Joining Chabad

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Rants Joining Chabad

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 497 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1696743

    Chossid
    Participant

    Dear writer
    I hear your frustration, but my point just flew over your head.

    Did I ever say this?
    “This is the problem with you guys, someone visits a lubavitcher or listens to a dvar Torah so you already turn them into leaving their own minhagim and seeing “the light” of chabad.”

    You missed the point, I’m trying to bring out that if all these Gedolim/Rebbeim agreed, that chabad are koifrim, apikursim, Lev Tahor, then they wouldn’t attend these Chabad weddings, dance to chabad nigunim, or meet with Lubavitcher chassidim.
    From the fact that they do attend, it seems that they don’t agree with these comments.

    No one is claiming that they should change or changed their minhagim.

    The Rebbe never told people to change thier minhagim, in fact, there is lots of Lubavitchers that wear a shtrimul and lingeh rekul, some wore personally told by the Rebb how to change.
    Rather the Rebbe encourage them to learn chassidus.

    Sorry if you missed my point, I hope you do now.
    Have a great shabbos.

    #1696751

    Chossid
    Participant

    CORRECTION:
    The Rebbe never told people to change thier minhagim, in fact, there is lots of Lubavitchers that wear a shtrimul and lingeh rekul, some wore personally told by the Rebbe not to change.
    Rather the Rebbe encourage them to learn chassidus.

    #1696758

    Benephraim
    Participant

    Those who are insecure with their Torah and בין אדם לחבריו will are probably best suited for an introverted Torah world. Those who feel secure enough to go out will find kindred spirit in outreach and שליחות.

    #1696859

    LerntminTayrah
    Participant

    Chossid, why is llearning chassidus so important? Why not gemara and shulchan aruch?

    Gedolim attend chabad weddings because chezkas kashrus that they don’t fully believe the nonsense like “atzmus” and are fully aware the Rebbe died 25 years ago and isn’t alive. But go around litvish yeshivos instead of going by what people say hear and you will quickly see that Chabad is very suspect, and that they are at least chochesh for the view of Rav aharon Kotler zt”l that Chabad is avoda zara. Considering some chabadsker sent Rav Shach zt”l a noose in the mail, I don’t blame everyone for being silent in public. The talmidim know the truth.

    The goyim have an expression- if you go after the king, you better not miss. It’s also true that if you declare yourself king, you better not miss. The Rebbe declared himself moshiach in his “basi legani” maamar. You can easily find the video called “Daly Rebbe 244” Where the Rebbe sings along to the yechi adoneinu song, so claims the Rebbe never said he was moshiach are nonsense and just for outsiders. 25 years later, the rest of us know the Rebbe was just another in a long line of false moshiachs, from Yoshke to Shabsai Tzvi to the one in Teiman that caused the Rambam to write his famous “Igeres Teiman” to Jacob Frank to the Rebbe to Eliezer Berland in modern times.

    #1696866

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    When did people begin the practice of saying “look it up” at the end of every argument? Back in my day (3 weeks ago on the other Chabad war thread) we used to bring at least vague rayes like “the S”A says so.”

    #1696873

    zahavasdad
    Participant

    The Lubavich Rebbe never delcared himself the Moshiach, others did.

    Leaning Tanya is not my thing, but if someone wants to learn it, Gezen Deh Heh, not everyone can learn gemoral of Shulhan Aruch all the time

    #1696871

    Sechel HaYashar
    Participant

    “Chossid, why is llearning chassidus so important? Why not gemara and shulchan aruch?”

    Umm… They’re both of extreme importance. And if you would care to look at the facts, you’ll see that in every single Chabad Yeshiva, the bulk of the day is spent learning… Wait for it… Gemarah!! Yes, we are also Frum Yidden. And FYI Chabad has a very strong focus on Shulchan Aruch, and all Bochurim learn Yore De’ah before marriage. Lerntnittorah, can I ask you a few questions from Shulchan Aruch? Or are you too scared to face off against a Lubavitcher Bochur who is a Rov Musmach who can likely stump you very quickly?

