Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Common,
Please, this is completely out of context.
Why would you bring up a random post from the height of the covid debate in 2021 here in this thread?
(It didn’t even have to do with the vaccine. Chanie315 actually agreed with the vaccine. They were arguing about the severity of the virus).This is just asking for an argument. And in a sinas chinam thread.
Come on.Common,
I didn’t take the shot, but why bring up old fights in this thread?
>>>There is NO INDICATION WHATSOEVER regarding a Rav , Rebbe or R’Ys Shitah re Chabad , when it comes to their theology because of 2 reasons…
I assume that you are referring to the Rav Hutner discussion, which you are taking completely out of context.
I was not trying to say that Rav Hutner holds of Lubavitch. Frankly, it makes as much of a difference to me as it would make a difference to you if the Lubavitcher Rebbe holds of Rav Hutner.The correspondents of Rav Hutner was brought in response to avira’s post:
“And i was waiting for someone to mention putting on tefillin once as an example of returning jews to Torah. It isn’t. Because, as rav hutner explained, the rishonim are clear that in order for a mitzva to count, even according to the opinion that mitzvos don’t require kavanah, one must believe in their existence and be aware of their existence, otherwise it’s a maysoh kof b’alma….”It’s absurd to claim that Rav Hutner was against mivtzah tefillin without knowing the lengthy correspondence where he asks the Rebbe all of his questions. He also writes that he made sure not to go public with his opinion, etc. It’s also interesting to note the sensitivity he uses in his argument.
To ignore these letters and just claim (or imply) that Rav Hutner was against mivtzah tefllin is burying your head in the sand.>>>Does ‘giving land to Arabs’ not make things worse?
It does.
It’s a clear ruling in Shulchan Aruch OC siman 329:
עכו”ם שצרו על עיירות ישראל אם באו על עסק ממון אין מחללין עליהם את השבת באו על עסק נפשות ואפי’ סתם יוצאים עליהם בכלי זיין ומחללים עליהם את השבת ובעיר הסמוכה לספר אפילו לא באו אלא על עסקי תבן וקש מחללין עליהם את השבת: הגה ואפילו לא באו עדיין אלא רוצים לבא
Regarding non-Jews who besiege Jewish cities: if they come for money, we do not desecrate the Shabbat [to protect ourselves], but if they came to kill or come with no presented reason, we go out with weapons and desecrate the Shabbat. In a city that is near the border, EVEN IF THEY JUST COME FOR STRAW OR HAY, we desecrate the Shabbat. Rem”a: Even if they haven’t come but they want to come.
Mishna Berurah:
(יד) לספר וכו’ – עיר שמבדלת בין גבול שישראל דרים בה לגבול העו”ג וחיישינן שאם ילכדוה משם תהא הארץ נוחה ליכבש לפניהם:@yungermanS,
Thanks for the inspiration. Hopefully we’ll indeed succeed in uniting despite our opposing views, and bring Moshiach.
@amiricanyeshivish,
❤️😂Goldilocks,
Description from Women of the Wall website:
“As Women of the Wall, our central mission is to attain social and legal recognition of our right, as women, to wear prayer shawls, pray, and read from the Torah, collectively and aloud, at the Western Wall.”i.e. Their mission is to wage a war against Hashem Himself by publicly going against His will as it is manifested in halacha.
And all this – in the holiest place in the world – the place where the Shechina rests! ר”ל ר”ל
May this abomination be obliterated immediately.As a Lubavitcher, I follow the path of the Chabad rabbeim of being mekarev every Yid, even those with the status of מורידין ולא מעלין (See Likkutei Sichos vol. 2 pg. 620).
As the Gemara says: יתמו חטאים ולא חוטאיםWhile I wouldn’t hate Women of the Wall (since they are Jewish), and I would try to be mekarev them, their actions are definitely deplorable.
The Rebbe Rashab has a very sharp maamar know as החלצו תרנ”ט where he discusses the concept of sinas chinam at length and how to rid oneself of it.
This was particularly hard for me to learn because it so aptly describes the the relationship I have with some people, and the struggle of overcoming these feelings. I’m still working to rid myself of this sinas chinam.
