CS

Rso

“Did you ever read the accounts given by the only grandchild of the Rayatz on his uncle-in-law’s early life? I don’t expect you to believe them, I don’t believe all of them either, but then again, I also don’t believe most of the wondrous stories about the Lubavicher rebbe.”

If you give weight to an individual who had a strong agenda against lubavitch and knowing the story of hei teves etc. and cite that as an acceptable source, all that shows is how your bias against lubavitch is negatively affecting your objectivity. (No I haven’t read it nor have I am interest in it)

“I don’t give much weight to stories that Satmar chassidim tell about their rebbe, and I don’t give much weight to stories litvishe tell about Reb Chaim Kanievsky. I am more likely to believe stories litvishe tell about Satmar and stories Satmar tells about Reb C Kanievsky. All the wondrous stories I hear about your rebbe have lubavich as their source, so I see no reason to give them much weight at all.”

For me, the fact that the Satmar chassidim regarded their Rebbe Reb Yoel as a tzadik, is good enough reason for me to err on the side of caution and treat him with that level of respect. Even if he argued with my Rebbe, that doesn’t mean he wasn’t a great person or a tzadik. Unless I had valid reason to suspect that the majority of stories said about him were untrue (such as fact checking three of the stories printed by Satmar and finding them to be made up and their attributed authors denying having ever said such a thing or contradicted their own stories or were known as liars etc ) I’ll take their word for it. Yidden are smart people and choose who they choose because they see him as authentic and not a charlatan. As the famous story of the chofetz chaim goes (may I assume you are all familiar?) “Your honour they don’t tell these stories about me or you.”

I would say this general distrust on your part just implies a level of unhealthy skepticism of others.

And that was even if all the stories were said by lubavitchers. But there are many many first person video recorded encounters with the Rebbe recorded by Jem said by noon lubavitchers.

In fact there is a Sefer I heard a previously poilisher chossid was working on, documenting all the Gedolim and Rebbeim who met with the Rebbe, what they had to say about him etc. I can look into the name of it if your really interested.

“Nice to say that, but it’s not really fine when I give you the literal translation of the passuk, and you say you interpret it differently as a demand. Isn’t that what xians have done with the whole Torah? Please cite me a source to back it up other than the source I am disputing, which is either you or your rebbe.”

Hey rso I was happy to leave it at that as I believe I have explained myself adequately, and you seem to have a less pshat understanding of pshat. However since you can’t seem to let it go, I will present it in such a way that the ben chomesh lmikra can understand. I hope that will suffice and if not, than you should explain WHY instead of just repeating that its not what I said, it’s a request.

OK here is the posuk:
וַיֹּאמְרוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים הָהֵמָּה אֵלָיו אֲנַחְנוּ טְמֵאִים לְנֶפֶשׁ אָדָם לָמָּה נִגָּרַע לְבִלְתִּי הַקְרִב אֶת קָרְבַּן ה במועדו

So if we were to understand lama nigara as a request, that would make no sense. Because the answer to “why should we lack (the opportunity) to bring a korban to Hashem in its right time?” Is “because you are tamei and tamei people cannot bring the korban.”

But wait. Obviously they know that already, in fact, in the very same posuk they say “anachnu tmeim lonefesh.”

So they werent asking why can’t they as in a request. Because they already answered their own question before they even asked it. So the simple pshat reading of the posuk is that lama nigara isn’t a request as in why not, it is a protest and demand for the right to fulfil it because they don’t want to miss out for doing something good! In that case, Moshe rabbeinu says, let me see whet Hashem says. Hashem also didn’t respond with an explanation as to why they are going to miss out. Rather He gave them a new mitzvah and opportunity so they shouldn’t miss out. I hope this clarifies in case it wasn’t clear enough before.

Neville (post 3):

“As for this tourist attraction story, you never named the rabbi in the story so how are we supposed to compare him to Rav Shteinman?”

I don’t know his name, and in any case, seeing that for whatever reason the story was seen in an extremely negative light, I don’t think I’d be able to release it at this point due to lashon hara (just to clarify not motzei Shem ra.)

” I have heard personal stories about Rav Shteinman making similar comments to people in order to make them feel more comfortable. In fact, I think I’ve even heard Lubavitchers tell stories about the Rebbe speaking of mundane subjects with followers to show that he can relate to them.”

Yeah but this is different. I’ll tell you why. The Rebbe for example once asked this American kid with the clipped on yarmulka etc. what he was into, and he said baseball. So then the Rebbe discussed with him the rules of baseball and applied it to the boys upcoming bar mitzvah (how he needs to be a player now with mitzvos not a fan.)

