I’m anti-Chabad and anti-Rebbe but I’m not an anti Semite. Candace Owens is anti-Chabad and anti-Rebbe and she is an anti-Semite. When a person makes a statement it must be understood in the context of the speaker
Well, there it is, exactly what I’ve been saying all along. Just as Candace Owens hates Jews and therefore tries to twist any potentially suspicious Jewish statement, Qwerty does the same with Chabad and a tremendous tzaddik (r”l). It’s not the content of the statements he’s reacting to, but the fact that it came from Chabad.
Qwerty’s bias is so extreme that he’s willing to ridicule a vort from the Vilna Gaon simply because a Lubavitcher repeated it.
Qwerty wrote about the Vilna Gaon’s vort: “that’s absolutely false” and that it “…downplayed Avraham Avinu’s greatness by writing in his book that the Akeidah was our Founder’s only true test which is obviously false. Leaving his homeland and sending away Yishmael were examples of Avraham going against his Middah of Chesed.” Not only is Qwerty attacking the Vilna Gaon here, but he’s also attacking Rashi on Chumash and the Gemara (that Hashem begged Avraham to pass the last test “lest it seem that the first tests had no substance” “שלא יאמרו הראשונות אין בהם ממש”)!
In an earlier chapter of the book [Rabbi Posner] wrote that there are two kinds of Orthodox Jews…
I don’t have the book, but I doubt he wrote it the way you’re presenting it. Either way:
What you have here is simply a Lubavitcher explaining why he believes Chabad’s derech is unique and important. It’s no different from a Satmar chossid saying: “There are some Orthodox Jews who are Zionists, but Satmar follows the true Torah derech of opposing Zionism.”
If a Satmar chossid doesn’t believe that his derech is the truest, and instead says that being a Zionist is just as valid, then he isn’t really Satmar, because he doesn’t even believe in his own views!
This doesn’t mean that every Lubavitcher, Satmar, Zionist, or Brisker thinks that they are personally superior. Each individual knows their personal faults (hopefully), but we believe we are following the best derech.
Your own self-comparison to Candace Owens is so perfect: She accuses Jews of “supremacism” because we dare to believe our religion is greater than all others and that Jews have a unique connection to G-d. Meanwhile, she obviously believes the same about her own religion. If she didn’t think her faith was superior, she’d convert!
Conclusion: You interpret Chabad’s statements negatively because you hate Chabad. You hate Chabad because of how you interpret their statements. This is nothing but circular logic.
I think we’ve found the perfect definition of sinas chinam. I don’t use that term lightly (I acknowledge it’s often misused) but in this case, I think it fits exactly.