Here are some excerpts:
שנאת-חינם היא, שאחד שונא את חברו סתם כך, על לא-דבר. לפעמים הוא ממציא טענה כלשהי, מדוע הוא שונאו, אבל אין זו אלא תואנה ועלילה להצדיק את שנאתו. הסיבה האמיתית היא – ישותו העצמית, שאינה מניחה מקום לזולתו. חשוב הוא בעיני עצמו, ולכן הזולת ממעט את מציאותו.…
כל אחד בונה במה לעצמו, בתורה ובעבודה, על-פי דעתו ושכלו דווקא, ואין אחד מתאחד ומתחבר עם רעהו. כל אחד מבטל את הטוב שבעבודת חברו, וכל חיסרון שימצא בה – יגדיל וירחיב עשרת מונים (אף אם אינו אלא חיצוני, שאינו נוגע בגוף ובעצם עבודתו). התנהגות זו מעידה ששונא הוא את חברו בליבו ואינו חפץ כלל בטובתו. ומהי הסיבה לשנאה זו? ישותו והרגשת עצמו, או בלשון אחרת: העדר הביטול והעדר הנחת עצמותו
Square,
Well said, you took the words out of my mouth.
>>>Re, rav hutner; I’d trust what his talmidim say over online people…
Great. You still refuse to check the written correspondence – a mouseclick away. You would rather trust word of mouth as long as it’s hateful. And then you wonder why people call it “chinam”…
Go ahead, bury your head in the sand.>>>Lubavitch information flat out spreads falsities about what gedolim said about Lubavitch.
I can say the same about Chaim Berlin.
Most people’s words can’t be blindly trusted for the fear of bias.That’s why I posted a link with written correspondence between the two gedolim. The letters speak for themselves (unless you are afraid of forgeries. Though if you look at chabadpedia you can find the original letters of Rav Hutner with the Rebbe’s handwritten response).
As usual, you would rather argue about facts without checking them despite them being a Google search away (whereas taking a trip to chaim berlin is very impractical for me). This seems like cowardice to me.
>>>Lubavitchers make lots of claims about how gedolim viewed their rebbe; if you want to know what rav hutner held of him, talk to a chaim berlin person.
Or: Read the aforementioned correspondence (google: anash correspondence Rebbe Rav Hutner) and see for yourself their relationship. Also, you will see there the status of Rav Hutner’s “hisnagdus” to mivtzah tefillin.
>>>The Vilna Gaon is who people refer to when saying “The Gaon”. The Rogotchover I don’t believe is ever referred to by that title, he’s always “The Rogotchover Rebbe”.
In Chabad also “the Gaon” refers to the Vilna Gaon, though he is usually referred to as Vilna Gaon or Gra.
I’ve never heard anyone refer to the Rogatchover as “the Gaon” but neither is he called “rebbe”.
I think he is universally called “the Rogatchover gaon” or הגאון הרוגצ’ובי
>>>a leader of [hi]s generation … has to be accepted by virtually all of klal yisroel”
Something to think about:
Was Moshe the Jewish leader because every Yid cared about and respected him, or because he cared for every Yid?
>>>I don’t know which is worse
Making fun is worse. It’s not nice to make fun of death.
On the other hand, looking at everything through the lenses of how it affects Yidden is a very good thing, as Avira wrote.
I’ll add to Avira that not only is everything that HAPPENS in the world for the Yidden, but the very existence of the world is only for the Yidden.
As Rashi writes on the first posuk:
בראשית – בשביל ישראל ובשביל התורה שנקראו ראשיתProblem #4886 with Lubavitch:
There is a Lubavitcher who doesn’t know who Reb Shamshon Refael Hirsch is.Another reason to put them in cherem.
RULES OF THE YWN COFFEEROOM (updated):
There shall be (at least) two threads about Lubavitch-Moshiach running at at every given moment.
If a day passes without this discussion, the CR will automatically be shut down forever.
Thanks for understanding.
Correction to my previous post:
The Shulchan Aruch says ואינו מנהג
(Nasty spell check)mdd1,
Please explain why all attack Chabad for דוקא being נוהג like an accepted leniency, while I have yet to see anyone attack the chassidish velt (and many litvishers) for going AGAINST the halacha in Shulchan Aruch and Mishnah Brurah.Again, Shulchan Aruch mentions the minhag of not sleeping in the Sukkah and supports it (albeit בדיעבד), while it mentions the Shmini Atzeres minhag and CONDEMNS it!
