Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
CS, you seem to claim to have answered my request for pirmary sources by citing a number of quotes from a number of your rebbes. But I don’t see how any of them say that a person is meant to try to see exactly where he is holding on the rasha-beinoni-tzaddik scale.
Knowing one’s maalos and chisronos is not the same as knowing where one is on the scale. It is just an indication of what requires more work and what requires less.
You also wrote: “Don’t forget your primary friend in this sense is your spouse- so see how s/he relates to you/ enjoys your company, if you want a guide for you middos.”
Sorry, but I can’t accept that. If one gets on with one’s spouse – I certainly hope that’s the case! – the spouse has been moulded and moulded you in a way that you think alike and agree on many matters, especially if you have been married for some time,. Someone who thinks like you, and has adapted to your views and middos, is the last person to help you improve.
Was this claim of yours something the Lubavicher rebbe actually said, or something you came to yourself or heard in sem?
Avirah, I disagree with you on one thing.
You attempt to prove that the Vilna Gaon was definitely greater than the Baal Hatanya from Litvishe sources. I don’t see anything wrong with Lubavichers believing that the Baal Hatanya, who we all agree was an absolute giant in nigleh and nistar, was greater than the Vilna Gaon.
As an aside, i have heard a number of times that one of the early Belzer Rebbes said that the world thinks that the Vilna Gaon was greater than the Baal Hatanya in nigleh, while the latter was greater than the former in nistar. This is actually a mistake as the reverse is true.
I wrote earlier: “I don’t believe there were daf yomi shiurim in any Lubavich shul in Crown Heights before 3 Tammuz.”
While that may indeed be true, I’m not sure about it. What I meant to write was that there were no shiurim BEFORE DAVENING, as Menachem claims there now are.
To help people remember – because I myself am beginning to forget – I’d like to start a list of questions that those on our side have and that have not even been addressed by the other side, even by quoting their own sources.
In no particular order:
1. The whole concept of Nossi Hador is something that has been non-existent for centuries, and the Lubavicher rebbe reinvented it, applied it to his father-in-law and… to himself.2. The fact that his father-in-law, and by succession he himself, was/is a Navi without any proof other than the Lubavicher rebbe’s claim that the Rayatz predicted things correctly. And not to be overlooked is the fact that the Lubavicher rebbe predicted that no Yid would be killed in the 1991 Gulf War, and there was a Yid who was killed R”L.
3. It is now almost thirty years since the Lubavicher rebbe died, and more than thirty years since he last said anything. and he said that Mashiach was coming bekarov mamash and that Mashiach is around the corner. Thirty years, with Rachmomo litzlan thousands and thousands of tragedies that would not have happened had Mashiach come, is not bekarov mamash or around the corner by anyone’s calculation. Anyone, that is, except for Lubavichers.
4. The fact that before 3 Tammuz ABSOLUTELY EVERY LUBAVICHER “believed” that Mashiach has to be someone who was alive, and then on 3 Tammuz that changed.
5. There is someone in each generation who is fit to be Mashiach. Until 3 Tammuz “generation” meant what generation is generally taken to mean. After 3 Tammuz it means from the time the Lubavicher rebbe beame rebbe until Mashiach comes, regardless of how many years pass.
6. The claim of him being Mashiach based on the Rambam even though not one of the criteria of the Rambam can be definitely assigned to him. And don’t forget that WE KNOW that he is descended from Dovid Hamelech because he said so himself!
7. The Lubavicher rebbe was “forced” into becoming a rebbe, even though in a number of books written by Lubavicher it shows otherwise.
8. The Lubavicher rebbe was anav mikol adam and never pushed himself to the forefront. What proof is there of that? I can think of many proofs – some have been mentioned in this thread – that show the opposite. One small indication, not mentioned until now, is that visiting gedolei Yisrael had to come to 770 to visit him, and “suffer” with all types of publicity surrounding their visit. Is there any case where he visited others. In the Torah world when one Rebbe visits another, the latter repays the visit. In Lubavich the visits were only in one direction.