Here, this was a black hatted Yeshiva bochur who the Rebbe asked about touring for himself. You don’t think he had any common discussion in learning etc they could have connected on? And the bochur didn’t tell him anything about his personal touring interests.

“The only possible take-away you wanted from that story was to imply that the rabbi was inferior to Lubavitchers. Why do you still think we don’t see through these things? Or, at this point, have you just pulled out the stops and decided to be an all-purpose troll account because you’re angry at
us?”

Na neither. My point was two fold. My main point was actually emphasizing what we expect of Rebbes in other kreizin – if the bochur didn’t bat an eyelash, that would show he would think this is normal behaviour for a Rebbe.

I suppose a secondary side point that emerges from the story is that many Torah leaders on different levels of Avodas Hashem use the title of Rebbe. Like I said I don’t think, based on what I’ve read about Rav Shteinman zatzal, that he would be personally interested in touring. This Rebbe did. So I’m not gonna treat him with the and level of respect as my Rebbe just because they use the same title. Fair?

Neville (post 1 for neville)

“Okay, you may respond on the condition that you either a) apologize to belittling our Rebbeim in a way that isn’t a loaded apology like “I’m sorry you misunderstood what I said,” or b) answer whether or not you believe the Rebbe is moshiach, which is what you’ve been skirting all along.
Otherwise, the answer is still you; you’re still the one skirting.”

OK I find this demand ridiculous or should I say unreasonable. I definitely won’t apologise as if I did, I would be admitting that I posted that to belittle Rebbes as you say, and now I am sorry. Since that was not my intention I have no intention of apologising.

In fact, to give a comparison, if I were to demand an apology from Sam for posting the story by the kiddush above, for daring to belittle the Lubavitcher Rabbi, I’m sure you would be one of the first to quickly point out that that’s ridiculous and in fact, by demanding he apologise for posting his personal experience and personal impression formed thereof, I am in fact admitting that the Rabbi was belittling lubavitch, not sam who is merely repeating what happened.

My choices would amount to condemning the Rabbi but saying he is a odd case who doesn’t represent the klal, or explaining how sam probably misunderstood him.

Since no one here is claiming the first, and giving weak explanations of the latter (as I will address), my conclusion is that I was right he isn’t an odd case and youre just demanding an apology because it’s politically incorrect.

As for b) i don’t see why I should post my own opinion or shitta. If its to assess my credibility, than I can provide Torah Torah sources either way for that debate. In fact b is ridiculous altogether because I already did exactly that on that all too long 19 page thread. If you have anything else to ask our sources to bring that I didn’t address then, you’re welcome to bring them after THIS topic / question is clarified so we can address one question at a time in a mesudar manner.

Rso regarding your assumptions of the Rebbe based on usual quotes you’ve seen from the Rebbe (btw did you learn them in context or just see a few listed somewhere out of context):

If I would tell you “Anochi omed bein Hashem uveineichem” and “I will provide all your Gashmius needs if you listen to My commands,” you would think I’m a narcissistic lunatic or apikorus.

However knowing who Moshe Rabbeinu was, no one of course describes him that way.

Regarding The former quote, if I would say it, it would be untrue and narcissistic for me to believe it’s true. By Moshe Rabbeinu it was a statement of fact. In fact, he wasn’t even boasting about himself, as the Torah testifies that he was the humblest of all time. He was simply stating fact intended to help us in our Avodas Hashem (anything in Torah is to guide us in Avodas Hashem.)

Regarding the second it can sound like a meisis umeidiach, a avoda zara etc. However with Moshe, it was simply Shechina midaberes mitoch grono shel Moshe, and the I and Me were in fact referring to Hashem and not Moshe as an individual.

Get my point? Basically, when your talking of someone acknowledged by many many Torah leaders, Rabbanim etc. as a Nassi Byisrael or similar terms, than the same words mean something completely different than if Joe or I say them. And even if you choose to go by others who didn’t see the Rebbe that way, you can a) understand why we do, and b) be careful when you’re disagreeing with the Rebbe to word it properly and respectfully, quoting the actual dissenting sources and not your opinion etc. (In case this gets posted out of order this is the second post following the first addressed to non political and rso)

No political, Rso ( I think my reply to him addresses your post as well):

“Once a person has chosen to believe that a certain person is a Tzadik who has no Yetzer HaRah and any of his statements are a direct expression of Divine Will no further discussion (on any matter pertaining to the Tzadik or his teachings) is possible. The strength of such a belief is precisely in the fact that no positive evidence is presented for it and therefore there is nothing to refute. Instead the focus is on wonderous and miraculous stories about the Tzadik.”