I am not chas v’shalom pushing to attack anyone’s minhagim. I think every yid should follow the mesorah from his rabbeim and the tzaddikim of previous generations.
I am just upset by the blatant double standard.
If it’s a mesorah from the Baal Shem Tov passed down by polisher chassidim – it is welcomed with open arms.
If it’s a mesorah from the Mitteler Rebbe (during the times of the Baal HaTanya) passed down by Chabad rabbeim – it is “akiras mitzvos” (ח”ו עפ”ל)!I’m shocked by those who attack Chabad for not sleeping in Sukkah, yet defend not eating on Shmino Atzeres.
Regarding sleeping the Shulchan Aruch says that today most are נוהג not to sleep, and give a few reasons. Chabad explains another reason according to our mesorah from the Mitteler Rebbe.
Regarding eating in the Sukkah on Shmini Atzeres, the Shulchan Aruch writes that there are those who don’t eat on Shmini Atzeres ואנחנו מנהג – This is NOT A MINHAG!
There is no classic halachic source for not eating in Sukkah on Shmini Atzeres other than a mesorah from the Baal Shem Tov (which, btw is not accepted in Chabad) yet everyone is fine with that.
The vina gaon writes that one who doesn’t sleep in the Sukkah on Shmini Atzeres is chayav misah for violating divrei sofrim.
Certainly so regarding eating!The anti chabad bias is clear as day.
Square,
Your disrespect is shocking. If the topic doesn’t interest you, don’t post.
This fast is brought in Magen Avraham (או”ח סו”ס תקפה)
נוהגין להתענות עשרים בסיום בכל מלכות פוליןEven for those who don’t fast, it is a day that can be spent in teshuva and introspection. Davening for the end to our suffering in golus and the coming of Moshiach.
See Sefer Hasichos 5751 vol. 2 pg. 611
>>>This language was removed from subsequent prints.
This is a lie. There is no edition missing these words, because Lubavitch has no need to cover this up.
Since this has been discussed at great length hundreds of times in the CR, it is pointless to rehash.
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 שלאפןDaMoshe, mdd1
If you also think Shulchan Aruch Harav and the Mitteler Rebbe are “oker Torah” (ח”ו עפ”ל) then we indeed have absolutely no שפה משותפת (neither do you have with most bnei Torah of this generation or previous ones).
>>>the mitteler did not admonish people for sleeping in the sukkah. the way everyone else has the story, his statement of “how can I sleep….” was said regarding himself, to explain his own practice of not sleeping in a sukkah.
Avira, you are obviously only interested in picking fights. You continue to argue and lie in order to bring out your point, and you refuse to check any sources I gave you to see if you are factually correct.
This is the quote from the Frierdiker Rebbe:
פעם אחד סיפרו לאדמו”ר האמצעי שאברכים ישנים בסוכה, האט ער – אדמו”ר האמצעי – זיי געגעבן דם אמת’ן חלק, ואמר: שלאפן אין מקיף, מילא לערנען אין מקיף הרי זה דחק ונכנס, אבער שלאפן אין מקיף?! עיי”ש>>> most jews did not sleep in a sukkah in Europe. The mitteler rebbe had a valid, normal halachik heter not to.
Again, you obviously only learned the sicha from those who seek to twist the Rebbe’s words, but not the original. This is like arguing about pshat in a Rashi without learning the Gemara!
Lubavitchers are extremely machmir in Sukkah, not even taking a sip of water outside of the Sukkah when it’s pouring rain. Yet, when it came to sleeping in the Sukkah, Chabad was never machmir. This, the Rebbe points out, is very strange.
The Rebbe brings a story (told (and printed) by the Frierdiker Rebbe – Sukkos 5699) that the Mitteler Rebbe (who was appointed by his father – the baal hatanya – to lead the younger chassidim during his own lifetime) admonished the yungeleit for sleeping in the Sukkah “ווי קען מען שלאפן אין מקיפים דבינה”.
The Rebbe then supports this minhag on a halachic basis. The Rebbe is not being mechadesh a new minhag, rather being מיישב a minhag of several generations.
***>>> and no, there’s no reference to look at tzafnas paneach or other seforim from the rogotchover.
I’m not exactly sure what you’re referring to, maybe something earlier in the posts?
