Menachem Shmei

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.

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.

Shtika Kihoda?

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?

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…

Please elaborate . Who else had Nevua after Chagai , Z and M ?

#2214125

It stands for “keep it simple stupid.” Too many of the posters get bogged down arguimg Pshatim in Tanya and the like. This is irrelevant. Lubavichers posit that the Rebbe is god. Nothing .ore need be said

Sorry, but in my books, Judaism isn’t simple and stupid. The tzedukkim said to use the KISS method. Why make problems? Just take Torah literally!

But that is not Judaism. Judaism is complicated, with lots of nuance.

Qwerty,
You still haven’t answered me why you accept all the Torah giants that I quoted earlier, when if using the KISS method, they would be saying that tzaddikim are G-d?
I think I asked you this 5 or 6 times

Just a small question – when their rebbe told his hasidim to “phaiph” , who do you think they were phaiphing on ?
They were phaiphing on us , on our criticism of habad . On our questions .

Interesting, this seems to answer my question my OP:

You are so obsessed with Chabad because you are an unfortunate victim of the Rebbe asking people to whistle at farbrengens.

2cents,

Very important and worthy question about method of knowing.

could you specify the source indicating that tzadikim no longer possess a yetzer harah?

Tanya. Perek Yud, etc.

The Alter Rebbe bases this on several psukim and Maamarei Razal.
לבי חלל בקרבי
ובערת הרע מקרבך
צדיקים יצר טוב שופטן
Etc.

In tzaddik itself, there are many levels. Tzaddik gramur, tzaddik eino gamur. In the latter are countless levels.

“I was not a misnaged. Far from it . I Was an Omed Min HaTsad. Did not understand what all those people wanted from habad . And had sympathy for the [apparent] victim of unwarranted accusations.
Nevertheless came to that conclusion.
So it seems that you agree that you are not qualified ?”

I am pro-Chabad in all (or most) of my posts, so you assume that I’m a chossid and therefore biased.
Subsequently, I should do the same with you:
You are anti-Chabad in all (or most) of your posts, so I should assume that you’re a misnaged and therefore biased.

So you answer that you weren’t born a misnaged, you BECAME one. And what if I became Lubavitch? Do you have any reason to assume that I was born Lubavitch?
And if I was born Lubavitch, maybe my grandfather was born into a holy rebbishe mishpacha, yet left to become Lubavitch because he found the truth there?
Maybe I have friends who were top talmidim in Lakewood, choshuve families in Satmar, who left and became Lubavitch, and are now shluchim around the world?

What makes you think that you’re the only one with the right to unbiasedness?

Listening to his talks is irrelevant to this question

How is it irrelevant? You are trying to figure out a rabbis true kavana in how he spoke. Obviously, someone who learned his teachings know more about what he thinks than someone who didn’t.

This is like someone who says (ch”v ch”v) that the Talmud is a horrible book that is full of hateful teachings and illogical ideas. You ask him, “How much Talmud have you studied?” He says, “studying Talmud is irrelevant to this question.”

(However, the guy who did study Talmud has one downside: Since he spent so much time studying it, he becomes biased in defending it. Whereas the guy who never opened it up is completely objective, so his hateful remarks have more value.)

why do you think Chabad has so many misnagdim, way more than other Chassidic groups?

Let me reword that:

Why did misnagdim stop being menaged to most Chassidic groups, but stayed menaged to Chabad?…

Think that your being a hasid of his , precludes you of objectivity in this regard

I can say the same about you being a misnaged.

I used to be naive , but made a uturn on this .

Why?

Because you studied and listened to so many of his talks that you realized what he really meant?

Or because you heard so many one-line excerpts of his statements?

Or because you heard so much anti-Chabad rhetoric?

mainstream Jewry categorically rejects this

Who is mainstream Jewry?

The democrats?
The litvishers?
The mizrachim?
The MO?
The chassidishers?

If it’s the latter, which one? Belz? Satmar? Sanz? Bobev? Gur?

If you answer all of the above, how many things do they all agree on?
Does Belz have to give up their derech because no one else in the list agrees with them (or else they would be Belz)? What about MO? What about Brisk? What about Rabbi Miller?

Each one of these groups is different from “mainstream Jewry” whatever that means.

edited

In no way are we enjoined to delve into the esoteric… but Chabad ignored all this and decided to go against the norm. It is now reaping what it sowed in violating the edict of our Rabbonim.

You make it sound like all the rabbanim of klal Yisroel ruled that one is not allowed to learn kabbala, yet in recent years a bunch of Chabad fanatics ignored the rabbanim and started poking their noses in the wrong places.

