Forum Replies Created
Qwerty, when you follow up your “innocent” question about the Holocaust with your classic “G-d in human” rhetoric, you make it clear that your entire goal is לקנטר, and you’re not actually interested in an answer.
I’ve learned from the months I’ve spent on this site, Lubavichers rarely answer any question
This is a good reason for me to not answer your question. After hundreds of posts that I’ve written to answer the silly arguments here, you still have the audacity to write this. What a disgrace.
Anyone can go back to previous threads and see how your questions were answered time and time again.
This reminds me of what the Rebbe once told Rabbi Tzvi Kahana by dollars (10 Sivan 5750):
ע”פ דין איז “מילתא דעבידא לאיגלויי – לא משקרי אינשי”. איז ידוע אין דערויף די שאלה וואס מ’האט געפרעגט בא א גדול אין דורות שלפני זה: היתכן, מ’זעט דאך אז “משקרי אינשי מילתא דעבידא לאיגלויי”? האט ער אויף דערויף געענטפערט: דער תירוץ אויף דערויף איז א פשוט’ער, ס’שטייט “לא משקרי אינשי” – זיי זיינען ניט בגדר פון “אינשי”! עכ”ל, והמבין יבין
the Rebbe believed that the Holocaust was a Gezerah and therefore it shouldn’t be discussed. The Friediker Rebbe, on the other hand, basically held like Rabbi Miller that the Holocaust was a punishment from Shamayim for the breakdown of European Jewry.
Again, as I mentioned in my previous post, nuance and context is very important.
Your quotes of the Rebbe and Frierdiker Rebbe are anything but that.
Did the Rebbe ever say that the Holocaust “shouldn’t be discussed”?
Did the Frierdiker Rebbe ever say that “the Holocaust was a punishment from Shamayim for the breakdown of European Jewry”?
Please provide the statements that you’re actually referring to, and then we can properly discuss it.
the expression pops up in indices and descriptions provided by editors, who assimilated in part into general community and lost sensitivity.
My point is that using the term “kiruv rechokim” is not any assimilation. It depends on context.
The publishers of the Rebbe’s seforim in Kehos can hardly be classified as assimilators.
I showed how even the Rebbe used it in a certain context.
Nuance is very important here. No one said the term is ossur, it is just disliked in certain contexts.
I agree, I brought quotes from L Rebbe about that. But, to clarify the issue, maybe someone can find L Rebbe’s quotes where he used the word kiruv?
There are many. Here are some:
לקוטי שיחות חלק ט”ו ע’ 496 (“הדרך לקירוב הלבבות ליהדות ומצותי'”)
אגרות קודש חלק ח ע’ צז (“דורך קירוב קען מען אויפטאן מער ממה שע”י דיחוי וריחוק… לקרב את אחיו וב”ג תחי’ יותר לדרכי היהדות)
It is necessary to point out that while there may be general dislike for the term קירוב רחוקים, this is not to say that it is completely taboo. The term does get used in Chabad circles in certain contexts (e.g. in the indexes in back of the the Rebbe’s seforim, you can usually find an entry called “קירוב רחוקים”).
As a matter of fact, I have actually found one place (I think it’s the only one) where the Rebbe himself writes a private response using the term קירוב רחוקים!
נלכה באורחותיו ע’ 220. וכ”ה בליקוט מענות קודש תש”מ ע’ 17:
“כיון שמוכרח קירוב רחוקים, ובמילא צ”ל הפעולה צעד אחר צעד”
However, in that context the Rebbe is specifically highlighting the idea that they are (meanwhile) רחוקים (he actually underlined the word) in the context of the manner of dealing with them.
I remember a SCOTUS decision during his brief Presidency that stopped me from being forced to say Christian prayers in a public elementary school.
“Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence on Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our country”
What exactly makes this Christian? The fact that it’s in English?
Sounds like a translation of Modeh Ani to me.
“I acknowledge before You, living and eternal King that You have returned my soul to me with mercy, great is Your faithfulness.”
CTL, were there other prayers that they forced you to say in your school?November 23, 2023 5:13 am at 5:13 am in reply to: Why not 3 Israeli hostages for 1 Palestenian prisoner? Not the opposite! #2241822
If they’re smart, they’ll inject them with subcutaneous tracking devices.
And if they’re even smarter, they won’t tell us about it.
Please answer the following questions, so we can evaluate your expertise in this area…
Then entire idea of the CR is for people to hash out their non-professional opinions on random matters that they know little about. No one is claiming that this is a military panel.
But what does that have to do with Zionism?
I just saw in an internal shlichus journal a photo title; shaliach X and a mekurav at a yechidus
The idea of kiruv in itself was never a no-no in Lubavitch.
Perhaps we named our work “shlichus” while the name “kiruv” is mainly used by other organizations, but you’ll ALWAYS find the term “to be mekarev a Yid” or “someone brought a mekurav” – going back all the years.
There may be more of a dislike in Chabad for the term “kiruv rechokim” since we try not to label a Jew as rachok.
Hence, it WOULD be surprising if a Chabad magazine would say: “Shliach talking to rachok. Trying to be mekarev”November 22, 2023 10:15 am at 10:15 am in reply to: Why not 3 Israeli hostages for 1 Palestenian prisoner? Not the opposite! #2241567
especially if they were arrested only for opposing the regime (as opposed to terrorism)
Many of those being released have attempted to kill Jews; they should have received the death sentence long ago.
By halacha, killing non-combatants is only allowed if Ha-Shem, or at least a Navi, or at least a Kohen Gadol with Urim ve-Tumim says its okay.
Source in Shulchan Aruch?
its the sicha of Purim תש״ט in the foot note at the end ״ער האט אונז געשיקט אין גלות און ער וועט אונז ארויסנעמען אליין גייט מען ניט״
Indeed, the Rebbe Rayatz expressed this often. (See his letter from ח’ מנ”א תש”ח (אג”ק חי”ג) – regarding “הכרזת הציונים מלכות ישראל”. Also י”ד אייר תש”ח (אג”ק ח”ט)….)
The Rebbe also spoke about this often, perhaps even sharper than the Rebbe Rayatz.
My point remains. No change in ideology. But there was a change in manner of vocalizing opposition.