9. His explanation al pi nigleh how a person who is mitzta’er that he CAN fall asleep is pottur from sleeping in the sukkah. It is totally preposterous to claim that this is a valid reason. I might as well say that if I’m mitzta’er that I enjoy eating in the sukkah I am pottur from eating in the sukkah!
10. My proof from the story of the sundial that the memoirs of the Rayatz are fictional and my assumption that the memoirs were never meant to be taken literally. By the way, it is not just the story of the sundial that is unbelievable. There are many others that, while not impossible, are extremely difficult to believe.
I think there are more, but the above is what I can come up with offhand. Please fill in whatever I have missed out.
And for the Lubavichers, how about you address these points directly without obfuscating (why do all these fancy words only come to me in the Coffee Room?)?
Again and again, YankelBerel, you hit the nail on the head. Gedolei hador have never pushed themselves to the forefront and promoted themselves. That is something their followers and klal Yisrael did. The Lubavicher rebbe, on the other hand, promoted himself all the time.
Just a very very minor example. When the Lubavicher rebbe came out with the idea of learning Rambam, he said he would let them know how to divide up the hakdomo etc and when to start. Then when he came up with the system the first siyum “just happened” to fall on 11 Nissan, his birthday. What a coincidence for someone who never pushed himself to the forefront.
There are better examples and proofs, but I just thought I’d mention this obvious one.
Menachem, you said that 5783 is anti-Lubavich. Are you serious? He constantly toes the party-line to the extreme. Or did I mix up 5783 with someone else?
Re winding tefillin outwards: “I don’t think that this is even a true reason for our minhag. I’ve heard it mentioned before in jest.”
I have no doubt that that is not the reason for winding on tefillin in that direction, but I have definitely heard it used by Lubavichers taunting Litvaks, and not in jest.
“This is how a Lubavitcher could have worded it:
“As a group, you consider us meisisim umadichim, so then don’t get upset when we belittle your shitos.””Doesn’t the Torah command us to hate the meisis for trying to convince others to follow avodah zarah? So why shouldn’t we get upset when we see Lubavichers belittling Torah-true shitos and trying to convince others to follow shitos that we see as “questionable” at best? It’s not that we care that you’re making fun of us; non-frum Jews also make fun of us all the time. It’s that you do so in the name of Yiddishkeit and Torah.
“every Chabad yeshiva has a Gemara seder on Shabbos”
Are you sure of that? The Lubavicher once said that during the week the seder should be 1/3 chassidus and 2/3 nigleh. On Shabbos it should be the opposite. Then people wrote in to him that in a kuntres of the Rashab – I think it may have been called Eitz Chaim – it says that only chassidus should be learned on Shabbos, and he retracted it. I personally have been confronted and laughed at for learning gemoro on Shabbos. (Some of this may have changed when the Lubavicher rebbe instituted learning Rambam every day of the week.)
“Many daf yomi shiurim before shachris in Chabad shuls in Crown Heights and other communities”
You must be quite young if you’re going to cite that. Lubavich, and the rebbe, were always against daf yomi. I don’t believe there were daf yomi shiurim in any Lubavich shul in Crown Heights before 3 Tammuz.
And in regards to eating gebrokts on Pesach, and putting tefillin on in a particular way. While there is certainly no “mivtza” in those areas, Lubavichers openly tell others that it is prohibited to eat gebrokts and that they put on tefillin in a more preferred manner that others.
But it is probably just a matter of you showing you age again. All these things used to be important to Lubavichers, until the last 30+ years when the Mashiach campain took over so strongly that in many parts that is all we hear about.
Meanchem, re the books I referred to which indicated that the Lubavicher did indeed want to become rebbe –
larger than Life by Shimon (I think) Deitsch says that his parents would only agree to the shidduch if the Rayatz agreed to nominate him as the next rebbe. They knew that the Rayatz’s daughter could not bear children, so that’s the reason they agreed to the shidduch. I seem to recall the story was related by someone with the name Althoiz, who was very close to the Rayatz, and he may even have been the one who finalized the shidduch. I know that this doesn’t say clearly that the Lubavicher rebbe actually wanted to be the next rebbe, but it certainly implies that he accepted that as part of the plan. After all, unlike other chaddishe rebbes of the times who married at a much younger age, the Lubavicher rebbe was something like 25 when he got engaged, and I’m sure he had some input into the matter.