    #1696878

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    All of the sudden your allowed to make fun of a talmid chochom – someone that learnt a bit more Torah then you??
    No need to go into any more details you get the point I’m being moche for on what your saying.
    And unless you have clear sources for what you say (not just repeating lashon hara) I think this conversation is not something YOU should deal with.

    And btw
    Who ever said gemora & shulchan aruch is not important
    You’re hearing a lot of things from places full of hate you didn’t bring one reliable source anything you claimed against Chabad
    Some of the comments that were posted recently even admitted they never saw what they claimed actually happening. They just heard about it

    #1696879

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    @lmt
    Gedolim attend chabad weddings because chezkas kashrus that they don’t fully believe the nonsense like “atzmus” and are fully aware the Rebbe died 25 years ago and isn’t alive. But go around litvish yeshivos instead of going by what people say hear and you will quickly see that Chabad is very suspect, and that they are at least chochesh for the view of Rav aharon Kotler zt”l that Chabad is avoda zara. Considering some chabadsker sent Rav Shach zt”l a noose in the mail, I don’t blame everyone for being silent in public. The talmidim know the truth.

    Read what you wrote again again you sound like an oxymoron

    #1696880

    Joseph
    Participant

    Is it true that the Chabad Lubavitch of prewar Europe was much much different in many ways (much moreso than the prewar/postwar differences of other Chasidim and Litvish groups) than the Chabad Lubavitch of postwar America?

    #1696885

    Chossid
    Participant

    “Chossid, why is llearning chassidus so important?”

    Yes, If you can explain to me why learning Torah is so important.

    Why not gemara and shulchan aruch?
    Did anyone say it’s not? (It seems like you are just hearing loshon harah)

    Btw we learn more Gemorah and shulchon aruch then chassidus, in our Yeshiva system.
    So get the facts straight.
    Maybe come and visit Chabad yeshivois and check then out.
    In the past year a few chassidish yeshivas brought their bochurim to Chabad yeshivois to check in out, and learn chassidus together.
    Feel free to join.

    “Gedolim attend chabad weddings because chezkas kashrus”

    Halevai you would at least follow their way….. And not call Chabad all these names, and be moitzi Shem rah.

    But you missed the point, if a certain kries are koifrim… Lev Tahor. Then no godol will attend their events, so from the fact that they do, is proof that they don’t agree with you.

    “But go around litvish yeshivos instead of going by what people say hear and you will quickly see that Chabad is very suspect”

    I hang around litvish yeshivois, and btw I live in a litvish community. And I can tell you one thing, they are dieing to learn more chassidus, and hear another chassidish vort. I speak to them all day, and nobody ever told me these cheshoshois. Because it’s all false.
    And I know personally, many well respected litvish people that go to the Rebbes Ohel, they just got to do it in secret, because they are scared people are going to bad mouth them.

    Yes eventually people start seeing beyond the loshin harah that people say against an eida kedeisha.
    I hope eventually you too.

    And btw if you only knew who shabtzi tzvi was and how he was mevazeh Torah, you wouldn’t dear ever say your last comment.

    Your just revealing your true colors, who is the tinoik shenishba (bein loshon harah and moitzi Shem rah).