P.S. The Rebbe once wrote to someone:
וכמה פעמים אמר כ”ק אדמו”ר (מהוריי”ץ) נ”ע גלוי, ובפעם האחרונה אמר זה בשנת תש”ט-תש”י, שאף שיסד כפר חב”ד בארץ הקודש ת”ו, אבל אין כל שינוי בהשקפת ליובאוויטש על הענין דארץ הקודש ת”ו ואביזרייהו
are you also as strict regarding movement members who sign another “infamous nigunim” of maschihistim or you are more understanding about that?
I was wondering how long it would take for a thread on Chabad’s attitude to Zionism to become a thread about the Rebbe being Moshiach… Only 15 posts in!… 😏
5783: look at שיחת אחרון של פסח תש״ט to see what was the שיטה of the Rayatz towards the state of Israel in his later years
I’m sorry, I couldn’t find anything in the source that you gave, please be more specific.
P.S. I would like to clarify again that by “change” – I’m referring specifically to the MANNER of opposition, not ch”v a change in ideology.
The Rebbe Rashab (and Rayatz in his early years) fought strongly and publicly to prevent the actual establishment of the “state”.
However, once the state became more of a reality, the manner of public opposition changed by the Rebbe Rayatz and the Rebbe, despite the fact that they continued reject the zionist ideology (as can be found in their sichos).
My response as a Lubavitcher:
Since the “founding” of the “state” in 1948, Lubavitch has become less VOCAL about their opposition to Zionism, the reasons for which are discussed in the sefer mentioned by sechel, and other places.
(This change was already brought about by the Rebbe Rayatz. As a matter of fact, the Rebbe was much more vocal about anti-zionism than his father-in-law was in his later years).
Due to this, unfortunately, there are Lubavitchers nowadays who are ignorant of our shita on zionism and may confuse strongly supporting Eretz Yisroel with promoting zionist symbols r”l.
The Rebbe was adamantly opposed to the hanging of the flag, singing hatikva, celebrating yom haatzmaut, and even referring to Eretz Yisroel as “state of Israel.”
The Rebbe stripped his נשיאות from Tomchei Tmimim (the central Chabad yeshiva) in 5715 when they allowed a balebos to sing “הניגון הידוע” (the Rebbe wouldn’t even refer to it by name) at a dinner.
On a separate occasion, the Rebbe wrote that singing this can interrupt Hashem’s brochos to the institution.
The Rebbe railed against the concept of אתחלתא דגאולה in no uncertain terms, even saying that this idea has brought much darkness and hardships to klal Yisroel (I won’t get into specifics due to the public nature of this site).
At the Lag B’omer parades, children would march with American flag and Tzivos Hashem flag, but the zionist flag was not allowed.
B”H, most Lubavitchers and shluchim know this info, and keep a proper balance between supporting the Yidden in Eretz Yisroel while rejecting the zionist ideology and symbols.
Unfortunately, there are indeed some who are either uneducated on the subject, or were unable to withstand the נסיון of appealing to the wider Jewish public and have allowed such symbols and ideologies to infiltrate their Chabad Houses, etc.
These are B”H not many (though they may be vocal), and I and others have done our best to reach out to these people and influence them to correct their ways.
It’s also important to note that some may call themselves Lubavitchers while being totally rejected by Lubavitch. Figures such as Shmuley Boteach who has been banned by Chabad rabbis and doesn’t represent us whatsoever.
In conclusion: No, Chabad is not zionist. Our IDEOLOGY has not changed one iota from the times of the Rebbe Rashab (as opposed to the manner of vocalizing our ideology).
P.S. Joining IDF is a completely separate issue that has nothing to do with zionism. However, I would still venture to say that it’s still the same type of bochurim that you described (though I wouldn’t describe them that way) who join, because for the most part, the way for yeshiva bochurim to protect Eretz Yisroel is solely through limmud hatorah.
Re magen davids: While there are issues with the symbol, it’s in no way comparable to the zionist flag.
I strongly agree with Marxist.
Avira, the problem isn’t (necessarily) with “politicizing a tragedy” – rather doing so during this time of war. Same goes for all those who are looking for government officials to blame. All of this can wait.
Resigning in a time of war would be a cowardly and dangerous move.
Let’s wait till the dust settles to start pointing fingers.
It seems pretty clear what the results will be; anything else is wishful thinking.
Biden and Trump are WAY ahead of any other nominee, so they will probably run against each other.
In the last four years, despite many people coming to dislike Biden, it seems that there was an increase of many more never-Trumpers, but not many more never-Bideners.
Consequently, if Biden won last election, there isn’t much of a reason for him to lose this time.
If he stole last election, there isn’t much a a reason for him not to steal it this time.
The best hope for Trump would be a third party. While they wouldn’t win presidentship, it could take many votes away from Biden, paving the way for Trump.
Something to think about is what will happen if (when?) Trump loses the election.
Is it possible that he would incite something terrible? Even without much incitement from his part, we saw January 6. Trump had to remain (somewhat) diplomatic since (a) he still had a chance to win 2024, and (b) he wanted to stay out of jail.
This election, Trump (probably) has neither of these incentives, and it’s possible that in his self-centered rage (which is definitely not foreign to Trump’s character, whether you hate him or love him) he could incite something never seen before.
He has enough supporters who would go through fire and water for him even if he would “stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody.”
Could we possibly see something similar to the BLM riots, but this time by people who own (lots of) guns?
I just pray that he won’t direct any anger at the “Jewish traitors” that he often complains about… We know who usually suffers first from political unrest, may Hashem protect us…
These are just my thoughts. I wonder what others have to say about this
I must say that I like 741’s point
but if you’re offended, it’s probably best not to be on here, or to engage in discussions with anyone outside of crown heights
Judging from his previous posts, Emunas disagrees with everyone in Crown Heights as well.
Just pointing this out.
you do not realize the unbelievable chashivus ascribed by Chabad to the statements of Arizal.
You’re not the first one who asked this strong question.
In the letter of the Rebbe that I quoted above, he writes: צריך עיון גדול
Indeed, this is a great question.
In a later letter (אגרות קודש טז שבט תשכ”ב – אגרת ח’שלב), the Rebbe points out a possible way to solve the argument: The difference between the Rambam and Ramban (that the Arizal meant) is that the Ramban studied Kabbalah during the main part of his life, because this was connected to his שרש הנשמה.
Whereas, the Rambam only studied at the end of his life, as it’s possible that it was בבחינת עיבור (neshoma stuff – I don’t understand exactly).
it is accepted by Klal Yisroel – from the Litvishe to Sefardi Mekubalim that Rambam did not learn Kabbolah
Were the Shomer Emunim and Avodas Hakodesh not great mekubalim?
