ARSo

Despite being absolutely terrified of the rantings and ravings of the non-arrogant and humble qwerty, I am taking the risk and saying that once again I agree with Menachem in his posting that the Rif makes no mention of Yaakov Avinu being in a comatose state davka until he was brought to Eretz Yisroel. As Menachem wrote (does this agreement c”v make me an idolater?) the Rif clearly says that Yaakov is still alive even after his burial. He writes that Yaakov was in a similar state to someone who had fainted and who shows no sign of life. And that’s how they buried him.

Ah, it doesn’t make sense? That just shows that we can’t understand everything. It does not mean that we can reject that interpretation of Yaakov Avinu lo meis!

And again, for the needless 1000th time, nothing whatsoever to do with the LR, about whom no one of accepted Torah authority has said that he did not die.

You may recall that my first post in this thread included a call on all the Lubavichers here to explain clearly and in plain English what they mean when they say that the LR is physically alive and still here with us, in Queens, in 770, in fact everywhere. (Btw, no one has deigned to answer that.)

Now it seems that some on the other side are also falling into the same trap. Do they believe in Rashi? Ostensibly yes. That doesn’t mean that they hold that Rashi’s explanation has more weight than any other meforash, but it does mean that when Rashi says something he can’t just be blithely dismissed.

Now Rashi clearly says that according to Rebbi Yochanan in the gemoro, Yaakov is alive forever, and the passuk clearly says that they buried Yaakov. So, according to Rashi, is Yaakov still alive in Me’aras Hamachpelah? The only correct answer I can come up with is “yes”, although I don’t understand what it means. If you think the answe is “no”, then I would really like to know the logic you use to arrive at that “no”. And without recourse to the views of other Rishonim or Acharonim who understand the gemoro differently to Rashi.

There is so much to write in regards to some of qwerty’s and philosopher’s weird claims.

1. Just because I happen to be in agreement with Menachem – despite being totally opposed to absolutely every Lubavicher who thinks that their rebbe was the leader of Torah Jewry – regarding the understanding of Rashi in both the gemoro and Chumash, I am now a loke’ach shochad! I suppose I’ll just have to take qwerty’s word on that as he has testified that he is not arrogant and that he is humble. (Is it possible he hasn’t been taking his medication, and that that has been causing him to rant?)

2. As regards to the “expired” and “dying” discussion. What does the word ויגוע mean? If, as philosopher keeps claiming, it means he expired, then that means he died, doesn’t it? Certainly, that is the dictionary definition of expiring! (I looked it up.) So what does it mean elsewhere when it says ויגוע… וימת? He expired and then died?! That’s meaningless. Clearly גויעה is not expiring.

After doing some research I see that the Malbim (Bereishis 25:8) writes:
הגויעה מציין אפיסת כחות הגוף, והמיתה מציין פירוד הנפש מן הגוף – gviah refers to the lack of any physical strength, while misah refers to the departure of the soul from the body.
So according to that, when the gemoro says that Yaakov lo meis – and Rashi clearly says that he is alive forever – it seems to mean it in a physical sense. He was still alive, but without any physical strength. And that, by the way, is how the gemoro in Sotah 13a can say that Yaakov opened his eyes and smiled.

Of course, nowhere do Chazal say that the LR did not die, and I have been clear about than in many of my earlier posts. In fact, I feel stupid having to reiterate my stance here, and I only do so because of the possible future ravings of some.

3. There may be other meforshim who say otherwise, but I have not found any Rishon (if I am wrong please correct me) who says that the gemoro in Sanhedrin 98b allows the possibility of any dead person other than Daniel Ish Chamudos being Mashiach. As I have posted a number of times, according to one pshat in Rashi, if you are looking for a person who has died as the type of person that the live Mashiach will be, then it is Daniel. According to the other pshat, if Mashiach is someone who has died, then it must be Daniel. Based on this gemoro, then, there is no room for anyone else who is not alive to be Mashiach.

