sechel83

“They wrote on areas where there is clear responsibility , areas where you cannot say hidushim which merely SOUND nice .
In those areas you can be confronted with clear proofs against you , which you will have to answer to , which will hold you to account .
This is the stuff real Gdolei Yisrael are made of”

amazing idea, i would say the oppisite. the rebbe’s way of learning was to answer many questions (some times 5 some times 15) with a deeper explanation of the sugya, that prooves the truth to the answer whereas when you have one question and one answer you can always ask another question. the rebbes derech was also to explain the lishitasahu of taanayim, amoraim, rishonim, and show how thru shas they follow that way of looking at the sugyos. (see Otsar Likkutei Sichos – Leshitasayhu)

seems like you really learned alot of sichos of the rebbe?

This was not even postable. If someone taught you that, than shame on you both.

arso “And I have a question. If the Lubavicher rebbe was atzmus melubash beguf, and thus all-powerful, why wasn’t he able to avoid having a stroke, and avoid dying?”
great question so instead of the possibility of whoever told you that chabad said this misquoted something, you ask chabad why…?
see igeres hakodesh (in tanya) chapter 25. also likutai amarim perek 2

In reply to sechel’s question as to who can be considered a gadol if the Lubavicher rebbe isn’t, coffee addict replied: Rav Shach.
rav shach was a gadol i agree he gave many shiurim and has around 10-15 seforim printed of his torah on talmud bavli and specificly the yeshiva mesechtos. the rebbe has about 200 sefrim on bavli yerushalmi, kabalah zohar and everything else so thats my point, if the rebbe isint than who is
btw how many people can tell you a torah of rav shach?

