- This topic has 1,376 replies, 54 voices, and was last updated 7 months, 3 weeks ago by .
-
Posts
-
@ujm
With the exception of the post put up for me last Elul when Mrs. CTL was niftara no one in the family or the firm knows that I post on the CR or my user name. I trust completely that the poster of that notification can keep the confidence.As the expression says since last Elul this has been a schartz yahr for CTL. First Mrs. CTL passed, I had hand surgery in one hand before Chanukah, discovered a cancerous tumor Purim time which required surgery during Pesach. Now awaiting surgery on my other hand (which accounts for many typos).
B”H I feel fine and can keep a full schedule, these are merely bumps in the road of life to be negotiated.Also, I always own my errors and mistakes, no man is perfect.
AviraDeArah,
“So because i don’t accept their accounts as a given, i chose not to passel a yid who I know nothing about, who for all i know could have been a very good jew.”
Sounds like a good policy to have, thanks.
Menachem Shmei,
“The vast majority of shuls I’ve been to don’t have a picture of the Rebbe in shul at all (they will often have one in the hallway or lobby).”
This has been my observation as well, though I’m sure my sample size is much smaller than yours.
@CTL
Very sorry about everything you are going through. You should know your posts in the CR are very appreciated. I do not always agree with you, including on this very thread (I could name OOT communities that felt they’d borrow business terminology “hostile takeover”), your dissenting voice is precious, please keep taking the time to post, when you can. Shabbat ShalomNeville > Nobody says everyone should be mevatel other mitzvos to focus solely on kiruv.
Did I say that? I am saying I highly value what they do here, despite whatever other issues are there. That means to me that there was something important in L Rebbe’s teachings, even if not of his students (or by now, students of students) turned out holding strange opinions. Maybe the alternative was that these people (or their parents) would be smoking pot on campus somewhere .. As R Dessler, I think, says that a handicapped person would use anything he can find to keep himself going up sulam yaakov.
“Did I say that? I am saying I highly value what they do here, despite whatever other issues are there.”
No, not letting you off this easy; you literally said someone who goes and does mitzvas bikur cholim is a chosid shoteh. You can retract what you said and own up to it, but you can’t pretend you didn’t say it. It’s right here in black and white for all of the world to see.
Neville, I am applying chosid shoteh comparison to those who say that saving drowning Jews is not so important, other mitzvos will do fine. And not only not getting involved themselves, but looking down at those who do, focusing on their imperfections.
AAQ:
My problem isn’t that I didn’t understand your analogy. My problem is that you are very wrong in what you’re saying and absolutely no frum yid with any integrity would even pretend to agree with you.
The topic of other groups being good about bikur cholim in the same way that Chabad is good at kiruv is what sparked this. You immediately insinuated that those groups focusing on mitzvos other than kuriv are chosid shotehs.
Menachem Shmei,
“I honestly request that you name the Chabad Houses that you’ve seen with a picture of the Rebbe on mizrach vant, because something like this is a huge issue that must be addressed”
In this era where so many people are carrying a camera with them at all times, I doubt such a place actually exists.
@Menachem-Shmei At least one in Tzfat. Can’t say the specifics, because I don’t recall. Can you state with absolute honesty that no one davening in 770 believes him to still be sitting in his chair up front? Or that there’s no significant amount of Chabadskers that have their Rebbe in mind when davening Shmoneh Esrei?
@yserbius #motzi shem ra, choshed bichsharim.
if someone beleives the rebbe is alive sitting in his chair then what? which one of the 13 ikrim does this contradict. (learn igeres hatshuvah (tanya) #27, sefer chassidim about rebbi, gemarah kesubos 103 i think)@Menachem Shmei I don’t make it a habit of going to many Chabad houses nor Lubavitch shuls. I’ve been to maybe seven in my life. I know of one that has a picture of their Rebbe front and center. By simple logic it’s highly unlikely that this is the only one and I happen to have stumbled on to it.
There are people in authority in Chabad (you know their names) who have gone on record saying things like “Asking the (dead) Rebbe for help”, “The Rebbe is listening to our teffilos”, and “This is happening because the Rebbe wanted it”. You may be in denial that people literally daven to a man, but in the opinion of most of the Gedolim in Klal Yisroel, it absolutely happens and Chabad does nothing to discourage it. In fact, it’s encouraged with things like giving an invisible man an Aliya l’Torah, and telling people to ask bakoshois of a dead man at his kever.
