel Dov Odesser
    Oknovski
    Openheim
    Paprosh
    Parnas
    Pereles

    #1709667

    yehoshuaahron
    Participant

    It’s very bothersome how some people here are saying such words against The Rebbe Zt’l. if anyone would bother learning any of these Sichos instead of just quoting it upside-down then there would be no debate. Rav Solovechik had great Kavod for the Rebbe till gimmel Tammuz and learned the first Sichos and mamor of The Rebbe when he took on the Nesius where the Rebbe Zt’l says explicitly The Fridiker Rebbe will take us out of galus (after his histalkus) and speaks of the Zohar quoted about Atzmus. Tell where exactly to find this 1979 “Atzmus Sicha” to check what it actually says please. In general every Jew has a חלק אלקה. As far as I know all the Rebbe said about an Admur is that since such a person’s neshama is b’giluy as it is ” above” therefore “Man PNEI Adon Havaye da Rashbi” but in truth the same could be said of every single Jew as the Rebbe said various times.

    #1709670

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    There’s a famous klal in psak- you don’t go after aggadeta. The gemara discussing the idea that moshiach can be from the dead is just as relevant as the gemara saying there is no moshiach anymore. Shkoyach on your abarbenel, but mainstream Judaism rejected that idea years ago. I know it’s much easier to say the Rebbe didn’t die, which is why many are forced to say such nonsense.

    But, like Rav Aharon Feldman shlit”a said, those who believe the Rebbe dies and is still moshiach are making a mistake but aren’t apikorsim, unlike the ones who say he’s alive. So a tip of the hat for being within the fold. Kemoscha yirbu beLubavitch.

    #1709697

    Non Political
    Participant

    @ anyusernameopen

    You wrote:

    Step 1 – “I’m not saying you don’t have questions”

    ,Step 2 – “but they way you write is just wrong, and dont deserve an answer even if you wanted one

    Step 3 – “which you dont”

    I have a question. Doesn’t step 3 contradict step 1?

    #1709708

    RSo
    Participant

    Anyusername: “so hears how you can look at it
    according to rashi no
    according to abbarbanel yes”

    You can look at it any way you want, but there’s absolutely no reason to say that Abarbanel disagrees with Rashi from what the Abarbanel writes, and we have a klal that we avoid saying there is a machlokes where possible.

    Furthermore, and more to the point, you wrote that according to Rashi it is OK to say your rebbe, who has died according to most authorities, is moshiach. I said that it is not what Rashi is saying. Now you say that the Abarbanel – whom you say holds moshiach can be from the dead – is arguing with Rashi. So you are backtracking and changing your mind about Rashi.

    That is fine, as I believe everyone on this thread will agree that I have proven that Rashi’s commentary to Sanhedrin 98b does not allow one to say that anyone who is dead can be moshiach other than Doniel. But you have still avoided writing that you were wrong about Rashi.

    I don’t need the ego boost of you saying you were wrong. Aderaba, I am enjoying the fact that, as is the case with nearly 100% of lubavichers on this and other threads, the cardinal rule in lubavich is “Never admit you were wrong”! It makes for fun reading.

    #1709714

    RSo
    Participant

    Anyusername in reference to LMT (and giving me a compliment in the course of the discussion): “The difference i see between you and @rso is, that @rso at least argues with the concept at hand, if its relevant or not, you on the other hand give me the impression of stam an am haaretz that argues on random things that have nothing to do with the argument but rather just to ignite a fire”

    Nope. Not true at all. All his arguments are logical and learned, despite me not agreeing with his view on not needing a rebbe. I haven’t called anyone an am haaretz yet, but you have told me more than once that I can’t read a gemoro and now you have called LMT an am haaretz. I think that after seeing all your misquotes and miscitations the shoe is really on the other foot.

    In fact, I don’t even believe that you yourself saw the Sdei Chemed or the Abarbanel before you quoted them.

    #1709727

    RSo
    Participant

    yehohuaahron, citing a list of family names that are descended from Dovid Hamelech means nothing. First, because in many cases it is an unproven claim. Second, because many people with those family names are descended through females. Take the lubavicher rebbe, for example. He is ben achar ben from the Tzemach Tzedek whose father was an Altshuler. Yet his family name was Shneerson. So family names don’t prove a lot.