4. The gemoro itself – the part that was censored in Sanhedrin 43a – says that yeshu was a maisis umaidiach. What other reason did the Sanhedrin have to execute him?

Thanks Menachem for the reference to the Eitz Yosef/Chida. I had wondered about the embalming for a long time and now, thanks to you, I have an answer.

Also, I now understand what you’re saying in regards to the B”D executing yoshke despite them not yet having come up with the idea of a second coming.

As to qwerty’s alleged non-arrogance, well, if you say “I’m extremely humble” we’ll just have to take your word for it.

Finally, in regards to that shiksa yemach shema, who cares what she asks? We reject yoshke because he was a meisis umadiach. All the rest is just icing on the cake.

Out of interest, when did she have a debate with Boteach?

Menachem: If Jews reject Christianity because of the second coming, why did beis din kill Yoshke In the first place?

Sorry, but I don’t understand at all what you are saying here.

I have to agree with yankel berel in all that he said regarding the so-called nevuah of the Gulf War, and it not coming exactly to pass.

I too followed it all at the time, and I clearly remember all the claims that were made, and which didn’t eventuate. If those statements no longer appear in Lubavich publications it’s because they were intentionally edited out.

coffee addict: Lubavitch is a derech, not a race.

Of course that’s true. They lost the race years ago!

But on a more serious note, out of all the Lubavichers on the thread the only one who addressed my two questions (about the LR being physically alive, and the correctness of using the igros) was Menachem Shmei, and he agreed with me! Are there really no Lubavichers around who can logically, and in a Torah-true fashion, answer my questions?

Hi to all. I’m sure you’ve ALL been wondering where I am and hoping for my reappearance. Ta da! I’m here. The reason I haven’t given my two cents’ worth until know is because what I’ve read in this thread is basically a lot of rehashing of old stuff that has been debated in the past. But I am (slightly) human, so I can’t stay silent forever.

I have two topics on which to comment:

1. When someone says that a person who others assume has died is “with us physically” what does it mean? No beating around the bush, please. What does it mean? I know what a live person being with us physically means – he is in his body and nowhere else, in one place, he’s breathing and his heart is beating – but what does it mean when it is said about someone who has died? Even Yaakov Avinu lo meis – what does it mean? To me, from the gemara in Sotah 13a, it seems that he was alive but his soul was in his body, and not that he was in 770 or elsewhere. So without dissembling, what does it mean when someone says the L rebbe is alive physically.

2. Goral Hagra was transmitted from the Gra himself, which is why it is called that (surprise, surprise). What is the source for using the LR’s igros to answer questions? Had he himself said to do it, I would have accepted that Lubavichers do it even though I would not have believed in it. But he didn’t, so who says it is right?
And please don’t tell me “it works”, because that doesn’t mean it’s right or even permitted.
And don’t tell me, as a Lubavicher told me nearly three decades ago, “The rebbe said that there would always be a way to be connected to him, and therefore we use the igros,” as one does not lead to the other.
Finally, don’t quote me anecdotal stories about people putting kvitlech in seforim of their Rebbes, and having answers and/or yeshuos. I believe that many of those stories are in fact true, but that is not the same as reading what the sefer says when it is opened at random and deciding what it means on a personal level.

sechel, I forgot a very important point in regards to your claim about tefillas nedavah. A tefillas nedavah cannot be said on Shabbos!

sechel, Shmoneh Esrei can be a tefillas nedavah, but birkos Krias Shema after chatzos can’t, and that makes them a berachah levatalah.

sechel: Another famous thing you quote is about Sukkah the hater is were mitztayer that were not mitztayer that were not mitztayer,
I think it comes from the yated.
In truth the rebbe says only once מצטער.)

I did not get it from Yated. I heard it from Lubavichers who think that it’s an amazing chidush al pi nigleh. (The fact that it makes no sense means nothing to Lubavichers, as since their rebbe said it al pi nigleh, it must be right.)

