Forum Replies Created
whats a 4th degree burn? If I may ask
Now not to proof it from the wording in the abarbanel because in that we have our own opinions, but I think from the artscroll which looks pretty clear. Would be better (Which is also why I brought the artscroll to begin with. As I mentioned the first time.)
Artscroll quote on this gemora in sanhedrin regarding doniel being moshiach “(Abarbanel explains that it is possible for the Messiah to be among the resurrected (Yeshuos Meshicho lyun 2 ch. 1)”
(I think – that they brought the abarbanel to explain this gemora in sanhedrin which most ppl wont understand because everyone knows that moshiach will come from those that are alive. so they brought the abarbanel to tell you that, there are opinions that say no, moshiach can come from those ahat have passed away.
Btw isnt someone that twists the words of chazal an “am haaretz”? Meaning he doesnt know how to learn which is why he’s twisting them?
Now that we finished this topic…
Can hashem make something too heavy for himself to pick up?
I think thats enough for one stomachache 🙂
1. I forgot to mention (where you saw my compliment) that i dont either agree with some of the not nice terms you use either (just saying, even though you’ll probably say its a matter of opinion).
2. How’s life 🙂
I hope your not getting any white hairs over this (I’m not).
If everyone calms down a bit, life would be even better.
Sorry for calling @lmt an am haaretz
(social media doesnt prove anything so I would have to take it back unless I meet him and its takeh true)
*not that we should be calling ppl am haaratzim in general
V’ein loch reshus leharher achreha.
I think I mentioned quite a few times that this is incorrect
Quote “I haven’t called anyone an am haaretz yet,”
You are correct,
as far as I know you never used the term “am haaretz” but you have used a few terms which have the same or very similar definition as an am haaretz
He very clearly disagrees with rashi
Rashi says only doniel
Abarbanel says even this other person
Step 1 I’m not saying you don’t have questions”
,Step 2 – “but they way you write is just wrong, and dont deserve an answer even if you wanted one
Step 3 – “which you dont”
I have a question. Doesn’t step 3 contradict step 1?”
Read it again…
“Which you don’t” is going on the fact that he doesn’t want an answer. And not step 3
In general i stopped answering you because i find most of what you write is plain stupidity and you’re just here to ignite some fires (I’m not saying you don’t have questions, but they way you write is just wrong, and dont deserve an answer even if you wanted one – which you dont)
But i feel that for this i should reply.
All of the sudden you see there is such a concept so all you could say is we dont hold of him?
there was an argument for quite a while on a number of threads that had this question and finally you get an answer so you switch tactics/subjects?
The difference i see between you and @rso is, that @rso at least argues with the concept at hand, if its relevant or not, you on the other hand give me the impression of stam an am haaretz that argues on random things that have nothing to do with the argument but rather just to ignite a fire.
I know you or someone else will say something “smart” similar to the things you said before but that’s ok most people that never learned say the same thing during such an argument.
Same thing regarding “haters” that you guys dont like us calling you.
during an argument you can say certain things but if your arguing on one thing and someone brings in a total different subject together with mocking at the same time, THATS called a “hater”!
were arguing on a specific topic here whether moshiach can be from the dead other then doniel.
you said no i said yes.
so hears how you can look at it
according to rashi no
according to abbarbanel yes
who said rashi and abbarbanel have to agree?
who said that rashi learnt the same thing in the yerushalmi it could be he argues with the abbarbanel, and learns the story a different way (there are a few ways to learn that story).
you seem pretty adamant to say that rashi and abarbanel agree.
the abarbanel is trying to explain a story that no on was able to explain, and he learnt it from this gemoro that it could make sense – that from the fact that the gemoro says doniel can be moshiach, he says so to we can use that same logic for our story (remember this goes against rashi that says only doniel)
He brings his proof that MOSHIACH can come from the dead from the fact that the gemora says doniel can be moshiach.
The abbarbanel holds that moshiach can come from the dead using this gemora, (meaning he doesn’t learn the gemora the way you were learning it till now, that it can only be doniel but rather he learns, that from the fact that doniel can be moshiach we can use the same logic for anyone else that passes away) and that why he has no problem with the yerushalmi.