Anyway, there are two points in the sicha which are based on the Rogotchover, and of course, both are clearly referenced in the footnotes:
Seif daled discusses Tzofnas Paneach on the Rambam הלכות סוכה פ”ו ה”ב.
Footnote 63 discusses Tzofnas Paneach מהד”ת כה, רע”ג.
***>>>where is the source for not washing for shalosh seudos? It just doesn’t exist. He was mechadesh these things
You asked a question, yet decided the answer on your own.
The Frierdiker Rebbe mentions several times in his sichos that minhag Chabad (and the minhag of the baal hatanya, mitteler rebbe, tzemach tzedek, etc.) is not to be קובע סעודה for seuda shlishis, rather to eat a small snack.
See סה”ש אדמו”ר מהוריי”צ תש”ב ע’ 29, and more.
Also, Hayom Yom 22 Adar Beis, the Frierdiker Rebbe says:
אאמו”ר כותב באחד ממאמריו: הא דסעודה שלישית היום לא גו’, היינו שאין צריך פת, אבל צריך לטעום איזה דברThe Rebbe is מיישב (not מחדש) this minhag halachically in Likkutei Sichos. That’s it.
https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14944&pgnum=97P.S. Sorry for writing so long, but really much more should be written to defend כבוד התורה.
Honestly, the sichos speak for themselves and my explanations are unnecessary, but it seems that no one is interested in looking in the originals despite them being widely available online, so I feel the need to provide the general ענינים.
I encourage everyone to read the truth for themselves in the original seforim before reading them in books whose entire purpose is to be מזייף ומסלף the holy words of tzaddikim.
The amount of nonsense and lies on every page of על התורה ועל התמורה is endless.>>>the rise of people openly saying “boreinu” in their yechi liturgy..
Throughout my life of meeting and talking to thousands of fellow lubavitchers, many of whom are quite diverse in their beliefs, I have only met ONE Lubavitcher who espouses this heresy, and he is a know yungerman who is shunned by all.
The very notion that this is a “group of people” that is “on the rise” is a vicious slander.
>>>you’re mixing up the books that Wolbe wrote. He received a haskama on yechi hamelech
This happens to be irrelevant to the point I’m trying to make, that it’s ridiculous to learn a sefer from it’s attacker.
However, I am not sure you’re right. Unfortunately I don’t have the sefer at my disposal, but according to my research it seems that he did give a haskamah to Yedaber Sholom. Rabbi Wolpo references it in his second volume.
>>>He “proves” from the gemara about rebbe hillel, that moshiach won’t come, but rather Hashem will redeem us Himself
Which page? I went through the entire Yechi Hamelech (also using otzar hachochma search) and couldn’t find it.
This is also surprising, since the Rebbe often brings and supports the Chasam Sofer that anyone who holds like R’ Hillel is כופר בכלל התורה.
>>>The Lubavitcher rebbe would have to prove to us that the rogotchover said it
Happens to be, the Rebbe is extremely careful to source every single quote in Likkutei Sichos. You will never find him quoting anyone without a footnote and source.
One of the wonderful things about על התורה ועל התמורה is that they often show pictures of Sichos but they cut out all the sources, so you shouldn’t chas v’shalom see that most of what they attack is just direct quotes from other places in Torah.
How many people know that the minhag Chabad of not sleeping in the Sukkah or not eating bread for Shalosh Seudos have nothing to do with the seventh Rebbe, and have been part of Chabad minhagim since the baal hatanyah?
The Rebbe’s sichos source all these things from the Frierdiker Rebbe’s seforim, the tzemach tzedek, etc.
Al Hatorah conveniently hides these facts to make it look as if the Rebbe was mechadeshNeville,
We have reached the stage of מחלוקת במציאותAvira,
Learning Likkutei Sichos from על התורה is like learning Avi Ezri from Yedaber Sholom
(the difference being that Yedaber Sholom is more lomdish with less attacking (nevertheless, the Rebbe forbade Rabbi Wolpo from printing another volume), and has haskamos from Rav Moshe Feinstein, the Gerrer Rebbe, Rav Grusman, Rav Weiss (Eida Hachareidis), Rav Ovadia Yosef, etc.)Additionally, על התורה is obviously extremely one-sided, perfect for people looking for clickbait to attack Chabad.
Anyone honest would (in addition to learning the Rebbe’s Sichos in the original) also read books that oppose the claims in Al Hatorah.