So according to you, what is the heter al pi nigleh?

Btw, as a favor to me, please check your spelling and punctuation. I’m guessing that you went through the yeshivah system, and didn’t do much English. That’s fine with me. It’s just that it took me a while to figure out what “the hater is were mitztayer that were not mitztayer that were not mitztayer” meant.

I guess according to you the yeshivish are very concerned about their image…

No idea – and I don’t care – because I’m not yeshivish.

Chabad didn’t sleep in the suckah since the alter rebbe, didn’t eat shalosh seudos either.

Sorry, but I don’t believe that. I knew Russian Lubavichers aleihem haShalom who slept in the sukkah until they heard the news that Lubavichers don’t. They also ate Shalosh Seudos. There is a lot of revisionist history in Lubavich, as I have claimed a number of times in regards to the Memoirs of the Rayatz.

sechel: Arso being mekarev yidden. See keser shem tov, see seforim hakdoahim – full of it.

Can you supply some quotes, please?

And according to you it’s new, so…. Internet it also new, shaitels are also new, yeshiva movement is also new, brisker derech halimud is also new

My problem was never that it’s new. Rather, my problem is your claim that this is the correct way of acting now, and that it’s based on Chazal, Poskim and Chassidus. So my question stands: if that is the case, why was it not done before the advent of mivtzoim?

now that you know that when you go to your relatives you may see something not tznius, did you stop going?

You don’t read carefully, and/or pay attention to what others say, do you? BH my Lubavich relatives are basically tzniusdik in dress, although they are lacking in other areas of tznius (e.g. gender mixing), and I never even insinuated that the terrible lack of tznius that I have witnessed be’oness was caused by them. It was other fully-committed sheitel wearing Lubavichers who caused shock when I inadvertently came across them.

Reb yeruchem from the mir wrote a letter in support [or mivtza tefillin].

I see now that the Lubavicher rebbe is not the only one who cheated the Mal’ach Hamoves! According to all known sources, Reb Yeruchem of Mir was niftar in 5696 (1936), but if he wrote a letter supporting mivtza tefillin, which began over 30 years later, then obviously he didn’t die either.

Somehow ponovitch and satmer had success thru their massive advertising campaigns to convince dumb people who are too stupid to research facts, that all the gedolim were always against chabad or at least since the rebbe or the frierdiker rebbe.

That’s fresh! The biggest advertiser and propagandist in the (so-called) frum world is Lubavich, and you’re blaming others for advertising. I don’t know about Satmar, but I have never heard of any advertising done by Ponevich.

Also, don’t fool yourself. Nearly all the gedolim were against Lubavich in their ‘push’ for Mashiach (started by the Rayatz) and many of Lubavich’s other aspects. Just that for a number of reasons they decided not to voice their opposition publicly outside their own circles.

sechel: The Baal shem tov himself traveled to be mikarev Jews, and sent shluchim, so did all the rebbes. If anything how it’s only chabad, many yrs ago it was every rebbe going around himself and sending shluchim to be mikarev Jews. It was maybe a bit different cuz most Jews in those times were just simple and ignorent and needed chizuk, to be taught what to do, but even then they deal with people totally off as seen in all the seforim.

They most certainly did not travel to non-frum Yidden to be mekarev them because the concept of ‘non-frum Yidden’ had not really come about at the time. As you yourself say, they traveled in their areas to encourage people who were erlich and yirei Shomayim, but who needed chizuk. Yes, there is the occasional story of meeting meshumadim and the like – there is a famous story of the Besh”t and the bishop – but those incidents were to save Yidden, not merely to be mekarev the meshumad himself.

In truth, I don’t know the extent of kol Yisrael areivim, which is why I did not bring any argument to indicate that we are not responsible for all the Yidden who don’t put on tefillin. But the fact remains, that it was never done in the past in any community, so the rule of kol Yisrael areivim must not apply to that type of activity. I don’t know why, but it seems very clear to me that that is the case.

sechel, I never suggested that a non-tznius woman should be thrown out of the community. What I would like to see, however, is that there is a generally accepted attitude in Crown Heights, and other Lubavich communities, that non-tznius is TOTALLY unacceptable.

