Forum Replies Created
In all my years of Yeshiva, we never had a shiur by anyone clarifying these things or twisting Rambams. That’s something more commonplace by girls. Secondly, regarding SB Volpa, the Rebbe didn’t allow him to publish his book, in fact the Rebbe went so far as to tell him never to have anything to do with Moshiach inyanim anymore. Unfortunately, he took advantage of the Rebbes stroke, and went ahead with it. He is a big talmid chochom, but loves to twist and convolute things.
I’m not well acquainted with R Mann, so I can’t comment on his integrity. I am surprised that if you’re starting with diyukim in Rambam you don’t mention the well known אם נהרג one. That’s been going around for a long time.
Also, I’m curious to know what questions in Chassidus you asked him that no one else could answer.
I’m sure you know that תכלית הבריאה is ימות המשיח??
What you said regarding Detroit and Chicago reveals alot about your views on Meshichistim. Just realize, no matter how you try explain it, no one here will become convinced. Aderabe, they’ll hate us more for it.
As a Lubavitcher male, I have never heard these diyukim in Rambam from any respected figure in a Yeshiva. I suspect it’s just parroted by women and some bochurim. And don’t use noshim datan kalos as a cop out, if you sit down and actually try understand it without any preconceived notions you will get to the truth.
It’s hard for me to fully explain everything I want here, in person would be better, but of course, that’s not happening.
Let me explain:
Rambam Hilchos Melochim Perek 11 Halacha 4:
ואם יעמוד מלך מבית דוד הוגה בתורה ועוסק במצות כדוד אביו כפי תורה שבכתב ושבעל פה, ויכוף כל ישראל לילך בה ולחזק בדקה.
So far you can argue the Rebbe fulfilled. וילחם מלחמות ה’. הרי זה בחזקת שהוא משיח.
This unfortunately wasn’t fulfilled in the Rebbe. אם עשה והצליח,
(If he was successful in ‘ויכוף כל ישראל וכו )
וניצח כל האומות שסביביו,
(From here we see that ‘מלחמת ה is kipshuto)
ובנה מקדש במקומו, וקבץ נדחי ישראל, הרי זה משיח בודאי. ואם לא הצליח עד כה או נהרג, בידוע שאינו זה שהבטיחה עליו תורה. והרי הוא ככל מלכי בית דוד השלמים הכשרים שמתו.
I do not know of any sicha saying that Milchemes Hashem is in ruchniyusdike terms. That would contradict וניצח כל האומות שסביביו. Also I didn’t get your diyuk of “veyilchom” especially as it’s “veyilochaym”.
Who told you that ‘וילחם מלחמת ה means sending out shluchim and being mekarev Yidden? Is that the pshat in the rambam? Please read the Rambam again, with an intellectually honest outlook, and you’ll see that the Rebbe wasn’t Chezkas Moshiach. FYI, I’m a regular Lubavitcher, I do Chitas and Rambam, and I go on Mivtzoim every Friday…
I don’t know where you get these sheer and utter nonsensical statements from, do they teach them in school or did you make it up? The Rebbe zy”a never said not to fast on YK. Nor did he say Moshiach is already here.
“Please look up the phrase “Nassi Hador hu haMoshiach shebador.” Nassi Hador is another way of saying Moshe Rabbeinu of the generation, just shorter:). If you still can’t find it, I’ll Google it myself and tell you an exact source, although as a fellow Lubavitcher I’d be surprised if you haven’t come across it yet.”
Obviously I have. Off hand it’s Shoftim Nun Alef.
But the term Mosher Shebador doesn’t automatically mean Moshiach Shebador. And Moshe Shebador in the original use doesn’t mean Nassi Hador, so I’m saying don’t jump the gun..
Secondly, please refer to want the Rebbe said on כח ניסן “אורות דתוהו בכלים בתיקון” vedai lchakima beremiza.
I failed to draw such conclusions from ChabadShluchas summary of some points of the maamar, or the actual maamar itself.
@ChabadShlucha, I agree with most of want you’re saying besides one thing. “Moshiach Shebador” isn’t a halachic concept, it’s not based on the Rambam, so it’s not the greatest point to bring in an argument. Secondly, nowhere does it says that the משה שבדור is משיח שבדור. Saying it will not help you prove you point. I don’t understand why you are seemingly trying to validate or legitimise beliefs that are based on emotion, not intellect through logic.
If I were trying to defend or explain it, I would simply say, that Chassidim believe that their Rebbe was the most worthy of being Moshiach, were he to come in his time. Such belief is no novelty, it’s seen in the Gemara, and in past generations there were other Chassidim who believed this about their Rebbe, (such as Vizhnitz).
To conclude, never ever, not even once did the rebber ever declare or otherwise insinuate that he was Moshiach. ( Once, Rabbi L Groner, a secretary of the Rebbe handed the Rebbe a letter which had been received and was addressed to “Moshiach”, the Rebbe said “I’ll give it to him when he comes”.
That said, if someone chooses to believe that the Rebbe or any Rebbe is Moshiach, that doesn’t make him a Kofer or anything. It may be foolish to believe so after his passing, but definitely isn’t assur in any way, shape or form.