If you have an otzar hachachma, see הוגה בתורה which tears apart all the taanos brought in על התורה.
קבל את האמת ממי שאמרו>>>The old guard in Chabad is very strict to never use terms like “Litvisher” or “yeshivish,” or anything non-offensive, so they simply aren’t aware of them.
What a lie. I have never heard the term “snag” from anyone’s mouth other than immature bochurim and online posters (היינו הך?)
All older people (yungeleit, mashpiim, teachers, baaleibatim, etc.) refer as veltishe/litvishe, or “misnagdim” if referring to someone who is attacking Chabad.The average Chabad adult who doesn’t hang out online or with bochurim doesn’t even know what a snag is!!
This is just more anti chabad slander.
Avira,
My point was that when it comes to the midrash, you look in mefarshim to understand what it meant.
When it comes to a sicha, you refuse to even open up the sicha itself and see what it says, let alone ask someone learned in these subjects to explain it properly (excluding those in the CR. Online discussions just go in circles.)You hear that the Rebbe quoted a Midrash, and suddenly it’s kefirah!?
And your Rambam problem is even more ridiculous.
What kind of lomdus is this? Imagine you hear a chiddush of a rosh yeshiva, and you are told that he discusses how it fits with a Rambam, yet you are stubborn that “it’s impossible to explain it any other way” without even taking a peek at his explanation!Did you check the link I sent? Did you look at seif daled:
“לכאורה קען מען אויף דערויף פרעגן: דעם רמב”ם פסק’נט: אלו שכותבין מבפנים…”???Did you see that the Rebbe’s original statement (which seems to contradict the Rambam) was based on a diyuk in the ב”ח and the טור?
You would rather “refute” what the Rebbe said without seeing it.
If this isn’t called burying your head in the sand, I don’t know what is.>>>his outlandish statement that a mezuzah is a shmirah without it being a mitzvah – this is something that likely falls under the rambams classification of using a mezuzah like a kamayah, which he says makes one lose their share in olam haba.
The Rebbe’s statement about mezuzah is taken from an entire pilpul of the Rebbe on THIS VERY Rambam, where the Rebbe discusses this very question, in connection with a ב”ח and a טור, etc.
Did you look up that sicha to see how the Rebbe explains the Rambam???
Find me one other rosh yeshiva whose shiurim are refuted by people who don’t even learn them, using sources that he himself brings and explains. What a chutzpah!
See the full sicha here:
https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14942&st=&pgnum=134>>>The author also shows something else that’s probably kefirah; in likutei sichos, the Lubavitcher rebbe says that Moshe was only taught the klalim of Torah shebaal peh, and not the pratim… because of a kasha….how could he have learned it all in 40 days; I’m shocked at the arrogance of this kasha – it was Hashem teaching! And Moshe was the talmid! What limit on Hashem’s teaching ability can there be? It’s also against open chazals
This “statement of the Rebbe” which you call “kefira” (ח”ו עפ”ל) actually happens be a direct quote from Shmos Rabbah:
וְכִי כָּל הַתּוֹרָה לָמַד משֶׁה, כְּתִיב בַּתּוֹרָה “אֲרֻכָּה מֵאֶרֶץ מִדָּהּ וּרְחָבָה מִנִּי יָם”, וּלְאַרְבָּעִים יוֹם לְמָדָהּ משֶׁה?! אֶלָּא כְּלָלִים לִמְדָהוּ הקב”ה לְמשֶׁה.The same is with all the other attacks. They come from pulling one-liners out of long and complex shiurim.
If you hate someone who has thousands of pages of pilpulim and chidushim, it is very easy to find a few lines and statements that sound strange when taken out of context and feed them to the ignorant public to help stoke the flames of machlokes.
This is called לימוד התורה לקנטר ר”ל.If anyone wants to be intellectually honest, look into the Rebbe’s sichos yourself, they’re all available on HeberewBooks.
Or, ask a Lubavitcher to direct you to some. You may be surprised.>>>the only maamar i need to know is that he thought that a rebbe is the essence of god wrapped in a body. It doesn’t matter to me what other ideas or teachings he had, or how much Torah knowledge he had.