The other sefer is more explicit. I don’t remember it’s name, and I have only seen it once when it was lent to me for a few weeks close to ten years ago. It was writting – in Hebrew – by S Z Gurary aka Jimmy, who was close and even family with the Rayatz I believe. Sruprisingly, and this is why my friend lent me the sefer, it details that fights that went on behind the scenes after the petirah of the Rayatz.
One question that has been basically overlooked and/or ignored by Lubavichers on this thread is why before 3 Tammuz 5754 ALL Lubavichers WITHOUT EXCEPTION were in 100% agreement that Mashiach has to be someone who is alive. Then, immediately after 3 Tammuz it was acceptable to say that Mashiach can be someone who has died? (Is it correct to put the question mark there at the end of the second sentence, when the first sentence asks “why” and the second is just a statement? On the one hand it doesn’t seem right, but on the other it does. Perhaps I should have used a semicolon instead of a period between the sentences. Oh well.)
The truth is, the most consistent view is that of the crazies who say he never died. At least they don’t have to change their original belief.
Menachem to qwerty: “The main ones who attack almost any argument I make (at least in the last few pages) are you and yankel.”
Hey! Did you intentionally leave me out? I’m hurt!
mdd: “ARSo, if someone has heretical views, it is not okay to just let it go without challenging them.”
Are you trying to say that I haven’t been challenging them?!
First, I’d like once again to thank YankelBerel for saying so clearly the stuff that I myself think and would like to write. Yasher koach!
As to the story that the Lubavicher rebbe said that a poshute chossid who learns chassidus is on a higher madreiga than the Chazon ish: that story has been discussed in the past on an earlier thread. It’s true that he said something along those lines. Lubavichers on the other thread tried to mitigate it, mostly unsuccessfully.
Menachem: “I disagree with many of your examples”
I don’s see why. They are all examples that I and others have personally witnessed. Have you never seen a Lubavicher telling a Litvak who puts on tefillin by winding it inwards, “All you care about is yourself, so you’re winding inwards. We care about others, so we wind outwards”? (It’s actually quite a funny claim, because Satmar also winds outwards, yet Lubavich were at great odds with them in the past.)
At any rate, you claim that the Lubavich shitah is the best for all Yidden, and I accept that you believe that. And that is why as a group you (perhaps not you personally) belittle other shitos. Please don’t say that you don’t – we all know that you do, especially at drunken farbrengens. But then don’t get upset with those of us who consider Lubavichers close to meisisim umadichim when they try to get us to believe what we consider nonesense, and at times apikorsus.
n0m: “No kol korei ever accurately conveyed the wishes of the leader.”
That is an amazing sweeping statement for which I see you bringing no support. What makes you say this?
5783, it’s great to have you post occasionally because all Menachem’s efforts to show how reasonable and logical Lubavich theology is, are contradicted when you come along and show how radical and ridiculous it all is!
“he said that the main נבואה of this generation is that moshiach is coming ״בקרוב ממש״ and ״לאלתר״ which means very soon”
While bekarov mamash may mean very soon, le’alter means immediately, and we non-Lubavichers all believe that he hasn’t come yet. That itself shows how the “nevuah” is false.
“ounds a bit crazy”
I disagree. It doesn’t sound a bit crazy. It sounds very crazy.
Avirah: “Avodas Hashem IS being in touch with your neshoma, because you’re feeding it what it needs, i.e. Torah and mitzvos, which the tanya calls “food” for the neshoma (regarding learning)”
At first I thought with the above you were disagreeing with what I wrote, and it confused me because you write in the next paragraph that the BST said one shouldn’t dwell on his level, which seemed to agree with me. But after rereading a few times I think that you are agreeing with me even in the first paragraph.
That is, you are saying that there is no reason to put in effort to be in touch with your neshama because you automatically are through avodas Hashem.
Did I get that right?
Menachem: “What the Rebbe is explaining is the common practice of asking a Rebbe for brochos.”