OK I can see where you base your assumption non political as I have heavily emphasised the miracles and ruach hakodesh aspect to show that the Rebbe was not a regular person/ Rav (or tzadik as per non lubavitch perlance).

But I was writing that assuming we shared a certain common knowledge or ground which I now see is lacking. So I’ll back up.

If someone random came to town and performed wonders while saying strange things that no one else said, I’d agree with your post above. But that’s not the case.

The Rebbe from his childhood on, was not typical (in an attempt at brevity I’ll leave it at that, I can elaborate more if wanted.)

By the time he arrived in America in 1940, and the Frierdiker Rebbe sent chassidim to greet him at the port here was where he was holding, by the Frierdiker Rebbes description: “My son in law knows the entire shas with Tosfos, Rosh and Ran as well as all printed chassidishe seforim.”

The Rebbes tremendous knowledge of Torah is evident by his Farbrengens, where he would sit for hours on end, quoting from kol HaTorah Jul by heart with no notes, a fact that greatly impressed Rabbi JB Soloveitchik zatzal.

The chassidim got to know the Rebbe and see how he was careful with every detail in halacha as would of course be expected from such a tremendous gaon.

Not just chassidim, people from all walks who met the Rebbe beforehand knew he was a very special young man and a tremendous gaon.

That all went without saying. Within lubavitch, it is impressive to be a tremendous gaon, but we’re not overly impressed if it’s something the average person could do, with the time and investment put into it. We have plenty of very learned people within lubavitch, Geonim (by today’s standard for sure) etc, not like the Rebbe of course, that’s highly unusual, but very learned people. We respect them off course, we stand up when they come in, respectfully ask them on halacha and hashkafa, consider it an honour to marry in to their families and spend time around them – at their shabbos tables etc.

We have tens of people like this within lubavitch. But we are not overly impressed with them, although we respect them greatly, because we know they are still regular people like me and young, just much farther along avoda wise

And this is the respect I see paid by other chassidim and litvaks to their own Roshei Yeshivos Rabbanim Rebbe’s etc for the most part.

How do you know if someone is not normal? Has reached a spiritual height that is out of your league but precisely because of that can help you in ways the “regular” Rabbanim etc can’t?

When you see evidence that aside from all the above (which goes without saying, otherwise what are you even proving), they can sense and see things normal people can’t. They can read thoughts and see straight into ones soul. That’s what u mean by that proof.meaning its proof that the Rebbe is beyond our league. I can finish shas three times and still be as far from that as I am now. It’s simply a different status- a tzadik of Tanya.

Btw rso, thinking of it, there were contemporary Tzaddikim who manifested these signs as well, amongst them, the Gerrer Rebbe, who had ruach hakodesh. The Baba Sali. And one that may surprise you, the Satmar Rebbe Reb Yoel who sharply disagreed with the Rebbe in regards to the approach towards eretz Yisrael etc.

But as their chassidim treated them as tzaddikim of the Tanya (and I’ve also heard ruach hakodesh stories about the former two myself) we also regard them with great respect due to a tzadik of Tanya. With regards to Reb Yoel, while we of course hold by our Rebbes shitta, we would never put ourselves on the same footing as Reb Yoel and say things like “in my opinion he makes no sense (because of course I understand Torah better than him) and he is wrong.” Cvs that’s disrespecting Talmidei chachamim.rather we would either cite our Rebbes view on the matter, or see in his own words where he may have misunderstood our shitta. That’s where I say that expect the same from you rso. You can hold higher of your own Rebbe, but until you also know kol HaTorah Baal peh inside out yourself, don’t think you can put your understanding of nigle on the Rebbe’s level. You can say his chassidim haven’t understood this matter to the extent that satisfies me, or I don’t understand how the Rebbe’s statement here is in line with this mishna here etc. But to put yourself on the same footing and speak dismissively of the Rebbe – that is a problem

Regarding the righteous indignation in reaction to the story I posted: I would understand it if it was a mashal we lubavitchers made up or even if it true, but used in a class on the “difference between our Rebbes and theirs ” (just to clarify we never had such a class.)

But that’s not the case. It was a true story that went around the week it happened in the city it happened in. Ok?

