- This topic has 1,376 replies, 54 voices, and was last updated 7 months, 3 weeks ago by .
-
Posts
-
AAQ- the sources are given so you can look things up for yourself. Chabad dot org has shiurim in Tanya
CS
“No not at all. We hold our Rebbe to be the Moshe Rabbeinu of this generation.”
Fascinatingly, Chabad’s strong defense of “the Rebbe’s” statements and their profound respect for every maimer stem from their belief in his unparalleled historical significance, placing “the Rebbe” on the level of Moshe Rabeinu.
Before delving into endless debates, it’s important for those not within Chabad to understand their foundational perspective, one that places “the Rebbe” on par with Moshe Rabeinu himself.
Once this premise is understood, there is not much room for arguing.
It would be wise for Chabad people to understand that this is not accepted by any mainstream yiddin outside of Chabad, even if they held of “the Rebbe”.
The remaining question pertains to ascertaining if an individual has truly attained such a status. Unlike Moshe Rabeinu, who was affirmed by Hashem himself, relying on subjective judgment is inadequate.
CS
“Yes but with ruach hakodesh…”
Come on.
@menachem
Thanks for offering your friends to write [without bias] .
You seem to be missing the point again . Did your friends change to habad BECAUSE and as A RESULT of these issues , or they changed because of ‘other good things’ they saw in habad ? Think its the latter .The former are not a catalyst to change towards habad.
So when it comes to those issues , they are biased . Biased by the other ‘good things’ they think they derive from habad .
1] To doubt the leader , axiomatically includes [in the mind of most people] also doubting his other lessons and hadracha. Which they are loath to accept . And which they are clearly programmed to reject [the real purpose of the near deification – or the deification of their leader , depending on the observer] , one of the clear purposes of the ‘whistling’ mentioned before.
2] Once you are part of a movement , you identify with it . Your personality gets enmeshed with the movement , its leader and its ideals .
Criticism of the movement is automatically perceived as criticism of the person himself .Which triggers an automated defense mechanism .
Hardly conducive to level headed thinking and analysis.
So when analyzing whether the ‘current’ rebbi of habad did or did not use references to his father in law [the original issue raised on these pages] as a means to hint to himself . It will be the unbiased people who are most qualified to reach a correct conclusion.
The biased people do not even seem to grasp the mere existence of the issue at all .
On all the main issues I raised here on this thread , I did not seem to get any to the point answers . Only sidestepping or their wholesale ignoring .@ Menachem
I think that we need Mashiach now …. the REAL one .“This is one thing we both agree on.”
——————————–
Not at all sure we can agree on this one . For obvious reasons .
You have a so called ‘Nevua’ from the navi [which is included in the Shlosha Asar Minor Nevi’im] , regarding Biat HaMashiach.
. Whereas I do not .
For me [and 98% of Klal Yisrael] it still is the Trei Asar minor Nevi’im .
Which causes REAL DIFFERENCES re who the REAL MASHIACH could or could not be .
A real big issue ,
A big issue which is not going to disappear by good natured banter , nor by sidestepping this issue by referring to other points.
Hope this is not of the causes of the beginning of a real Schism in Klal Yisrael.
Thats the last thing we need now.
Question remains – Do we have 12 or 13 Minor Prophets ?
We have to hash it out and come to Klal Yisrael wide accepted Maskana.
A clear, level headed , unbiased , proof based discussion is urgently needed.CS, I am not complaining about the references, I am wondering whether people feel qualified to discuss these issues if they cannot predict tomorrow’s stock market or weather
2scents- there’sa Moshe Rabbeinu in each generation- not just ours
Why it’s such a focus today? My thoughts are that The Rebbe needed an army to accomplish our generations mission (when The Rebbe spoke of taking over the world and bringing moshiach- it also seemed ludicrous to the few survivors of Stalin who were there…)
So The Rebbe revealed deeper truths to us, which went well known in the generations before- about our own power- about a Rebbes power- and built an army of soldiers to send out all over the globe
We’re used to being mocked/ challenged since the beginning of Chassidus.