I find it hard to accept that the question the rebbe mentioned, i.e how is it possible to ask from a rebbe, was referring to brochos. Everyone has always known that any Yid can give a brocho. What else does the greeting Shalom aleichem mean if not one Yid giving a brocho to the other? I therefore find it easier to believe that he is talking about asking direct help from the rebbe, which is a form of davening to him.
And you’re right, I did not mean davening Shmoneh Esrei to him, although I imagine that the crazy who wrote “Who Elokeinu? The rebbe Melech Hamashiach, that’s who!” probably does, as well as the person I mentioned who says “Baruch Harebbe”.
“the sicha was said at a time (5710) when the Rebbe was still adamantly opposed to chassidim even considering him “Rebbe,””
Which reminds me. You never addressed my references to two books published by Lubavicher chassidim which clearly indicate that the Lubavicher rebbe wanted to be rebbe after the Rayatz. I understand that you may be reticent to accept Deitsch’s version, as he has sort of moved away from the party line, but the other was written by Shneur Zalman Gurary, and he was loyal until the end.
YankelBerel, can you please quote the actual lashon of the sicha, so that I can either agree that it says one should be in touch with one’s neshama, or argue that it doesn’t? Thanks
CS, you asked how I was taught to get in touch with my neshama. And if I wasn’t talught how by my Rebbe, what did he teach me?
The problem with your question, as with a lot of other things that you and other Lubavichers write, is that aside from being taught a certain derech – ostensibly the derech of Lubavich – you are also taught that the purpose behind those teachings is universal and accepted by all.
So to answer your question, I was most definitely NOT taught to get in touch with my neshama, and I don’t believe that there is a need for that. Furthermore, a lot of “getting in touch” with one’s neshama is not a Jewish concept. Look at how the world is a mess because of people who “are in touch with themselves”. How does a person know that he is in touch with his neshama and that it is not merely his nefesh habehamis telling him that he is. As long as a person has base taavos and the like, he can’t judge where he is at.
So what does my Rebbe, and his forebears teach me? Not to try to get in touch with my neshama at all! To perform mitzvas and to learn Torah with yegiah and to be besimchah that I can do even the smallest mitzvah and learn even the smallest amount of Torah. Let the RBSO deal with my neshama; I have to deal with my machshavah, dibbur and maaseh in this world.
I could give you a number of very good sources on the matter… but then you’d probably figure out where exactly I belong. And if you want to know why I’m scared of that, the answer is that I don’t want to denigrate my chassidus by publicly claiming that I am a sort of spokesman of theirs.
One important question that I have: can you please provide a source – Lubavicher sources are fine here, although it has to be a primary source and not something a teacher in sem taught you – where it says that a person has to be in touch with his neshama? I would even like a source that says that a person has to know what state of righteousness he is currently at. Who cares where I am at the moment, it’s where I’m headed that matters… isn’t it?
I decided that I just had to check out those quotes from seforim that Menachem keeps referring to, and I discovered two very important differences between what those seforim say and what the Lubavicher rebbe said.
1. Nowhere in those quotes does it say that one may daven to a tzaddik, and the Lubavicher rebbe clearly said that you can daven to an atzmus melubash baguf. If I remember correctly, that was the point of his explanation.
2. All the quotes Menachem brought refer to other tzaddikim, not the people who made them. The Lubaavicher rebbe was – all the chassidim agree – referring to himself!
Menachem: “Otherwise, I’m just wasting my breath.”
You won’t be wasing your breath if you explain how the story of R Chaim Brisker is relevant to those who have kashas on Lubavich.
And while I have your attention, I want to point out something that I don’t think has been mentioned – at least, I haven’t mentioned it and I don’t recall others mentioning it.
Were Lubavich to have these weird and possibly heretical views, but they kept them to themselves, I, and I assume others, would not be so vehement in attacking them. Take Satmar, for example. I totally disagree with their views on the State of israel, but I can handle them because they don’t usually try to force their views on me.