Why Our Sanctuaries Remain Pure

The conclusion of the tractate of Chagigah and the entire Order of Mo’ed (Festivals) records a difference of opinion between Rabbi Eliezer and the Sages as to why the Golden Altar and the Copper Altar of the Sanctuary1 were not susceptible to ritual impurity.
Rabbi Eliezer explains that the altars are considered as earth.2 Just as earth cannot contract ritual impurity, so too, these altars. Our Sages, by contrast, state that the reason is that the gold or copper coverings were merely an overlay. As such, they were subordinate to (and considered an extension of) the altars’ inner material, which was not susceptible to ritual impurity.3
The Torah, which was given by an infinite G‑d, is itself infinite. Its lessons are equally relevant at all times and in all places. It has the same strength now, in the darkness of exile, as when it was given to Moshe on Mount Sinai.
One hallmark of the Torah’s infinity is that every concept in it has endless interpretations. In general, these are divided into four categories: pshat the simple meaning, remez an extended meaning or allusion, derush a homily, and sod the underlying mystic concept.4
An allusion derived from the teaching mentioned above provides us with lessons relevant to our daily lives, for in his own place, every person serves as a “sanctuary in microcosm” in which the Divine Presence rests.
There were several sacred articles in the Sanctuary and the Beis HaMikdash. Similarly, within our individual “sanctuaries” there are “sacred articles”: our intellect, our feelings, and the like. In these matters, there is the possibility for “ritual impurity;” selfish intent, secular influence, or an unholy thought may creep in. There is even the possibility of sin, doing the opposite of G‑d’s will, and acting in conflict with the directives of the Torah and its mitzvos.
Continuing the analogy, sin makes a person’s “sacred articles” his thoughts or feelings impure. It thus becomes necessary to devise a means whereby that “sacred article” can be returned to G‑d’s sanctuary. For G‑d’s sanctuary every Jewish man, woman, and child must be pure.
With regard to material matters, and similarly with regard to spiritual potential, mankind is divided into the rich and the poor. Gold serves as an analogy for the rich,5 while the poor are associated with copper.6
The core of every Jew’s Jewishness, the pintele Yid, remains intact, regardless of the inner or outer dimensions of his personality. And this aspect of his being has one desire: to fulfill G‑d’s will. As my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe, would say:7 “No Jew desires to nor can he sever his bond with G‑d.”
Accordingly, every Jew can be considered an altar for G‑d. For what is an altar? A place where one slaughters one’s yetzer hora and brings a sacrifice for G‑d.
This concept is relevant to all Jews: both the rich (who can be compared to the Golden Altar), and the poor (who are likened to the Copper Altar). The true desire of every one is to slaughter the yetzer hora and fulfill G‑d’s will.
As mentioned, the altars are not susceptible to ritual impurity. The two rationales given can also be interpreted in the context of our Divine service. The first rationale holds that the altars are considered like the earth. This refers to the quality of humility, as we say in our prayers:8 “May my soul be as dust to all.” Just as everyone treads on the earth, so too a humble person has no self-concern, and no desire other than to fulfill G‑d’s will as expressed in the Torah and its mitzvos.
This is the rationale taught by Rabbi Eliezer ben Horkenus. Rabbi Eliezer was referred to as “Rabbi Eliezer the Great,” and was considered “equivalent to all the other Sages of Israel.”9 Nevertheless, he remained so humble that he “never mentioned a teaching that [he] had not heard from [his] teachers.”10
This approach enabled him to see the inner dimension of every Jew’s character, appreciating the level of which it is said:11 “Israel, the Torah, and the Holy One, blessed be He, are all one,” i.e., a Jew’s entire life consists of the observance of Torah and mitzvos. Rabbi Eliezer taught his students that intellect and bittul (self-transcendence) are not opposites, and indeed complement each other, as reflected in his own Divine service: “never mention[ing] a teaching that [he] had not heard from [his] teachers.”
The Sages offer a second rationale, for they feel that Rabbi Eliezer’s approach is too difficult for the general public. They instead thought about a Jew’s external dimension. For it may happen that a person will stumble within his path of Divine service. This is particularly true with regard to a Jew who can be compared to a Golden Altar. Since he is involved with matters concerning gold, he may be distracted, and for a brief time may ignore the fulfillment of G‑d’s will. Similarly, a Jew who can be compared to a Copper Altar may be confronted by financial straits that cause him to violate G‑d’s will. Nevertheless, our Sages maintain that these occasional transgressions cause neither the rich Jew nor the poor Jew to become impure.
The reasoning is that both the gold and the copper are superficial coverings. The inner dimension of every Jew remains immune to impurity. Moreover, this inner dimension is so powerful that the external dimension becomes subordinate to it. In other words: every person will ultimately turn to G‑d in teshuvah and appreciate the Truth. He will grasp that a Jew’s life is solely G‑dliness, and that this G‑dliness can be tapped only through the study of the Torah, and observance of the mitzvos.