    #1696882

    yehoshuaahron
    Participant

    Did you even learn Basi legani!? Why don’t you learn some Chasidus and befriend some Chassidishe Lubavitchers before being motzi shem-rah on kesherim shleimim un Yereim! This is a quote from Basi Legani, the Rebbe says the Frierdiker Rebbe is should be Moshiach and that’s AFTER his histalkus. The Rebbe never saw himself as Rebbe, he always refered to the Frierdiker Rebbe as the Nosi Hador (after his histalkus).
    “All the above is accomplished through the passing (histalkus) of tzaddikim, that is even harsher than the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash. Since we have already experienced all these things, everything now depends only on us — the seventh generation. May we be privileged to see and meet with65 the Rebbe here in this world, in a physical body, in this earthy domain — and he will redeem us.
    65. See end of Sefer Chassidim (quoted in Gilyon HaShas, Kesubbos 103a); Bamidbar Rabbah 19:13.”
    Once the Rebbe was asked how he could say the Frierdiker Rebbe is Nosi after his histalkusand said that there’s stira of two pesukim – about shimshon in shoftim :
    in the first posuk it says that shimshon had judged Klal Yisroel for 20 years, but another posuk says that he judged them for 40 years. Chazal answer the stira saying that since the Pelishtim feared the Yidden for 29 years after shimshon was nistalek, he was considered the Nossi for those next 20 years. Meaning that in some cases the Nossi continues after his histalkus if his Hashpoho is still felt in the world. (The nossi Hador is moshiach shebador).
    Also the Zohar haKadosh (See Zohar I, 140a; Chiddushei Ritva on Rosh HaShanah 16b; Responsa of Radvaz, Vol. III, sections 1069, 644; Migdal David, p. 83a; Biurei HaZohar of the Tzemach Tzedek, p. 134. See also Sichos Kodesh 5710 (Kehot), p. 100, and Likkutei Sichos, Vol. II, p. 518.) says that certain Tzaddikim will have Techias Hamesim before the main Techias Hamesim hakloli, the Rebbe explains that if Moshiach is Min Hamesim then he would have Techia amongst those special Tzaddikim. (This explains how Moshiach can be min Hamesim if Techia is after Moshiach reveals himself). Moshiach Min Hameisim mekoros:
    Sanhedrin 98b. Abarbanel, Yeshuos Meshicho p. 104. He cites a passage from Tractate Derech Eretz Zuta: “Nine people entered the Garden of Eden alive …Mashiach.” He explains that according to this view, a righteous individual deemed to be the Mashiach will live, then die on account of the sins of his generation, but will eventually be resurrected.
    Sdei Chemed, Pe’as HaSadeh, Maareches Alef, footnote 70.
    R. Chizkiyah Medini states that if Israel is exceedingly meritorious, Mashiach will be resurrected from the dead in a miraculous manner.
    See also Or HaChaim, Parshas Balak, on the verse (Bamidbar 24:17), “A star shall shoot forth from Yaakov”: “If Israel are found worthy, Mashiach will be revealed from heaven.” See also: Zohar I, 203b; Arba Meios Shekel Kessef (by R. Chaim Vital), p. 68; Shaar HaGilgulim, ch. 13; Meorei Tzion, ch. 97; Biurei Zohar by the Alter Rebbe, p. 106b; Biurei Zohar by the Tzemach Tzedek and Yahel Or of the Tzemach Tzedek on Tehillim 82; Or HaChamah on Zohar I, 7b, and I, 212a. Note the closing phrase (“and he will redeem us”) of the first maamar of the Rebbe (entitled Basi LeGani 5711 [1951]), translated by Sichos In English in Basi LeGani: Chassidic Discourses (Kehot, N.Y., 1990), p. 103.

    #1696895

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    The Lubavich Rebbe never delcared himself the Moshiach, others did.

    According to many Lubavichers, he did.

    See post above.

    #1696902

    RSo
    Participant

    zhavasdad: “Gezen Deh Heh”.

    Did you see the dalet and vov as well?

    #1696961

    zahavasdad
    Participant

    According to many Lubavichers, he did.

    Just because according to many chabadnicks think he did, doesnt mean he said he did. Unfortunatly too many times people think a gadol said or did something and really didnt

    #1696974

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    Just because according to many chabadnicks think he did, doesnt mean he said he did.

    This isn’t a matter of of someone claiming he said something privately. That’s the case with the denials.

    This is based on public statements.

    It seems like the vast majority of the intended audience, his chassidim, understood his statements as claiming he was moshiach.

    Kol hakavod to those Lubavicher chassidim, such as Sechel Hayashar, who try to interpret his words differently so that they don’t need to consider him a moshiach sheker.

    Unfortunately , most, it seems (although the antis claim it’s just a vocal minority) avoid considering him a moshiach sheker by either saying he’s still alive, or that he is going to be resurrected as moshiach. The problem, of course, is that this is a distortion of Yiddishkeit.