Lubavich, on the other hand, have an agenda, and that is that the entire world has to recognize that the late rebbe is the Nassi Hador and that therefore everyone has to do what he says. Learning nigleh on Shabbos or before davening is wrong. Eating gebrokts is wrong. Even putting on tefillin differently is wrong. And don’t tell me that’s not true because decades of experience – it sounds like from even before you were born – have shown me that it is true.
I’ll give you one example. My sister-in-law was in Meron this last Shabbos and on Friday she overheard a Lubavicher woman asking a Sefardi women if her daughter lights Shabbos candles. The latter said that her daughter does.
“With a beracha?”
“No. Without.”
“Well she should make a beracha.”
“But our minhag is not to.”
“The Lubavicher rebbe said girls should. Do you think he doesn’t know what he’s talking about?!”It’s this typical type of behaviour that really gets on people’s nerves, and that’s why we are so often on the attack. That, and the posters/pictures/stickers of Melech Hamashiach put all over the place, even on private property.
If you would “leave us alone” we wouldn’t go on the attack nearly as much. Of course, your answer will likely be that your rebbe wanted you to convince everyone that he is a Navi/Nassi/Mashiach, so that’s what you have to do. And that just compounds the problem.
And just to make things clear. The above is NOT my major complaint with Lubavich. It’s just the reason that I find it difficult to remain silent.
I agree with Avirah that CS is fooling herself. Not that she considers herself a tzaddekes or a beinnonis, but that she has had “beinoni moments” and that she feels the joy or her neshamah or something along those lines.
It is so easy for the yetzer hara to fool someone into thinking that an action, speech or thought they did/had was good, and we should never consider ourselves on the level where we feel satisfied.
When the Tanya writes that a person should consider himself a beinoni I believe he wasn’t referring to every Tom, Dick or Harry (or their feminine equivalents). He was explicitly referring to the maamar Chazal that if the whole world says you’re a tzaddik you should consider yourself a rasha, and on that he says even if you are free of sin consider yourself only a beinoni.
n0m: “The gemara in Chullin is a nice chap”
You’re also a nice chap!
“Assuming that all pictures are not a problem of making images, a picture would not become an idol until it is worshipped or specifically created to be worshipped”
What about if it was used to exude some spiritual power?
“The mice picture also bothers me a little. But that I have seen in a bunch of places.”
I was thinking that perhaps it’s not the paper and print that works, it’s that mice are scared of the image of R Shayale. That would certainly be different to having a picture that can’t be seen on the knees of the sandek at a bris.
Does the segulah of R Shayale work if the picture is covered and can’t be seen?
LostSpark: “RSo every time someone brings a picture of R Shayaleh into their house to get rid of mice they are committing AZ?!?”
Good question. I have always had a problem with that, and I don’t know how to justify it. Maybe someone else can come up with a justification.
Sorry about my previous post. It was meant for another thread.
LostSpark: “RSo every time someone brings a picture of R Shayaleh into their house to get rid of mice they are committing AZ?!?”
Good question. I have always had a problem with that, and I don’t know how to justify it. Maybe someone else can come up with a justification.
n0m, thanks for the quote from Yeshayah!
n0m: “Avodah zara is about worship. A physical action. Something one does to serve a higher power. It does not take place in the mind.”
Not true. See the very end of Chulin where the gemoro suggests that the reason that the mitzvah of Shiluach Haken did not save a person from falling and dying was because he may have had a “thought” of avodah zarah, in which case the mitzvah would not save him:
דלמא מהרהר בעבודה זרה הוה דכתיב למען תפוש את בית ישראל בלבם ואמר רב אחא בר יעקב זו מחשבת עבודה זרה.Furthermore, if you attribute spiritual power to a photo, you have certainly transgressed the prohibition of creating/owning an avodah zarah, even if you don’t worship it.
n0m: “Why should we know how to live our life? It’s just do what Hashem wants…. Enter Arizal.. Baal Shem…”
Because without these great Torah leaders and thinkers, together with others who are not affiliated davka with the above paths, e.g. Sfardim and Litvish, we would not be serving hashem properly, and we would be performing mitzvos אנשים מלומדה. Not that we aren’t doing so now, but hopefully these leaders/thinkers are awakening us at least somewhat.