That’s like saying that all you need to know about Zohar is that it says “who is the face of the Master Havayeh? This is Rabbi Shimon bar yochai”
Or: all you need to know about the Yerushalmi is that it says “Havayeh in His holy chamber – this is R’ Elazar in the Beis Midrash”
Or about Midrash rabbah: “Moshe from his top half is Elokim and from his bottom half human”
Do you disregard all these seforim immediately (chas v’shalom) because you found a statement that you don’t understand, or do you look into the context to try and understand it better?
>>>It was expected in Chabad that you accepted whatever he said. No one asked him kashes on it
Complete ignorance.
Lubavitch yeshivos around the world printed (and continue to print) weekly or monthly kovtzim where they discuss, explain, and ASK QUESTIONS on the Rebbe’s Sichos (in addition to pilpulim in shas and poskim).
The Rebbe often discussed the questions that were asked in the kovtzim, and clarified and answered.
Instead of arguing if the Rebbe is “known” for lomdus, open his seforim and see for yourself.
Unless you’re not interested in honest discussion, feel free to put your head in the sand.
>He is also committed to correcting some of the outright lies often repeated, examples include: the Rebbe having studied at the Sorbonne
I haven’t read Deutsch’s book, but he would have to prove that Lubavitchers forged the Rebbe’s handwriting in two different places in the Sorbonne registration book in 1937 & 1938.
Highly unlikely.Google “in the halls of the Sorbonne”
Minute 4:00 of the videoAvira,
What you say is interesting.
If you look online, you will also see some lubavitchers at the parade putting tefillin on people, even though the Lubavitcher Rebbe forbade lubavitchers from being anywhere in the proximity even for the purpose of mivtzoim, lest it be seen as giving a hechsher for Zionism, chas v’shalom.
YumgermanS,
The world you describe is what we are indeed waiting for every moment of the day – Yemos Hamoshiach.
As the Rambam writes in the final halacha of Mishneh Torah:
וּבְאוֹתוֹ הַזְּמַן לֹא יִהְיֶה שָׁם לֹא רָעָב וְלֹא מִלְחָמָה. וְלֹא קִנְאָה וְתַחֲרוּת. שֶׁהַטּוֹבָה תִּהְיֶה מֻשְׁפַּעַת הַרְבֵּה. וְכָל הַמַּעֲדַנִּים מְצוּיִין כֶּעָפָר. וְלֹא יִהְיֶה עֵסֶק כָּל הָעוֹלָם אֶלָּא לָדַעַת אֶת ה’ בִּלְבַד. וּלְפִיכָךְ יִהְיוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל חֲכָמִים גְּדוֹלִים וְיוֹדְעִים דְּבָרִים הַסְּתוּמִים וְיַשִּׂיגוּ דַּעַת בּוֹרְאָם כְּפִי כֹּחַ הָאָדָם. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה יא, ט) “כִּי מָלְאָה הָאָרֶץ דֵּעָה אֶת ה’ כַּמַּיִם לַיָּם מְכַסִּים”:Going through these posts, it’s amazing to see the coffeeroom of old. Wish I would’ve joined then.
Just imagining if this discussion would have been started in the current CR. Oy.DaMoshe, thanks for wrapping up the story. Very heartwarming!
Crown Heights rabbanim vehemently oppose the eiruv as well
Avira: “it’s not only in chabad”
Yes, I am aware this. I was specifically addressing n0mesorah’s supposed diyuk in the Rebbe’s lashon.
>”Some simply enjoy…”
Well said.>I wonder if he really believed it to be.
The arrogance of ignorance
(Please state your own opinions. No need to claim the Rebbe supports your claims. If you really care to know the Rebbe’s opinion, you’re going to have to look at a lot more than one translated letter. The Rebbe has THOUSANDS of pages on Lag Beomer. See his opinion for yourself)
n0mesorah,
Additionally, you seem to be מדייק in the word “Rejoicing of Rashbi” in the Rebbe’s letter.
This was not the Rebbe’s words (it’s a translation). The Rebbe wrote “הילולא דרשב”י” – which he always uses to describe passing. The yahrzeits of the Chabad rabbeim are often referred to as יום הילולא.This is taken from the term which the Zohar uses about the passing of Rashbi: ואתכנשו להילולא דרבי שמעון (Zohar Idrah Zutah 296b).
>n0mesora: “The Rebbe was adamant that lag baomer was not the day rashbi died.”