Moreover, such conduct is the medium which enables us to receive the blessings which G‑d promises, as it is written:12 “And if you walk in My statutes and observe My commandments… the land will provide its yield, and the trees of the field will give their fruit.”
In contrast, the Altars are associated with the middle vector (see also Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 51a and 60a), and the middle vector “ascends to the inner dimensions of Kesser. ”
This also relates to the Ark, located in the Holy of Holies, which contained the Tablets of the Ten Commandments. The ark was entombed because it is not possible that gentiles would attain power over it.
Nevertheless, a reason must be given why the altars cannot contract impurity. For although they are represented by the middle vector, they are represented by attributes which are limited in nature.
The reason given by Rabbi Eliezer is that they are considered like earth, i.e., they reflect the utter selflessness that characterizes the quality of Kesser (Hosafos l’Torah Or, the beginning of Megillas Esther). There is indeed an explicit verse which identifies the external altar with earth, as it is written: “You shall make an altar of earth for Me.” This is stated explicitly only with regard to the external altar, the level of Malchus, because “the end is rooted at the beginning, and the beginning at the end (Sefer Yetzirah 1:7).” Therefore, in the destruction of the vessels of the World of Tohu, “the earth (alone) became nullified.”
With regard to the altars themselves, the inner altar is identified with Tiferes d’Zaer Anpin, and is thus considered “rich” when compared to the external altar identified with Malchus, of which it is said (Zohar I, 33b): “It has nothing of its own.”
The reason that the altars did not require tevilah (טבילה), which is identified [Siddur Im Dach, p. 159d] with bittul (הביטול), is because they themselves are expressions of bittul. Two reasons are given for this: they are considered like earth, and their surface is subordinate to their inner substance.
Rabbi Eliezer refers to the essence of G‑d, as reflected by the association (Bamidbar Rabbah 19:7) of his name with the verse (Shmos 18:4): אלה-י אבי בעזרי “The G‑d of my father provided assistance for me.” He is called “the Great,” and it is said (Megillah 31a): “In the place of His greatness, there you find His humility.” While looking at the external dimensions of existence, he was able to perceive the inner dimension. Thus the fact that the external substance of the altar was subservient to its inner substance was not significant for him, so he gave another rationale. For according to his conception, the external substance was always batel, for “There is nothing, [but Him] (Devarim 4:39, see the explanation in Tanya, Shaar HaYichud, ch. 6).”
The Sages differ, and the halachah follows their opinion, for “[Torah law] is not in the heavens (cf. Devarim 30:12),” but rather is determined according to the principles which prevail within the spiritual cosmos (Seder HaHishtalshelus). On this level, the external surface of the altar could be susceptible to ritual impurity, except that since it is batel to its inner substance, it is not. This is not the place for further elaboration concerning this matter.
“And if you walk in My statutes and observe My commandments… the land will provide its yield, and the trees of the field will give their fruit.”
https://www.chabad .org/therebbe/article_cdo/aid/70531/jewish/Likkutei-Sichot-Tetzaveh.htm
1 The connection of this concept to the weekly portion is reflected in the fact that the conclusion of Parshas Tetzaveh speaks about the Golden Altar, while the conclusion of the previous Torah reading, Parshas Terumah, speaks about the Copper Altar. The sichah to follow is adapted from a letter from the Rebbe to a Society [for the Study] of Mishnayos whose members had concluded their study of the Order of Mo’ed. [The final mishnah of that Order deals with these subjects.] In the letter, the Rebbe emphasizes the spiritual contrasts between these two altars.
2 It is written (Shmos 20:21): “You shall make an altar of earth for Me.” On this basis, Rabbi Eliezer establishes a comparison between the altar and earth. And on the basis of another verse (Bamidbar 3:31), an equivalence is established between both altars (Chagigah 27a).
3 For the inner substance of the altars was wood, and an oversized wooden vessel is not susceptible to ritual impurity (Rashi, Chagigah, ibid.).
4 See Shaar HaGilgulim, preface 17.
5 See Bava Basra 25b, which cites Iyov 37:22 “Gold will be brought from the north,” and which says that a person who wants to become rich should face north (the direction of the Golden Table) when he prays.
6 See the interpretation of the Mishnah (Bava Metzia 4:1).
7 Igros Kodesh of the Rebbe Rayatz, Vol. IV, p. 547; HaYom Yom entry 21 Sivan, 25 Tammuz.
8 The passage E-lohai Netzor, recited at the conclusion of the Shemoneh Esreh, Siddur Tehillat HaShem, p. 61.
9 Avos 2:9.
10 Sukkah 27b, 28a.
11 See Zohar, Vol. III, p. 73a.
12 Vayikra 26:3-4.
To briefly explain the above on a deeper level: As stated in the Tzemach Tzedek’s, Sefer HaMitzvos, Mitzvas Binyan HaMikdash, ch. 2, there were four sacred articles of fundamental importance in the Beis HaMikdash : the Menorah, the Golden Table, and the two Altars. These articles correspond to the attributes Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferes, and Malchus. The Menorah and the Golden Table, corresponding to Chesed and Gevurah, were susceptible to ritual impurity, as stated in the first clause of the mishnah.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by YW Moderator-29 👨‍💻.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by YW Moderator-29 👨‍💻.