Is the Migdal Oz not an accepted peirush on the Rambam?
And the Abarbanel?
Rambam never learnt Kabbola.
The fact that the Rambam learned Kabbala (at least at the end of his lifetime) has been discussed and passed down by all of the Chabad Rabbeim in the name of the Baal Shem Tov.
Here are some non-Chabad sources:
The Migdal Oz (student of the Rashba) writes in his peirush to Mishneh Torah (הל’ יסודי התורה פ”א ה”ט) that he found proof that the Rambam learned Kabbala at the end of his life:
ולדעתי שר”מ ז”ל ידע בהם בסוף ימיו שאני מעיד שראיתי בספרד ארץ מולדתנו כתוב במגלה של קלף ישן מיושן ומעושן לשון זה. אני משה ב”ר מימון כשירדתי לחדרי המרכבה בינותי בענין הקץ וכו’, וקרובים היו דבריו לדברי המקובלים האמיתיים שרמז רבינו הגדול הרמב”ן ז”ל בתחלת פירושו לתורה. גם ראיתי תשובה אחרת ממנו והיה ז”ל מגיד בה שהתחיל לפרש הגדות על דרך נסתר …
Shomer Emunim (ויכוח ראשון יג – brought also in Avodas Hakodesh) writes that a certain Rav Yaakov traveled to Mitzrayim and taught the Rambam Kabbalah, and the Rambam would praise it to his students:
גם הרמב”ם בסוף ימיו זכה לקבל זאת החכמה מפי מקובל, כמו שכתב אחד ממפרשי הרמב”ן בפרשת בשלח וזה לשונו ורבי יעקב זה הלך למצרים ומסר הקבל להרמב”ם ז”ל, ולרוב שמחתו בה היה משתבח בה לתלמידיו, אמנם לא זכה לזה עד קרוב לאחרית ימיו כו’
Abarbanel (נחלת אבות ספ”ג) writes that the Rambam was taught Kabbalah, and the Rambam lamented that if he would have discovered it earlier in life he would have retracted several things that he wrote (!!):
וגם אני שמעתי שהרב הגדול המימוני כתב באגרת שלו אלו הדברים: ‘בסוף ימי בא אלי אדם אחד ואמר לי דברים של טעם ואלולי שהייתי בסוף ימי ונתפשטו חבורי בעולם הייתי חוזר מדברים רבים שכתבתי בהם’. אין ספק שדברי קבלה היו אשר שמע באחרית ימיו.
The same idea was written in Seder Hadoros:
וראיתי בספר אגרת חמודות שחיבר רבי אליהו חיים שכתב: וראיתי איגרות הרמב”ם שכתב מירושלים למצרים לתלמידו, והיה אומר אחרי בואי לארץ הצבי מצאתי זקן שהאיר את עיני בדרכי הקבלה, ואילו ידעתי אז מה שהשגתי עתה, דברים רבים שכתבתי לא הייתי כותבם
So why, dear mdd, do you state so unequivocally that the Rambam didn’t learn Kabbala?
P.S. There are indeed other sources that imply (from the Arizal) that the Rambam did NOT learn Kabbalah. There are source both ways.
The Radziner Rebbe (Rav Yerucham Leiner) once wrote on the topic of the Rambam knowing Kabbalah (הגר”א איש הנגלה והנסתר).
The Lubavitcher Rebbe wrote him a letter (אגרות קודש י”ח כסלו תש”י – אגרת תקנא) with several he’oros, and among them:
ג) ע’ 174. שהרמב”ם ידע תורת הקבלה, כעין זה סיפר כ”ק מו”ח אדמו”ר שליט”א שקיבל מרבו (הוא אביו) ורבו מרבו עד הבעש”ט, אז דער רמב”ם איז געווען א גרויסער מקובל (נדפס בספר השיחות-קיץ ש”ת ע’ 41)15. וכבר העירותי שם בשולי הגליון שלכאורה צע”ג ממש”כ בשער הגלגולים להאריז”ל הקדמה לו ובספר הגלגולים בלקוטים, אשר הרמב”ם לא למד חכמת האמת וזה מתאים לשרשו. וציינתי שם לשה”ג לחיד”א וכו’ וכו’.
There were several other occasions where the Lubavitcher Rebbe commented on this as well.
Does Chabad of Lakewood do kiruv?
I know of a Chabad in Lakewood that does kiruv for OTD youth.
Shabbos seudos, shiurim, and often giving them a place to sleep (many are kicked out of home).
Unfortunately, many were very smart bochurim who dropped out yeshivos for various reasons.
I live in a very frum yeshivish neighborhood and drugs is unheard of
It has less to do with neighborhoods, more to do with who you hang out with.
Sometimes, people can be oblivious to what’s going on with other crowds in their same neighborhood (unless it’s tiny).
while thank G-d I never became an alcoholic, I developed a very unhealthy relationship with alcohol to deal with anxiety and depression.
I’m curious to understand what you mean in differentiating between alcoholism and unhealthy relationship?September 6, 2023 12:17 pm at 12:17 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223386
The Rebbe took Purim seeiously. That’s when he “killed” Stalin. I guess in 1956 he decided to…
I am mocheh for the kavod of the Chazon Ish.September 6, 2023 10:05 am at 10:05 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223363
We previously established that the Rebbe stated in a letter that every Nasi Chabad is also Nasi Hador for all Klal Yisroel. Therefore he was referring to himself as well as the Rayatz.
The Rebbe never officially considered himself nossi Chabad. He always considered his father-in-law as such. Chassidim accepted the Rebbe as nossi. No great rabbi ever crowns himself as rabbi. He is crowned by his talmidim.
For more explanation, refer to my response to ARSo.
I actually have a guess for the answer you’re going to provide.
I hope that you indeed were able to guess the answer, since it is fairly simple.September 6, 2023 10:02 am at 10:02 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223362
He said it about the Rayatz and not about himself. So did he or did he not mean to imply it about himself?
Oy, this is so simple. The fact that it’s about Lubavitch seems to be clouding your mind (as yankel says, shochad y’aver…)
Again, imagine if Reb Chaim proved from a Gemara that “Talmidei Chachamim go straight to Olam Habah.”
