- This topic has 2,052 replies, 68 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 12 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
“CS, I believe Syag’s question went totally over your head… and that is part of the problem”
Ouch
“Sh”Tz came on the scene (again, I’m not comparing, just illustrating a point)”
Why not compare? It’s an identical situation.
Neville: “Why not compare? It’s an identical situation.”
Because if it was directly compared they would have yet another excuse to avoid the topic.
But in truth, it’s not identical. Sh”Tz encouraged being oiver chiyuvei krisus.
CS, in case you’re still following this thread, and I believe that you are, I will attempt to explain clearly what Syag was (I believe) trying to convey, and what I meant by my comment.
You said that you’re sure “the rebbe didn’t approve” of your post. So Syag asked you what about HKB”H?
What (I believe) he meant was that what seems to concern you is only what your rebbe approves of, not what Hashem approves of.
So you answered that you believe that Hashem “would say the same because this is my derech. However if I was in a derech that stressed kanaus above all else for example, it could be Hashem would be fine with it”. In other words, other people may hold that Hashem wants something else, but your concern is what your rebbe holds that Hashem wants.
Theoretically that’s fine. Every shita is based on its understanding of what Hashem wants. But then you should have written something like “our rebbe taught us that Hashem doesn’t want us to speak that way”, not that this is what our rebbe wants.
This is the crux of the issue that went over your head. You have replaced Hashem with “the rebbe”.
Syag, did I get it right?
👍🏼
Syag, did I get it right?
My ouch was basically once you said that it was understood (or at least should’ve been) and if it wasn’t there’s a serious problem here
CS: Don’t want to reopen this, but rereading this, you seem to have confirmed my very first claim – that some Chabadniks replace Hashem with the Rebbe, a la the Rambam in Avoda Zara. While SY and Username still seem to be full-fledged maaminim, you seem to have written yourself out with that last comment. Unless you’d like to clarify?
“Unless you’d like to clarify?”
Rambam you’re referencing was brought up a few times by myself and others. She claims she addressed them, I don’t know where. It seems to me she really sincerely doesn’t see the issues.Attention Sechel Hayashar, Username, if your out there:
Someone pointed out to me that there are rishoinei Asheknaz who held that it was assur for most people to wear tefillin, because they were too holy for the roiv am. This is at least a basis that it is permissible to hold of the Rebbe’s shita by sukkah (and no problem of kfira, unlike Rso) .However, this same person told me that he personally witnissed in Indeanappolis a whole minyan of meshichists davening towards a picture of the rebbe (this is a chabadnik I trust implicitly, and he is not making it up). So as long as chabad doesn’t disavow this mashiach nonsense (which often leads to a”z) I’m still not joining.
Hi. Nice to be back.
Rockstar, firstly I don’t see how you can compare Rishonei Ashkenaz with something made up within the last 100 years.
Furthermore, the Gemoro itself says that tefillin need a guf noki and also that one may not be meisiach daas while wearing tefillin. It is for both of these reasons that we (at least the vast majority of us) wear tefillin only while davening Shachris even though the original mitzvah was to wear tefillin all day. When it comes to sukkah, however, there is no such caveat and Chazal explicitly say that sleeping is to be done in the sukkah.
1,960 comments on ‘GEULA’, WOW!
plus, it’s about the number of years we are in galus.
for sure we are all here in the coffee room ready for the GEULA.@rso, did you not say before that you have no issue with the minhag of sleeping in sukkah?
This is my bewilderment: If one has a minhag to not fulfill a mitzvah and he is unable to find a substantial Heter then he would still be mechuyav to fulfill the mitzvah regardless of the baloney he received in his community. As far as i remember, RSo said that he has no issue with the minhag per se but with the “warped”(in his understanding) explanation that the Lubavitch Rebbe provided to explain the Heter in Halachik terms. (am i correct on that?) I take issue with that outlook on yiddishkeit. I may have a very holy and ancient minhag to not keep shabbos, but as long as i keep it in the realm of MINHAG and don’t bluff that it has a halachik and legal basis, then im alright?! am i missing something here RSO?