    You will also find, unfortunately, that there are goyim with those family names as well, as they are descended patrilineally from those families. I have a friend who was in business in the States with a goy whose family name was… Shneerson. Rachmono litzlon!

    #1709737

    RSo
    Participant

    yehoshuaahron: “Rav Solovechik … learned the first Sichos and mamor of The Rebbe when he took on the Nesius where the Rebbe Zt’l says explicitly The Fridiker Rebbe will take us out of galus (after his histalkus) and speaks of the Zohar quoted about Atzmus.”

    Source please. Btw a non-lubavich source would do nicely.

    “Tell where exactly to find this 1979 “Atzmus Sicha” to check what it actually says please”

    It’s on page 8 of this thread, and it says much worse than you seem to think.

    #1709741

    BneiBarakObama
    Participant

    Rso, your holding the abarbanel the same way a mishichist holds a rambam.

    #1709778

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    yehoshuaahron: “Rav Solovechik … learned the first Sichos and mamor of The Rebbe when he took on the Nesius where the Rebbe Zt’l says explicitly The Fridiker Rebbe will take us out of galus (after his histalkus) and speaks of the Zohar quoted about Atzmus.”

    So wait a second. If the Rebbe said his father-in-law is moshiach, how can the whole of Lubavitch contradict him and say the Rebbe himself is moshiach?!

    #1709806

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    “those who believe the Rebbe dies and is still moshiach are making a mistake but aren’t apikorsim, unlike the ones who say he’s alive.”

    Source for this distinction? Why would it be worse to believe he’s alive and hiding somewhere?
    Crazy? Yes. But, I don’t see why it’s halachically worse.

    #1709845

    samthenylic
    Participant

    Lubavichers are so “far-kishuft” with Moshiach, that they have EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS to the name, that they will INSIST that their manhig, their Rebbe IS IT! V’ein loch reshus leharher achreha. “zei hoben a zuk in kop!”

    #1709921

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    Lubavitch would do itself a favor if it would name a new Rebbe, even if they say it’s just a temporary rebbe until the real one returns.

    #1710156

    RSo
    Participant

    BBO: “Rso, your holding the abarbanel the same way a mishichist holds a rambam”

    Please explain.

    #1710194

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    @np
    Step 1 I’m not saying you don’t have questions”

    ,Step 2 – “but they way you write is just wrong, and dont deserve an answer even if you wanted one

    Step 3 – “which you dont”

    I have a question. Doesn’t step 3 contradict step 1?”

    Read it again…
    “Which you don’t” is going on the fact that he doesn’t want an answer. And not step 3

    #1710195

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    @rso
    He very clearly disagrees with rashi

    Rashi says only doniel
    Abarbanel says even this other person

    #1710202

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    Quote “I haven’t called anyone an am haaretz yet,”

    You are correct,
    as far as I know you never used the term “am haaretz” but you have used a few terms which have the same or very similar definition as an am haaretz

    #1710203

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    V’ein loch reshus leharher achreha.

    I think I mentioned quite a few times that this is incorrect

    #1710210

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    *not that we should be calling ppl am haaratzim in general

    #1710207

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    @rso
    1. I forgot to mention (where you saw my compliment) that i dont either agree with some of the not nice terms you use either (just saying, even though you’ll probably say its a matter of opinion).

    2. How’s life 🙂
    I hope your not getting any white hairs over this (I’m not).
    If everyone calms down a bit, life would be even better.

    Sorry for calling @lmt an am haaretz
    (social media doesnt prove anything so I would have to take it back unless I meet him and its takeh true)

    #1710212

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    I think thats enough for one stomachache 🙂

    #1710233

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    Now that we finished this topic…
    #random
    Can hashem make something too heavy for himself to pick up?

    #1710258

    RSo
    Participant

    Anyusername: “He very clearly disagrees with rashi
    Rashi says only doniel
    Abarbanel says even this other person”

    NO! Rashi says that the Gemoro in Sanhedrin 98b can only be talking about Doniel himself (according to the opinion there that moshiach may be someone who died). Rashi DOES NOT say that there are no other maamorei Chazal that say someone else who died is moshiach.