His talmidim will probably say, “Wow, our dear teacher, Reb Chaim, will go straight to Olam Habah!”
Here’s the question: Was Reb Chaim referring to himself in his statement?
If yes – that’s gaava!
If not – why did his students say that it was about himself?
I think the answer to this is simple common sense, and that applies also to your question about the Rebbe.
Wasn’t it R Yoel Kahn who said after 3 Tammuz that the mistake of the chassidim is that they decided the rebbe was Mashiach when he didn’t say so explicitly
No. He said that it’s the mistake of chassidim to OBSESS with the Rebbe being Moshiach since he didn’t say so explicitly and it can cause lots of damage.
Reb Yoel considered the Rebbe his Rebbe even though he never ever said “I’m the Rebbe.”
Why? Because a Rebbe doesn’t decide that he is Rebbe, chassidim decide to accept someone as their Rebbe.
This has been throughout history.
Teachers never taught their students how to look at them and how to respect them.
The students learned from the respect that the teachers had for THEIR teachers to learn how to relate to them.
Reb Elimelech never said “I am one with Hashem, connect with me!” He said: “Tzaddikim are one with Hashem.”
I’m sure that his talmidim inferred from there that Reb Elimelech is one with Hashem, and treated him with great respect. Does this mean that really he was referring to himself so this is gaava?
I feel like I’m explaining a concept to a five year old.September 6, 2023 9:58 am at 9:58 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223356
It’s amazing how even after I posted a link to the sicha, you’re not afraid of quoting a twisted version; skipping out the important parts which you know will make the whole thing sound different.
Let’s break up the way you quoted it:
  
These weren’t said by the Rebbe himself!!! The Rebbe said (paraphrasing, see link): “I received many angry letters from Eretz Yisroel complaining that Reb Foleh Kahan was farbrenging recently in Kfar Chabad, and he said about ploni ben ploni…” [then he quotes what he said about jealous etc.]
And the Rebbe continues (in a PURIM SPIRIT – as you can hear clearly in the recording (it’s a Purim farbrengen)): “We can answer their complaints with a Gemara in Bava Basra…”
Doesn’t say such a thing. But great way to make it sound worse.
Again, according to the Gemara in Bava Basra.
[Your whole “guess who that is” thing is ridiculous. Doing that every time the Rebbe mentions Moshiach is like illuminati conspiracy theorists who go crazy every time they see a triangle or an eye].
The Rebbe does NOT say that’s how it will be fulfilled. He uses the term in passing (the Rebbe’s manner of talk was always peppered with maamorei razal and pesukim. If you watch farbrengens or dollars you’ll know what I mean.)
Why did you skip that it wasn’t the Rebbe’s vort, rather he was saying what Reb Foleh said and that people complained about?
Why did you skip that all that the Rebbe added pretty much (again, in a Purim spirit) was explaining how this fits with a Gemara in Bava Basra?
I’m sure you’ll find some excuses to show why it’s still “a terrible statement” etc.
But the very fact that you chose to skip the main parts of the sicha shows how inconvenient they are for you.September 5, 2023 11:54 pm at 11:54 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223236
On page 16 you stated that the Rebbe said he’s god clothed in human form. Is he the only person to reach that madregah. Sounds like a real Anav to say that about himself don’t you think?
This is one of the things that you guys are going to repeat again and again until you convince yourself that it makes sense.
The Rebbe never said this about himself. The Rebbe said this about his father-in-law, the Rebbe Rayatz.
The sicha, said a few months after the passing of the Rebbe Rayatz, is about getting brochos at the kever of the Rayatz after his passing.
Do you do this every time tzaddik talks about tzaddikim!?
“I can’t believe it! Reb Chaim Brisker is praising Talmidei Chachamim, this must mean that he’s praising himself. Such gaava!”
The fact that posters keep writing this ridiculous sevara again and again shows a true lack of logic in this discussion.September 5, 2023 10:56 pm at 10:56 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223222
By the gaon, they said that his neshoma literally belonged to tekufas harishonim
Nu nu. You need me to find something like this about the Alter Rebbe?
No problem, but does it make a difference?
Rav Yosef Kotkovsy (rov in Ukraine in the late 1800s) writes immense praises for the Shluchan Aruch Harav in the introduction to his sefer Darkei Hachayim, and then he writes:
“I have heard from someone trustworthy who saw a handwritten note by the Rav of Barditchov as follows: I can testify that if Rav Shneur Zalman of Liady [the Alter Rebbe] would have lived in the days of the Rif and the Rambam [rishonim…] he would have been like one of them… His golden language is literally [yes, “literally”] like the language of the Rif and Rambam.”
וכאשר שמעתי מפי מגידי אמת שראה כתיבת יד קודש של הרב הגאון האלקי מבארדיטשוב שכתבו וז”ל מעיד אני עלי שמים וארץ שאלו היו הרב הגאון אלקי ר’ שניאור זלמן מלאדי בימי הרי”ף והרמב”ם היו כאחד מהם . . לשונו הזהב הוא ממש כלשון הרי”ף והרמב”ם ז”ל.
And, talking about “neshamos”, and being that this week was Chai Elul, I guess I should bring the sicha of the Rebbe Rayatz from Chai Elul 5705 (Sefer Hasichos pg. 129) where he describes the events surrounding the birth of the Alter Rebbe:
On Chai Elul 5505 [the day the Alter Rebbe was born] the Baal Shem Tov was in a very joyous mood. After davening, he arranged a seuda for his students and said “Today a neshama chadasha [new soul] entered the world which will light up the world with nigleh and chassidus, and will have mesiras nefesh for the derech of chassidus, and succeed until bias hamoshiach.”
The Rebbe Rashab famously said: “Every neshama is sourced in the world of Atzilus, but the Alter Rebbe was a neshama d’Atzilus even as a נשמה בגוף בעולם הזה”September 5, 2023 7:54 pm at 7:54 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223186
I’d like to add the Rebbe abandoning the plain Pshat in Chelek and announcing that Moshiach will redeem every Jew.
Why do I have to defend the way my Rebbe understood a Gemara because you think it’s not the plain pshat?
Should I start bringing Avi Esris that change the plain pshat of Gemaros and demand that you explain them? And of course, if you can’t explain them, that means that you’re admitting to some sort of fault in litvish Jewry!?
the Rebbe announcing that Gehinnom no longer exists because there’s no such thing as a Jew who sins.
Where? I’ve never seen this, and I don’t know what you’re talking about.