“but in the opinion of most of the Gedolim in Klal Yisroel, it absolutely happens and Chabad does nothing to discourage it” – i guess its a machlokes (bimtzius) of the gedolim whether it happens or not, some litvish gedolim think it happens, chabad and chassidish gedolim hold it dosent happen, and that answers simply why they dont do anything about it (the thing that dosent happen).
Yseribus: Who took the poll or survey that leads you to think that it is the “opinion of most of the Gedolim in Klal Yisroel”?
Menachem:
Serious question, what’s the big deal (from your viewpoint) with having a Rebbe picture on the eastern wall? Most Lubavitcher’s houses seem to have at least one picture of him on each wall. Should they avoid the eastern wall, or are you talking about only in an actual beis medrash? Would it be a problem for the Chabad houses where the rabbi’s house doubles as the shul?
This just seems like an arbitrary point to draw the line for someone who’s otherwise fine with meshichism.
Menachem:
It’s going to pretty much be guaranteed to happen in any Chabad that’s a house-shul like I mentioned. Admittedly, I don’t know that I’ve seen it in an actual beis medrash, but I wouldn’t have really noticed it. I’ve never jumped to the assumption that anyone’s kavana was to bow down to the picture as a replacement for Hashem; Chabad just likes putting Rebbe pictures everywhere. Seems like a strange thing for either side of this conversation to make a big deal of.
To everyone else:
You’ve gotten the Lubavitchers either on this thread or elsewhere to admit that they believe the Rebbe is/will be moshiach. You’ve gotten them to admit that they don’t see anything theologically wrong with someone believing the Rebbe is literally alive and sitting in the empty chair in 770. What more are you looking for? If the neutral parties reading this thread still have no objections to Chabad even with those things out in the open, then they never will, no matter how many Litvish gedolim you bring in who say they should.
@ujm When Rav Shach made his statements against Chabad, he was speaking as his role of Gadol HaDor and merely voicing what the opinion of his peers was.
@Menachem-Shmei Yeah, I’m going to go with what @Neville-Chaim-Berlin is saying. You’ve already admitted to multiple beliefs that the rest of Klal Yisroel holds of as (at the very least) tipshus with a heavy apikorsus flavor. I’m not going to press the issue if there are Lubavitchers that literally pray to something other than Hashem, since I think at this point the issue is moot.Yseribus: What leads you to believe HaRav Shach zt’l wasn’t offering his own opinion rather than acting as spokesman for others?
Ujm:
Why are you challenging him on this? This stuff is common knowledge. A person could try and say that all Yeshivish gedolim are just being mean and misnagdish or something, but nobody can seriously doubt the consensus on this. Even the Lubavitchers on here have never tried to argue that Rav Shach was a daas yochid among Litvishers.
Yserbius123,
“You’ve already admitted to multiple beliefs”
What’s it like to be completely unencumbered by the concepts of truthfulness and accuracy? Menachem Shmei didn’t “admit” to having these beliefs; he acknowledged that there may be “crazies” who hold these beliefs. To ask how pervasive the beliefs are, why Chabad seems to tolerate them, and at what point it crosses the boundary from “tipshus” to “apikorsus” seem to be legitimate questions.
Neville ChaimBerlin,
“It’s going to pretty much be guaranteed to happen in any Chabad that’s a house-shul like I mentioned.”
I doubt it.
“I’ve never jumped to the assumption that anyone’s kavana was to bow down to the picture as a replacement for Hashem; Chabad just likes putting Rebbe pictures everywhere.”
There’s many steps before literally bowing down and replacing.
“Seems like a strange thing for either side of this conversation to make a big deal of.”
It’s forbidden to daven in front of a picture (or even a mirror), so Yserbius123 was making a pretty big accusation.
“What more are you looking for? If the neutral parties reading this thread still have no objections to Chabad even with those things out in the open, then they never will, no matter how many Litvish gedolim you bring in who say they should.”
So my goal in participating in this thread wasn’t to get people to object to Chabad, but rather to have a discussion and debate, with the possibility that we could understand each other better.