    #1696982

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    @DY
    What’s a connection with all this to moshiach sheker?
    Where do you see such a thing

    #1696983

    yehoshuaahron
    Participant

    Daasyochid, am haaretz, a Moshiach sheker is someone who claimed he is Moshiach and then was kofer or killed, no Lubavitcher claims The Rebbe is/was Moshiach, only that he has the status of CHEZKAS Moshiach. Moshiach Vadai has to rebuild the Beis Hamikdash etc etc… NO Lubavitcher claims the Rebbe IS Moshiach. Meshichistim believe that being that The Rebbe is still bechezkas Moshiach even after his passing, as he was not killed but died as a Tzaddik through a natural death, and having been a Nossi of this for, it is only logical, that if it will be min hameisim, that he will be Moshiach. However any Meshichist would agree that if Moshiach is min hamesim it could be the Baal Shem Tov, or any Tzaddik that was bechezkas Moshiach before his histalkus. Obviously you didn’t read my post with the Mekoros of Moshiach min Hamesim, and what Chazal say about Shimshon being Nossi after his death. If you don’t believe Moshiach could come from the dead you are a kofer in Toras Moshe and have no chelek in Olam Habo!

    #1696981

    zahavasdad
    Participant

    People always here what they want to hear and from my experience it seems the meshaiacs are more loud than the non-meshaics

    I am not a chabnick, so I am commenting as an outsider and certainly I think messianism is wrong and I do not agree with chabad houses opening up in certain communtiies where it seems they are made to bring people to chabadism rather than yiddishkeit (Lakewood is the best example of this)

    #1697019

    🍫Syag Lchochma
    Participant

    Guys, ya gotta stop calling everyone with halachik taynas agai st chabad a hater. It’s getting old. You want to call the information lashon hora? Well news flash- a lot of it came fro. You guys here, and lubavitchers we’ve met i real life. Go complain to them if you don’t like the kefira or ignorance or am haartzus they spread.
    Either give an answer or don’t or cut it out with the hater calling. It isn’t caled hating to call out things that are wrong.if you want to deny the source, go ahead and try, but you shouldn’t be complaining that we defend Torah.

    #1697018

    Joseph
    Participant

    Why do meshichists feel that the Rebbe is more likely to be Moshiach than the Baal Shem or the Chasam Sofer or Rashi?

    #1697014

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    Nonpolitical: Obviously, he relied on chassidus. It’s not like his Rebbe the GR”A was familiar with the Zohar and Kitvai HaAri, he needed the Baal HaTanya to explain it to him. Nebech.

    Spoken like someone who has never gone through the NH nor the Tanya. The NH is not Kaballah rather it is based on Kabbalah, the same as the Tanya (and Chassidus in general). And as is the case with anything that is based on something, there is a hermeneutic that predisposed any interpretation; this is what I meant by saying the NH is based on the Chassidus. If you would like to see exactly the extant that he based it, there is a new NH that just came out which endeavors to show the general sources (not strictly Chassidic ones) of the NH. If you would go through it you will many novel interpetaions of the NH are actually taken from early Chassidic texts. So unless the NH was mechaven to chassidis by himself he obviously took it from there. (At the minimum there are many places where he deviates from the Gra himself, e.g. 3:7).
    {In the future before making away with what someone says, make sure you check your facts)

    #1697017

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    As to the Rashbi and the Arizal not being put in Cherem, that is completely irrelevant, as the question was why did Chasisidus need to “invent” something new. To that the answer is that it is the same invention as Kabbalah in general, (i.e. not an invention at all).

    #1697056

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    If you don’t believe Moshiach could come from the dead you are a kofer in Toras Moshe and have no chelek in Olam Habo!

    As I believe Sechel Hayashar has posted, before the Rebbe was niftar, nobody considered the possibility that moshiach could be a dead person. Digging up supposed shittos that moshiach could be a dead person was done because of many people in Chabad being unable to accept reality.

    Saying he is “b’chezkas moshiach” is the distortion of Torah. Just read the Rambam, and hold the sefer straight, not upside down.

