- This topic has 1,090 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 1 day, 4 hours ago by .
-
Posts
-
qwerty: I spoke to Rav David Feinstein’s son-in-law. He’s my biggest Mashpia in Torah and I told him that posters are arguing if Yaakov Avinu is still alive. You can imagine what he said.
Well, if he is inline with his illustrious father-in-law and grandfather-in-law, I imagine he said that Rashi says he is alive.
Being a Torah Jew doesn’t require one to replace rationality with voodoo logic. To that point my other Mashpia Rabbi Moshe Plutchok says that we follow Rambam who rejects any violation of natural law even Bilaam ‘s talking donkey.
Who are the “we” you are talking about? I, and I’m confident, most others on this thread, believes that Bilaam’s donkey did indeed talk.
The Gemara says ,”Lama Li Kra, Sevara He?” Judaism is a rational religion.
And that is why we (chas Veshalom) reject miracles, or Mattan Torah for that matter, not to mention a mabbul of hot water, and the ten makkos…
If Rashi says that Yaakov will live forever, then he means it, and most, if not all, of us do NOT reject it. Nor do we reject the totally irrational gemoro that says that Yaakov opened his eyes and smiled after he died.
In answer to those who have been yelling on the top of their lungs that only a deranged Lubavitcher would be crazy enough to understand Rashi in Taanis 5b that Yaakov Lo Mes was literal:
In addition to the meforshim that I brought earlier who explain what I said at length, here is the footnote in artscroll 5b (fn 18):
“Since this verse proves that Jacob is still alive, we must conclude that Jacob only appeared to be dead to those who embalmed him (Rashi). Other commentators explain Jacob’s immortality not as a prolongation of physical life but as a form of continued spiritual existence (see Maharsha).”
Exactly what I’ve been saying all along. Rashi is understood to mean that Yaakov is physically alive in his kever, he only seemed dead. Maharsha and others argue.
Was Artscroll hijacked by crazy Lubavitchers? Maybe. But I would think that then they would mention the Rebbe’s teachings every now and then.
You may recall that my first post in this thread included a call on all the Lubavichers here to explain clearly and in plain English what they mean when they say that the LR is physically alive and still here with us, in Queens, in 770, in fact everywhere. (Btw, no one has deigned to answer that.)
Now it seems that some on the other side are also falling into the same trap. Do they believe in Rashi? Ostensibly yes. That doesn’t mean that they hold that Rashi’s explanation has more weight than any other meforash, but it does mean that when Rashi says something he can’t just be blithely dismissed.
Now Rashi clearly says that according to Rebbi Yochanan in the gemoro, Yaakov is alive forever, and the passuk clearly says that they buried Yaakov. So, according to Rashi, is Yaakov still alive in Me’aras Hamachpelah? The only correct answer I can come up with is “yes”, although I don’t understand what it means. If you think the answe is “no”, then I would really like to know the logic you use to arrive at that “no”. And without recourse to the views of other Rishonim or Acharonim who understand the gemoro differently to Rashi.
This a nice shuir by Rabbi Gladstein. He says the Alshich says that Yaacov lo mes means that the faculties of neshomah cling to him and lays dormant (not that his body is alive).
What I find fascinating is that Yosef didn’t tell the people that Yaacov didn’t die because then they would turn him into a deity and worship him. This is similar scenerio to the Lubavitche who turned their rebbe into a deity who is supposedly running the world. They have to claim that he is PHYSICALLY alive, otherwise he is just like the other tzaddikim (if you consider him to be a tzaddik) who died and has no major deity-like superpowers.
Menachem Shmei said repeatedly that Yaacov is PHYSICALLY alive so that he can draw a parallel from his rebbe to Yaacov, both supposedly being physically alive. Yosef Hatzaddik, who saw that Yaacov lo meis, was afraid the Mitzrim will worship Yaacov so he told the mitzrim to embalm him (partially) and the reason he could do so was because he knew that his physical body had expired (despite his neshama still clinging to his body in a dormant manner according to the Alshich) But Menachem shmei is still saying that Yaacov is PHYSICALLY ALIVE just so he can “prove” his rebbe can also be physically alive…
To coffee addict
That’s what Shmei is implying but he will never give you or anyone a straightforward answer because he wants to be able to reverse himself when the need presents.