Ujm’s point, i think, isn’t that rav shach was alone, but rather that userb’s theory of him being a spokesperson is off – i agree with ujm on that. Rav shach wasn’t the spokesperson for gedolei yisroel; gedolei yisroel listened to his opinions because he was the biggest of his generation.
So the other gedolim agreed with him on chabad, for the most part, because they deferred to him; yserb has the chain of command backwards.
“Menachem Shmei didn’t “admit” to having these beliefs”
Untrue. He admitted on one of these threads to the belief that Moshiach will be the Rebbe. He [seemingly] defended those who believe the Rebbe is alive at the front of 770 after another poster explicitly defended it.
“I doubt it.”
Why? I didn’t even mean that as an attack, just a practical matter. If Lubavitchers put Rebbe pictures on all house walls, and the house serves as the shul, then there’s going to be one on the eastern wall. I personally don’t care, nor do I see why anyone else does.
“It’s forbidden to daven in front of a picture (or even a mirror)”
That wasn’t Yserbius’ point, clearly. If that were the only problem, it wouldn’t matter if it were a painting of a landscape. In any case, people seem to be meikel when davening in their own homes (i.e. I’ve never seen anyone leave their eastern wall undecorated on purpose), so I wouldn’t call it a “big accusation” to claim that they’re among these meikelim.
“he acknowledged that there may be “crazies” who hold these beliefs.”
The fundamental difference is the following: what bothers him about the “crazies” is that they make Chabad look silly. What bothers the other side is that they actually hold l’halacha that those beliefs are kefira. That’s a huge difference, and we can’t pretend they have common ground built around criticizing the vocal “crazies” in Chabad.
כל המיצר לישראל נעשה ראש גיטין נו
similar can be said about chabad, whoever stands up against chabad becomes a gadol, whoever becomes chabad – like r ezra shochat, r’ yosef avraham heller, r shlome zelig feldman all top bochurim of brisk, but when they became chabad, for some reason the litvaks dont care about their gadlus anymore.Neville Chaim Berlin,
“Untrue. He admitted on one of these threads to the belief that Moshiach will be the Rebbe.”
I don’t recall that, but it’s possible. I haven’t been following the ins and outs of all the threads too closely.
“He [seemingly] defended those who believe the Rebbe is alive at the front of 770 after another poster explicitly defended it.”
I didn’t read the “so what” as a defense, but more of a “I’m not responsible for what others believe and do”, which I disagree with. Many people here are arguing that belief in the Rebbe being the Moshiach with deity-like powers or even a deity mamash is a mainstream belief within Chabad, and that some Lubavitchers only make a feint of objection because they know the beliefs are unacceptable to other frum Jews and therefore try to hide the beliefs. I prefer to take what Menachem Shmei is writing at face value, and if I wanted to dive into the theological debates, what I’d wonder is – if indeed the mainstream majority of Chabad thinks these “crazies” are wrong, and even falling into avoda zara, at what point do they make a real break and clearly define their shita? And Menachem’s other point that our disagreement is mainly on understanding the terminology of chassidus… if so, the crazies are also seemingly “misunderstanding” the lingo and hence falling into kefira. How then does Chabad insure that things are taught correctly?
Perhaps more in support of your position, Menachem Shmei tried to draw a distinction between “meshichism” and “elokism” by noting that the “yechi” litany does not contain “boreinu”. I don’t think this helps, because avoda zara is not limited to just thinking that something other than Hashem created us. In fact, the original avoda zara acknowledged Hashem as the original Creator, but held that Hashem gave power and control to other beings, who could then be petitioned or praised independently. That and ascribing powers to people or things that do not have such powers.
“If Lubavitchers put Rebbe pictures on all house walls, and the house serves as the shul, then there’s going to be one on the eastern wall.” … That wasn’t Yserbius’ point, clearly.” … “In any case, people seem to be meikel when davening in their own homes (i.e. I’ve never seen anyone leave their eastern wall undecorated on purpose)”
Even in smaller Chabad houses, it’s not like davening in someone’s living room. They set up a room as a functional shul, with an aron kodesh, bima, amud, mechitza, etc. So no, I would not expect pictures to be on the wall at the front of that room. If a picture of the Lubavitcher Rebbe was placed there at the front, with the aron kodesh and amud, it would be a deliberate act and a statement with clear theological ramifications. Yserbius123 obviously thought that, because he brought it up with hyperbolic flair. I thought that, and Menachem Shmei obviously thought that based on his responses. So I’m not sure that it’s me who’s missing the point.