You have to remember the abarbanel is trying to answer a question that someone might have regarding this story. So he says the question is not a question, because we already see such a thing in sanhedrin that moshiach can come from the dead.
In your words you can say the abarbanel is arguing with rashi.
QUOTE “I would assume that the answer to all three is yes”
I agree, i think the same way and i feel that the rebbe also does.
Remember WE cant argue on the arizal and beis yosef as we dont know them nor can we argue on anyone else but its a matter of opinion.
AS I SAID MANY TIME THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WE CAN ARGUE ON THIS IS A MATTER OF OPINION
you say i cant prove it to YOU, im not looking to prove it to you. you had questions which i tried answering, if you dont understand it ask somone else.
now regarding the abbarbanel you can look in the makor i told you (where he brings an explanation regarding the story of the “aravi” (the story of moshiach’s birth) and at the end he says:
ואל יקשה עליך שיהי’ מלך המשיח מן המתים כי כבר נסתפקו על זה בפ’ החלק ואמר רב אסי אם מן חייא הוא כגון רבינו הקדוש אם מן מתייא הוא כגון דניאל איש חמודות
i will explain a bit but you wont take anything i say anyway so go look it up yourself.
throughout the entire explanation he is trying to explain the story. and in middle he says that moshiach will pass away and then get up with techiyas hameisim (nothing to do with doniel yet) then he bring the proof for what he says and brings the gemoro in sanhedrin.
so no, he is not trying to explain this gemoro in sanhedrin, he is trying to explain something else and bring this gemoro in sanhedrin as proof that moshiach can come from the dead.
quote “You could use your statement just as well if you were a … trying to convince us”
you’re the one trying to convince me not the other way around 🙂
you asked a few questions which i feel i answered to the best of my ability if you still dont understand thats ok, im fine with that. ask someone else that might explain it better btw there are many more mekoros (which you call twisted. some may be, some may not). so if you are interested go look up ALL the sources regarding moshiach, if your not then i understand why you have questions. – you dont need to tell us if you interested or not.
were not gonna get into if the Rebbe fit the catogory or not because thats a matter of opinion which you disagree with so no point in going there.
but let me ask you like this
how were they able to say to say the arizal was moshiach did he fit the rambams critiria?
did the teacher of the rama fit the critiria?
did all the other people that were thought to be moshiach fit the full critiria?
Quote “That is a very big jump from the quote. The Sdei Chemed says that in every generation there is someone muchshar – fit – to be the Moshiach, and you somehow think that that gives the right to any person/group to choose whoever they think is the greatest of that generation. But the Sdei Chemed doesn’t even say that his talmidim held he was the greatest of the generation. Don’t forget we are talking of the generation of the Beis Yosef and other gedolei Yisroel of such great stature.”
i think any normal person assumes moshiach is the greatest person and not some beggar on the street (although it is possible).
And you still never explained why they said their teacher is moshiach and please explain the line i quoted.
again, you’re not proving to me that what im saying is against pshat you’re just basing it on the fact that im learning it different than you, which is fine – we both have an opinion. but to say that it is against pshat is wrong to say.
we have different opinions on a lot of things. but to say everyone disagrees with me i think your wrong.
Pls explain what was wrong with what I said pls
the claims that the rebbe is not moshiach started from the beginning. I was trying to answer the point (as you saw very clearly) why we said he is mosbiach back then (no this is not something I made up today)
The next part was explaining how it is possible for moshiach to come from the dead (this was not spoken about 25 yrs ago because we didnt have to go down that path, meaning no one said it definitely cant be from the dead)
Meaning all along there where two arguments 1 how can you say the rebbe was moshiach 2 how can you say the rebbe is moshiach – both of which I feel I answered
“I would almost buy these justifications for deification”
We’re talking about moshiach now
Like RSO you argue on things that are not being discussed
Atzmus was brought in for a bit but has since moved to another thread
You guys liked what I said so much but had to argue so you found a few words to argue on.
Whichever way you slice it, you have an answer. whether be is alive or not.
This is where this line comes in: for those that want answers there are answers, for those that dont want they will never find no matter what you say.