If it would be the BTs who were the only ones who were not tzniusdik, I could understand, but don’t fool yourself, it isn’t! I have lived in areas with a large Lubavich presence – and as I have mentioned many times, I have close relatives who are Lubavich – and what I have literally seen b’oness with my own eyes has at times shocked me. And I’m referring to women who are makpid to wear sheitels in public because that’s what the LR wanted. (I don’t want to elaborate further, or even go there in my mind, because you’re not allowed to remember those sights!)

If these women weren’t stam ‘accepted’ the way they are, but they were repeatedly approached and told that their mode of dress is unconsionable, and that it would be better if they stayed at home, perhaps it would help. Ah, but in Lubavich we let everyone do as they want on their own level… and that’s why we have so much attrition (which we constantly deny, but which everyone else knows about).

sechel, we’ve dealt with the 7 mitzvos topic at length in the past. The Rambam does NOT say that we have to teach goyim the 7 mitvos. He writes that Hashem told Moshe Rabbeinu to ‘force’ all of non-Jewish humanity to keep the mitvos that Bnei Noach were commanded, and that if they don’t they are to be executed! So all the meforshim agree that it doesn’t apply to times when the goyim are not under the control of Bnei Yisroel. Furthermore, there are criteria that must be met in order for the non-Jew to be considered adhering to the mitvos of Bnei Noach, and merely doing it out of morality is meaningless. As I wrote, we have discussed this at length in the past.

As Kol Yisrael areivim, if it means that we have to go out and get non-frum people to put on tefillin etc, why did not of the preceding Lubavicher Rebbes tell t cheir hassidim to do so? And why is tefillin more important than any other mitzvah? Why not informing people that they are not allowed to have tattoos, or any other of the many mitzvos that they unfortunately do not fulfill?

CS: The Rebbe never meant it doesn’t make sense period.

I believe that is indeed what he said. Can you please find the quote?

I meant that in lubavitch there is a systematic path of avoda one can take from the lowest point to an endless height with role models along the way. That’s what Chabad is about.

You are very blinkered. That is what the entire world is about, and Yidden have many paths to rise ‘to the Heavens’ by looking up to and emulating those who are on higher levels than they themselves are. But that doesn’t excuse a community not objecting to the many women who are publicly not tzniusdik, and who are thereby machshil others. I’m not talking about yelling at them or anything like that. But the objections should be strong enough that they feel uncomfortable dressing improperly in public.

yb: I personally know many Orthodox Rabanim who would accept your sefer . After reading your comments on this thread.

Thanks for the compliment. I’ll make sure to send you an autographed complimentary copy.

the moon is a banana

A banana?! Don’t be ridiculous. Everyone knows it’s made out of green cheese.

In reply to my objecting to the LR saying that it doesn’t make sense that Mashiach hasn’t come yet, CS wrote: I believe I answered this already. Shlomo hamelech couldn’t understand para adumah…

Please please please stop being medameh milsa lemilsa. I’ll be melamed zechus and say that as you do not have a background in Gemoro, you haven’t learned to be discerning in your comparisons.

There is NO comparison between אמרתי אחכמה והיא רחוקה ממני – I said I will understand, but it is too distant from me – which is what Shlomo Hamelech said about the Para Aduma, and saying, as the LR did, that there is NO sense to the fact that Mashiach hasn’t come. The former in admission of not understanding. The latter is saying that the RBS”O is wrong c”v as THERE IS NO SENSE to it.

within lubavitch there’s always who to look up to and where to grow ad ain sof

As there is in any community. But in other communities women who are machshil others are asked to fix themselves or leave. In Lubavich they become shluchim.

disclaimer: they are asked to fix themselves, not always to leave. But most definitely not to teach.

sechel: I argue that tznius was never a focus

I agree. Tznius was never a focus, just like breathing was never a focus. ALL Jewish women were automatically tzniusdig (as were many women in other cultures, lehavdil) so there was no need to focus on it. It was only once fashion became a focus, and when the world became more permissive Rachmono litzlon, that tznius among women started going downhill.