CS you make out as if it is easy to do something lesheim Shomayim once you become aware of it.
There are very few people – and it is unlikely that any of them spend time in the CR – who do things solely for the sake of Hashem. It’s very nice that people realize that they can make a dirah for Hashem, so to speak, and it may indeed change their mindset, but to assume that that is takke the reason they are doing it, and that they no longer have personal motives, is unreal.
Kol ma’asecha yihyu lesheim Shomayim, is the finish line, not the starting line.
qwerty: “the claim that the Baal Hatanya was a Neshama Chadasha, the first in 2000 years”
I don’t know about the first in 2000 years part, but Lubavichers certainly make the claim that the Baal Hatanya was a neshama chadasha. Of course, they are the only ones who make that claim about him.
LostSpark: “How is that AZ? Enlighten me”
Are you serious? I thought I explained that. If you attribute some sort of spiritual power to an image (that can’t even be seen at the time!), isn’t that a”z?
CS: “Arso the bris thing was directed by The Rebbe.”
That’s what makes it worse! He is attributing some special spiritual power to a photo of himself!
For those who are interested in a source, I looked it up online and it can be found on the chabadpedia website, among others. Do a search for תמונת הרבי ברית סנדק (the first two words in quotes) and you will find it. The Lubavicher rebbe explains that the photo should be placed on the knees of the sandek, and the reason the chassidim put it there is because they would actually like the rebbe himself (should I be capitalizing the word “himself”?) to be sandek.
Is no Lubavicher going to address the claim of avodah zarah in regards to the Lubavicher rebbe’s picture being placed under the baby at a bris?
It seems to me that this is what the Lubavich contingent in this thread are best at. If they can’t answer by quoting a sicha or the like, they ignore the question altogether.
n0m: “The mention of the whole world acknowledging moshiach is in Sefer Yeshaya.”
Can you please provide chapter and verse? I’m not arguing, just wanting to know.
n0m: “we have been taught that it all comes down to Torah Study. Why is that so?”
It doesn’t all come down to Torah study. Someone who studies Torah and doesn’t keep Mitzvos is a posheia. Nonetheless, תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם. Furthermore, without learning Torah how will one know how to live his life?
CS: “As far as arrogant etc, a few of my friends who became lubavitch told me how they found it so refreshing- instead of doing Torah and mitzvos for themselves (to become the best ever, get Olam Haba, get closest to Hashem etc) they now put the focus on the other way around- what can I do to help make a dirah for Hashem?”
Isn’t that also selfish, albeit on a lesser level? They are happier and feeling refreshed.
First, my apologies for not mentioning the following earlier regarding avodah zarah. The truth is that I can’t believe that it slipped my mind.
Many of us – both chassidim and Litvishe – have pictures hanging in their houses of their rebbe or rosh yeshivah, and this is despite many gedolei Yisroel not being happy with the practice. The purpose of this (aside from showing others where you belong :)) is so that when you look at the picture it will hopefully inspire you to live up to the directives of the person pictured and to increase in Torah and mitzvos. If, however, you were to hang up a picture of your rebbe/RY and have it permanently covered, citing the reason that the picture itself can achieve something, that would be akin to avodah zarah. Does anyone disagree with that?
Yet in Lubavich the minhag is to have a picture of the Lubavicher rebbe hidden in the pillow holding the child at his bris. No one can see the picture at the time. If the minhag would be to show others – or even the rach hanimol, who probably can’t focus yet – the picture so that the image uplifts people, it could be understood. But please explain why hiding the picture where it can’t be seen is not an act of avodah zarah by attributing some form of power to a picture.
In one of the pamphlets put out by the Degel people in 5749, during the bitter election campaign between Degel and Agudah – they cited a story about R Yaakov Landa zt”l, the rov of Bnei Brak, who was a Lubavicher and, I believe, the house rov of the Rashab of Lubavich. According to the pamphlet, he once attended a bris, and when he saw them putting the picture in the pillow he asked what was going on. When he was told he became extremely agitated and said that it was avodah zarah. He could not be calmed down and had to be taken out of the room.