I know this type of line was said a bunch of times on this thread but now everyone can see it clearly
1 a. When you have an argument with someone your supposed to argue on the same thing –
I think I said 3 times about the abarbanel and you keep arguing on a diff point that I never brought up.
b. Just to make it simple since anything i say you will disagree with so I’ll just quote from the artscroll which I assume everyone here holds of
“Begining of Footnote 42: If the Messiah is currently alive, he is certainly Rebbi. If the Messiah is someone who has a ready died, he is Daniel. (Abarbanel explains that it is possible for the Messiah to be among the resurrected (Yeshuos Meshicho lyun 2 ch. 1).)”
the abarbanel says nothing about being doniel rather about being from the dead
The point is that there are opinions that say moshiach can come from the dead.
2 let me make this a little bit simpler (the supposed term)
וכן הוא בכל דור ודור צ”ל אחד מוכשר שמא יזכו (ועפי”ז כתבו ג”כ תלמידי הארי”זל שבימיו הי׳האריז”ל
How I think it’s translated
In every generation there is someone capable of being moshiach in case the yidden are meritus/זוכה (or זכו however you want to translate this)
Based on this this, the talmidim of the arizal wrote that in the days of the arizal it was the arizal.
What I take from this is that they assumed that moshiach is the greatest person in that generation and they said Who is greater then the a arizal – if they felt there was someone greater then the arizal they would have said that it was that person
= I think the rebbe is the greatest person in our generation so if I’m looking for a candidate for moshiach I think that it should be him – the greatest person in our generation.
You on the other hand are not a lubavicher so you think that someone else was greater then the rebbe I’m ok with that -everyone has there own opinion. So I would assume that you say that that person is moshiach.
1st one i wasnt so clear when i brought the abarbanel but i explained it in the next one
2 ME “if moshiach is from the dead it doeasnt necessarily mean only doniel – look in abarbanel thst i quoted”
RSO “And as to the Abarbanel which you miscite (I made that word up because I think it will get a lot of usage when it comes to arguing with lubavichers): after explaining that the Mishnah davka says that שמו של משיח was created on erev Shabbos, and not Moshiach himself, as it is referring to various characteristics of Moshiach, he then cites the Gemoro in Sanhedrin 98b where the talmidim cited the names of Moshiach as similar to that of their rebbes:
ואין ספק שכל אחד מהחכמים האלה היה דורש טוב לעצמו ומיחס שם המשיח כשמו כי דבי ר’ שילא קראוהו שילה בשם רבם…
Once again, HE DOES NOT WRITE that students should believe their rebbes are Moshiach, and he does not even say that those students did believe as much. (And again, if those talmidim would have believed as much it would NOT have been based on lubavich-like manufactured fictitious characteristics.)”
3. ME “But you only had a problem with the part that it can be from the dead which is why I quoted the abarbanel only for that reason”
RSO “I saw that the Abarbanel did NOT say that the talmidim claimed their rebbes were Moshiach.
remind me again what were arguing on?
Depends on if your a lubavitcher or a litvak
That’s what your answer will be
1. “Just for the record, you will not find any post of mine saying that Moshiach can’t be from someone who has died”
It’s funny how until I brought the abarbanel you said if it’s from the dead its only doniel now that I brought the abarbanel your saying that its not from sanhedrin.
But B”H we both agree that moshiach can be from the dead and not necessarily only doniel.
2. You are 100 % correct regarding the sdei chemed. Nowhere does he say its a mitzvah to believe that your rebbe is moshiach BUT he does say that in each generation there is someone that is muchsher to be moshiach and each set of talmidim said that if moshiach is the greatest person in that generation’s who is greater then our teacher which is why they said that their teacher is moshiach
וכן הוא בכל דור ודור צ”ל אחד מוכשר שמא יזכו (ועפי”ז כתבו ג”כ תלמידי הארי”זל שבימיו הי׳האריז”ל
This is after a long hemshech
(The term supposed was used in the same way I assumed u use the term apikorses – just trying to bring out your point in a very strong way)
Quote “And do you remember the story of yoshke/S”T/Mendelsohn/Geiger etc? If someone being called a kofer is a proof that he is not, we should all have xmas trees!
Just because B”H Klal Yisroel decided that the Rambam was not a kofer does not mean that no one should be called a kofer.”