    The Abarbanel is explaining the Yerushalmi in Brochos.

    They are not disagreeing because they are not discussing the same maamorei Chazal.

    But… there is no Rashi anywhere in Shas that says that maybe someone else who has died could be moshiach, and that you can pick whoever you want. And you have not showed me where the Abarbanel says that moshiach can be anyone who has died other than that child mentioned in Yerushalmi. As I’ve said, perhaps the Abarbanel does say it, but no one yet has shown me where. And perhaps Rashi himself held, based on other maamorei Chazal, that moshiach could be someone who has died, but no one has shown me where he says it.

    But I like the way you have abandoned your “proof” from Rashi and act as if you never quoted that Rashi as a source. Nice lubavich footwork!

    And you haven’t mentioned your “proof” from the Maharsho there either…

    #1710259

    RSo
    Participant

    Anyusername to me: “Quote “I haven’t called anyone an am haaretz yet,”
    You are correct,
    as far as I know you never used the term “am haaretz” but you have used a few terms which have the same or very similar definition as an am haaretz”

    I admit that I don’t remember everything that I have written, but I don’t think I have. I have used the term apikorsus which is far worse, but totally unrelated, to am haaretz. And I still believe that people who twist divrei Chazal and Rishonim are close to apikorsim, if not there already, because out of their own desires they are willing to discard Chazal and Rishonim.

    Don’t get me wrong. No one here is claiming to be perfect. But there’s a big difference between saying “I do aveiros R”L” and “Chazal/Rishonim agree with me” when there is absolutely no question that they don’t. The former is someone who (hopefully only occasionally) gives in to his yeter horo. The latter is megaleh ponim batorah shelo kehalocho.

    And now for one of your better and most amusing lines: “Now that we finished this topic…”
    ! ! ! !

    #1710387

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    @rso

    Now not to proof it from the wording in the abarbanel because in that we have our own opinions, but I think from the artscroll which looks pretty clear. Would be better (Which is also why I brought the artscroll to begin with. As I mentioned the first time.)

    Artscroll quote on this gemora in sanhedrin regarding doniel being moshiach “(Abarbanel explains that it is possible for the Messiah to be among the resurrected (Yeshuos Meshicho lyun 2 ch. 1)”

    (I think – that they brought the abarbanel to explain this gemora in sanhedrin which most ppl wont understand because everyone knows that moshiach will come from those that are alive. so they brought the abarbanel to tell you that, there are opinions that say no, moshiach can come from those ahat have passed away.

    Btw isnt someone that twists the words of chazal an “am haaretz”? Meaning he doesnt know how to learn which is why he’s twisting them?

    #1710779

    RSo
    Participant

    Anyusernamd: “Now not to proof it from the wording in the abarbanel because in that we have our own opinions, but I think from the artscroll which looks pretty clear. Would be better (Which is also why I brought the artscroll to begin with. As I mentioned the first time.)”

    Quoting a footnote in an Artscroll to “prove” what the Abarbanel means is very weak, and makes me think that you didn’t see the Abarbanel inside. Had you seen it inside you would never have written that he said what you said he did.

    Note, you quoted Rashi as a proof where he clearly is not, as you seem to have accepted (although not chas Veshalom admitted) and you quoted a Maharsho as proof where he clearly is not, and you have never addressed that.

    You also told us that your rebbe is ben achar ben from Dovid Hamelech because he is ben achar ben from the Metzudos who was ben achar ben from Dovid. Neither of those claims have been validated at all.

    So overall, you can’t really expect me to take your claims too seriously.

    #1710778

    RSo
    Participant

    Anyusername: “Btw isnt someone that twists the words of chazal an “am haaretz”? Meaning he doesnt know how to learn which is why he’s twisting them?”

    No, I don’t think so. Someone who misinterprets the words of Chazal because he doesn’t understand them we might call an am haaretz. But someone who twists the words of Chazal to come up with a result they want for their own personal reasons is closer to an apikorus.