Yes in a normal living room setup there’s likely pictures on the wall, but the room was not intentionally set up for davening. When I daven at home I stand close to the wall and davka not directly in front of a picture or mirror. When I’m at someone else’s house, it’s harder, but I try to not be directly in front of pictures.
my thoughts on some misnagdim who say some chabad says any g-dly terms about the rebbe.
apparently in chabad we have a much greater definition on what is a tzadik, and our understanding (the little we can) and beleif about hashem is also much greater.
so when a chabad says the rebbe lives forever, some litvaks claim “how can you say such a thing? only g-d is forever” (once i heard a misnagdishe rov speak about chabad for saying leolam voed about a person, apperently he dosent know tehillim – 22, suckah perek lulavv vaaravah)
and many claims like this, its the same idea.Sechel, are you implying that only chabad understands the greatness of Hashem and how big a tzadik can be?
Have you ever seen a gadol who’s not chabad daven? Try it out. What you’re saying is incredibly offensive and myopic.
No one has a problem with tzadikim living forever in olam haba or after techias hamaysim. The issue is that there are people saying that a mortal should live forever in the simple sense, just living like you and me without ever dying.
If you want to know how litvishe understand gadlus Hashem, have you ever learned nefesh hachaim? Daas torah? Rav dessler? Sichos mussar? Or are you talking from complete self imposed ignorance?
Menachem:
I hear your point, but the tone still comes off as defensive when you say “so what?” (albeit understandably so). The issue that people keep driving at is that if you really have such a problem with these sub-groups, why are you so unwilling to directly criticize them? You saw on this thread how willing Avram and I were to criticize another Yeshivish person who was claiming that elitism is okay. The view on various Chabad sub-groups does not seem to include any disapproval. What seems to be the mainstream approach would be to say “we believe moshiach can come from the dead, others believe the Rebbe is literally still alive in the flesh and can never die; both are legitimate shittos in Chabad.” Am I wrong about this?
“I responded that no one denies that there are many Lubavitchers with these beliefs that you mentioned.”
I would challenge this. There’s very clearly a concentrated effort to hide Chabad’s beliefs about the Rebbe from the masses. The topic is meticulously censored from Chabad dot org, shluchim clearly have a policy of staying away from it, etc. Maybe it’s not so much “denying” the beliefs so much as concealing.
Avram:
“if indeed the mainstream majority of Chabad thinks these “crazies” are wrong, and even falling into avoda zara”
The simplest explanation is that they don’t hold it’s wrong and certainly don’t hold it’s avoda zara. They’re just embarrassed at how flashy some people are with it.
As far as the Rebbe picture thing, part of my point was that Yserbius could have just seen it in a Chabadnik davening in the living room situation. I felt it was necessary to mention the practice of putting a picture of him on every wall, otherwise it sounded like he was accusing them of putting it davka on the eastern wall.
Menachem Shmei,
“It depends. This may be the approach of the more openminded and respectful-of-other-opinions guys. While the more hotblooded my-opinion-is-the-only-opinion guys will rant and rave about the stupidity of those with that opinion, and constantly call them out as crazies.”
Is the literally alive in the flesh really considered a legitimate shita in Chabad? Who then is interred in the ohel? Regarding live and let live, when I was younger, a Chabad synagogue in my area got kicked out of the main organization over a dispute on opening a new Chabad house. The existence of this place was scrubbed from Chabad dot org. Other Chabad houses/rabbis have been ousted over the years for all sorts of reasons, e.g., inviting Yitzchak Rabin to speak, opposing Covid policies, what have you. It seems that Chabad has no qualms about enforcing its preferences up to the point of putting its own shluchim, who have sacrificed much to go into remote locales, into cherem. Why then, when it comes to this issue, does Chabad suddenly become squeamish and “let’s respect everyone’s opinion here”?
“>>>Maybe it’s not so much “denying” the beliefs so much as concealing.
Well said.”
What is the purpose of the concealment?
“Mainly the latter.”
What, in your opinion, is the boundary line between “ridiculous” and avoda zara?