Sorry, במכ”ת this statement is laughable for anyone who glanced at any of the Rebbe’s hundreds of Lag Baomer sichos and letters. You completely misunderstood the Rebbe’s letter.
The Rebbe is only commenting that Rashbi couldn’t have died together with the students of Rabbi Akiva.
The Rebbe stated COUNTLESS times that Lag Baomer is the day of Rashbi’s passing.
Here is one example (among many) from a letter that the Rebbe wrote TWO YEARS after the aforementioned letter to Rabbi Zevin (Pesach Sheini 5711):
כמה טעמים נאמרו בשמחת ל”ג בעומר וחגיגתו. ואנו אין לנו אלא האמור בכתהאריז”ל ומובא בדא”ח, אשר יום זה הוא יום הסתלקותו של רבי שמעון בן יוחאי – הילולא דרבי שמעוןThe Rebbe attaches several sources (also makes mention of aforementioned Chida).
See original letter here:
https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=15951#p=300&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr=Dear Bot, what are your thoughts on this:
In what is believed to be a first-of-its-kind ban, more than a dozen rabbanim and dayanim from the Skver chasidus have signed a strongly worded letter assuring the use of AI chatbots.
The letter, first released on Thursday, mentions OpenAI, the company behind artificial intelligence marvel ChatGPT, but makes it clear that it is not speaking of only that developer’s products.
“The severity of the danger is not yet clear and obvious to everyone,” the letter states, noting that it poses, in the eyes of the rabbanim, a critical danger to frum yidden.
AI chatbots provide completely unfiltered access to apikorsus, lewd and perverse content, and all the issurim of “lo sasuru acharei levavchem,’ the kol koreh says.
The use of AI chatbots is thus in the same category as the “issur hachamur” of using unfiltered internet, regardless of how the chatbot is used.
“Therefore,” the letter says, “the use of AI is stricly prohibited in every way and form, even on a phone.”
Wolf, Bath,
You are absolutely correct. Torah and mitzvos are eternal. As the Rambam writes (I just learned this in shlosha prokim):
דבר ברור ומפורש בתורה שהיא מצוה עומדת לעולם ולעולמי עולמים אין לה לא שינוי כו’
Or, as he writes in Hilchos Megilla, that all of Nach (except Megilla) will be nullified in Yemos Hamoshiach, whereas Chumash and all the halachos will exist forever
הלכות של תורה שבעל פה שאינן בטלים לעולםThe problem is that the idea of mitzvos being nullified in Yemos Hamoshiach is not the imagination of some overzealous messianists based on some vague midrashim, rather clear gemoros with halachic implications (not aggada).
See Niddah 61b: מצוות בטלות לעתיד לבוא (regarding the halacha of בגד שאבד בו כלאים). See Tosfos there, and Rambam Hilchos Kilayim 10:25.
See שדי חמד כללים מ’ ס”ק ריח for more examples.This seeming contradiction is something that Torah scholars have struggled with (though obviously in a respectful way. I am shocked by the audacity of Bath “Anyone who says otherwise, even chazal, is either wrong or a misunderstanding.” עפ”ל עפ”ל)
Among others, Rav Elchanan Wasserman discusses this at length in Kovetz Shiurim (ח”ב סי’ ט) and proposes two answers.
The Lubavitchers Rebbe as well has a brilliant pilpul on this sugya. See here: https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=59257&st=&pgnum=206
Chas v’shalom to dismiss the words of chachamim. If we don’t understand, we must ask and learn.
Gadolhadofi,
It’s hard for me to tell you, because I don’t personally know any Lubavitchers who are in college (though I assume that there are some).
Again, the Rebbe was adamantly against any Jew (not just Lubavitchers) going to college (aside from very rare individual exceptions). Therefore, this is considered very taboo in Chabad.
I guess a chossid who would do this would be viewed like anyone who does something very wrong.
Google: “chabad dot org no college” for many letters (the less fiery ones) of the Rebbe (mostly to non chassidim) on the matter.
(For parnosa, there were certain conditions when the Rebbe allowed it bedieved, such as only AFTER MARRIAGE, etc.)
Gadolhadofi,
No, it’s not ironic. The Rebbe was specifically instructed by his Rebbe and father-in-law to receive that education.
Just as there were unique exceptions when the Rebbe encouraged certain chassidim to go to college.