(Maybe you think that rabbi on youtube with a long white beard and glasses is the Lubavitcher Rebbe? No. It’s Manis Friedman. I don’t know if he says this either, but I’ve definitely never heard the Rebbe say this. And I’ve seen LOTS of what the Rebbe says…)
The oy problem is no real Jews are buying any of that nonsense.
The blacks are the real Jews.September 5, 2023 4:40 pm at 4:40 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223113
The siyum Ramban each year should have continued to come out on his b’day. However, one ibbur yohr throws it off.
The Rambam was split into 339 days, so siyum couldn’t have been on the same day every year.September 5, 2023 4:40 pm at 4:40 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223111
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
He never said that. What he did say is in the sicha I brought above from Toras Menachem (Hebrewbooks).
Hey! Did you intentionally leave me out? I’m hurt!
I was mentioning those who are overtly vocal in a bit of an immature way.
I feel that your style of arguing (while I strongly disagree) is more logical and less emotional than those I mentioned.
his parents would only agree to the shidduch if the Rayatz agreed to nominate him as the next rebbe
Reb Chaim Liberman was the Rebbe Rayatz’s secretary, and he recounts that Rebbitzin Chana (Rebbe’s mother) came to see the Rebbe Rayatz to see the kalla, and asked him for nadden. He said that they didn’t have any money. She said, I don’t need money, I want a promise for rabbisteveh.
This has nothing to do with the Rebbe himself, and the historical facts of 5710 are known.
it details that fights that went on behind the scenes after the petirah of the Rayatz.
To the best of my knowledge, the fights were between Chassidism who wanted the “Ramash” to be Rebbe, and Rashag who wanted to be Rebbe. The Rebbe stayed away from the fighting.
I’ll have to find the sefer (I think I know which one you’re talking about) and see what it says.
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?
Some quotes from 5783:
-“you’re rebbe was never בחזקת משיח to begin with”
-“your משיח שקר [עפ”ל!] did not say the same thing as דבי ר׳ שילה”
-“To Menachem maybe you can explain how that דעה נפסדה fits with the י״ג עיקרים “
-“if you learned the מקורות than please explain to me how you came to the conclusion that your rebbe was בחזקת משיח”
-“The Lubavitcher is a משיח שקר [עפ”ל!] is because he doesn’t have any of the סימני משיח brought down in rambam”
Yeah, you get the point.
“every Chabad yeshiva has a Gemara seder on Shabbos”
Are you sure of that?
Yes. People asked the Rebbe if they should follow the 1/3 or only chassidus (each way was written by the Rebbe Rashab in different places), the Rebbe said that he preferred the first way, and he indeed spoke lengthy nigleh sichos during the Shabbos farbrengens (possibly even more than chassidus).
Every Chabad yeshiva has Gemara seder on Shabbos. (Many don’t even keep to the “only 1/3” rule).
Lubavich, and the rebbe, were always against daf yomi.
Indeed, I’m not very fond of it either (but let’s please not get into that!). My point was that it’s not considered “ossur” to learn nigleh before davening. It’s just looked down on because it’s preferred to spend the time before davening learning chassidus as a hachana to thinking about Hashem.
But it is probably just a matter of you showing you age again.
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.
Again, anyone who knows about the Rebbe knows how little he held of himself.
BTW, I wonder why this didn’t disturb the many gedolim and rebbes who supported the Rambam cycle, and joined in the siyum celebrations.September 5, 2023 4:39 pm at 4:39 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223105
in the gaons time, the other gedolei yisroel said that his neshoma belonged to the rishonim
And at the Alter Rebbe’s bar mitzva he was registered in the chevra Kadisha and received the title “החכים המופלג תנא ופליג” – a title meaning that he is on the level of the tanaim! (a handwritten copy of the certificate is in the Chabad library)
the gaon was unlike anyone in his time, or for several hundred years prior, and the baal hatanya was after him, so it is not unreasonable for even a chasidishe yid to say that the gaon was bigger than the baal hatanya.
I’m sure some say that the gaon was greater than the Alter Rebbe, but others say differently:
Rav Yaakov Berman, talmid of the Rogachover, related to Rav Yehoshua Mondshine (Chabad historian and researcher): Once, the Rogachover was praising the incredible knowledge of the Vilna Gaon, but he concluded, “אבער קענען לערנען?! דאס האט גיקנענט דער אלטער רבי”
Rav Mondshine also relates that he heard from Rav Shmuel Lazanovsky (I heard this as well from Rav Segal – rosh kolel of Tzemach Tzedek Yerushalaim – who also heard it from Rav Shmuel):
The Avnei Nezer usually referred to the Gra as “haGaon”, and referred to the Baal Hatanya as “haGaon haAmiti.” He once told his grandson that in the Shulchan Aruch Harav you can find more depth than in Biurei haGra, and he showed him fourteen “צריך עיון” that the Gra left unanswered which are answered in Shluchan Aruch Harav.
Let’s just drop the “who is a greater gadol game”, because it will get us nowhere.September 5, 2023 12:33 pm at 12:33 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2223039
I have stated in this thread that I only criticize Chabad. That’s a fact. I never said anything negative about black hatters. That’s an outright lie…
To Menachem Shmei You’re on notice. I want you to present evidence that I’m anti black hatter. All my Rabbonim wear black hats including those from YU.
I didn’t say that you’re anti black hatter. I said that you have a problem with black hatters.
You claim to have never said anything negative about black hatters? Nu nu. This is a machlokes b’metzius, so no point of arguing (שדי חמד מע’ מ כלל קסד).
“To Menachem Shmei’s credit, he’s able to understand that I have a healthy relationship with my Rabbonim… Unfortunately the black hatters are so dogmatic that anyone who veers from their concept of how a Jew must act is labeled off the derech.”
The Rebbe makes…
In the CR, I would never speak so disrespectfully about any Litvisher gadol, even if I strongly disagree with him, and even if I think he’s not actually a true gadol.
If someone is looked up to as a manhig by many frum Yidden, I wouldn’t talk about him to his talmidim like this.
you promoted the notion that the Rebbe is god
You will not find ONE POST where I said that the Rebbe was G-d!
All I did was insist that you’re misunderstanding the quote “עצמות ומהות אליין ווי ער איז אריינגעשטעלט אין א גוף”.
The quotes I brought were to show that such a statement is not so rare in traditional Jewish literature.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Find me a post that says differently.