When one of the Garelik girls (stationed in Italy on shlichus) was challenged by her teacher that even if you take hot water, if you keep adding cold water, it will become cold, she answered, but if you plug in the pot, the whole thing will become hot!
She was right
By empowering us- I mean every person and group, us as yidden, as men, as women, as children, as Chassidim etc whatever group you were- The Rebbe uplifted you
To CS
“Every generation has aoshe Rabbeinu.”
Who was Moshe Rabbeinu in the. Dor before the Rebbe? As if we don’t know your answer.Were previous ggeneration continuously arguing who is or is not Moshe of that generation? Any Rashis about his generation? Well, maybe those generations were not as connected as ours, so if MoMoshe was Teimani, Rashi may not have known him .
.
Maybe Rambam eventually was called equal to Moshe, but I do not recall him hinting to that in his writings.Cs, chabad was actually the least mocked by litvishe, misnagdim, and even maskilim lehavdil, because of how intellectual they were. They were different from the euphoric, emotional chasidus of poland and breslov.
To say that chabad were mocked more than others and use that as a shield against criticism (along with “you’re just a misnaged”) is revisionist history.
@menachem
“Okay, you’re right. I am a Lubavitcher so I am biased, so I have no right to defend Lubavitch. Only those who disagree with Lubavitch have the right to defend it. You are completely objective, as you only care about truth, so all your attacks on Lubavitch must be true, and my defenses are worthless.Your interpretations of what the Rebbe meant trump mine, despite the fact that you barely learned any of his teachings, while I learned thousands of pages of his teachings, and heard hundreds of hours of his talks. As a matter of fact, the more I study, the more biased I become, and the less of an ability I have to understand his teachings.”
—————————————————————-
What your rebbe meant or did not mean , i.e. as pshat in his words is NOT the issue here .
.
The issue is whether he had ANOTHER MOTIVE , as in the desired effect of his words on his followers ,all the while outwardly keeping to the literal meaning of the words , which is AXIOMATICALLY hard to accept for a devoted follower [hasid] . [that he would manipulate his hasidim ]
.
This is not an issue of the kesef mishna and the magid mishna sparring over the true intent of the rambam where one could use your yardstick .
Here the question is – did he mean his father in law ONLY , or did he also allude to himself ?
This is the question , and the only question .
.
Interestingly , the answer to this question , should come [but in a different way you intimated] from those who spent like you said ‘countless hours listening and learning his words ‘ i.e. his real hasidim .
BeZot Tibochenu : DID HIS HASIDIM TAKE IT AS PERTAINING ONLY TO HIS FATHER IN LAW ? OR DID THEY APPLY IT FULLY TO HIMSELF TOO ?
The answer is obvious , but to the willfully blind that is .
Clear as day , they fully applied it as pertaining to himself .
So the answer is provided not by me , not I am saying this .
The actions of the hasidim themselves speak volumes .
He WAS referring to himself .
.
This analysis you could not write . Not because it is beneath your intellect ,which I do not doubt.
But because of your bias . Which you are proud of , and rightfully so .
But which stops you from making an objective analysis of your own mentors words .
Like a son who cannot sit in judgement on his own father , even though he spends countless hours learning his fathers words .@ menachem
[I would just like to repeat an analogy that I used before: Someone reads antisemitic literature with some “shockingly hateful” statements from the Talmud. He approaches the Talmudic scholar and says, “I can’t believe you study this terrible book.” The scholar responds, “You have only read a few lines out of context……]
——————————————
The hater who hates the talmud, hated the talmud and the Jews before he found the relevant quote .
In my case , the ta’anot against modern habad started only with and because modern habads ‘innovations’.
But that s not the main point .
.
The main point is the following –
There is no context here re the question whether your rebbi meant his father in law only , or also alluded to himself . What RELEVANT context is there to add ?
.
The only relevant context I can see here is – THE CLEAR RESULTS of those pronouncements about his father inlaw as expressed in his hasidim in their own attitude towards him …
Which only pushes it further to the correct interpretation .