I would like to add another difference between the mitzvah of putting on tefillin and sleeping in sukkah. The mitzvah to put on tefillin is to put on tefillin, and the mitzvah of sleeping in sukkah is part of the all encompassing chiyuv of “teishvi k”ein taduru”, therefore we are “koiveia” the bracha of “leisheiv bassukah” on the eating and not on the sleeping.
comparing sleeping in sukkah to tefillin in ANY way, is ridiculous.
But i agree that the over focus on the rebbe in chabad circles is a major issue and can lead to something “interesting” things to say the least.
“BneiBarakObama”
Wow, that’s a good username. I can see you and me being buddies. I can also see us constantly being accused of being the same person given the similar nature of our usernames.“If one has a minhag to not fulfill a mitzvah and he is unable to find a substantial Heter then he would still be mechuyav to fulfill the mitzvah regardless of the baloney he received in his community.”
Well, the short answer is yes, but I think you misunderstood RSo’s point. There is actually a substantial heter to not sleep in the sukkah that many non-Chabad people in northeast America rely upon. The problem is that Chabad will never say they are relying on this heter. They instead created their own logic and now refer to not sleeping in the sukkah as a chumrah. They institutionalized the heter to the point that those who could otherwise sleep in the sukkah just fine don’t.What RSo and others were doing was differentiating between this argument and a public criticism of all who do not sleep in the sukkah. If it were the latter, Chabad would call us hypocrites given that [probably] most Jews in the NYC area do not sleep in the sukkah either. The way I see it, it’s a self-awareness problem. If somebody has to rely on heters and be meikel every now in then, fine; that’s just being human as long as they’re honest about it. But, this need to redefine reality so that they can think of themselves as “big chossids,” who have a lot of “chumrahs” even when that’s not the case is just weird and almost kind of sad.
BBO
‘But i agree that the over focus on the rebbe in chabad circles is a major issue and can lead to something ‘interesting’ things to say the least’.
ARE YOU BLIND????? dont you know the facts on the ground???? ”the over focus on the rebbe in chabad’ had brought about:
thousands and thousands baaley teshuva, and in all corners of the world;
thousands of yidden of all circles are learning chasidus chabad and deriving inspiration in their avodas hashem;
yeshivos and schools of chabad are shteiging in their learning and yiras shamayim, plus giving up of their free time to bring yidden closer to yiddishkeit.
טעמו וראו כי טוב ה’ i suggest you taste what chasidus chabad is all about and then you will see the emmes about chabad. and about ‘the over focus on the rebbe’.I ask with respect and with the desire to be educated in the meaning of terms that seem to contradict each other, but are routinely used:
Can you please define the following terms (especially in relation to each other) in concise clear language:
1. world IS in ” state of geulah”
2. “waiting” for moshiach
2. “atchalta d’geula”
3. “imminent”_”coming” of moshiach
4. “revelation” of moshiach
5. “ikvesa d’meshicha”And also please explain the contradictory one-liners like “it is darkest before dawn” vs “already seeing the impact of moshiach’s arrival” (various positive things (fall of Iron Curtain and USSR, nations recognizing EY belongs to yidden – which BTW happened in 1948 – not when Trump moved the embassy, but let’s not get confused by historical facts)
I am late in the conversation, yet I ask this with respect and curiousity.
@neville-myself. is your issue that you think the heter is warped or that they say they are better than those that do sleep? if its the former then check out the sicha where the lubavitch Rebbe explains it not as a heter but as a reasoning as to why the chassidim were machmir on shehakol but not machmir on shina bssukah. in other words its not exactly a heter and not even a limmud zchus in the conventional sense. (perhaps this is what username meant to say.)
The reason as to why they were not machmir is definitely not warped. And a chassidic explanation was given. And as you say, the issue of not sleeping in sukka is not an issue. There is a substantial HETER. (whether in north america or anywhere else in the world, the basis of the heter can remain the same and see the many heterim mentioned by Rabbi Gavriel Tzinner.) And Chassidim will definitely be “mehader” to utilize a limmud zchus provided by their Rebbe as much as figuratively possible. NOW THINK AND READ AGAIN BEFORE YOU RESPOND!