To DaMoshe
I assume you’re taking a shot at me because I attend a Chabad synagogue and therefore you’re implying that when I go there I engage in theological discussions with Meshichistim. Nothing could be further from the truth. I come there for a minyan and that’s all. We’re friendly but I don’t push my beliefs on them and vice versa. Try again
To ARSo
Your comment is beyond the pale. It’s in the style the Lubavichers use when they try to delegitimize me. Are you so jealous of my writing ability that you insinuate that I’m mentally ill? Continue developing your budding friendship with Shmei. You deserve each other.
Philosopher,
Menachem shmei, no, none of the meforshim say that Yaacov alive in his kever.
What about the Rif, Etz Yosef and Iyun Yaakov (all of which I linked above), and how Artscroll learns Rashi (as I quoted above)?
A body to be alive needs air, it needs food, it needs water, it needs to do bodily functions.
But the posuk testifies to a miracle. Hence מקרא אני דורש.
the Rif and others say the comatose stage was until he was bought Eretz Yisroel and was buried there.
Rif!? Not in the Rif that I saw. Would you be so kind as to point out which words of the Rif says this?
[I did indeed see this in a different meforash – can’t remember which – but the Rif clearly says that he was buried while still alive.]Menachem Shmei said repeatedly that Yaacov is PHYSICALLY alive so that he can draw a parallel from his rebbe to Yaacov
Completely wrong. You don’t even know my opinion about the Rebbe, and I never brought him up in this discussion!
YOU brought up the topic of Yaakov lo mes, and (falsely) claimed that no meforash interprets it physically. That’s what began this discussion.
This has nothing to do with the Rebbe or Chabad.
This is about understanding how meforshim learn a certain sugya in Gemara.The Gemara says ,”Lama Li Kra, Sevara He?” Judaism is a rational religion.
Lol, thanks for proving my point.
למה לי קרא means that you only need a posuk to prove something illogical, i.e., NOT everything in Yiddishkeit is rational!
למה לי קרא is saying, why do we need Torah for things that could be understood without Torah!The discussion in the Gemara Taanis is the FLIPSIDE of למה לי קרא סברא הוא: Rav Yitzchak acknowledged that according to סברא it would be ridiculous to say that Yaakov is alive, but he responds מקרא אני דורש – it may not be logical, but that’s what the Torah says!
He only needs to bring a posuk because it’s not logical! If this was rational, Rav Nachman could have responded to the hekesh למה לי קרא סבתא הוא!
To the normal posters(you know who you are)
The debate is over because Shmei couldn’t and/or wouldn’t answer Candace Owens’ question. Let’s take a step back and break this thread down. The Lubavichers aka the Three Stooges use the phantasmagoric as fact to substantiate their idolatrous beliefs and Benedict ARSo appears to be joining their ranks. I saw the following:(on YWN OR VIN?) Why can’t the Rebbe commute between the Ohel and 770? Rebbe visited his wife after he died. Aside from the Chuptzah of comparing some Rabbi to a Tanna, these stories aren’t factually understandable and they certainly can’t be used as a paradigm to elicit similar incidents. ARSo is now convinced that Yaakov Avinu is still alive. Let him tell that to his Rav. The Rav won’t ask if he took his meds, he’ll have him put away. Yes, the Torah(Tanach, Gemara, Midrash, etc. is replete with references to the supernatural, but it’s our job to discern the truth within. Generally speaking, we’re expected to eschew the fantastic in favor of the mundane. Hameivin yavin.
To the moderators
My bad. I wanted to end my last post with the following, “A Chassidishe Rav who lived on the LES once told me, “If you believe in everything you’re a fool, but if you believe in nothing you’re a Kofer.” A person has to develop his own “truemometer” to recognize the truth. This can only be accomplished if one has the desire to see the truth, a quality that’s totally lacking in Lubavichers and its acolytes.
Without going into rishonim – from my limited exposure to Chabad, nobody discussed mesim when LR was alive and even shortly after. When Rebbe was very sick, the crazy stuff was to declare him moschiach ASAP while he is in this world. It took a little time to re-organize and start a new theory. This _is_ similar to the other religion(s) – when theories change according to events. According to Karl Popper, a real theory is falsifiable – that is it will be declared not true, rather than amended, after some conceivable events. Halochos of false navi are similar.
Maybe, there were previous cases when someone was considered a M aharei misah – previous LR? Also, the nicknames Alter/Mittlele rebbes have a hint of upcoming finality, not sure what exactly happened. If this indeed happened, maybe we can do after-action analysis of those – and how they ended.