This is far from the truth.

The Arizal already said: בדורות אלו האחרונים מותר ומצוה לגלות זאת החכמה
(In these recent generations it is a mitzvah to reveal this chochma).

Came the Baal Shem Tov and his many followers in the next generations who were Torah giants in nigleh and chassidus, and they felt that the time came to spread this Torah to Klal Yisroel more than ever before (because of the special inspiration that was need for our hard times, as well as to prepare for the geula).

If Rav Reuven Feinstein (or any other rov) feels that this is unnecessary, does that compel Chabad chassidim to give up the derech of their own rebbes!?

(Then you claim that CHABAD wants everyone to follow their rabbis!)

There’s been a little too much heat here today for me to get a logical word in, so I’m just gonna let everything slip by.

There’s just one thing that I feel the need to comment on:

In one such letter the Rebbe described the characteristics of a Nasi Chabad, and I’ll quote,”Every Nasi Chabad is a Baal Mofes, and he has Ruach Hakodesh. But the main thing to know is that the Nasi Chabad is the Nasi Hador.”

Since the Rebbe was grossly misquoted here, I feel the need to bring the true letter that qwerty is probably referring to, dated Gimmel Tammuz 5710:

ב”ה,

רבים המחפשים ומבארים מעלות וגדולת נשיאי חב”ד בכלל, ונשיא דורנו, הוא כ”ק מו”ח אדמו”ר הכ”מ, בפרט בענינים שונים: איש המסירות-נפש, גאון, בעל מדות, צדיק, בעל רוח הקודש, מלומד בנסים ועוד ועוד.

וגדלו ביותר שבחים אלו, על פי ההגדרה בתורת החסידות, מהו מסירות נפש, מהו גאון וכו’.

ובכל זה – העיקר חסר כאן. ונוסף על זה, שהוא עיקר בעצם, חשוב הוא ביחוד משום שנוגע ביותר, וביחוד לנו, קהל חסידיו ומקושריו. וזהו – מה שהוא הוא הנשיא, ונשיא חב”ד.

כי – נשיא בכלל, נקרא ראש1 אלפי ישראל, הוא בחינת ראש ומוח לגביהם, וממנו היא יניקה וחיות שלהם. ועל ידי הדביקה בו קשורים ומיוחדים הם בשרשם למעלה מעלה.

והנה כמה סוגים בנשיאים2: אלו אשר השפעתם בבחינת פנימיות, ואלו אשר השפעתם בבחינת מקיף. ובזה גופא חילוקים: אם השפיעו בתורת הנגלה או הנסתר או בשניהם יחדיו, לימדו דרכי העבודה והחסידות, המשיכו השפעות גשמיות וכו’ וכו’.

וישנם כאלו, שהי’ בהם כמה מבחינות הנ”ל, או גם כולם3.

וזה הי’ מאז ועד עתה ענין הנהגת נשיאי חב”ד, מן כ”ק אדמו”ר הזקן ועד כ”ק מו”ח אדמו”ר הכ”מ ועד בכלל, אשר כללו כל הסוגים והחילוקים: השפיעו בפנימיות ובמקיף, בתורה עבודה וגמ”ח, ברוחניות ובגשמיות. ובמילא היתה התקשרותם עם השייכים אליהם בכל תרי”ג אברי נפש וגוף המקושרים.

ועל כל אחד ואחת מאתנו כולנו לדעת, היינו להעמיק דעתו ולתקוע מחשבתו בזה, אשר הוא הוא הנשיא והראש, ממנו ועל ידו הם כל ההשפעות בגשמיות וברוחניות, ועל ידי ההתקשרות אליו (וכבר הורה במכתביו איך ובמה מתקשרים) קשורים, ומיוחדים בשרש ושרש השרש עד למעלה מעלה כו’.

מנחם שניאורסאהן

ג’ תמוז, ה’שי”ת,

ברוקלין, נ.י.

1.
ראה תניא פ”ב.

2.
באריכות: תורה אור פ’ מקץ ד”ה ת”ר מצות נ”ח. סהמ”צ להצ”צ מצות נ”ח פ”ג. ד”ה למען דעת, תרס”ט [סה”מ תרס”ט ע’ לט ואילך].

3.
ראה בתו”א שם ספ”ז דבמשיח יש ב’ הבחי’, דרועים ונסיכים. – ובש”ס (סוכה נב, ב) נחשב בנסיכים, י”ל מפני שזהו העיקר בו.

in Tanya perek Beis it explains that all neshamos are one body and receive everything from Hashem through the “head” (Tzaddikim/ Rebbes) Neshamos.