finally another topic, good point differnent opinions if women can learn gemarah. so too there are differnt opinions if moshiach can be from the dead. and differnt opinions if you can shave your beard and if you need to sleep in the suckah if its too big of a shlep to bring your bed there. and if one can be yotze shalosh seudos with fruits or you need to wash. or if you can eat before davening. all have diffeerent opinions, for some reason some call others kofrim if they hold like the other opinion?!

@arso i forgot to mention, how many sichos did you learn? how many maamarim? of the rebbe

i think arso and da moshe should become a rebbe. they seem to claim to know more than the baal shem tov, and every other gadol

i think instead of finding issues with chassidus, you guys should start learning it. i guarantee you the gra would rather you learn tanya then spend time on yw coffee room, especially writing ridiculous comments.
the baal shem tov being a talmid chacham is almost like the people who say the rebbe wasn’t and dont bother opening any of his 200+ seforim or listening to any of his thousends of hours of sichos speaking for hours straight with no notes etc.
(i say almost cuz there are not many seforim and recordings of the baal shem tov, but even open keser shem tov, its beyond any sefer printed the last 50 yrs.)

btw about the statement that “today all chabad does is talk about how great the rebbe is”
i was wondering, some people told me they dont want to learn tanya from a lubavitcher or go to a farbrengen because all chabad does is talk about how great the rebbe is,
i always wondered who they hung around, because at the farbrengens i went to the talk is about avodas hashem, (needless to say a shiur tanya is pshat in tanya)
now i realize these guys didn’t go to any farbrengens, they are just quoting this rav!
where did he get it from? i would imagine he read a column of stories of the rebbe in some magazine, and figured thats all we do, like if i go to lakewoods dmv and only see litvaks getting there driving license, ill think thats all they do the whole day!

to point out todays Hayom Yom:

One of the Baal Shem Tov’s teachings:
“When you see chamor, a donkey”1 – when you carefully examine your chomer (“materiality”), your body, you will see…
…”your enemy” – meaning, that your chomer hates your Divine soul that longs for G‑dliness and the spiritual, and furthermore, you will see that it is…
…”lying under its burden” placed upon it – (the body) by G‑d, namely, that it should become refined through Torah and mitzvot; but the body is lazy to fulfill them. It may then occur to you that…
…”you will refrain from helping it” – to enable it to fulfill its mission, and instead you will follow the path of mortification2 of the flesh to break down the body’s crass materiality. However, not in this approach will the light of Torah reside. Rather…
…”you must aid it” – purify the body, refine it, but do not break it by mortification.

the Taz writes (Even HaEzer 25:1) that one who eats well and sleeps adequately to have energy to serve Hashem earns the same merit as one who fasts. He thus explains the passuk (Tehilim 127:2) “It is futile for you who arise early, who sit late, who eat the bread of toil, so will the Lord give to one who banishes sleep from himself” – both learners who deprive themselves of sleep in order to learn and those who sleep adequately before learning earn the same merit, because what one can do in an hour after sleeping well, a sleep-deprived learner does in two. “It is futile for you who arise early” – the efforts you make to wake up early in the morning and sit up late in the Beis Midrash at night, are for naught, because: “…So will the Lord give to one who banishes sleep from himself.” The portion of Torah of one who sleeps properly and one who deprives himself of sleep will be equal. : “Everything depends on the intention“

@damoshe: to explain a bit more about the nigun:
questions are a lack of understanding.
its explained in kabala and chassidus that questions come from klipa that covers over on kidusha. so when a person rises to a higher level, he understands the sugay better and the questions disapper. this can either be by learning deeper or be revealing a deeper level in the neshama.
in Raaya Mehemna, it says that “a kashya – query…emanates from the side of evil.” this is explained in tanya igeres 26 and more at length in hemshech 5666 page 120-122 in the new print
to point out for those who want to see for themselves, look at any maamer of any of the chabad rabbaim. almost all them start with questions on the parsha or holiday, then explain an idea in chassidus, then answer the questions automaticlly. this is more clear in a continuation of maamarim like 5666 (60 maamarim) which is one lenthy idea in chassidus slip up into 60 shabbosim and y”t. and each week the rebbe rashab added questions on the parsha, then continued the idea where he left off, then answered the questions. Because thru a maamer which reveals yechida shebinefesh and yechida of torah – all the questions are answered.

answer to all your questions on chabad: sing a nigun from the rebbe!

In the early years of his leadership, the founder of Chabad Chassidism, Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, would expound his teachings in the form of short homiletic sayings. It was only in later years (particularly after his liberation from imprisonment in Petersburg in 1798) that he began delivering the lengthy, intellectually profound discourses which characterize the “Chabad” system of Chassidic thought.

One of these early short discourses was based on the Talmudic passage, “All bearers of collars go out with a collar and are drawn by a collar” (Shabbat 51b). The Talmud is discussing the laws of Shabbat, on which it is forbidden for a Jew to allow his animal to carry anything out from a private domain to a public domain; however, it is permitted to allow one’s animal to go out with its collar around its neck, and even to draw it along by means of its collar. But the Hebrew word the Talmud uses for “collar,” shir, also means “song.” Thus Rabbi Schneur Zalman interpreted the Talmud’s words to say that, “The masters of song — the souls and the angels — go out in song and are drawn by song. Their ‘going out’ in yearning for G‑d, and their drawing back into their own existence in order to fulfill the purpose of their creation, are by means of song and melody.”