@knaidlich. what i meant to say is the focus on the rebbe as an all powerful being. not someone who is devoted to his teachings and derech in avodas hashem and ahavas yisroel, but those that see hiskashrus to the rebbe as an IKKAR in YIDDISHKEIT. Such a focus automatically causes misunderstandings in the generation that cant differentiate between the rebbe as a holy man and continues to have a spiritual effect on the world and someone to live by his teachings to GOD Almighty himself. not to mention the impression it has on baalei teshuvas (at least in the beginning stages of the their teshuvah journey)
@knaidlach. just to provide the theory with a real life example. I have heard from a couple of lubavitchers (VERY VERY few to be honest but one is to much, HEY, the people in lakewood dont care, its YOUR community) that its okay to daven in front of a picture…
The reason as to why they were not machmir is definitely not warped. And a chassidic explanation was given.
Very warped. If that’s chassidus, then chassidus isn’t Yiddishkeit.
“I have heard from a couple of lubavitchers (VERY VERY few to be honest but one is to much, HEY, the people in lakewood dont care, its YOUR community) that its okay to daven in front of a picture…”
Which Lubavitchers do you know?
@dasyochid. i dont know what you said.
The reason given to not sleep in the sukkah is nonsensical, but not just a mistake, it’s a distortion of Torah.
@daasyochid. There is no reason given to not sleep in sukkah.
Agreed, but the attempt was made.
@sechel. why are you asking me that? Anyway,one of them is a big askan in crown heights… not a lamdan but a big askan. (This is a public forum, i cant say whom)
@Sechel – I have heard this from lubavichers that there exists such a minyan in Indineapolis, among other places. It seems to be more common by russian baalei tshuvas and certain sefardim than mainstream chabad though.
And I know and have mishpacha in chabad.
Don’t forget the infamous Haaretz article with Sokolovsky (author of the defunct RebbeGod blog rl”tz) and the Tzfat yeshiva. And the beis mashiach article.It’s not sinas chinam when there are elements of kefira in chabad – at least until there exists a kol koreh denouncing the movement.
@dasyochid. i dont know what you just said.
They try to explain why they don’t sleep in the sukkah, but it doesn’t make sense.
BneiBarak: Sorry, I didn’t catch that last thing you said. It’s loud in here.
Not saying if its right or wrong but look in shulchan aruch siman 90 seif 22 and seif koton 71 regarding davening in front of pictures
YR,
I’ve never heard of this minyan in Indianapolis (yes, that’s the correct spelling:)) as far as I’m aware, the only Lubavitchers there would be the Shluchim.Never heard of Rebbe God or Sokolovsky in my life. You’re giving legitimacy to crazies that the average Lubavitcher has never even heard of. YR, I’ve actually been inside the infamous “Tzfas Yeshiva” I doubt you have. While I definitely disagree with them, even they don’t daven to a picture of the Rebbe.
BneiBarakObama: “@rso, did you not say before that you have no issue with the minhag of sleeping in sukkah?”
Yes. I indeed have no problem with their minhag. But I have a great problem with the crooked lomdus used to justify it and to show how they are really trying for a supposedly higher level than the halacha.
BBO: “I take issue with that outlook on yiddishkeit. I may have a very holy and ancient minhag to not keep shabbos, but as long as i keep it in the realm of MINHAG and don’t bluff that it has a halachik and legal basis, then im alright?!”
There is a difference between shev v’al taaseh and kum va’asei. Not keeping Shabbos is kum va’asei and no minhag can allow actual chilul. But if there was, say, as minhag not to make eat cholent then that would be ok. Same here. If there is a minhag not to sleep in a sukkah I would find that ok.
However, having said that, I do understand your objection. It’s just that I don’t object in the same way.
There is a difference between shev v’al taaseh and kum va’asei. Not keeping Shabbos is kum va’asei and no minhag can allow actual chilul. But if there was, say, as minhag not to make eat cholent then that would be ok.
This is more like a minhag not to make Kiddush.
Also, if someone had a minhag davka not to make cholent, I would strongly suspect him of being a Tz’duki.
one thing is for sure. none of you have learned the rebbe’s sicha inside about not sleeping in the sukka. have you learned it inside you wouldn’t have said what you said. i will come back bli neder to explain
“Also, if someone had a minhag davka not to make cholent, I would strongly suspect him of being a Tz’duki.”