    #1697053

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    @sl
    The hater part has to do with people who are saying things without knowing facts or not having any sources what they’re saying as someone commented before that they never actually saw something happening they just heard about it
    Go explain

    #1697065

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    Why do meshichists feel that the Rebbe is more likely to be Moshiach than the Baal Shem or the Chasam Sofer or Rashi?

    There’s no logical reason, but as you say, they “feel” that way.

    #1697066

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    So unless the NH was mechaven to chassidis by himself he obviously took it from there.

    That only makes sense if you think chassidus was invented, not if it’s just restating what’s already in the Torah.

    #1697067

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    What’s a connection with all this to moshiach sheker?

    IF he indeed claimed himself to be moshiach, as many (probably most) Chabad chassidim claim, and as posted by several in this and other threads, then there are two options: he’s moshiach, or he was a moshiach sheker.

    #1697073

    🍫Syag Lchochma
    Participant

    Any- the hater is what the chabad suppoerters have screamed repeatedly at every comment made that backs them into a coener or involves supporting things the leader has done wrong per halacha. Its something you have seemingly learned to call anyone with legitamate questions in order to excuse a need for giving answers.

    #1697074

    yehoshuaahron
    Participant

    Joseph: 2 answers:
    1. A Talmid should believe his Rebbe is Moshiach. (Sanhedrin 98b) where the Gemara relates the opinions of four schools, each of whose Talmidim thought that their Rebbe is Moshiach.
    2. On Sanhedrin 98b, the MaHaRSha, comments that Rebi and Daniel are specifically mentioned as examples as candidates for Moshiach because they had already been leaders of the Jews of their generation during the period of exile, (Bereishis 49:10): “The scepter [of rulership] shall not depart from [the tribe of] Yehuda.” The, Be’er Sheva, gives the same reason for Rav Nachman (Amorah) saying, in the above Talmudic passage, quoting a Scriptural verse (Jeremiah 30:21) to prove that if Moshiach is one of those living in his time, it would be he.
    In other words, besides the conditions specified by RaShI, MaHaRShA and Be’er Sheva emphasize that Moshiach will be one who has been a leader of the Jews of his generation, as were Rav Nachman, Rabbi Yehuda HaNassi and Daniel.
    The Rebbe has fulfilled all these conditions . . . Not all great Tzaddikim were “Nessiim”. Obviously according to this lav-davka only The Rebbe, but it does narrow it down to certain Tzaddikim.
    So Meshichistim believe (emphasis on believe) being that The Rebbe was the Nossi of OUR dor it makes sense he would be the appropriate Goel if Moshiach’s time is now (specially in light of what Chazal say about Shimshon, in which case The Rebbe could still be considered the current Nossi as his presence is strongly felt, batei Chabad, The Rebbe’s Shluchim, Hafatzas Hamayanos etc…) So, The Rebbe, in contrast to other great talmidei chochomim was chezkas Moshiach not just because of his Torah and Yichus.

    #1697075

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    DaasYochid: That only makes sense if you think chassidus was invented, not if it’s just restating what’s already in the Torah.

    In that case there should and should not have been any disagreements about Chassidus. [And if you mean to say that the parts that the NH writes like Chassidus is not because he takes it from them, rather because it is pashut peshat in Chazal, In that case you missed my point. The NH interpenetrates many passages in the same context as Chassidus, where it is not found in any other source only there.]

    #1697079

    🍫Syag Lchochma
    Participant

    “You missed the point, I’m trying to bring out that if all these Gedolim/Rebbeim agreed, that chabad are koifrim, apikursim, Lev Tahor, then they wouldn’t attend these Chabad weddings, dance to chabad nigunim, or meet with Lubavitcher chassidim.
    From the fact that they do attend, it seems that they don’t agree with these comments.”

    You seem to be confusing haskama and simple ahavas yisroel. Perhaps it stems from the difference between the language we use when refering to chabad leaders with whom we strongly disagree and the disgusting hateful way your leaders and members are mivaze torah giants like rav ahron and rav shach. Hatred may sometimes be displayed here, but we dont teach and condone it

    #1697084

    Non Political
    Participant

    @ DY
    “That only makes sense if you think chassidus was invented”

    I don’t think he understands the premise of his own proposition. Maybe the cliff notes version will help.