This was in the early years of the Chassidic movement, when the opposition to Chassidism by many mainstream rabbis and scholars was still quite strong. This latest teaching by Rabbi Schneur Zalman, which quickly spread among his followers throughout White Russia and Lithuania, elicited a strong reaction from his opponents, who complained that the Chassidim have, yet again, employed homiletic wordplay and outright distortion of the holy Torah to support innovations to Jewish tradition. The Talmud, said they, is talking about collars worn by animals, not about the singing of souls and angels! No genuine Torah scholar could endorse, much less propagate, such an “interpretation.”

Rabbi Schneur Zalman’s words caused a particular uproar in the city of Shklov. Shklov was a town full of Torah scholars and a bastion of opposition to Chassidism. There were Chassidim in Shklov, but they were a small and much persecuted minority, and this latest controversy inflamed the ardor of their detractors. While the Chassidim of Shklov did not doubt the truth of their Rebbe’s words, they were hard-pressed to defend them in the face of the outrage and ridicule this latest saying had evoked.

A while later, Rabbi Schneur Zalman passed through Shklov on one of his journeys. Among those who visited the Rebbe at his lodgings were many of the town’s greatest scholars, who presented to him the questions and difficulties they had accumulated in the course of their studies. For even the Rebbe’s most vehement opponents acknowledged his genius and greatness in Torah. The Rebbe listened attentively to all the questions put to him but did not reply to any of them. However, when the scholars of Shklov invited him to lecture in the central study hall, the Rebbe accepted the invitation.

When Rabbi Schneur Zalman ascended the podium at the central study hall of Shklov, the large room was filled to overflowing. Virtually all the town’s scholars were there. Some had come to hear the Rebbe speak, but most were there for what was to follow the lecture, when the town’s scholars would have the opportunity to present their questions to the visiting lecturer. All had heard of Rabbi Schneur Zalman’s strange behavior earlier that day, when all the questions put to him were met with silence. Many hoped to humiliate the Chassidic leader by publicly demonstrating his inability to answer their questions. In the background, of course, loomed the recent controversy over the Rebbe’s unconventional interpretation of the Talmudic passage about animals’ collars on Shabbat.

Rabbi Schneur Zalman began to speak. “All those of shir,” he quoted, “go out with shir and are drawn by shir.” “The masters of song,” explained the Rebbe, “the souls and the angels, all go out in song and are drawn by song. Their yearning for G‑d, and their drawing back to fulfill the purpose of their creation, are by means of song and melody.” And then the Rebbe began to sing.

The room fell utterly silent. All were caught in the thrall of the melody, a melody of yearning and resolve, of ascent and retreat. As the Rebbe sang, every man in the room felt himself transported from the crowded hall to the innermost recesses of his own mind, where a man is alone with the confusion of his thoughts, alone with his questions and doubts. Only the confusion was gradually being dispelled, the doubts resolved. By the time the Rebbe finished singing, all the questions in the room had been answered.

Among those present in the Shklov study hall that day was one of the town’s foremost prodigies, Rabbi Yosef Kolbo. Many years later, Rabbi Yosef related his experience to the Chassid, Reb Avraham Sheines. “I came to the study hall that day with four extremely difficult questions — questions I had put forth to the leading scholars of Vilna and Slutzk, to no avail. When the Rebbe began to sing, the knots in my mind began to unravel, the concepts began to crystallize and fall into place. One by one, my questions fell away. When the Rebbe finished singing, everything was clear. I felt like a newly-born child beholding the world for the very first time.

“That was also the day I became a Chassid,” concluded Rabbi Yosef.

arso and qwerty: you did not explain how moshiach can come. you basiclly explain its impossible for moshiach to come cuz he needsa to be a king appointed by a navi and sanhedrin. and force every jew to keep torah by himself with no help.
so unlike you. i and alot of others actually learned the rambam in depth and many other sources about the coming of moshiach. the rebbe has over 500 pages printed explaining the last 2 peraking of hilchos melachim. so go learn and dont say moshiach cant come.
no person has the right to say that he’s Moshiach and if he does he should be put in a mental institution: like the amoraim in sanhedrin, the gra and is written by his talkid in sefer קול התור. i think anyone who says they are a rosh yeshiva should be put in a mental insitution. or anyone who says he’s a rov, a doctor, anything!