Now judging by your reactions, I would correct my assumption (based on my personal experience) that this kind of Rebbe is common. And just to clarify, I have heard enough about HaRav Shteinman zatzal and HaRav Chaim Kanievsky to never think of attributing this level to them. They are on the level of Toraso umanaso and could care less about touring.

So what I see is that the bachur was shocked, but you would also be shocked because you would also expect more.

However, the fact it did happen, and i had another similar encounter personally with a granddaughter of a similar minded Rebbe shows me it does exist.

So would you agree with my rule of thumb that we accord due respect to Rebbes depending on their level? Or would you treat the Rebbe of my story with the same degree of respect as you would HaRav Shteinman zatzal?

Rso welcome back! I was looking forward to your response. Regarding pesach Sheni I think we’ve both explained ourselves so we can just agree to disagree, which is fine. Ain deioseihen shavos. I think I have solid basis to see it as a demand to fulfil the mitzvah but you can see it your own way.

Regarding where in the thread you disliked demand, same here. It is long. If it’s important to you up on it up iyh some point and post for you.

Regarding apikorsus cvs (and I’m still surprised by the ease with which that term gets thrown about, I’m used to the opposite within lubavitch) you may want to see the well known chazal “Im harishonim kmalachim anu kbnei adam, vim heim kbnei adam, anu kachamorim.”

It is for that reason that amoraim cannot disagree with tannaim and a later beis din cannot revoke a gzeira of a previous beis din. In simple terms, we know it as yeridas hadoros

Coffee addict:

“Moshe rabbeinu worked on himself to make himself a tzaddik (maaseh where they brought someone to draw
him)”

As has been noted on this forum that Sefer is highly questionable. Rashi and medrash bring how from the beginning he wasn’t a typical person- ie born walking and taking, mohul etc. That being said there definitely were tzaddikim who did work on themselves until they reached the level of beinoni, and thereafter were granted the level of tzadik by Hashem (tzadik involves control over emotions, not practical expressions of thought speech and action and therefore cannot be attained simply through working on oneself. Hashem decides who He will grant this level of avoda)

“Additionally nowhere does it term benonim in Gemara like you, Benoni could be either someone that is “50/50” or someone that has at least one mitzvah”

If that definition of beinoni were the case (as the Alter Rebbe brings in Tanya) there is no way Rabba would mistake himself for a beinoni (even though he was a tzadik) as he never did any aveiros…

“We say Yosef is Yosef hatzadik because he was עומד
בנסוין”

Yes so he was a tzadik who stood up to his yetzer hara even in extremely difficult circumstances (beinoni), so thereafter Hashem granted him the level of tzadik (where he didn’t have to struggle anymore to fight doing bad, but fight the tolerance for bad. And he ended up a tzadik gamur as well where he completely evicted his yetzer hara and had no tolerance for it.)

“yet there are four people who didn’t sin and only died “because of the נחש”

Good point. Aveiros are different for tzaddikim than they are for us. For us its actually doing/ speaking / thinking something wrong halachically. For tzaddikim its not being in line with what Hashem would expect from then on their level. Ex: Dovid and Batsheva. For them its considered a chet – chet as in chisaron.

“And I highly doubt the בעל התניא thought he was a בינוני”

And? He was holding by the avoda of tzaddikim. He wrote the Tanya, also known as the Sefer shel beinonim, and also wrote a Sefer shel tzaddikim which unfortunately was burnt. Point being he could only write the Sefer if he was holding there…

Syag: as you wish. Btw thinking it over I was going to address yours first as it is the one with the clearest answer. Note I didn’t scold you for your sharp post – you are free to speak to me as you wish – I am no Rebbe lol. Just on a personal level its easier for me to take in a respectfully worded post and respond likewise when the post is similarly worded.

Coffee addict appreciate your post as well will respond when I can. Good Shabbos!

Thanks coffee addict. It’s good to see that in not just talking to myself 🙂

Samthenylic

“When we talk about being “Mekarev es hageulah”, talking about Moshiach and Geulah takes a distant BACK SEAT to doing mizvos & maasim tovim for the sake of doing “rotzon Hashem”. CASE CLOSED!”

Sam the fact you see the two as a contradiction once more shows that you have allot to learn…

Coffee addict:

“If that’s a beinoni, I guess we’re all reshaim according to the Baal hatanya and really the only tzaddikim are ?”

See my reply to iitft above on his Tanya post. Happy to elaborate more if desired.

Post 5:
Me: “And if we have evidence that our Rebbe is a tzadik of Tanya”

Rso: “Evidence?! First, I was taught that we chassidim had emunas chachamim.”