To bring some sholom here – Dennis Prager says that he does not want to discuss future with his non-Jewish political partners – as long as they are our partners right now, when M comes, we will then discuss whether he came first or second time. Similarly, ma nafka mina of the debate of whether a particular Rebbe will be a Moschiach? If my local Rav is destined to be a moschiach – will other Rabonim oblige to follow his psak now? Lo b’shmayim hi…
Now, if this belief leads people to drive on red light on the way to ohel, then we can deal with that directly.
@arso
@shmei
Again, for those of you who struggle with comprehension
Never claimed that Ramban and Rambam were machshir j for mashiach if not his dying/disappearing.
That’s crystal clear to anyone who reads my posts carefully.
And that should be self evident to any straight thinking person.They do however state very clearly that WE KNOW that j is out because of the inadmissibility of a second coming
I repeat
They state very clearly that WE KNOW that j is out because of the inadmissibility of a second coming !!!!Whether yakov avinu is considered dead or not is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT here.
Again , when our gdolei harishonim mamash said their piece, the discussion should be over and done.
Besides for the fools who would want to argue against those cherished Rebei’im amiti’im of THE WHOLE KLAL YISRAEL DURING ALL THE GENERATIONS SINCE THEIR LIFETIME.
I rest my case.
Also, the nicknames Alter/Mittlele rebbes have a hint of upcoming finality, not sure what exactly happened
They got these titles during the leadership of the next rebbe. During their lifetime they were called “the Rebbe.”
ma nafka mina of the debate of whether a particular Rebbe will be a Moschiach? If my local Rav is destined to be a moschiach – will other Rabonim oblige to follow his psak now? Lo b’shmayim hi…
Not sure if I would base my derech on Dennis Prager, but this has indeed been my mehalech here. I don’t think I ever voiced my opinion in the Coffeeroom on the Who is Moshiach debate.
Hi
Gm
“Being a Torah Jew doesn’t require one to replace rationality with voodoo logic.”
this statement is not what chassidim beleive – the perpose of existence is to turn the yesh to ayin – i have to get rid of the way i think and think the way torah says to think even if it doesn’t make sence to my limited brain
and i think this is not what toras haniglah believes either
דעת בעלי בתים היפך דעת תורהTo philosopher
Don’t fall into the trap of engaging in a discussion with Shmei. He’s a consummate liar and phony like his worthless Rebbe/god. It’s interesting that Benedict ARSo stated that in his first posting on this thread he asked the Lubavitchers to definitively state if they believe the Rebbe is physically alive but no one has answered him. Someone with a quarter of a brain would understand that the reason they never answer any question is because they know that they’re going to change whatever they said at some later date. An intelligent person would write them off, but this fool is sucking up to them while attacking me. It’s truly an upside down world. At least coffee addict straightened himself out, but it appears that Arso is lost
To always
The Gemara says that idolaters are davuk, slavishly obsessed with their getchke. Most, if not all Lubavitchers will not accept the real Moshiach. The question is what they’ll do when he comes.
When you study habad literature , you will see that after each and everyone of their rebeim’s expired name there is a navgam , an acronym for Nishmato Bginzei Meromim, translated to english ‘his soul is in the treasured heavens’
It seems to me that no habad faction – even those who ostensibly agree that he died – would use this about their deceased leader .
The most they would write , is ‘zhuto yagen aleinu’
Why is their recent leader any different to their previous rebei’m , who did deserve ‘navgam’ and their present one who somehow does not ?
And who decided to differentiate ?
.I think there’s a point Qwerty has been making recently that I can help clarify:
“Yes, the Torah (Tanach, Gemara, Midrash, etc.) is filled with references to the supernatural, but it’s our job to discern the truth within. Generally speaking, we’re expected to eschew the fantastic in favor of the mundane. Hameivin yavin.”
“We follow Rambam, who rejects any violation of natural law, even Bilaam’s talking donkey. The Gemara says, ‘Lama Li Kra, Sevara He?’ Judaism is a rational religion. This is the point that philosopher and yankel berel are making, and obviously, they’re right.”Qwerty keeps saying that Judaism is rational, and that we should try to rationalize the supernatural rather than interpret Torah as depicting changes in nature. He argues that this is the Rambam’s view, and thus the derech we must follow.
I want to clarify the issue here:
It’s important to remember that there are different opinions in Torah. If you’re quoting the Rambam, keep in mind that many Rishonim strongly disagreed with him.