What I was trying to say just flew way over your head
The one who is warping things here in mefoshim is you. we both clearly saw sdei chemed/abarbanel and you, that can’t take a loss are twisting it in such a way that even I couldn’t do
Even if I tried
I love how there are 3 threads on the same topic.
@rebbitzin I would like to publicly thank you for starting a new thread (I’m a bit jealous cuz I was thinking of doing it too but I couldnt think of a good topic)
@mods any idea for a good 4th one (a good name)
(Jealosy in kedusha is good)
Btw do you know the history of the rambam – yes he was called a kofer, ppl burned his seforim, and made up alot of things about him………..
Look what happened a couple of years later he is considered a majer halachic authority….
In those days if you called someone that went against the rambam, a hater he would say the same thing that @dy says.
Yes, all the gedolim were against the rambam….
It’s ok for a gadol to say; that something is totally wrong, and then everyone later realizes that its not wrong…
There are many concepts in chabad that the gedolim used to say is totally wrong and the gedolim condemned it but slowy ppl are realizing that those concepts are not wrong.
(I’m not saying in any way “my rebbe is better the your rebbe” or that the gedolim are wrong in what they said.)
(Dont start quoting me that thats what they say about everything)
I feel I mentioned your question very clearly but I’ll say it again:
If something is Torah it must be said straight out, as is even if it sounds weird, toras emes is emes – truth is not worried about questions –
Because Moshe gave a very vague description about when he is coming back the yidden got confused and made an eigel….
I know it sounds very weird and very extreme but its the same thing.
If someone were to call him something nasty, would you defend it as someone’s opinion
I may disagree with it but will I not let him voice his opinion
Btw ppl do use really degrading word on all sorts of ppl on TYW and the mods allow it
“Maybe some of the mods are Lubavitch”
I doubt it, othwrwise some posts would be taken down
And certain treads would not be started 🙂
I always wondered how ppl misunderstood the rebbes words. I just got my answer from the way you just argued on what I said/twisted what i said
Did you know that becuase of Moshe the yidden made an eigel, miraglim came abt (שלך לך לדעתך) moshe was the one who asked that the eiruv rav be saved and look what came out of them…
Yidden had so much suffering because of the way ppl learnt torah….. Bgashmius ubruchnius – Much worse then what you claim abt chabad
Are you gonna say Moshe/moshiach was a kofer C”v or that hashem should have never given us the torah c”v??
I disagree with the way you understood about what I said about gedolim – yes accourding to their opinion it’s a wrong way of learning but thier are those that disagree and say its correct….
No one ever said that davening TO the rebbe is ok.
And no, at face value the rebbe Cleary bring sources to what He says.
And No, I’m not needed to farentfer the rebbes sichas.
No one is trying to convince you to agree with chabad you were the one that asked the question.
need i say more?
*I cant stop him from voicing his opinion
I love how when TT Says shlita it gets taken out but when someone wants to make fun your allowed to have it
It’s All a matter of opinion, why cant he write it??
Maybe some of the mods are Lubavitch
Not sure if this answer your question but here goes
For now ill go accourding to your second way you assumed the sicha which means the concept is correct but some ppl misunderstood it and daven Directly to the rebbe
There is a concept I’m sure you heard of – I forgot the words offhand but its something to do with hashem gave way to the goyim to say things against him by writing certain things in Torah
There were the tzidukim baitosim and others that learnt Torah and totally learnt it wrong. Are you gonna say that hashem shouldt have given the Torah?? I hope u get what I’m trying to say
The rebbe said a sicha – some ppl may have learnt it wrong but if its part of Torah it has to be said as is. no point of hiding it… Even if ppl learnt it wrong and took it totally out of context it’s still Torah
(you might disagree with some parts but its backed up with mekoros (not as halacha as the rebbe says himself but rather as hergesh – but its backed up with makoros) and unless you know all the mekoros and all the merforshim on them you cant say its kfira)
I know u’ll say “but our gedolim said its kfira” and it’s a mitzvah lfarsem or something similar to that. but that’s a lame excuse. as you say get better tactic. bring all mokoros where you see that its totally against pshat in this – not just “the ramchal or NH says” even if there is one safer that holds of it means that its not kfira even if majority dont agree with that sefer.