The attitude of habad hasidim toward their rebbe exceeds by far , the attitude of other talmidim towards their rebbe , and even the attitude of other hasidim towards their rebbe.
Is that happenstance ?
Considering the evidence , not .CS, about the determining who is a tzadik according to the Tanya by talking to him etc.: I am really sorry, but your answer really does not hold water — you can’t tell if a person killed his yetzer ha’ra by talking to him. A person can be on the level to control his yetzer ha’ra and say and do the right things, but it does not mean that he killed it. According to the Tanya’s definition of a tzadik, no one can really tell who he is.
@ menachem
We can’t agree that we need Moshiach since I hold that many tzaddikim have had nevuah after חגי זכריה מלאכי!?
————–
Please elaborate . Who else had Nevua after Chagai , Z and M ?
And source corroborating their nevua as valid ?
Was it widely accepted in Klal Yisrael ?
Thanks in advance for the forthcoming details .To yankel berel
Menachem shmei claims that “he” holds that many Tzaddimim after Malachi etc had Nevuah. No he doesn’t. What he means is that the Rebbe said this and since every word the Rebbe spoke was Torah Misinai Menachem accepts it. Just as Menachem accepts that all Jews will be redeemed by Moshiach even though this contradicts the Gemara. The Rebbe successfully took away the free will of his Chassidim by forcing them to accept his every word as Nevuah.
CS: “Rso- regarding more sources for Moshe Rabbeinu/ Nassi hador- I posted a sicha on it before shabbos together with the sources. I believe the first was the megale amukos”
Yes, you did, but as far as I recall none of the sources said that there is an actual Nassi Hador nowadays.
CS: “What’s the point of revealing Elokus in this world?……
It’s like saying I believe in dialing the exact phone number (but forgetting the point is to make a call😀)”I don’t understand the question (or the moshol). I specifically wrote that the plan is to keep Torah and Mitzvos SOLELEY BECAUSE HASHEM SAID TO. A result of that is that Elokus will become revealed, but that is NOT the reason we do what Hashem says.
qwerty to CS: ““Every generation has aoshe Rabbeinu.”
Who was Moshe Rabbeinu in the. Dor before the Rebbe?”Who is the Moshe Rabbeinu of this dor?
Avirah: “the euphoric, emotional chasidus of poland”
Euphoric and emotional?! Have you ever been to Alexander, Amshinov, Gur, Modzitz or Sochachev? Far less euphoric and emotional than Lubavich.
Lubavich has always denigrated “Poilishe chassidim” as using the heart and not the brain, but as a huge talmid chochom and chassidishe Yid who didn’t belong to either of the above explained to me, the original appellation “Poilishe chassidim” was used by Lubavich to describe Chernobyler chassidim who, apparently, were much more into emotion. This makes a lot of sense because in Europe Lubavich would have come into quite a bit of contact with Chernobyler chassidim, as opposed to those from Poland.
At any rate, Lubavich has for decades categorized all other chassidim as “Poilishe chassidim” – even Satmar who were nowhere near Poland.
What’s bothering me at the moment is where the goalposts are.
We are constantly arguing about whether there is nevuah nowadays, whether the Lubavicher rebbe was referring to himself as a navi, whether the criteria of Mashiach cited by the Rambam can apply to him even though he has allegedly died, whether there is a problem with atzmus melubash beguf, etc.
All of the above implies that if we resolve these problems then we would all be in agreement that he could be a navi, Mashiach and that atzmus could be melubash in his guf. I’m sorry, but I disagree, and I assume some of others in this thread would too.
Notwithstanding the many zechuyos that the Lubavicher rebbe had – in my opinion, Chabad houses are the greatest – he was not humble, pushed himself to the forefront and was very chauvinistic. (As a chassid of a well-known and well-accepted rebbe – someone who I believe even Lubavichers may acknowledge – once said to me, “For my rebbe it makes no difference if someone is his own chassid or a Lubavicher. My Rebbe will be happy if he can get him to live like a Yid. For the Lubavicher rebbe, it made no difference if someone was a Yid or a goy, as long as he was a Lubavicher.”)