@qwerty613 you didnt answer my question
”I have 1 simple question for Lubavitch Chassidim. If Moshiach comes today but he isn’t the Rebbe, would you accept him?
i have a counter question: if someone comes and says he’s moshiach, how will you know to believe him or not?
(i mentioned that the rebbe started doing (and continues to do thru his shluchim) what the rambam says about moshiach will do, and you still dont think the rebbe was moshiach when he was alive, so give me someone who you will accept as moshiach?
a melech has to be appionted by sanhedrin and a navi! learn milchos melachim.
so explain to me the rambam please and how according to you moshiach will come.
great rabbonim paskened that the rebbe is moshiach and a navi

see igeres hakodesh vol 1 letter 85, about someone who dies without teshuva how he can be zoche to olam haba.
a regular person who is a tzadik then goes off the derech – see kidushin end of the first perek 40b, someone who regrets his prior avodas hashem
ר”ש בן יוחי אומר אפילו צדיק גמור כל ימיו ומרד באחרונה איבד את הראשונות שנאמר צדקת הצדיק לא תצילנו ביום פשעו ואפילו רשע גמור כל ימיו ועשה תשובה באחרונה אין מזכירים לו שוב רשעו שנאמר ורשעת הרשע לא יכשל בה ביום שובו מרשעו וניהוי כמחצה עונות ומחצה זכיות אמר ריש לקיש בתוהא על הראשונות

the “purpose” of a rebbe is (as explained in tanya) he has a higher neshama and from him comes chayus – both spiritual and physical to his chassidim and even not his chassidim including even those that fight against him. this is only the rebbe’s relation to his chassidim, in essence the rebbe is much higher.
now as explained in tanya this hashpaah of the tzadik is even greater after he is nistalek, so whether you beleive the rebbe is alive or not ch”v, we have a rebbe, and thats where our chayus comes from.
i assume the intended question was that since some see things in chabad and breslev that they think is crazy, they should appoint a rebbe to straighten them out.
1) the reason they do these things (most) is because they are following their rebbe’s directive, so obviouly if there would be a nother rebbe he would follow the rebbe and not the opinion of some ywn coffee room person (or even a litvishe gadol). 2) and the ones that dont follow their rebbe, well if there was a live one why would they follow either, everyone beleives Hashem is chai vikayom, and many (r”l as of now) dont keep all mitzvos, halachos etc. 3) in lubavitch (dont know about breslev) the rebbe clearly said there wont be another rebbe, the rebbe gave instructions how to act when having a question after 3 tamuz, so should lubavith GO AGAINST their rebbe and apoint a nother one?! they would be misnagdim! not chassidim. 4) we cant give someone this neshama that a rebbe is, only hashem can 5) if youre question is someone to lead, we have rabbonim, roshai yeshivos, mashpiiim just like everyone else.

all i said was that from learning chassidus i learned the value of being a jew, not just casue i get schar in olem haba which a goy – chasidai umos haolem – also get (according to some). if i was dealing with a goy who wanted to convert, i would do like the shulchan aruch says.

@avaira i dont understand your point. anyway, tanya says that clear that chasidai umos heolam nefesh HABAHAMIS comes from klipas nogah just like yidden, but jews have a nefesh HAELOKIS – peice of G-d that non jews dont have.
as far as kavanas habria like i wrote. yidden ARE the perpose. non jews can do their part but they were created FOR the perpose of yidden and torah.

reb moshe’s isur to make eruvin is based on opinions not brought down in shulchan aruch- that was his deredch hapsak, so just like he can argue with shulchan aruch and nosai keilim, so too other rabbonim can argue with reb moshe and just follow there way of psak based on the sh”u.
according to r”t, only his tefillin are kosher, only is zman is the halacha, etc

@kuvult
a jew is essentially diferent than a guy. the world was created bishvil yisroel, everything else besides jews were created for this perpose – yisroel and torah. a jew himself IS the purpose of creation. a jew is a piece of g-d.
after what i know in chassidus, i dont want to talk about myself in such a way, but a guy who would know what i have been privliged to learn, (its not really possible for a guy to understand achdus hashem and many other idea’s in chassidus the way a yid can but if it be possible) would defiantly become a jew.