Menachem Shmei, another issue I was wondering what insight you might share is regarding the state of tznius in Crown Heights. I’ve heard numerous folks comment, both Lubavitchers from the neighborhood as well as outsiders, that the general state leaves a lot to be desired as there is problem in this area, regarding how too many women dress in public, to a notably greater extent than you’d find in other Chareidi communities. In fact, Itzhak Schier z”l, a Lubavitcher who used to be a very frequent and active poster here in this Coffee Room, was one of those that acknowledged this problem. I’m wondering what you might attribute to why this is a greater issue in Lubavitch than in other Chasidic (where typically they have stricter standards) communities or even other non-Chasidic frum neighborhoods.
UJM:
In other communities, if a woman doesn’t keep tznius we just label her as Modern Orthodox, and voila, our community no longer has a tznius issue because she isn’t “part of our community” anymore. I personally am totally fine with this system, but Chabad doesn’t seem to do it. They seem to have this “us against the world” sense of solidarity where they never internally criticize, as you can see on this thread. The result ends up being that Chabad women who are by anyone’s estimation Modern or Conservadox get to go around calling themselves “chasidish” and nobody in their own community calls them out on it. Maybe they do privately among themselves.
My point is, the Ashkenazi world has created a clear cut divide between women to care about tznius and those who don’t thanks to contemporary sectarian labels. If you included the MO as part of our tzibbur the same way you include Chabad-Lite as part of Chabad, then I’m not sure our stats would be any better on this issue.
@avaira. i agree its offensive, but its true. thats the fact, that what tanya calls a tzadik its much greater than a litvak can imagine. and in chabad we spend at least a few hours a day learning about gadlus hashem.
btw the ramban holds there will be everlasting psychical life after techiyas hamasim, chassidus explains this idea in depth, at length.We all know about the Tanya’s definition of a tzadik. Stop pretending that the whole world is in darkness and only one small sect knows the truth. How do you know the musagim of the litvishe yeshivos? Have you ever spent 5 minutes in a conversation with a gadol outside of crown heights? It’s offensive not just because it’s false, but because it’s myopic and egotistic.
But I’m glad someone says the quiet part out loud; chabad has a problem with supremacism. Many in that group believe themselves intrinsically better because they are Lubavitch, despite the whole “all jews are equal and why are you better than a frei etc….” Refrain. We see it’s fake from the gazaanim shiduchim world, and we see it’s fake from it’s adherents who are loose lipped and let these nuggets of wisdom fall out.
Satmar thinks that they’re right. They really, really think they’re right and the rest of the world is mostly wrong about zionism. But that didn’t stop the satmar rov from telling chasidim to daven at the kever of the litvishe rav yaakov yosef, or his great appreciation litvishe gedolim as tzadikim and talmidei chachamim. The name rav chaim kanievsky carries enormous weight in satmar, as does the chofetz Chaim, the Gaon, the ketzos, and many other litvishe gedolim. They think that their shitah is the only valid one in zionism, but they do not discount others as being valid gedolim if they may not have felt exactly the same way(but they will not accept as a gadol, someone like rabbi kook, etc…, And in this they are far from alone). Satmar doesn’t think that you need to be satmar to be a tzadik.
There’s a big difference.
To emphasize what was reiterated so many times….
I had a conversation with a Chabad bachur many years ago when I was a young impretionable bachur myself. We were sitting next to each other in an airport. I had a sefer with me (Derech Hashem from the Ramchal) and this chabd bachur who was a few years my senior started making deragetory comments against the sefer and litvishe Yeshiva bachurim in general.
I was very shaken up and tried not to get confrontational with him and told him that I just know what we are told by our Gedolim…
His retort which still repulses me 25 plus years later was…
“Do you mean the “Gedolim” of Siman Gimmel in Shulchan Aruch?”
I think everyone can understand the meaning and depravity of that comment told to a young innocent 17 year old Yeshiva boy trying to mind his own buisness.
But of course this was all in the name of saving a poor lost soul from eternal Snag damnation.
G-D bless his soulAmerican, I’ve never encountered that before…a Lubavitcher insulting the ramchal; I have to admit that the most likely reason was that he never heard of the ramchal and assumed that he must be a litvishe gadol, in which case he’s…. Which is still obviously unacceptable.