CS: My point was that the Alter Rebbe was referring to a small small sect of people, and even those don’t exist today, because the ones off, aren’t doing it because of their knowledge of Hashem and Yiddishkeit, but rather from their lack of it

Do you have a (non-Lubavich) source that makes this distinction? I know that the velt says in the name of R Chaim Brisker that nebech an apikorus is still an apikorus.

if you know aleph teach aleph

That’s a lovely concept… in theory. In practice, however, it is very dangerous! If someone only knows alef, when he/she tries to teach it to someone else, that person can very easily be influenced who has harmful hashkofos which the teacher does not necessarily know is harmful. That is clearly the reason for so many children of shluchim and other Lubavichers going OTD Rachmono litzlon. (You’re going to deny that the numbers are high, but they are certainly MUCH higher than the attrition in other groups of chareidim.)

Tznius is not its own Mitzvah doyraisa

??? Of course it is! Being machshil someone else is an issur d’Oiraisa!

“Al yemin shehu smol veal smol shehu yemin , the rashi you mentioned is speaking about sanhedrin hagadol in yerushalayim where it is indeed prohibited to argue against”
I don’t recall Rashi mentioning Sanhedrin, just quoting it in relation to our leaders. You’re welcome to correct

The passuk itself is talking about the Sanhedrin! Look it up in parshas Shoftim.

a soon to be giyores iyH who I had taught Chassidus on the basis of thinking she was Jewish, (I think I’ve heard Chassidus is ok to teach goyim too- they’re also obligated to believe in Hashem)

You THINK it’s ok? Is that mean to justify what you did, albeit unwittingly?

[the woman] told me that Chassidus had infected her so to speak- that when she is told about a mandatory class she needs to take for giyur and how it’s so amazing and deep, she’s found everything dry and basic (I’m talking hashkofa etc) after learning Chassidus

You know you’re scraping the bottom of the barrel when you bring an anecdotal proof from a shikse!

Being that that’s just #88 out of #200 complaints etc you’ll have, I don’t see the need [to provide a source]

Now that is certainly a winning reply to a challenge for you to back up some garbage you wrote!

yankel berel, I think that we would all agree that the Baal Hatanya was great and accepted enough that if he says something, even if it seems strange to us, we can accept it as being a correct shitah, even if it is not the shitah of others.

sechel: Saying talmud torah kineged kulam dosent apply anymore is not changing any mitzvah, only talking about its level of importance. So its not a contradiction to nitzchiyus hatorah.

That is untrue! If it says in Chazal תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם then that is as everlasting as anything else. That is why I suggested that the level of talmud Torah that Chazal was talking about – which was and IS everlasting – is not today’s level. Btw it’s only a suggestion, and maybe there’s a better answer (but I have no intention of looking in a Lubavich source of less than 100 years old to find that answer).

As to the tznius issue, sorry sechel, but you are totally wrong. Tznius is one of the MOST important mitzvos for women, and everyone except for MO and Lubavich seems to agree with that. It is certainly far more important than going on mivtzoim or learning chassidus.

I believe in Tanya it does indeed say that nowadays tzedokoh is more important than talmud Torah, and he explains his reasoning, but I can’t find it at the moment. Can someone please suppply an exact source?

Wow! This is a first! A Lubavicher quoting the Tifferes Yisroel! Since when do Lubavichers hold of him?

sechel: A already mentioned that in Torah or it says Yaakov avinu finished avodas habirurim, that you don’t have an issue with?

Clearly your rebbe had an issue with it because he said that it makes no sense that Mashiach hasn’t come after the end of avodas habirurim. (Btw I wouldn’t mind seeing that quote from Torah Or.)