@qwerty ok i made a mistake. the arizal talks about kabala. this is why we learn chassidus which includes (but not only) kabala – explains many concepts to even lower level neshamos – simple people.
besides its a clear rambam that the way to love and fear hashem is by thinking and contemplating about him. (just like you wont like anything (even in this world) before knowing what it is, basic concept no need to explain) this is not jumping to higher levels, the rambam hilchos tshuvah perek 10: הלכה ה
כל העוסק בתורה כדי לקבל שכר או כדי שלא תגיע עליו פורענות הרי זה עוסק שלא לשמה וכל העוסק בה לא ליראה ולא לקבל שכר אלא מפני אהבת אדון כל הארץ שצוה בה הרי זה עוסק בה לשמה ואמרו חכמים לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה ואפילו שלא לשמה שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה לפיכך כשמלמדין את הקטנים ואת הנשים וכלל עמי הארץ אין מלמדין אותן אלא לעבוד מיראה וכדי לקבל שכר עד שתרבה דעתן ויתחכמו חכמה יתירה מגלים להם רז זה מעט מעט ומרגילין אותן לענין זה בנחת עד שישיגוהו וידעוהו ויעבדוהו מאהבה.

הלכה ו
דבר ידוע וברור שאין אהבת הקב”ה נקשרת בלבו של אדם עד שישגה בה תמיד כראוי ויעזוב כל מה שבעולם חוץ ממנה כמו שצוה ואמר בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך אינו אוהב הקדוש ברוך הוא אלא בדעת שידעהו ועל פי הדעה תהיה האהבה אם מעט מעט ואם הרבה הרבה לפיכך צריך האדם ליחד עצמו להבין ולהשכיל בחכמות ותבונות המודיעים לו את קונו כפי כח שיש באדם להבין ולהשיג כמו שבארנו בהלכות יסודי התורה:
another clear halacha in sh”u hilchos tefillah siman 98:
המתפלל צריך שיכוין בלבו פי’ המלות שמוציא בשפתיו ויחשוב כאלו שכינה כנגדו ויסיר כל המחשבות הטורדות אותו עד שתשאר מחשבתו וכוונתו זכה בתפלתו ויחשוב כאלו היה מדבר לפני מלך בשר ודם היה מסדר דבריו ומכוין בהם יפה לבל יכשל ק”ו לפני ממ”ה הקב”ה שהוא חוקר כל המחשבות
וכך היו עושים חסידים ואנשי מעשה שהיו מתבודדים ומכוונין בתפלתם עד שהיו מגיעים להתפשטות הגשמיות ולהתגברות כח השכלי עד שהיו מגיעים קרוב למעלת הנבואה ואם תבא לו מחשבה אחרת בתוך התפלה ישתוק עד שיתבטל המחשב’
ויחשוב קודם התפלה מרוממות האל יתעלה ובשפלו’ האדם ויסיר כל תענוגי האדם מלבו
chabad and many other Chassidim (maybe non chassidim too – but in order to think about the greatness of hashem you need to first learn about it (one can see some greatness of hashem in the creation but that leads to a limited love and fear of hashem, chassidus and kabala teaches much more about the graeatness of hashem) are very careful in this halacha in shulchan aruch. and therefore learns chassidus – רוממות האל – and causes not to desire pleasures of this world, (and can even bring a person to the level of nevuah see rambam hilchos yesodai hatorah, (btw about nevuah today, the rambam clearly writes in igeres timan תחזור הנבואה לישראל בשנת ארבעה אלפים תתקע”ו ליצירה ואין ספק שחזרת הנבואה היא הקדמת משיח) for an hour or 2 before davening.
i was never tought hashems 42 letter name and i dont know anyone who was.

chas vishalom chabad was not influenced by zionism at all.