Which one is right? אלו ואלו דברי אלקים חיים.
Even if you pasken/lean toward a particular opinion, that doesn’t give you the right to misinterpret the opposing opinion to match the one you like.For example:
Regarding the future Geulah, there’s a major machlokes between the Rambam and Raavad. The Rambam says the Geulah will be entirely natural, while the Raavad argues it will be miraculous.
If you lean toward the Rambam’s approach (based on the hadracha of your rabbeim) that’s fine.
But if you were to say that also the Raavad holds the Geulah will be natural just because that’s how the Rambam understands it—that’s absurd!The same applies in our discussion:
Can the Gemara about יעקב לא מת be understood spiritually? Absolutely!
As I’ve written many times, many (or perhaps most) of the meforshim (beginning with the Maharsha and Rashba) interpret it this way.
But does Rashi understand it spiritually? No! Rashi explains that Yaakov seemed dead to those burying him, but in reality, he was alive. (Even the Maharsha reads Rashi this way, which is why he ARGUES with him. See Artscroll!) This is also how the Rif, Etz Yosef, and Iyun Yaakov understand it, as they clearly wrote.You may prefer a more rational interpretation, such as the Maharsha’s, because of your derech, but don’t misinterpret Rashi and say that the literal interpretation is completely invalid!
Menachem Shmei, with all the posts I can understand that you missed what I said regarding the Rif. The RIF said that he appeared comatose until they got to Eretz Yisroel and at that point he died and was buried. The funny thing is that you bought the RIF to prove that they said that he didn’t die while the RIF definitely said he died.
I did not check the other two meforshim you mentioned as I highly doubt that any of the two would say that he was buried alive. Unfortunately, i see this with everything you mentioned how you see things differently than what the meforshim write. The fact is that Rashi did not argue with the the pesukim and neither will the other meforshim. If I get a chance I will look it up but I can guarantee that nobody said he was buried alive which is what you are essentially saying that he was buried while being physically alive and he is still currently buried alive…
Menachem Shmei, also yo add to my previous post, you claim that you linked the meforshim. There are no links
Always ask, the issue is not about the rebbe being moshiach, the issue is that he has morphed into a deity which the Lubavitche worship.
“מקרא אני דורש – it may not be logical, but that’s what the Torah says!“
בדרך דרוש not בדרך פשט
Menachem shmei, I thought you missed my comment about the ria”f but then I went over the posts and saw that you did see it. There were so many responses to this thread I didn’t notice all of them.
OK, so whoever wants can look in the sefer eyin yaacov on everything that the Rif wrote on taanus 5 2 and yaacov lo meis.
At first I was impressed that you were able to refer to so many meforshim on this Rashi and Gemorah. But then when you mentioned that you don’t see the part of the rif that I mentioned I realized that it’s copy and paste from some “Chabad Torah” . Sure enough I unearthed a Chabad piece bringing all these meforshim and weaving it into their article titled “A King without a Nation”…in fact, there are many Chabad articles with reference to “Yaacov lo mes” and meforshim on it, taken out of context of course, and I see that this belief that Yaacov “being physically alive in his kever” is very central and important in the worship of the rebbe. It’s mamesh like Yosef Hatzadik feared the metzriim will deitify Yaacov, you are now doing to your rebbe all on the account of the words “Yaacov lo meis”…
qwerty to DaMoshe I assume you’re taking a shot at me because I attend a Chabad synagogue … I come there for a minyan and that’s all. We’re friendly but I don’t push my beliefs on them and vice versa. Try again
How do you daven in a minyan of idolators?
qwerty to me Are you so jealous of my writing ability that you insinuate that I’m mentally ill?
You may not believe me, but I guarantee you I am not jealous at all of your writing style. Nor am I jealous of the content. And to be honest, from reading your rantings, as well as your denigration of me because I agree with Menachem that ACCORDING TO RASHI, Yaakov Avinu is still alive (as the Artscroll edition allegedly says), I am indeed starting to wonder…
Despite being absolutely terrified of the rantings and ravings of the non-arrogant and humble qwerty, I am taking the risk and saying that once again I agree with Menachem in his posting that the Rif makes no mention of Yaakov Avinu being in a comatose state davka until he was brought to Eretz Yisroel. As Menachem wrote (does this agreement c”v make me an idolater?) the Rif clearly says that Yaakov is still alive even after his burial. He writes that Yaakov was in a similar state to someone who had fainted and who shows no sign of life. And that’s how they buried him.