When did the rebbe prophesize about moshiach ? About what ?

You’re kidding, right? The entire time we have been told by all the Lubavichers on this thread that the LR is a novi and that he said that he is Mashiach so we HAVE to believe him. And now you’re asking where he prophesied?! Just google נבואת הרבי שהוא משיח or something similar, like I did, and you’ll find quite a bit of stuff.

What about what the rambam writes at the end of hilchos tumas tzarass about someone who talks against a Talmud chacham? Oh so you claim the rebbe wasn’t a real Talmud chacham but you are?

Was Shabsi Tzvi a talmid chochom? Do we have to know as much Torah as he does to reject him? And don’t forget that Rav Shach, lehavdil, was a talmid chochom, but that didn’t stop any Lubavicher denigrating him when he was alive. And don’t deny it because I was around then, and he was talked about as if he was the lowest of the low.

No, I am not a talmid chochom, but I am qualified to reject someone whose agenda was to aggrandize himself as a novi, Mashiach and Nassi Hador. Someone like that, regardless of how much he knows, is by definition not a talmid chochom.

I bet even you agree that no one alive today comes close to the rebbes yedias hatorah. And if you don’t agree, then Listen to more sichos.

You really are brainwashed, aren’t you? I know a number of people who are BH alive today and have more yedias Hatorah than the LR had. Furthermore, their yedias Hatorah is not crooked. For example, they know that the LR’s crazy heter of mitztaer that you can fall asleep is a reason to exempt you from sleeping in the sukkah. And that is just one example.

Finally, I WON’T beshum oifen listen to his sichos, as I find them crooked, misleading and self-aggrandizing.

CS: This is where you yourself show me you have no idea of what a real Rebbe is- not something I grew up with. The Rebbe spoke with ruach hakodesh on a constant basis, and the many people impacted on a personal level can and do testify to this- and not only Lubavitchers.

So your answer to my claim that the LR was wrong and that he said something that if anyone else had said it you would call it apikorsus, is that the LR is right because he always is. You do realize, I hope, that that is not an acceptable reply to someone who doesn’t believe that the LR was a Nasi-Hador/Mashiach/Navi/infallible or a baal ruach hakodesh. It is merely saying, as you so often do, the LR is right, so there!

Btw, of course I have no idea what a real Rebbe is. If I did, I would probably be a real Rebbe. But I believe I do know WHO a real Rebbe is… and who is not.

the general context was that we need to finish up Avodas Habirurim during golus. I never saw it promise that the minute it’s finished, we enter Geula Shleima. Again I could be wrong, so I asked you to support your premise which you didn’t.

So I googled it and it came up easily… from a Lubavicher site. And there are more than just this one. (I am loath to quote a sichah, but here it is: )
וזלה”ק (בשיחת ש״פ נח, ד’ מר ־ חשון תשנ״ב – ספר השיחות תשנ״ב ע’ 65 ואילך): והדגשה יתירה בכהנ״ל – בנוגע לחשבון ־ צדק בשבת פרשת נח בשנה זו: ובהקדמה – שכיון שהעיד כ״ק מו”ח אדמו״ר נשיא דורנו שכבר סיימו כל עניני העבודה, כולל גם צחצוח הכפתורים, ועומדים מוכנים יעמדו הכן כולכם׳׳) לקבל פני משיח צדקנו, הרי, מסקנת החשבון – צדק (חשבון ־ צדק דייקא, חשבון אמיתי) שעושים בימינו אלו, היא, שתיכף ומיד ממש צריכה לבוא הגאולה האמיתית והשלמה בפועל ממש!
(My apologies if it comes out a bit garbled, but that often happens when copying from a Hebrew website into an English text. At any rate, the site is called merkazato and all you have to do is google נסתיימה עבודת הבירורים.)

I’m sure he later explains it all to HIS satisfaction, but I’m not interested in his rationalizations. I’m just responding to your request for a source.