For all those who get nervous from chassidus seforim, here is an incredible Chasam Sofer (שו”ת או”ח סי’ קסו):

He explains that according to the Maharal, one shouldn’t ask malachim to bring his tefillos to Hashem (doing so is “קטנות אמונה חלילה”), since this is only necessary for a human king, but Hashem accepts all of our tefillos directly no matter how low we are.

But, the Chasam Sofer continues, a tzaddik is different. All Yidden are one body with one soul. When one Jew is in pain, it affects everyone.
A poshute Yid is compared to the foot, while the tzaddik is the head. It only makes sense that when the foot (i.e. a Yid) is in pain, he asks the “head” (tzaddik) to daven for him, since it’s more appropriate for the head to enter the King’s chamber than the foot.

דרך להעמיד מליץ בין מלך להדיוט כשאין ההדיוט חשוב וספון לפני המלך או אינו יכול להטעים דבריו כראוי ויען ישראל לפנים ממלאכי השרת ואינם צריכים מליץ לפני אוהב’ ית”ש והוא מקבל בסבר פנים יפות אפי’ בלשון עלגים וגמגו’ אם כן המליץ הלז אינו אלא קטנות אמונה חלילה אך כל ישראל שותפים וגוף א’ ונפש א’ וכשא’ מצטער גם חבירו מרגיש ועמו מצער ועד”ז המתפלל על חברו צריך שיחלה עצמו עליו פי’ שיראה כאלו גם הוא חולה וכיון ששניהם בצער טוב יותר שיכנס הראש משיכנס הרגל ע”ד משל הת”ח הוא הראש והמצטער שהוא עתה שרוי בדין הוא בבחינת רגל וקצת נזוף טוב להכניס הראש כיון ששניהם בעלי דברים ולא כמליץ בעד אחר

As I’ve clearly articulated, I will not get involved in any discussion about a dead Jew being god.

I don’t think you understood my post.
My point was showing you that there are statements from many other widely accepted Torah sources that may seem radical or ch”v AZ at first glance without proper background.
Closing your ears and saying “I can’t listen to this gadol because something he said sounded like AZ to me” is very קליינקעפלדיק.

Whatever.

P.S. Since some people here are indeed a bit קליינקעפלדיק, and especially naïve about Lubavitch – I feel the need to point out the obvious:
It seems to me that Yechi’s post is sarcasm.
Just putting it out there to set the record straight.

Qwerty,

I asked you this question several times, but haven’t received a response, so I’ll ask it a different way:

You seem very strong that the statement “דאס איז עצמות ומהות אליין ווי ער האט זיך אריינגעשטעלט אין א גוף
” is most definitely AZ, and it’s impossible for there to be any alternative explanations.

My question is, 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?
And if not, why not?

I’ve downloaded the lecture and plan on listening to it.

Great! Let us know your thoughts. I haven’t listened to it in a while, so I’ll need to relisten.
Again, if I remember correctly, he doesn’t specifically mention the vort of the Rebbe. He gives a comprehensive overview on the matter as it is brought throughout Torah.

does Chabad chasidus consider “atzmus umahus” to literally mean “essence and being/makeup (of G-d)”

To the best of my knowledge, yes. Something along those lines.

Qwery,

Something about you that I actually admire is that you seem to have a uniquely close and personal connection to your rabbanim, with a very open relationship where you take guidance for many aspects of your life.

Not everyone is so lucky.

If you wish to be successful in raising the level of your learning, you need to limit your time in the coffee room.

How dare you insinuate that qwerty doesn’t spend time learning!?

He learns gemara for SEVEN HOURS a day.
Runs a medical practice for several hours.
Watches TV for an hour.
Asks his rabbanim shaalos about what was discussed in the CR.

Obviously, he only spends about 20 minutes in the coffeeroom.
How then does he do so much writing?
Well, thanks to his superior writing abilities and logic, it’s not much of a surprise. What you, the groceryman, can to in an hour, takes qwerty 5 minutes. Checkmate

When I joined this discussion you made a distinction…

Qwerty, were you saving that all the while for when you’re asked a straightforward question that you have nothing to answer?

Anyway, these are the posts where I explained the difference:
#2210713 & #2211434

Now, please point out to me a single post number where I called the Rebbe god (other than quoting the sicha in Likkutei Sichos vol. 2).

If you fail to do so, I don’t care what excuses you have – it clearly shows that you can’t actually prove that “Shmei has consistently stated, in no uncertain terms…”