Sechel83 finally gave up, why don’t you do the same? The fat lady has sung.
How will it help you in life if I give up?
I was having a discussion. You joined in middle. You are free to leave.
You still don’t feel that you can put me on your “checkmate list” until I leave the thread for good?
will try bln to check
(from the bottom of the page)September 5, 2023 8:02 am at 8:02 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222904
Can add some possible relevant info… If this is known to anyone , would like hear more detail…
It is obvious which sicha you’re referring to (Purim 5716), but of course, every detail is way off the mark.
The farbrengen was recorded, and you can actually listen to it on official Chabad sites.
It was also printed in Toras Menachem and can be found here:
https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=25048&st=&pgnum=158&hilite=September 5, 2023 8:01 am at 8:01 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222899
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 don’t recall the references. I’m actually quite interested.
Please let me know how I can find them or what it says.
I understand that you may be reticent to accept Deitsch’s version
I’ll accept it if he presents factual proofs (Lubavitchers are always looking for hints that the Rebbe actually accepted himself as Rebbe, since they are so rare).
If he gives theories, I may as well rely on your theories instead.
(According to all the facts and letters known to me from that time period, chassidim were begging and pressuring the Rebbe to accept, and he kept refusing. He claimed that he wasn’t qualified for the job. He even said that if they continue pressuring him he would flee, and they would never find him.
He finally relented (to an extent) at the first yahrtzeit, while still referring to his father-in-law as nossi, and going often to his ohel, etc.)
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!
Just pointing out that 5783 definitely doesn’t represent Lubavitch in any way, since he is a passionate anti-Lubavitcher (check out his posts).
Just in case you didn’t notice that.
(However, it does seem that he hung out with Lubavitchers a lot, as he picked up a lot of Lubavitch lingo (again, evident from his posts).
Have you never seen a Lubavicher telling a Litvak who puts on tefillin by winding it inwards…
Indeed, I have never seen a Lubavitcher telling a Litvak this.
I don’t think that this is even a true reason for our minhag. I’ve heard it mentioned before in jest.
Don’t litvishers also have cute one-liners to tease chassidim about some of their differences in minhagim? I hear them all the time.
as a group you (perhaps not you personally) belittle other shitos … But then don’t get upset with those of us who consider Lubavichers close to meisisim umadichim
Whatever. This complaint is a never-ending cycle.
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.”
Menachem: “I disagree with many of your examples”
I don’s see why. They are all examples that I and others have personally witnessed.
These are examples of things that I agree Lubavitchers often spread:
-Shabbos candles (was a mivtza of the Rebbe. Many rabbanim had correspondence with the Rebbe on the matter)
-Melech haMoshiach stickers and posters (a group of Lubavitchers are really into publicizing these, even thought the Rebbe (and many other Lubavitchers) wasn’t too happy with this).
-Navi/Nassi (they believe it’s the truth, so the more people who know the better)
Examples that I’ve never seen Lubavitchers spread (and I don’t think it’s part of the Chabad agenda):
-Learning nigleh on Shabbos (every Chabad yeshiva has a Gemara seder on Shabbos)
-Learning nigleh before davening (while looked down on in yeshivos, it is quite common among baalei batim. Many daf yomi shiurim before shachris in Chabad shuls in Crown Heights and other communities. This is definitely not something Lubavitchers try to impose on others).
-Eating gebroks is wrong (they might not allow someone to eat it in their home on Pesach, but never heard of trying to get other people to stop)
-Putting on tefillin differently (never seen this before. As I mentioned in earlier in this post)September 5, 2023 12:23 am at 12:23 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222886
Not every word of Torah that is taught is intended to fit with every other word that was ever taught.
“שבעים פנים לתורה”
Chabad isn’t going around that others should not sleep in the sukkah
Interesting point: Here is a quote from the Rebbe a few days after he said the sicha about sleeping in the sukkah (Shabbos Bereishis 5730):
איך האב געהערט א גירסא בשמי אז איך האב געזאגט אז מען טאר ניט שלאפן אין סוכה – איז דאס בפירוש ניט אמת, ואדרבה: דער וואס וויל – זאל שלאפן געזונטערהייט, ושכבת וערבה שנתיך, און עס זאל זיך אים חלום’ן גוטע חלומות וכו’, און קיינער זאל אים ניט שטערן. דאס וואס איך האב גערעדט, איז געווען אויף פארענטפערן מנהג רבותינו וכו’, ומנהג חב”ד, אויף ניט שלאפן
(“I heard people saying in my name that it is osur to sleep in the sukkah. This is completely false. On the contrary, if someone wants – let him sleep enjoyably [in the sukkah] undisturbed! What I spoke about [in the sicha with the reason not to sleep in the sukkah] was to defend the minhag of the Rabbeim and minhag Chabad of not sleeping [in the sukkah].”)September 5, 2023 12:18 am at 12:18 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222884
you have good writing skills
The problem is that you didn’t qualify your statement when I joined the thread.
I was very clear that you were interpreting the quote wrong, and that many other sources can SEEM to be “kefira” to those who don’t understand them.
It’s nice that it suddenly all makes sense to you after I gave one line of clarification, but it was really just a drop in the bucket of a much greater sugya.
I decided to leave it for you to research on your own since the full subject is beyond the scope of a coffeeroom post.
You singled out yankel berel and myself as Chabad bashers, but I think it’s clear that there are at least a dozen others in the thread who feel exactly the same way
I wrote: “(some of) the opponents to Lubavitch on this thread (especially yankel and qwerty) are staunchly opposed to Lubavitch, and will attack (almost) any argument that I make.”
The main ones who attack almost any argument I make (at least in the last few pages) are you and yankel. Simple as that.
as I’ve said at least twice in this thread, I have no problem with any group except Chabad.
And, if I remember correctly, “black hatters”.
Therefore the Alter Rebbe was bigger than the Gaon. The 5th and 6th Rebbes were greater than the Chafetz Chaim.
I assume that you say that the Gaon was greater than the Alter Rebbe, and the Chafetz Chaim was greater than the 5/6 Rebbes. How is that any different then what Lubavitch says? Because “more people” agree with you?
And the joke is that Chabad tries to sell us on the idea that the Rebbe was anav mikal adam.
How is looking at your Rebbes as the greatest leaders a contradiction to anivus? Is believing that Judaism is the greatest and truest religion a contradiction to anivus?