So in light of the above, I don’t believe he had a chance of being a navi, or to be considered someone with atzmus melubash in him. And as far as Mashiach is concerned, I am waiting for someone on a higher plane.
Remember listening to the kenes of hachtarat Mashiach on the radio , heard the tfillat arvit straight after the kenes , remember thinking to myself – that ‘s what we waited for 2000 years ?
When Mashiach comes – that is the type of tfillah we are going to have ?
.
Maybe for 14 Adar he can be Mashiach .
After thinking it through , no even for that date not …
.To the group
I asked CS a simple question, “Who was the Moshe of the previous generation?” To date I’ve received no answer. So I’ll answer for him. It was the Rayatz and before him the Rashab backto the Besht. As for the generations that preceded the Besht, Chabad treats them like Chazal treat the generatio s which preceded Avraham, totally irrelevant. To that point on Sukkos when mainstream Jewry pays homage to the 7 Ushpizin Chabad celebrates its 9 Ushpizin.This is a part of a carefully constructed plan to create a new religion within Judaism which they hope will replace Judaism.And that’s why they invented all their holidays. The truth is obvious for anyone who wants to see.
ARSo, “Atzmus besoch ha’guf” is a Christian-type heresy.
Dear Arso,
“I’m specifically talking about – and I’ve said this now a number of times – the Lubavich claim that when other non-Lubavich chassidim say the words “the rebbe” they are openly referring only to the Lubavicher rebbe, not to their own rebbe.”
And I knew that. But they think it in a cosmological sense. As opposed to your standard Lakewooder who always thinks of the R”Y ZT”L as Rav Aharon in a literal sense.
Dear Arso,
Satmar was a low key devout group that focused on positive exposure to wayward yidden. You can still detect this trait in their drashos. But it is laughable to even think about Satmar today as driven to be low key.
Gur in Europe was all in on Chassidus. Seclusion, intense Torah and Tefillah. Then tit was dropped for community building. Then it was dropped for kedushah. Then they remade their yeshivos. And now they are at it again. I’m waiting to see what is next.
Sanz is not from the Baal Shem. It is not even two hundred years old. Yet The Divrei Chaim’s many descendants may make up half of all the Rebbes in the world. Kein Yirbu. I don’t know what it is about their style, but the sons seem to move along with the conditions around them. Groups that were designed to be held together, soon split. Groups that were designed to rely on their own, soon integrate. I think this is good for the larger Jewish Community. But it obscures the leadership and vision of the original scion.
IN Lubavitch The Baal Hatanya and all the Rebbes’ voices still ring. Much like previous Rosh Yeshivos in Mir or Ponvezh. Or the GR”A and his Talmidim.
Dear Arso,
“Just look at all the anti chareidi movements that they gave birth to.”
“Would you mind explaining that because I have no idea what you’re talking about?”
It is a huge can of worms. The antiorthodox used former Lubavitchers as a cover to avoid conflict with the actual Chassidic groups that birthed them.
Dear Qwerty,
That is more like it. But the honest hardcore truth is that you will find Yidden in every group that belittle great gedolim all the time. Chabad just doesn’t realize that it isn’t smart optics. They don’t care about how it looks to others. They are the same in public and in private. Actually, they are better behaved in private. That beats other groups that will talk about how great everyone else is, and then stab them in the back at the first politically opportunity. The Rebbe did not belittle his contemporaries.
Dear Yankel,
“The attitude of habad hasidim toward their rebbe exceeds by far , the attitude of other talmidim towards their rebbe , and even the attitude of other hasidim towards their rebbe.”
Completely untrue. Maybe you were born yesterday. Maybe you will be born again tomorrow.
That is the proper attitude of a talmid for a rebbe. Everything the rebbe says is unequivocally the Word of the Torah. (A wise student knows not to retain everything as is.) And it is only half of what was Reb Boruch Ber to Reb Chaim. The difference with Chabad is this. You can be in almost any yeshiva or chassidus and not be a talmid of the rebbe. In most places the people in the group that actually follow the leader are a minority. IN Chabad, you have to follow the rebbe. There is no being Chabad, without being a follower of the rebbe.