Yes what does that have to do with anything? In fact a weighty factor of ours in selecting the Rebbe was the Frierdiker Rebbe’s estimation of him. But just because we have emunas chachamim it doesn’t mean we don’t lack evidence.

“Second, you have no evidence, just stories that you each spread about him.”

Thousands of first person personal encounters told by the people it happened to, from all walks of klal Yisrael, on JEM, does not amount to stories we have spread about him. Lol. Aside from my own parent’s stories. Friend’s parents stories etc. (and my very own and my generations very own, as some have come out just this year by the kinnus, of course. But that’s touching on a different topic.)

“Third, sorry, but I DO NOT believe that he was a tzaddik. Many, many zchusim, yes, but not a tzaddik. Look at the fights he had with Satmar, Rav Shach and anyone who didn’t believe in Lubavich. Look- at his self-interest in promoting himself as the Nasi of the dor (something, which I’ve mentioned in another thread, has no meaning nowadays except in Lubavich, as the concept does not exist) and the probable Mashiach.”

Ok. I guess I am sorry for you, because you may be guilty of disrespecting a Talmid chochom (by the way you write about him as a result of your assumptions.) which is a problem halachically to put it lightly. No, I am not trying to attack you, I really just feel bad for you. If you would apply the same diligence in researching your assumptions above, as you did your fact checking on EXACTLY which year every Rebbe I mentioned above was nistalek (which is great), you would likely come away with a very different picture. I am not going to get into the dirt as that is not my role- I actually only heard of the Rav Shach debacle from this very forum- and as people were questioning me on it, I figured it behooved me to know exactly what people were on about. There’s a very factual, I would say as non biased as can be, shiur on the topic on YU. But that’s the most I’ll say on the topic.

Rso
“At least you could learn from CS who usually writes respectfully, and certainly tries too. (Who would have thought that I would compliment CS?!)”

Appreciated.

Rso

“You said we have to demand Mashiach. As far as I understand the Lubavicher rebbe said you have to demand Mashiach. Although I don’t believe in that at all, I didn’t dispute that – at least not since this latest round started on November . ”

Right. You did before that. Which is what I was responding to when I restated the question. I suppose I could just stop here, as it seems you have retracted your objection… But because I took awhile, I will finish off…

“But I DID dispute your claim that the sources you quoted (the first of which was lama nigara) were demands and I demonstrated how none of them were. (The only exception being the fifth source, quoted later in the discussion, that the Chofetz Chaim did write that we should demand Mashiach, and I was the one who presented the source!)”

The one I said was a demand was Lama nigara. It is a demand to have the right to bring the korban pesach. Again, Lama nigara doesn’t mean, ” Is it possible for us to bring the korban too somehow?” It means, “Why should we miss out?!” Which is a demand for the opportunity to bring the korban Pesach.

As far as it being addressed to MOshe- it doesn’t matter- by the harsh punishment of Korach, it was made abundantly clear, and as Moshe and Aharon said themselves “Lo aleichem tlunoseichem, ki im al Hashem.”

The only difference was that by Korach it was an inappropriate challenge, whereas Pesach sheni was a welcome challenge, as it showed the Yidden’s affinity for the mitzvos.

Now, in the follow up, there were objections brought to any kind of strong language when requesting things from Hashem. Hence, I brought the other sources which were all strong language and not a meek request.
Micheini na- an implied threat, or at least a “stomping of the feet” if you will, if Hashem doesn’t forgive the Yidden, not a meek request.

etc.

and I wrote by those demand OR strong request for that reason…

“Now, I can’t make it any clearer than this (and if you still don’t get it, then you really shouldn’t be posting to a forum which requires a little basic clear-thinking): DO YOU ADMIT THAT THOSE FOUR SOURCES YOU QUOTED ARE NOT, I REPEAT, NOT, DEMANDS? Yes or No, PLEEEEEAAAAAASE!”

Yes not all 4 are demands (I only said the first one was and I still see it as such.). Happy now? But the question had been lost. And your original question I was answering you retracted upon seeing the chofetz chaim. So we’re good now on that one. Yeah?

I don’t know know syag that’s not the way I see it. The way I see it, neville and Co see any thread I open as a subversive attempt to convince everyone that the Rebbe is moshiach. And that is not what I meant.one thread I offered to answer others questions on what meshichism is, how it is etc m wasnt my idea. Then this thread I thought we could all agree on other topics within moshiach and Geula. But neville just can’t let go of the idea of the topic of moshiach and Geula being synonymous with the Rebbe being moshiach and me trying to subtly get that across. Which is quite frustrating for me.