    #1697090

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    The NH interpenetrates many passages in the same context as Chassidus, where it is not found in any other source only there.

    Where did chassidus get it from?

    #1697094

    yehoshuaahron
    Participant

    Daasyochid:
    Instead of just telling me to hold Rambam straight, why don’t you define for us what is Chezkas Moshiach if you actually have a argument. And for what you said about Moshiach min Hameisim, Yidden have always believed in that possiblity and no one had to “look up” mekoros lol, you call learning Gemara (Sanhedrin 98b) and Zohar looking up mekoros!? The only reason I can think of that you should be uncomfortable with Moshiach min Hamesim is that Christians believe in it too. So, why don’t you stop believing in Moshiach altogether if Christians believe in it lol. If Goyim start putting on Tefillin you’ll stop too!?
    And for you’re last comment. The Rebbe never said he is Moshiach. Period.

    #1697096

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    NonPolitical: First off, thanks for not answering me directly, it speaks volumes…
    Second of all, I understand perfectly the premise, but again both of you seem to miss the point. The term invented in this discussion has two meanings, 1) a new idea or concept, one that is not based on any earlier idea, 2) an addition and/or improvement to an earlier concept. However the Gr”a understood Chassidus, whether as an entirely new movement or an addition to the Arizal, he was against it, and further, there are no Chassidic concepts in his works whatsoever, nor are there any interpretations of the Torah and Chazal that parallel Chassidic ones.
    However, with the NH one encounters a completely different story. Not only does the NH quote extensively from Chassidic sources, at times he even deviates from his Rebbe the Gr”a in the favor of Chassidic interpretations, case in point Tzimzum. In fact the only place that the NH does not agree with Chassidus is in Shaar 4, (and the Yesodai Ha’Avodah was written in response to it). In other words, however R’ Chaim understood Chassidus, either as entirely new movement or as an addition, he actually had no issues with it whatsoever other than one aspect, (which was not the driving factor of the Gr”as’ cherem).
    To sum this up for those that need Cliff Notes, However the Gr’a viewed Chassus he had an issue with all the core tenets, whereas R’ Chaim his talmud had only one issue with it.

    Again, study the relevant texts before commenting.

    #1697097

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    Daas Yachid: Where did chassidus get it from?

    Same place that the Arizal and Rashbi did. [I am NOT comparing the Besh’t with them, that is not in my place]. They are new novel ways of understanding Kabbalistic concepts even for the layman that Hashem revealed to the Besh”t, which is why you do not find these interpretation anywhere else.

    #1697105

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant
    #1697106

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    I alreally brought my points regarding RAK regarding Shanghai you can search the web for the documents from those days

    DY
    That’s because no one has actually ever brought up any sources they only said things that they heard as I already mentioned before which you clearly didn’t read

    #1697107

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    They are new novel ways of understanding Kabbalistic concepts even for the layman that Hashem revealed to the Besh”t

    Sounds like a new testament, the way you describe it.

    #1697108

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    Sorry I meant @sl

    #1697114

    🍫Syag Lchochma
    Participant

    Any- when you say i clearly didnt read something, is that because you have a need to be condescending but cant find any fault in my words? Or because you clearly have no response? Because you clearly would have no idea what i have and have not read.
    And for the record, its Rav Ahron Kotler. Although mamesh works for you, RAK instead of Rov Ahron is just another way to be mivazeh a tolmid chochom.

    #1697120

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    Regarding what you’re saying before 3 tamuz, no one ever said that it cant be someone who is dead.
    There was no need to go down that path

    #1697128

    Anyusernameopen?
    Participant

    As far as rak and not reb ahron kotler it’s called roshei teivos
    As in rashi
    Gra
    And anyone else
    But if if you want to accuse me of being mevaze talmidei chachomim. I’m ok with that

    Now that we cleared that points can you explain the other part that I mentioned regarding Shanghai??
    Or do you not know what I’m talking about?

    #1697132

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    DaasYachid: Sounds like a new testament, the way you describe it.