@common “I have a chavursa who I learn chasidisher seforim since I’m a bucher and we cover all seform from Lekuati Maran to Tanya to Noam Elimelech”
amazing, good job. so maybe you know more about noam elimelech and lekutai maran than me.
but in lubavitch we learn chassidus chabad, in yeshiva for 3 hours a day, for about a decade, and after yeshiva most continue learning for at least an hour a day. so myself and other lubavitchers know a little chassidus chabad. its clear from your posts you dont know chassidus chabad. but continue learning tanya and other chassidus chabad. maybe one day.
to copy you i would say “true Harav moshe feinstein was a big posek, but i also learned a bunch of mesechtos of gemara, some with rishonim and achronim, i learned many parts of sh”u, and i even learned achronim that reb moshe didn’t learn so that should give me a right to argue with him?!?!”

@mdd. thats my point if you only learn medrash and gemara and chumash, you may understand it litterly (why not?) if you learn chassidus, its explained starting with tanya perek 2 and there is a clear maamer of the rebbe rashab – הקבצו תרסח – printed in המשך תרסו, thats explains these maamarai chazal.
also not thinking about hashem may not couse you to view him in a tzuras haguf etc, but it also dosent cause you to love and fear him and know him (3 mitzvos temidios – see rambam hilchos yesodai hatorah)

@qwerty the gra came after shabsai tzvi, and wrote about the obligation to learn kabala. and everyone agrees you can learn kabala after 40. even those who said not to younger.

@commen saychel
no i never learned imray noam, yetev lev, yismach yisroel, chadishay harim, divray chaim
thats why i dont tell satmer, ger and klosenberg (i dont know the rest) what THEIR shitos are.
likewise you should not tell chabad what OUR shitos are before learning all the chabad seforim. dont tell us what the chassidim of the alter rebbe did before learning all his seforim, i can tell you did’nt even learn torah or and likutai torah (the most basic seforim of the alter rebbe after tanya) i doubt you learned the whole tanya even. and there are many more seforim of the alter rebbe, and tons of seforim from the miteler rebbe, and tons from the other rebbes of chabad. many lubavitchers (not commen since its tons to learn (over 200 volumes) learned thru everything. they should have the say what is chabad shita. besides for the rebbe telling us clearly to do pirsumai nisa and the rebbe was clearly baki in all the chabad seforim (as evident from his maamarim and sichos, see toras menachem 120 volumes)

@5783 thats my point, don’t attack someone who says something you don’t understand. and if you think that saying something like that deserves attack, well attack the medrash rabba then.

@mdd1 and qwerty613: its a medrash not kabala. and btw here is a clear gemarah bavli מגילה יח,א: מנין שקראו הקב”ה ליעקב אל שנאמר ויקרא לו אל אלהי ישראל דאי סלקא דעתך למזבח קרא ליה יעקב אל ויקרא לו יעקב מיבעי ליה אלא ויקרא לו ליעקב אל ומי קראו אל אלהי ישראל
we should’nt learn kabala?! where do you come from? ברעיא מהימנא פרשת נשא: ״והמשכילים יזהירו כזהר הרקיע״ – ״בהאי חבורא דילך דאיהו ספר הזהר… ובגין דעתידין ישראל למטעם מאילנא דחיי, דאיהו האי ספר הזהר – יפקון ביה מן גלותא ברחמים, ויתקיים בהון: ״ה׳ בדד ינחנו, ואין עמו אל נכר
In Raaya Mehemna, section of Nasso, (it is stated): “‘And they that are wise shall shine as the splendor of the firmament’ with this work of yours, which is the Book of Splendor (Sefer HaZohar)…Because in time to come Israel will taste of the Tree of Life, which is the book of the Zohar, and through which they will leave their exile with mercy. And through them shall be realized that ‘The L–rd alone will lead him, and there is no strange god with Him.’
כמ”ש האריז”ל דדוקא בדורות אלו האחרונים מותר ומצוה לגלות זאת החכמה quoted in tanya igeres 26 see there.
the gra in his pirush in mishlei also writes about the need to learn kabala.
on the contrary you need to learn chassidus otherwise you may understand it litterly, and by not learning kabala, you dont solve the problem, as mentioned its in medrash, gemara, and even in chumash there are pesukim like “under (hashem’s) feet, if you dont learn chassidus, how you you understand it? litterly? that contradicts one of the 13 ikrim! oh so dont learn chumash either?!!!??