Ah, it doesn’t make sense? That just shows that we can’t understand everything. It does not mean that we can reject that interpretation of Yaakov Avinu lo meis!
And again, for the needless 1000th time, nothing whatsoever to do with the LR, about whom no one of accepted Torah authority has said that he did not die.
qwerty: The debate is over because Shmei couldn’t and/or wouldn’t answer Candace Owens’ question.
I may be mistaken, but haven’t you said in the past that the debate is over for a number of reasons. Maybe you should apply to become a mod, but in the meantime using language like “the debate is over” is infantile.
And I still don’t see why we should care at all about a question asked by CO yemach shema. We reject yoshke because he was a rasha (as is CO). We also don’t generally believe in a second coming, but according to one explanation given by Rashi in Sanhedrin 98b, Daniel, who has most definitely died, may return as Mashiach. So there is that possibility in regards to Daniel.
We mainstream Yidden also reject the suggestion that the LR is Mashiach, and for any number of reasons, as I have outlined in posts on earlier threads.
The Lubavichers aka the Three Stooges use the phantasmagoric as fact to substantiate their idolatrous beliefs and Benedict ARSo
I prefer Quisling.
appears to be joining their ranks.
For those of you who may not be aware of qwerty’s logic, because I know a little how to learn a gemoro with the Rashi on it, and I have come to the conclusion – supported by the Rif on Ein Yaakov, and apparently cited by Artscroll – that there is an opinion that Yaakov Avinu is still alive, I am on Menachem’s phantasmagoric and idolatrous side in all arguments.
I have a question for you. If I agree with Menachem’s spelling on a certain word, or if I like the way he divides his posts into paragraphs, and I then touch your wine, will it become stam yainam or actual yayin nesech?
ARSo
ARSo?! What happened to Benedict?
is now convinced that Yaakov Avinu is still alive. Let him tell that to his Rav. The Rav won’t ask if he took his meds, he’ll have him put away.
Tell me, in your great humility and non-arrogance (not to mention your amazing writing style) have you now been forced to reveal that you have Ruach Hakodesh? You have no idea who my Rav/Rebbe is, yet you know what he will ask and what he will do! I think I’ll drop him and start coming to you for advice etc.
Yes, the Torah(Tanach, Gemara, Midrash, etc. is replete with references to the supernatural, but it’s our job to discern the truth within. Generally speaking, we’re expected to eschew the fantastic in favor of the mundane. Hameivin yavin.
Yep, hameivin yavin. And that clearly excludes you!
To the rest of the onlookers, am I totally out of the ball park when I think that qwerty has ‘certain unpleasant’ issues?
qwerty, you are forever challenging people (stooges?) to answer your questions, so here is an opportunity to face my challenge and answer mine without obfuscation:
1. Does the Rif hold that Yaakov Avinu is still alive? (In case you don’t know exactly where to look, in the standard edition of Ein Yaakov, with all the meforshim surrounding the gemoro, it’s in the last three lines of the Rif on page 91 of the volume that contains Taanis. Btw I could have asked the same question about the Artscroll, but as I don’t have access to it I am reticent to rely on the testimony of one of the stooges.)
2. If your answer is, “Yes, he does,” then why is it not ok for someone to quote it as a valid opinion, just as the Artscroll apparently does?
3. If your answer is, “No, he doesn’t,” you are either a brazen liar, or someone who can’t read/translate Hebrew.
4. If your answer is along the lines of, “These ‘fantastic’ statements aren’t to be taken literally,” then you are mistaken. There are indeed opinions that many aggadatos are not to be taken literally, but to the best of my knowledge there is NO opinion that the explanations of the Rishonim/Acharonim are not to be taken literally.
Philosopher,
At first I was impressed that you were able to refer to so many meforshim on this Rashi and Gemorah. But then when you mentioned that you don’t see the part of the rif that I mentioned I realized that it’s copy and paste from some “Chabad Torah”
This is not true:
A) I spent lots of time researching and poring over the mefarshim to understand what they say.
I didn’t see the Rif brought anywhere other than the original Ein Yaakov which I linked above.
B) קבל את האמת ממי שאמרו – refute my points instead assuming where I got my information from.
OK, so whoever wants can look in the sefer eyin yaacov on everything that the Rif wrote on taanus 5 2 and yaacov lo meis.