    Seriously! The NT is not a novel way of interpreting the Torah, it quotes some, changes most, and makes away with it. [I will not quote any of it for obvious reasons]. Chassidus interpenetrates the Arizal in a novel way, much like the the Arizal interpenetrates the Zohar in a novel way.
    To sum it up, neither you or NonPolitical have actually quoted anything to substantiate you claims, whilst I have answered any point, regardless of its merit.

    #1697173

    yehoshuaahron
    Participant

    Anyusernameopen?:
    By the way, in reality the Rebbe himself from the beginning in fact the first day (1951 in Basi leGani) and throughout his whole nessius spoke of Moshiach min Hameisim when saying Vehu Yigalenu in reference to the Frierdiker Rebbe. It wasn’t until gimmel Tammuz that Moshiach min Hameisim was spoken about in Lubavitch.

    #1697174

    Milhouse
    Participant

    IF he indeed claimed himself to be moshiach, as many (probably most) Chabad chassidim claim, and as posted by several in this and other threads, then there are two options: he’s moshiach, or he was a moshiach sheker.

    Where do you find in Torah such a concept as “moshiach sheker”, or the idea that there’s something wrong with it? “Novi sheker” is a genuine halachic category; “moshiach sheker”, as fa as I can tell, is an invention of the maskilim.

    Shabsai Tzvi and Yaakov Frenk were rejected, not because they turned out not to be moshiach, but because they became resho’im, openly rejected observance of halacha and told their followers to commit serious aveiros, and eventually committed shmad.

    But the only halachic source we have for hilchos moshiach is the Rambam, and he holds that Bar Kochva was a tzadik and should be admired even though he failed as moshiach. Nor have I ever heard that gedolei yisoel ever condemned Shlomo Molcho or Dovid Reuveni or any of the other people who tried to be moshiach and failed, but did not go off the derech.

    So even if the Lubavitcher Rebbe had publicly announced (which he didn’t) that he was moshiach, and then he failed, there would be notihing wrong with that.

    #1697191

    Milhouse
    Participant

    The Lubavitcher Rebbe never said he was Moshiach, or even that he was going to be Moshiach, but he said a lot of things that could easily be understood to imply that this would happen. Since during his life all his chassidim took it for granted that he was going to be, many of them understood these ambiguous statements in that light. And perhaps he did mean it that way; after all, just as it was reasonable for his chassidim to expect him to be moshiach, it was reasonable for him to have the same expectation.

    And who is to say that it was wrong? It is very possible, even likely, that had we merited the geulah during his life he would have been the one to bring it. However, that didn’t happen. Whether he thought it would is now irrelevant. We should now expect moshiach to be someone who is currently alive in the same physical sense as all normal living people.

    However, if he comes back to life before the geulah, as certain tzadikim will, then it will once again become possible for him to be moshiach. It’s not likely, but it could happen, and if it did it would not contradict the Rambam. So it’s not wrong for those who wish desperately to hold on to that hope, to do so. If it encourages them in their shmiras hamitzvos it’s a good thing. So long as when the real moshiach finally does come, and it’s not him, they will accept him. (The same goes in reverse; if it does turn out to be him after all, the rest of us will need to accept him.)

    #1697193

    Lubavitcher
    Participant

    What about veahavta lireiacha kamoicha? Ahavas yisroel ?
    I love all Yiddin why can’t everyone just accept everyone for who they are?

    #1697194

    Lubavitcher
    Participant

    “It is not so poshut to join Chabad.

    Did you go over the 15 page application form?

    Then they have requirements that take hours of each day!

    The bare MINIMUM is you gotta spend lots of time each day doing what they call “Chitas” – the entire parsha WITH Rashi! A chunk of Tehilim. And almost a chapter in Tanya.

    But that’s not all! No youi aren’t done with the MINUMUM requirements yet!

    You also gotta do THREE preokim in RAMBAM – daily.

    They also expect you to learn many of the weekly sichos and attend regular farbrengens (almost weekly or at least 3 a month!) …

    and that is the MINIMUM requirements for…girls.

    Boys gotta do so much more”

    Your making stuff up…. we don’t need to do three perakim or the boys do that

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 497 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Trending