ARSo, I think that at the end of the day, the discussion isn’t about whether he could have been a Navi, or Mashiach. It’s about whether believing in those things is beyond Judaism, and considered apikorses. I don’t think any non-chabad people would agree to the things, but maybe they wouldn’t consider it as so wrong. Right now, many people consider people who have these beliefs as apikorsim.
Dear Yankel,
“The Rebbe successfully took away the free will of his Chassidim by forcing them to accept his every word as Nevuah.”
Every teacher of Torah, can be included in this statement. It is what you will find on antisemitic sites. Look at the fools who try to hang around every wise man.
Dear Arso,
So why did The Rebbe waste resources on the Litvishe Yeshivos? Why did he get so involved in helping Israel? Why did he help out Kashrus Organizations that were competitors to Chabad ones? Why did he shy away from most of the controversies in the Torah World?
I don’t know how to compare him with the other gedolim of his generation. It is clear to me from his correspondence that he wasn’t as proficient as Rav Moshe Feinstein. But to his credit, he very much considered Rav Moshe’s word binding on the people (for the most part) and he refused to have any part in attacking other gedolim. That to me, is a major sign of a leader.
“..the plan is to keep Torah and Mitzvos SOLELEY BECAUSE HASHEM SAID TO.”
So why learn Torah? Why are we spending two millennia in exile? Why do we keep mitzvos in the diaspora? Why do we value Torah knowledge above all other knowledge? There is no reason to answer me. Just keep doing whatever you were doing because Hashem said so.
But I have one question. Where did Hashem say to hate?
Dear Qwerty,
This point that is obvious to you, would only be rational if there was one who planned the “carefully constructed plan” that this is “only a part of”? Who is this ‘planner’? Some secret society in 770? The Rebbe? The Previous Rebbe? The Baal Hatanya? The Baal Shem Tov? The Arizal? Moshe Rabbeinu? The Illuminati?
To mdd1
You’re absolutely right. Even if there was a way to explain this on some esoteric level, it can never be allowed to become part of a Lubavitcher’s everyday speech as if it’s a normative position.
Dear Mdd,
You continue to repeat yourself without responding. There is no record of an early theological rift with Christianity. Your position is the one going against traditional jewish thought. I would explain more, but you don’t seem interested.
Looks like I’m done here as the questions aren’t sincere- at least at this point. I have dira btachtonim stuff to do, and learning/ helping friends if I have spare time. If you’d like a list of why I specifically chose and chose to be Chabad, I’ll be happy to provide. And if there’s any sincere questions (not looking to out us on one thing or another…) I’ll be happy to answer too.
AAQ- it’s because we learn Chassidus that we feel comfortable discussing these topics- the concepts are laid out simply in the sichos (with extensive fns from all over Torah, nigle and nistar. And expounded in depth in maamarim.
As for all of you mischaracterizing The Rebbe- we obviously hold that you’re mistaken (not because we don’t know enough of The Rebbe but because we do) and I would be careful because The Rebbe is a tzadik and it’s not a great Mitzvah to denigrate one.
Any more questions? Qwerty has a lovely Chabad Rabbi to ask.
Rso has plenty of lubavitch contacts (including his relatives).
Yankel Berel- Menachem made great points- and until you think about them and speak differently, there’s nothing to talk about (hence wholesale ignoring)
Rso you’re two lubavitch sources for denigrating The Rebbe, the first I never heard of and after Simple googling it’s obviously not a reliable reference as far as lubavitch goes (see we’re not that stupid- the author thinks The Rebbes Neshama entered his after gimmel Tammuz, so he would like to be the next Rebbe- I never heard of him ever until yesterday)
Dear Yankel,
“Re
used socks
Please check the original post .
It was not referring to hasidic socks at all .It was referring to changing IKAREI EMUNA , things which are the ABSOLUTE FOUNDATIONS of our belief , like used socks ”
I take exception to your posts having anything to do with Ikarei Emunah.
n0m: “So why learn Torah? Why are we spending two millennia in exile? Why do we keep mitzvos in the diaspora? Why do we value Torah knowledge above all other knowledge? There is no reason to answer me. Just keep doing whatever you were doing because Hashem said so.”