Dont either answer abt hergesh that’s not either a question as I just wrote.
@rso you agreed with me on this part already in your last post
But you only had a problem with the part that it can be from the dead which is why I quoted the abarbanel only for that reason
@rso the one warping things here is you
( Btw why did each one have to find a makor in Torah finding that thier rebbes name fits with moshiach ??
Why did they care if it was their rebbe?
I’m a bit confused if your bring that proof against me from the abarbanel when I said that the proof is from the sdei chemed and the proof of moshiach coming from the dead is from the abarbanel
since your so into “stump the rabbi”
theres a video there regarding sukka (6 min)
search the word “sukka” and it should come up.
im posting a link to the video but the @mod might take it out
i know your arguments regarding the fact that its only a kula etc. but i thought you might enjoy this.
quote from @ncb “all ur saying is ur scared to open a safer and look
How are you even arguing if you never opened a safer?”
The argument is how the shittah fits into the Jewish tradition, not the Chabad tradition. Using seforim from the Rebbe is totally circular logic”
i hope you didnt think i was talking about sukka – i was talking to @rso
but if you knew i was talking to @rso and still say what you say the ill say this
i never knew the rebbe wrote the sdei chemed chasam sofer abarbanel and others i quoted
i knew that would happen if i didnt explain myself.
i brought the sdei chemed is to show how when a tzadik is alive hes student are supposed to believe that he is moshich (quote part of it – כתבו ג״כ תלמידי האר״י ז״ל שבימיו הי׳ האר״י ז״ל) – something which i tried saying before which you couldn’t agree with (i think on page 3)
now that that is answered with the sdei chemed we can go on where we see that meforshim hold that it can be from the dead – and not necessarily only doniel
(im just bringing sources where you see these concepts of
1. students believed throughout the generations that their rebbe is moshiach
2. if moshiach is from the dead it doeasnt necessarily mean only doniel – look in abarbanel thst i quoted Where he clearly raises the possibility that Moshiach may be among those resurrected)
now that you have the abarbanel read the first pirush in rashi again
btw did you have a chance to listen to the shiur
“you are at best a looney and at worst an apikorus” – why do u say these things if you never fully learnt ALL the sources about moshiach – i only quoted 2
obviously there are many opinions on the subject but to say that someone that has backing from one but not the other is a lunatic is a bit overboard
i dont know why we are even having this argument if you yourself said you never looked in ALL the sources about moshiach (not just the ones i quoted)
i hope this clarify’s
all ur saying is ur scared to open a safer and look
How are you even arguing if you never opened a safer?
As far as the radio show how about listen to it instead of hearing other ppls opinion or are you scared to do that too?.
Just shows how ppl argue just say boich sevoros just for the sake of arguing (I know ull say im choshud for making things up – thats fine if you say that. but dont tell me I’m wrong or crazy without looking at what I brought)
Say I’m making things up!
Just for the inyan
שדי חמד פאת השדה מערכת האל”ף כללים אות ע
Abarbanel – yeshuos meshicho iyun 2 ch. 1 – from artscroll
You missed the point that I was trying to make out I quoted the radio show not regarding the fact to say how gedolim like lubavich. yes I did mention you will hear what the gedolim say but what I meant was to show from the Gamora which is about 10 minutes in (it was for @rso)
Now you’re going to say that he cut and pasted from different rabbis a word here in a word there? you can see that about anything in life
We don’t need proof from other people to say how Lubavitch is good
“Anyusername: “@rso did you look in all the merforshim I quoted? Or did you not got that far in learning?”
No. I saw the full texts of Rashi and the Maharsho which you quoted and saw that it had been distorted to mean what it definitely does not. ”
I guess your smarter then the chasam sofer, sdei chemed and others and I need to have more respect for you
Sorry for not giving you that respect
(Listen to the shiur from the famous radio host dovid Lichtenstein called “revisiting our relationship with lubavitch” it might be a good idea to hear what other litvaks, and gedolim he brings down say.)