(Of course, I must clarify that I’m not equating Lubavitch to the entire Jewish religion. Just bringing out a point)
He writes in a sicha that the baal hatanya was greater than R Yochanan Ben Zakai because RYBZ was not in touch with his neshama , he was too busy with his avodat hashem so he had never time to check his neshama it should not be in the kelipa .
This “quote” from the “Rebbe” may seem shocking to some of the readers (it was quoted often in the anti-Chabad rhetoric of the 80s), so allow me to clarify the source:
Rav Yochanan Ben Zakai cried on his deathbed that he doesn’t know which path they will take him. (Brochos 28b)
The Baal Hatanya explained that he was on an extremely high level of intellect which concealed his emotions, which led to his question.
The Rebbe Rashab said (Toras Sholom – Yud Tes Kislev 5673) that he heard from the TZEMACH TZEDEK (no, not from the seventh rebbe) that the Baal Hatanya was on a higher level than RYBZ who didn’t know which path he would be taken, while the Baal Hatanya did (see the full story there).
On the other hand, the REBBE explains (Likkutei Sichos vol. 16 pg. 273) that every Yid must learn from the avoda of RYBZ! The main focus of ones life shouldn’t be on himself and which level one is holding, instead it should be on the job that he was given to accomplish in the world. Only on his deathbed did RYBZ have a chance to begin contemplating his spiritual status.
The Rebbe once spoke about this in a maamar (Shvat 5712) and he sobbed very much how every person is given a certain amount of days from Hashem, and we must learn from RYBZ to use out every single moment for avodas Hashem without wasting any time even for worrying about oneself.
Just to set the record straight so no one should be confused about what the Rebbe said or where he got it from.September 4, 2023 10:58 am at 10:58 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222717
I decided that I just had to check out those quotes from seforim that Menachem keeps referring to
Thank you for actually checking this up (unlike others who were too intimidated)!
1. “the Lubavicher rebbe clearly said that you can daven to an atzmus melubash baguf”
Many people might misunderstand what you’re saying to mean that this is referring to davening shmone esrei or something. This is obviously not the case. I never heard of this concept of “davening to the Rebbe” from any Lubavitcher. I only hear it from misnagdim (i.e. those who are opposed to Lubavitch).
What the Rebbe is explaining is the common practice of asking a Rebbe for brochos. In the Rebbe’s words: וואס איז שייך בכלל בעטן ביי א רבי’ן, עס איז דאך אן ענין פון א ממוצע – “how is one allowed to request [בקשות] from a Rebbe? This [seems to be] the problem of an intermediary!”
The Rebbe goes on to bring the famous distinction brought in chassidus between two types of intermediaries: ממוצע המפסיק (which has the issue of AZ) and ממוצע המחבר (which applies to a tzaddik – this is how chassidus explains Moshe saying אנכי עומד בין ה’ וביניכם, and ונתתי עשב, etc.).
2. Nowhere in those quotes does it say that one may daven to a tzaddik
[The quote from Noam Elimelech brings out a very similar point to what the Rebbe is trying to say: Since a tzaddik is one with Hashem, he has the koach to draw down healing to a sick person.
But this is beside the point.]
My point wasn’t to explain or prove what the Rebbe said (and neither have I done so above), since, as I’ve pointed out many times, this is a complex topic that has been debated many times here in the CR, and I’m not delusional enough to think that with one post I can explain the whole concept. This is why I sent a reference to a shiur of Rabbi YY. There is also a 175 page sefer from Rav Pewsner “Al Hatzaddikim” (on Otzar Hachochma) that explains this sicha, with many souces from all over chazal rishonim and achronim.
This was my point with bringing those quotes:
Some people here went into a shock when they heard the excerpted line from the sicha, and decided that there is no need to research the subject before attacking Lubavitch, since the words “עצמות ומהות אליין ווי ער האט זיך אריינגעשטעלט אין א גוף” is “so obviously” AZ (ch”v).
My point was that there are many similar statements that can also be “shocking” at face value. Just as one wouldn’t discard (ch”v) a Noam Elimelech after seeing one strange-looking line (as you proved to us by trying to interpret why it’s not an issue), neither should one do this with Lubavitch.
Obviously, we don’t decide which parts of Torah are true or “false” from first-glance one-line clickbait lines that are thrown at us.
This was and remains my point.
3. The Lubaavicher rebbe was – all the chassidim agree – referring to himself!
This is also a complete misunderstanding of what chassidim mean. Of course, the Rebbe wasn’t talking about himself. The entire discussion over there is about going to the kever of the Rebbe Rayatz, and if people should still ask brochos from a tzaddik after he passed away. The Rebbe was alive then, so it obviously wasn’t about him.
Even more so, the sicha was said at a time (5710) when the Rebbe was still adamantly opposed to chassidim even considering him “Rebbe,” not even allowing them to refer to him with the title Admur.
Why, then, do chassidim say that the Rebbe was “referring to himself”?
Think about it like this: After Reb Elimelech said that a tzaddik has the power to heal since he is one with Hashem, I’m sure that his talmidim said: “Wow! Reb Elimelech is one with Hashem, and he has the power to heal! He said this about tzaddikim, and this surely applies to him!”
This is exactly the idea. The Rebbe said this idea about the Rebbe Rayatz, that he can give brochos after his passing, and he is one with Hashem, etc.
Chassidim, who consider the “Ramash” as their Rebbe, say: “Wow, this surely applies to OUR Rebbe as well! He is one with Hashem, and can give brochos!” etc.
Anyone who actually reads anything from the Rebbe knows that this whole claim of the Rebbe “praising himself” is completely baseless, and completely foreign to the Rebbe’s style.September 4, 2023 10:23 am at 10:23 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222683
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.
I didn’t say it about “those who have kashas on Lubavich”. I said it to explain my occasional silence on this thread (to answer the childish claim of “shtika k’hodaa (no, I don’t ch”v mean that the klal is childish. I mean that it’s childish to apply it to this context)).
My point is very simple: Over the 26 pages of this thread, it is quite obvious that (some of) the opponents to Lubavitch on this thread (especially yankel and qwerty) are staunchly opposed to Lubavitch, and will attack (almost) any argument that I make.
Honestly, the same is the other way around: I am staunchly Lubavitch, and I’ll probably disagree with (almost) any attack against Lubavitch made here on the thread.