Maybe I should just go back to my lubavitch groups. At least we understand each other. Here I feel either i am misunderstood or am accused of misunderstanding others.
I may just have to join stuartw on his coffee break if there isn’t a common language

Rso, ok I admit I’m trying to figure out what the problem is. I remember somewhere along the line, you had a problem with saying “moshiach needs to come already .” I thought it was the strong language – I used the word demand. So I brought other cases where demands / strong language was a good thing.

You responded by saying those weren’t demands they were just strong language.

Ok im honestly confused and figured I should just clear this up before nitpicking over each source – whether it’s demand or strong language because I don’t see what the difference is is. if the problem is speaking up strongly, it doesn’t matter what form it takes. So can you help me understand what exactly is the issue, and where your source for that is, so I can understand how my sources do or do not address it?

Rso your jumping too fast. I know I’m referencing from before that. Because my renewing the thread was to address the original issue you brought up beforehand. Patience please. I’ll get to it very soon iyh

Listen people I tried opening the understanding chabad thread earlier today, it has not been approved. I agree with the mods decision- it does infringe on extremely delicate subjects, and they will probably frequently find themselves in a quandary whether they can approve many posts. So sorry to disappoint you guys, but no need to hold your breath. You can discuss with any proper Lubavitcher chossid, or walk into your nearest yeshiva. As for me, I will continue to “skirt” topics that I feel are too controversial/ triggered, because I see they cannot be addressed openly, respectfully and honestly on this forum, which I am fine with.

RSo: In short, I wrote demand/ strong request, because, as I recall, you had a problem with any kind of strong language. You chose to emphasize demand over request. To me it is a matter of semantics. But i would need to look up the start of your question which is somewhere on page three, to be able to properly post your original problem, and thus show these sources adress that. No time though right now

@syag

Fun fact and story:
Fun fact: the Rebbe told the heads of the first lubavitcher seminary in EY that their tznius standards should be “azoi vi BY”

In fact there is a whole tznius club movement based on this in EY where the Lubavitcher women went to a group of BY principals and asked them detailed questions about their tznius Standards so they could tell their club members exactly how the Rebbe wanted them to dress…

Story: when I was in high school our teacher, who also taught in the local Yeshiva, told us how a litvak came storming in the doors of Yeshiva questioning how our Rebbeim could dare denigrate the chofetz chaim by ranking him as a beinoni. After he showed him what a beinoni of Tanya is (someone who has a yetzer hara but never does any aveira, big or small, in thought speech or action) the guy left expressing that not many litvaks think that highly of the chofetz chaim

Samthenylic
I have seen from your other posts that were not talking the same language and you have no clue about moshiach and Geula, so I won’t take your fiery post personally nor am I particularly impressed.

Post three (final): What I actually find ironic neville is that there are plenty of things that lubavitchers wish on other yidden: that they all keep Torah and mitzvos. That they learn Chassidus etc.

What you won’t find any lubavitcher who frequents this forum (as there is the EY branch of meshichism which is more extreme I suppose, like all EY things tend to be in the frum world) trying to convince any non lubavitcher to accept the Rebbe as moshiach. We obsess with the topic of moshiach, and find everything about it fascinating. There is a whole world of learning within that topic. The tiny detail of personal positions on that topic is not even discussed regularly or often within lubavitch ourselves, and when it is, it is by analysing or discussing the various sources for either side, many of which are based of the Rebbe’s sichos ( used to prove either side.) But non lubavitchers who haven’t even learned a sicha are not shayach to the discussion, at least in such a forum. It’s like talking to the vegan about korbanos. Or the goy about how you live your life based on bitachon. Too different to come together on unless you’ve learned sichos yourself

So I find it ironic that you think that everything is wink wink subtly convincing you that the Rebbe is moshiach when every (ok most) lubavitchers actually shy away from the topic and aren’t so conformable with it altogether.

However I don’t know if we’re correct. You could argue that moshiach is something that will affect the whole klal Yisrael so you should know what we whisper about as we are the ones who Koch in moshiach.

If you really want to see sources for both sides, I suppose you can attempt opening a thread entitled who can be moshiach? And we can discuss the topic from a learned point of view. Maybe the mids can be helpful by blocking solely emotional posts or rants etc so it won’t shut down?

But for my part im very happy just discussing things that we can agree on, or at least bridge the gap on, and hearing
different thoughts etc