Over and out
“I don’t need to understand Chabad’s twisted atzmus. I need to understand the ikkarim. ”
1. I heard you the first time and as I said, once you understand the answers everything else will be good besides for the part that we both agree is wrong
Nothing will be twisted hopefully.
2. As I wrote before “no one ever said it can’t be but there was no need to go down that path
@rso did you look in all the merforshim I quoted? Or did you not got that far in learning?
(On a side note by saying that only denial can be moshiach if it is someone from the dead means either you never opened a gemora before or your an apikorus)
Btw I heard a great shiur from the famous radio host dovid Lichtenstein called “revisiting our relationship with lubavitch” it might be a good idea to hear what other litvaks, and gedolim he brings down say.
(When the Goyim came into the Beis Hamikdosh and saw the Keruvim, they dragged them outside and showed everybody “what the Jews really worship”. Yirmiyah Hanavie didn’t bother answering them, because the answer is not as simple as the question. Instead he cried)
(Once R. Zalman Moshe sat near R. Moshe Gurary by a farbrengen and demanded of him, “You are a ‘scholar.’ Tell me, what is the ‘atmzus’ that we hear about so much in chassidus?”
R. Moshe tried to evade the question, “What can one possibly say about atzmus?”
But R. Zalman Moshe was unrelenting, and said, you must tell us, what is atzmus?”
Finally, R. Moshe opened his mouth and tried to explain something. But, at that moment, R. Zalman Moshe immediately turned to him again and gave a playful slap. He then said, the mere fact that it is possible to say something – that’s already not atzmus)
When I said atzmus I obviously don’t mean you will understand Atzmus for that is something that no person can understand
But what I do mean is that there are certain things that if you look at it with a regular eye doesn’t seem to make sense
1. based on the way Hashem created this world we are limited and Hashem is unlimited so how can limited affect the unlimited wouldnt that make us unlimited (obviously on hashems end that is not a question because hashem is unlimited, the question is on our end how do we see it (this part I don’t feel is the correct way to ask the question but I hope u get what I’m trying to say))
2. About Moshe it says חציו ומעלה אלוקים חציו ומטה איש
3. How can Moshe say ונתתי מטר ארצכם בעתו”
4. how can the Zohar say. “מאן פני האדון הוי’, דא רשב”י How can one say such a thing about a human
Before we continue we need to answer these questions – there has to be an answer (there are others but we will start with this)
I never said you don’t understand I said first we have to figure out what your question is and once that question falls off all your questions go all the way as well
Obviously if you don’t understand the concept of atzmus you will have questions
Before we get into the subject of Rebbe we first have to understand general concept of atzmus
Can we switch the the conversation on this thread for a bit just to the topic of Atzmus
And when I say understand we’re not just talkin about according to chassidus but rather also how it fits in halacha
Then we can continue to rebbe
P.s. (On a side note moshiach does not have to be alive – look in the gemora there and the merforshim I quoted)
great question about atzmus
from what i understand your whole problem is on the atzmus part – meaning if the atzmus part makes sense everything else in your questions pretty much makes sense and just needs to be fined tuned.
(as it looks like the moshiach part you can handle especially based on sanhedrin 98B based on poshut pshat and the meforshim there E.G. chasam sofer, pri tzadik, sdei chemed, beis shmuel in shulchan aruch regarding “ksivas get” and others)
there are a few options either we can try explaining it to you or you can ask a lubavitcher you respect (YY Jacobson was mentioned)
i dont mean that davening to the rebbeor anything similar to that is ok once you understand atzmusMarch 26, 2019 11:48 am at 11:48 am in reply to: Chabad? Most non religious Jews are not halachikly Jewish. #1701879
Quote “It would be much better if they hadn’t had a kosher wedding & wouldn’t have been married according to halacha. Then they wouldn’t need a get later”
???March 26, 2019 12:21 am at 12:21 am in reply to: Chabad? Most non religious Jews are not halachikly Jewish. #1701580
“They want the “benefits” of being recognized as a Jew! Kishke! Kaporos (unless you are PETA) Matzos! Coffee Room!! Tuitions! Shidduch crisis! Getting into seminary! Being Jewish is so great!!!! Every goy wants to sign up!!!”
Maybe that’s who started this thread. I mean he still didnt prove he Is jewish. כל הפוסל…