The story may not be true, after all, it was publicized by snags (!) but it certainly may be true.
n0m re the L rebbe and R Shach: “I have chased down multiple first hand accounts of The Rebbe and The Rosh Yeshiva. I don’t see a personal disagreement.”
Which is why he called him part of “seridei choshech” and why if you mention Rav Shach to a Lubavicher they bristle at the fact that you’ve given him the title Rav.
n0m re limud Torah: “Okay it’s a mitzvah. So is putting a fence on the porch. But why are we so consumed with it? Why is learning Torah so critical? It is what Hashem wants and nothing else. So let’s to some other mitzva instead.”
Because bittul Torah is an aveirah and one is meant to learn Torah during every free moment when one is not involved in any other important activity (such as writing in the coffee room?). And fine, if you have other mitzvos to do you are exempt from learning Torah at that time.
n0m, I would say that I know both Gur and Satmar quite well and that almost everything you said about them is incorrect.
Furthermore, all groups trace their lineage to the Baal Shem Tov. It’s just in Lubavich they have a longer chain of ben achar ben (with both Menachem Mendel’s being sons-in-law) than others. But then again, Rizhin has an even longer chain because they are descendents of the Maggid of Mezritch.
And you wrote: “If he had an issue, he spoke to the gadol directly and frankly.”
When was it exactly that he spoke to Rav Shach, because he certainly had issues with him?
n0m re Avirah’s claim that we don’t daven that the whole world will know Mashiach: “I do. 15th bracha of the Amidah. V’karno Tarum”
I don’t see how that means that the whole world will know Mashiach. It means, as far as understand the simple meaning, that we daven that Dovid Hamelech’s pride/fame will be uplifted (when Mashiach comes). There is not meantion of the whole world knowing it.
When Mashiach comes the whole world will indeed acknowledge him, as this is one of the Rambam’s criteria, but I don’t see where we pray for that result.
n0m: “If I am just doing what Hashem wants and nothing else, than why is learning Torah important? ”
I still can’t understand you. Learning Torah isn’t a mitzvah?! והגית בו יומם ולילה, תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם, ודברת בם etc.
We are meant to learn Torah and keep Mitzvos SOLELY BECAUSE HASHEM SAID TO. To put it simply, if Hashem said to us, “If you learn Torah and keep Mitzvos you will STOP Mashiach coming and you will hide Elokus even deeper in the world, but I want you to learn Torah and keep Mitzvos anyway,” we would have to do it and forget about Mashiach and Elokus.
BH that’s not the case, as Torah and Mitzvos do indeed bring Mashiach bimheirah and reveal Elokus in the world, but that, so to speak, is Hashem’s business, not ours.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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: “Other Chassidim I’ve met relate to this awe of The Rebbe (because their parents tell them stories etc of their original Rebbes) but hold there Rebbeim have gone through yeridas hadoros”
Two points:
1. You obviously haven’t met the chassidim that I and others hang around with.
2. So much of what you, and some others write, is based on what you feel about your rebbe. You feel he’s the greatest person who ever lived. You feel he’s the Mashiach. You feel that he is the only one who has not experienced yeridas hadors. Etc. I’m sorry to disappoint you, but feelings don’t count. Not in Torah. In Torah we have rules and criteria, and, as I keep pointing out, your rebbe doesn’t win on the necessary criteria.Furthermore, a lot or your feelings are based on “facts” without basis that were fed to you. We have heard someone claim that your rebbe knew virtually every sefer published before the war by heart. That he is direct patrilineal descendent of Dovid Hamelch (“He said so himself!”). That he didn’t want to become rebbe and it was forced upon him. (In refutation of that I gave LUBAVICH SOURCES: SZ Gurary’s book which discusses the infighting between the Lubavicher rebbe and his brother-in-law, and “Larger than Life” which says that his parents only agreed to the shidduch on condition that he later became rebbe.) That he was the most humble person. That he was the world’s greatest gaon (yes, I’m once again going to quote his nigleh reasoning for not sleeping in the sukkah to refute that claim). And more that I can’t remember offhand.