To me that sounds so weird. You disparage learning Torah and keeping Mitzvos if it is solely done because Hashem said so?! Do you really need a “better” reason?
“But I have one question. Where did Hashem say to hate?”
I don’t recall ever saying I hate Lubavich or Lubavichers. But I will say that the passuk says אוהבי ה’ שנאו רע, and anything that leads people away from true Torah views is רע and thus deserving of hate.
To n0mesorah
I don’t know when Chabad decided to separate itself from mainstream Jewry but it’s quite clear to any unbiased observer that Lubavitchers consider themselves Chabad rather than Jews. Some people believe that this aberration began with the Rebbe’s passing. To the other extreme, I’ve spoken to individuals who argue quite convincingly that Lubavitch has gone its own way since the Baal Hatanya’s passing. I’m not sufficiently schooled in the subject to make a conclusive statement. Trying to be a wise guy and mentioning Moshe Rabbeinu et al is not going to change the facts. You’ve decided to take a contrarian view on this subject, so you’re blind to the truth that Lubavichers do not represent normative Judaism. We do not deify our Rabbinic leaders.
n0m, you’re take on Satmar, Gur and Tsanz is partly wrong and partly shallow. According to what you write, if at one stage someone is hungry and then later he is not, that is a change of view. it’s not. It’s just a change of circumstance.
WWII wreaked havoc on those communities both physically and spiritually, and they had to rebuild in both areas. Where before they war they may have concentrated on one aspect, after the war they had to concentrate on others. That’s not a change of view, it’s a change of action to reach that view.
And when it comes to Lubavich you write that the voices of the previous rebbes are still heard. Are you really saying there’s no change? Before the war was Lubavich focused on outreach? Did they talk atout Mashiach as much as they do now? Of course not. Now the former could be a matter of adjustment, but not the stress on Mashiach.
As to your rhetorical question as to why the Lubavicher rebbe was involved in a number of things: I know nothing about him “wasting” resources on Litvish yeshivos or his helping opposition kashrus organizations, so I can’t comment. His “helping” Israel always seemed to me to be dictating what they should do, i.e. pushing his own view as the only correct one. And he shied away from so many controversies – not all – because he wanted to be able to be accepted by all sides.
Dear Arso,
I think you missed my question.
If I am just doing what Hashem wants and nothing else, than why is learning Torah important? Just keep doing what we always did and never change?
Judaism never went that way. We changed our habits constantly and our rituals sparingly. But Torah Study was constant. Why? Learning is by definition a human creative task. as we learn, we constantly factor in our understandings. What does that have to do with what HAshem wants?
Dear Qwerty,
You are being evasive. If you really think Chabad is tying to put a real plan in place, than there has to be someone who planned it to begin with. That is pure reason. Please answer.
I spent a lot of time talking one on one with Chabadzkers. Unlike many other groups, they definitely do not think of themselves as the only authentic Jews or anything like that. Lubavitch truly considers all Jews a great deal.
You would do better to claim the reverse. Chabad thinks that all Jews are Chabad!
Dear Always,
Nistar isn’t about opinions like nigla. Either you relate the experience or you doubt it. It’s a yes/no and can’t be taught with differing opinons.
Dear Avira,
” we don’t daven that the whole world will know moshiach”
I do. 15th bracha of the Amidah. V’karno Tarum. I must be the only one…. Because even CS missed this.
Dear Qwerty,
Not diefy, but accept their teachings unconditionally. It’s funny that Chassidus was originally called out for rebelling against the Rabbonim and not accepting them. The Misnagdim accepted everything the Gaon said. If they enacted it, that was something else to them. This broke down a lot in modernity.
Nomesorah, CHAS VE”SHOLOM!! You are as wrong as wrong can be! Why were Yidden going to be killed instead of accepting Chirstianity?!?!?
- The topic ‘Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher’ is closed to new replies.