If you’d be intellectually honest with yourself, you’d realize the fallacy of your argument. Go open a Gemara, and look how a classic stira between the gemaras statement and a possuk is resolved. Many times, it’ll be “the Tanna is speaking about this, and the possuk means this”. I’m not making chiddushim here, this is basic Jewish literacy.
“אין צדיק means there isn’t a tzaddik (who doesn’t sin), not that a lower level tzaddik doesn’t sin.”
That’s very flawed logic. Anyone who’s learned a Gemara or Tosfos will tell you that such rational is a very classic way of answering seeming contradictions or discrepancies in Torah.
@KCup, there are several. But you will notice that the vast majority of Lubavitcher Rabbanim and serious Talmidei Chachamim are non meshichist (what’s popularly called “anti”). I’m not going to name names of different Rabbanim here, but you can find that out yourself.November 21, 2017 1:59 am at 1:59 am in reply to: Does “Chasidish” refer to both Satmar and Lubavitch? #1407866
Secondly, when I wrote about Torah knowledge of Chabad women, I specifically used the word “many” as not to exclude anyone. I haven’t gone around testing women in Crown Heights and Lakewood.
Thirdly, I wasn’t going to write that line at all, but decided to in respect of ChabadShlucha, who does seem on the learned side. Fourth, many many Chabad women have learned the entire Rambam (Yad Hachazaka) several times. I’m not showing superiority, I am stating fact. I have the utmost respect for all Yiddishe Kraizen, and in no way believe that Chabad is “the exclusive path”. I do believe one has an obligation to study about the greatness of Hashem, and contemplate on it, (See Sh”A Orach Chayim 61) and learning Chassidus is a great way to accomplish that. I respect Gedolei Yisrael, and in fact the Chafetz Chayim in particular is greatly revered in Chabad, the Rebbe zy”a spoke of him in glowing terms. The Rebbe had extensive communication with many Gedolei Yisrael of the past generation, and the love Harav Moshe Feinstein ztz”l had for the Rebbe is well known, he even started wearing Rabbeinu Tams tefilin daily at the Rebbes request. So please, look at the facts instead of blindlessly hating other Yidden, Yireim Ushleimim.
@DaasYochid, relying on the Bachs heter for Chodosh isn’t a new thing. Aderabe, the chumra of being makpid on Yoshon is relatively new. Before the war almost everyone was eating Chodosh, including your own ancestors.November 20, 2017 8:04 pm at 8:04 pm in reply to: Does “Chasidish” refer to both Satmar and Lubavitch? #1407756
@DaasYochid, I hope in the this comment you are indeed a daas yochid, because what you said about am haratzus being rampant in Chabad is absolutely false. I’m a Lubavitcher, (male) and learned in Chabad Yeshivas in EY and US. We spend most of our day ( around 7hrs of it) learning Gemara, with all the meforshim, including Reb Boruch Ber, Shiurei R Shmuel, R Chaim and many more. Additionally, we finish the entire Rambam ( Yad Hachazaka) every year or every 3 years. Lubavitcher bochurim are boki in Yore Deah before getting married. If you didn’t realize until now, “ChabadShlucha” is a women, ( hence “shlucha” ) and as such, probably doesn’t learn as much as a Lubavitcher man. Although, I’m pretty certain that many Chabad women are more knowledgeable in Torah than other frum woman, as the Rebbe zy”a was very insistent on woman learning Torah, even Gemara.November 19, 2017 2:39 pm at 2:39 pm in reply to: Does “Chasidish” refer to both Satmar and Lubavitch? #1405795
To “770 Chabad”,
Please stop writing these things if you can’t properly explain them. The lashon “צדיק מלא עולם” isn’t mentioned in Tanya, or anywhere else for that matter. I know you want to stick up for Chabad, but you’re doing more harm than good.November 19, 2017 4:20 am at 4:20 am in reply to: Does “Chasidish” refer to both Satmar and Lubavitch? #1405509
In popular expression, no it doesn’t. Should it? One hundred percent! What are Chassidim if not for Chassidus? It’s deeper than Levush and Yiddish (to be sure, many, many Lubavitchers speak Yiddish at home) it’s a hashkafa, a worldview. FYI, in Chabad Yeshivas most if the day is spent learning Gemara biyun, in a very similar style to the Litvishe Yeshivas. And also, plenty of Lubavitchers learn Daf Yomi.
Ps, Lubavitchers commenting here (girls I’m assuming) you need to realize most of the world doesn’t understand our lingo, “hiskashrus”, or our special days “yud test Kislev” etc.
Also, to the commenter who said Chabad relys on the Gras zmanim, our shita is the Shulchan Aruch Harav ,which the Magid of Mezritch instructed to be compiled for all Chassidim, happens to be the Gra paskened the same way.
I’m surprised no one mentioned this, but in addition to paying mashgichim, and often multiple Hashgochos, milk must come from an animal that is kosher (not just a kosher species, but an animal that isn’t a treifah) so certain surgeries will disqualify a cows milk being used. I heard from a veteran mashgiach that being that it’s hard to know which surgery a particular cow may have had, and cow that ever had surgery is disqualified, and sometimes that’s up to 10% of the cows.
The baal Shu”t Tzemach Tzedek, a famous Chassidishe Rebbe (d. 1866) paskened “It’s better to eat in order to daven, than daven in order to eat.” The explanation should be self evident.