    #1711042

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    Neville: “those who believe the Rebbe dies and is still moshiach are making a mistake but aren’t apikorsim, unlike the ones who say he’s alive.”

    Source for this distinction? Why would it be worse to believe he’s alive and hiding somewhere?
    Crazy? Yes. But, I don’t see why it’s halachically worse.

    Nevile, The source for that is both Rav Menashe Klein zt”l and yblc”t Rav Aharon Feldman shlita. As mentioned, many do take the atzmus thing literally, where the Rebbe is c”v “G-d in human form”. Many don’t Baruch Hashem, though how they deal with the Rebbe saying “it’s not a problem asking to Rebbe instead of Hashem because he’s the essence of G-d in a human body” is beyond me.

    Almost all Lubavitchers believe the Rebbe is moshiach. If you believe he died, then you believe he’s moshiach but an ordinary human being. If you call him alive, you are ascribing to him deity-like powers to evade death beyond mere mortals. Both of those sources can be found by googling.

    #1711145

    Yeshivishrockstar
    Participant

    I answered this in the previous thread on CHabad.

    Did you read that?

    #1712329

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    I read what you wrote, and disagree. Yeshivish people are too busy learning to understand the source of the Chabad meshugas. They can see the toitzaois but not the ikkar shoiresh poireh roish velaana because why should they spend hours understanding Chabad when they can spend the same time horoven on a ketzois?

    #1712367

    Yeshivishrockstar
    Participant

    Lerntmin, if you would be studying a ketzois now, great! But you’re not! Rather, youre wasting time here in the CR – On the Chabad Thread!

    So surely you can look into what they really hold…

    #1712935

    Yeshivishrockstar
    Participant

    Lerntmin: Quote from you on a different subject:

    “The #1 rule of debating is to understand your opponent’s viewpoint so you can refute it.”

    Mmm hmm. Chabad being the exception?

    #1713000

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    YRS, the atzmus sicha is posted above, and we have the Rambam zt”l, Rav Shach zt”l and the rest to help us understand that peshuto kemashmao. There’s no “chassidus” exception in the ikkarim. You can check them yourself.
    But what kind of yeshivish rockstar isn’t familiar with the litvish gedoilim?

    #1713024

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    I’m starting to get the impression that the yeshiva Reshivish Rockstar is rocking is in morristown.

    #1715560

    Yeshivishrockstar
    Participant

    Lerntmin – not quite. I’m in the mir.

    If you would have read my post here; https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/the-world-is-in-a-state-of-geula-and-dont-misunderstand-us/page/30/#post-1646035 you would see my true feelings on chabad.

    Just that I don’t like dishinesty, as the Rebbe did not mean to say kefira, and most lubavichers are not kofrim. Even if you don’t understand it, don’t call it kefira, or all chabad kofrim. Just the ones that interpet it wrongly.

    #1715561

    Yeshivishrockstar
    Participant

    And here is where I defend the atzmus sicha (unlike the sukkah sicha, which remains incomprehensible to me.)

    The world is in a state of Geula- and don’t misunderstand us!

    #1715562

    Yeshivishrockstar
    Participant

    Lerntmin: Read this post by me

    The world is in a state of Geula- and don’t misunderstand us!

    Tell me if we’re not basically on the same page – except I think the rebbe was NOT a koifer

    #1716716

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    Again, the facts on the ground show what was meant or how it’s interpreted. As per the gedoilim, anyone who says yechi is clearly an apikoires which indicates that the atzmus sicha is understood peshuto kemashmao that you can daven to the Rebbe like it says kind of explicitly there. But I admire your leiv tov.

    #1717182

    Bitul
    Participant

    LerntmiTayrah: “As per the gedoilim, anyone who says yechi is clearly an apikoires”

    I guess these “gedolim” also hold that rebbi akiva – who said regarding bar kochba ‘Din Hu MAlka Meshicha” – is also an apikores.
    and i guess that dvei d’rav yanai ,dvei d’rav chisdai, and dvei d’rav menachem ben chizkiyah are also apikorsim for calling their rebbeim moshiach as it says in Sanhedrin 98b.

Viewing 47 posts - 451 through 497 (of 497 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Trending