This is the reason why this thread (and many other similar threads) are just going in circles with endless arguments and questions. Questions that are really meant as תירוצים for explaining the “problems with Lubavitch” or the “maalos of Lubavitch” (from each side respectively).
Therefore, when I’m being pummeled by dozens of questions on many different ideas, and I know that most of what I say won’t actually change the minds that are already set – I’m not really interested in working on answering every single question.
To say that this implies some sort of admission of guilt is ridiculous.
That’s why I mentioned the Reb Chaim story in connection to my “מוחה מוחה מוחה” in response to yankel’s claim of shtika k’hodaa.
Let me know if you need more clarification.
P.S. Regarding your later point:
I agree that Lubavitchers have an agenda. They feel that their derech will immensely improve the avodas Hashem of all Yidden, which is why they feel the need to spread it to anyone they come in contact with (however, I disagree with many of your examples).
Yidden who indeed recognize great qualities in the Lubavitch derech appreciate this VERY much (there are MANY such people – I’m referring to frum Yidden. Non-frum are a different story altogether).
Yidden who are more wary of the Lubavitch derech are (understandably) quite distressed by this (and it “really gets on their nerves”).September 4, 2023 2:06 am at 2:06 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222578
Please , in a moment of honesty – is that the case here ? The doubts about habad are A RESULT of discarding yahadut ?
No, it is not. You misunderstood me.
So , Menachem , what was your real intention ?
I think my intention was fairly obvious, and you’re trying to twist deeper meanings into my words.
If anyone besides for you and qwerty think that by quoting Reb Chayim I meant that doubts about Chabad are a result of discarding yahadus – then I will gladly explain them my true intention.
Otherwise, I’m just wasting my breath.September 3, 2023 3:54 pm at 3:54 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222445
If you think we misunderstood you explain yourself.
I told yankel berel that he misunderstood me. Why do you write “we”? I wasn’t talking about you!
Oh, I forgot. You’re on his chess team.
I won’t consider anything said by a person who called himself god
According to your definition of calling oneself G-d, why do you “consider anything” that was said by the Minchas Elozor, Noam Elimelech, Rabbeinu Bachya, Tanya, Zohar, or Yerushalmi – all of whom said the same idea as the Rebbe?
Btw why didn’t you answery question tne first time I asked it?
I answered this in the postscript of my previous post.
Just pointing out the obvious (Avira already mentioned):
Every case is unique, and a rov MUST be consultedSeptember 3, 2023 12:58 pm at 12:58 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222333
the last question I asked you which you never answered… That’s not tbe only question you refused to answer.
Well, I wasn’t the one who brought in the idea of shtika k’hodaa. I think it’s perfectly acceptable to ignore attacks from anonymous people on a forum, and this is no way insinuates that you agree with them. I think this is obvious to anyone who doesn’t see this as a game of chess.
When I questioned your “shtika k’hodaa” about the 7-times-question, it was only l’shitaschah that shtika k’hodaa is actually a thing here.
The origimal Christiana supported their heresy with verses, you do the same by misapplying Chazal
Maybe you’re the one misinterpreting the Rebbe?
And if you say that you’re just taking what he said at face value, why don’t you also take all the tzaddikim I mentioned at face value?
In the letter you posted, the Rebbe seemed to be saying that the Nasi Chabad is the Nasi of just Chabad. So how do you explain why most if not all Lubavichers say that the Nasi Chabad is the Nasi of all Jews?
Because there is more than one letter from the Rebbe printed (currently, they printed most letters up to the mid 1970s, and they number over 13,000), and hundreds of volumes of his talks.
This letter is making a specific point which is why the Rebbe calls them nesiei chabad (he’s clarifying whom he’s talking about).
Anyone who reads a little more than one letter will tell you that the Rebbe definitely considered his father-in-law (Rebbe Rayatz) and his father (Rebbe Rashab) etc. to be the nossi of the entire klal Yisroel.
If you need sources I can give.
P.S. It is quite exhausting and tedious to prepare answers for every question and misunderstanding that you happen to have. This in no way implies any admission of guilt.September 3, 2023 11:12 am at 11:12 am in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222332
Please , in a moment of honesty – is that the case here ? The doubts about habad are A RESULT of discarding yahadut ?
No, it is not. You misunderstood me.September 2, 2023 11:33 pm at 11:33 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222256
We’ve kept our end of the deal, but you’ve bowed out. I agree with Yankel Berel Shtikah Kihoda, If you can’t defend your position, you have no position.
Qwerty, you haven’t answered the question that I directed at you SEVEN times.
P.S. I asked the question in posts: #2213451 #2216778 #2216863 #2217091 #2218000 #2218095 #2220157
I’ll repeat it again: When Lubavitch said a statement that you understood as AZ at first glance, you immediately attacked Lubavitch, and it didn’t enter your mind that there can be a deeper meaning.
However, you do not attack the Minchas Elozor, Noam Elimelech, Rabbeinu Bachya, Tanya, Zohar, or Yerushalmi – all of whom said similar statements which can also sound like AZ at first glance to an ignorant person.
Or, I can ask the question as I wrote it in a different post:
What if I were to say:
“Hashem took the four letters of His holy name (הוי’) and garbed them in a hat and kapoto, and this is the Rebbe…”
Or: “Who is the face of י-ה-ו-ה? The Rebbe.”
Or: “When the posuk says that Hashem is in His holy chamber, this refers to the Rebbe when he’s in shul”
Or: “How can the Rebbe heal people if he is mortal and only G-d can give life? Since a tzaddik is one with G-d, he has the power of infinity since his life is Hashem’s essence, therefore he can give life to a sick person.”
Would you also call this AZ even though these are just paraphrased from the aforementioned gedolim?
And if not, why not?September 2, 2023 11:29 pm at 11:29 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222247
Thanks for the correction. Would you happen to know where I can find the story written?September 2, 2023 9:47 pm at 9:47 pm in reply to: Question of an ignorant, closed-minded Lubavitcher #2222120
Now- R Menachem Shmei . . should we apply the klal of Shtika KeHoda’a here or not
מוחה מוחה מוחה
P.S. I’m reminded of the famous story of Reb Chaim Brisker (I think). Someone was asking him questions in emuna, and he didn’t respond.
Later, he explained why he remained silent:
פאר א קשיא, קען איך געבן א תירוץ. אבער איך קען ניט געבן א תירוץ פאר א תירוץ…