What’s the mashal to the sukkah case?about not sleeping in sukka.
the sicha can be found in, ליקוטי שיחות חלק כ”ט עמוד 211.
the begining and most of the sicha the rebbe discusses the hanhaga of his father in law the frierdiger rebbe, that he didnt sleep in the sukka. AND THE REBBE BRINGS THE HETTER IN SHULCHAN ARUCH FOR NOT SLEEPING IN THE SUKKA. then the rebbe says that it is still not גלאטיק, meaning its not ‘smooth’ to explain that this hetter was the reason why the frierdiger rebbe did not sleep in the sukka. because the frierdiger rebbe did not look at any difficulties even when it came to hidur mitsva. He did not eat anything or even drink water out of the sukka, and even on shmini atseres, and even when it was raining, despite the dificulties He had to keep these hidurim. so the rebbe goes on to explain how his hanhaga was not according to halacha, not only as a hetter but it was fulfiling the mitsva of sukka bishlaimus. towards the end of the sicha the rebbe explains about chasidim not sleeping in the sukka, also al pi halacha. as i said its all in addition to the hetter in shulchan aruch.
in this forum its not the place to explain the whole beatuful biur of the rebbe. look it up yourselfabout someone davening to a picture of the rebbe.
I am 3rd generation chabad (maybe more but we don’t much about earlier generations). my children and grandchildren are chabad. so are my siblings and my wife’s siblings, I went through chabad yeshivos, I traveled the world and visited lots of chabad shuls and communities, I have never seen anyone davening to a picture of the rebbe and I don’t know anyone who does that.
and even if you will find someone doing this, this is not chabad, it’s his own thing. and he does not deserve attention here in the coffee room.
and even if he will say that he derived this from the rebbe’s sichos etc. so the tsedukim and missioneries also use pesukim of tanach to support their shitos, so what? וכי מםני השוטים וכו,
‘so the rebbe goes on to explain how his hanhaga was not according to halacha
In other words, chassidus trumps halacha, r”l.
Hashem yerachem.
I’m disturbed about some comments here about the rebbe’s biur for not sleeping in the sukka.
its OK to be mefalpel in anything that any godol beyisroel had said. its also encouraged to discuss it and try to understand. the Rebbe himself encouraged for everyone to discuss, ask, and answeer etc. on things He said. and yeshivos give out constantly koivtsim with peoples haoros on the Rebbe’s sichos. but many over here had expressed them self so direspectful, just because you dont understand it. and you didnt even learn the sicha inside. besides thats bichlal not a derech halimud. anything you don’t understand will you say its wrong or ridicules? and here we are taling about a manhig yisroel of thousands and thousands of yidden all over the world, a big gaon in all chelkei hatorah and in peshat remaz drush and sod, as its known to any yodea sefer and even a shtikel talmid chacham, an ish kadosh vetahor, a baal mofes veruach hakodesh with thousands of stories to testify this. how can a simple yid express some of the above expressions that I don’t even want to quote???? I’m surprised the moderator let it through.
this comments dont deserve i should comment on them, but since i saw them, i felt i should be moiche and stand up for kovod of my Rebbe.
this is real ביזוי תלמיד חכם. and if you are even a small talmid chacham you know what chazal say about המבזה תלמיד חכם. I strongly suggest you go to the rebbe’s oihel to ask mechila. if you can’t go personally you can send a fax or email to the office there and your letter will be brought to the tzion. plus to do תשןבת המשקל I suggest you publish here in the CR your apology.
be well and have a gut shabbos and a great improvement in kovod talmidei chachamim and gedoilei yisroel and manhigei yisroel.Knaidlach, I understand and respect that you feel the need to defend your Rebbe.
I hope that you likewise understand and respect our defense of the Torah itself.
These objections are not our own. They were made by people much greater than us.
daas yachid
I just realized that I missed a word ONLY. his hanhaga was not ONLY al pi halacha….Except that it wasn’t, unless it was cold, rainy, etc.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.