Bs”d
I just came across this thread, and I have a very important reason for joining in. My family is what I would term Yeshivish Litvish. We held that Rav Chaim Kanievsky zt”l was the Gadol HaDor, we daven Nusach Ashkenaz, we hold by the importance of a man learning full-time for as long as he can, and the wife working to support the family , for as long as possible. We hold that Lubavitch is a legitimate derech, but that those with the belief that the Lubavitcher Rebbe zt’l ‘s neshamah is in 770 and not in his grave, are way off. our son, in his 20’s, has gradually grown closer and closer to Chabad over the last few years. He is not married yet, and wants to continue to be a full-time learner until he is married, and wants to continue learning full-time when married, for as long as that is practical.
He is very drawn to Rabbi Yoel Kahn zt”l’s way of thinking. He has read his seforim, listened to his dvar torahs etc., and would like to follow his way of thinking. My son told me that he found out that the Lubavitchers who are “yehi” hold as follows: the Rebbe’s body IS buried in the Ohel, but his neshamah is in 770, similar to the way Reb Yehudah HaNosi, I think, used to come every Friday night to make Kiddush. they hold that Reb Yehudah HaNosi had to have been considered “alive”, because only someone who is alive has the chiyav of Kiddush and can motzei others. The Rebbe’s neshamah is drawn to 770 , because he wants to continue to help his chassidim. I’m sure a Lubavitcher can explain this better.
We do not want my son to follow this view, which we consider way out. Yes, it happened in the time of the Gemara, but we do not hold the Rebbe zt”l as being on the same level as Rabbi Yehudah HaNosi, although Lubavitchers do, and that is why this thinking has evolved in this way.
My son says they have a legitimate belief, that can be substantiated in this way, so they are not “crazies”, but right now he prefers to folow the Lubavitch belief that he will come back from the dead, which is a belief from the Gemara. Yes, it weas not mentioned while the Rebbe zt”l was alive, as they believed HE was Moshiach, so there was no need. But now that he is dead, they have to explain how he will still be Moshiach when the Yidden as a whole are ready. The Rebbe zt”l used to say that the Friedicker rebbe would “take us out of golus”, but my son says that Lubavitch believed he really meant himself.
My son wants to learn in a Lubavitcher yeshiva where the Rebbeim are non-yechi, but, since he is too old for a regular yeshiva, as Lubavitcher bochurim are usually only up to 20 or 21 years old in such places, he has been forced to consider to learn in 770. I use the term “forced”, because he knows 770 is a mixture of yechi and non-yechi believers. We don’t mind him becoming Lubavitch, as it was in the 80″s, which we know about, as we are familiar with how Lubavitch was then. We do not want him to start believing that Lubavitch is the best way to serve Hashem, and that any other group, especially Litivish, missing out.
Unfortunately, Reb Yoel passed away. My son really wants to have as his Rebbe and mentor, a staunch follower of Reb Yoel’s, who thinks as he did. Is this possible?Ehrlichkeit,
Can they make a minyan in 770 with only 9 people (with the rebbe being the tenth) he would still have a chiyuv
ehrlichkeit,
The Gemara also says that R’ Yehuda haNasi stopped coming to make kiddush when others found out about his appearance – he wanted it limited to his family. It says because he was humble, he didn’t want it known. Ask your son if the Lubavitcher Rebbe was a baal gaavah, that he wants people to know his spirit is there?
I don’t believe his soul is in 770. It’s in Shamayim.Ehrlich – it’s not so bad if your son thinks that chabad is the best way to serve Hashem. The trouble is that neo chabad believes that it is the ONLY true way of serving Hashem.
But serving Hashem isn’t even what’s prioritized; it’s all about doing the Lubavitcher rebbes will, spreading his vision, and doing it FOR him, as you can see throughout this thread and others.
Chabad in the 80s was still rational. While rabbi yoel kahn was among the most reasonable of neo chabad figures, i think you should get him interested in Rav Moshe Wolfson, a prominent Mashgiach who has transitioned many litvishe boys into chasidus, and built an entire community around this – emunas yisroel. He held of the Lubavitcher rebbe, and was close with him – but he was also close with satmar; he has a balanced mahalach.
I know people who he directed towards chabad chasidus, but kept them away from the crazies. Learning in his beis medrash, which has people of all ages at all times of the day, is a good idea, i think.
- The topic ‘Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher’ is closed to new replies.