I read and reread the Rif in the Ein Yaakov and I still can’t find what you’re referring to that יעקב לא מת was only until Eretz Yisroel (I do remember a different meforash saying that, not the Rif).
Would you be so kind as to quote the words that you’re referring to (as I requested once already)?Here’s the link to the meforshim again: https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=47607&st=&pgnum=130&hilite=
And again, here is Artscroll Taanis 5B fn. 18:
“Since this verse proves that Jacob is still alive, we must conclude that Jacob only appeared to be dead to those who embalmed him (Rashi). Other commentators explain Jacob’s immortality not as a prolongation of physical life but as a form of continued spiritual existence (see Maharsha).”[Mods, not sure if this post went through the first time]
Yankel,
They do however state very clearly that WE KNOW that j is out because of the inadmissibility of a second coming
They, including Rambam? Where?
I quoted the Rambam to demonstrate my point, I would expect you to quote the Rambam to demonstrate yours.Whether yakov avinu is considered dead or not is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT here.
It’s relevant because Philosopher brought it up to say that it’s crazy to say that Rashi learns יעקב לא מת physically.
There is no problem having a debate in how to understand a Gemara and meforshim.
I didn’t expect it to get so heated, with people considering Artscroll’s interpretation deranged kefira, or claiming that a Rif that I posted doesn’t exist.“He’s a consummate liar and phony like his worthless ———“
(עפ”ל!!!)I’m still surprised that the moderators keep letting trash like this through.
Yankel,
When you study habad literature , you will see that after each and everyone of their rebeim’s expired name there is a navgam… It seems to me that no habad faction – even those who ostensibly agree that he died – would use this about their deceased leader .
Every sefer of the Rebbe is printed with a shaar blatt that says
“כ”ק אדמו”ר מנחם מענדל שניאורסאהן זצוקללה”ה נבג”מ זי”ע”.
Go into kehos (the official Lubavitch publisher, established by the Rebbe) and look through any of the Rebbe’s seforim.(This is with the exception of a small fraction of seforim printed by fringe individuals who are constantly in court with kehos for violating copyright. Those say שליט”א)
To the group
I see that ARSo has several comments this morning. I assume he was energized by having his favorite breakfast, “Eggs benedict.” Okay that’s my last flippant comment, now let’s get serious. I enjoy healthy debate but both sides must play by the rules. These are the rules, AFAIC, complete honesty and respecting the opposing viewpoint as well as the opponent are required. Shmei doesn’t meet the first criterion and so I refuse to engage in any further discussion with him. As for the second, ARSo ignores the points I’m making and simply looks to find some way to shoot them down as well as attack my character. As I’ve explained, I am a rationalist as are the Rabbis to whom I cleave. We categorically reject statements which violate natural law. Genesis 6:3 sets the human life span at a maximum of 120. Therefore when we have Chazal which says that Yishai lived to 400 I don’t accept that literal interpretation. Are there others who do accept it? Absolutely and I would never try to change their minds. Eilu Veilu Divrei Elokim includes respecting other people’s views. Some believe in six days, 5784 others don’t. It’s not Kefirah to be in the second group. As I noted, my Rabbis include Rav Dovid Feinstein’s son-in-law, and Rabbi Moshe Plutchok. They are both iluim, but most of all they are strict Maimonideans. They would consider anyone who believes(Seichel why can’t you learn how to spell this word) Yaakov Avinu to be physically alive to be a nut job. And the same applies to the god in a box in Queens. As for ARSo’s suggestion that I am a kofer because I reject the concept of miracles. I definitely don’t reject the idea of miracles, what I reject is the concept that a miracle must involve Hashem suspending or violating natural law. I certainly agree that He is able to do that if He chooses, but as a rule He chooses not to. Are there exceptions to this rule? I’m not sure. The problem with viewing statements in the Torah and Chazal literally is that you end up like Chabad and make completely insane assertions. If anyone is willing to discuss any matter with me in a civilized manner, I’m always at the ready, but if you simply want to prove that I’m an atheist and a Kofer, I’ll reserve my comments for the reasonable Jews in this thread.
To philosopher
Again I remind you that arguing with Shmei is an exercise in futility. He’s a proven prevaricator so who care what proofs he brings you? He just wants to steer the conversation away from Chabad’s idolatry. You’re a bright guy and a good guy, but I fully understand Chabad and how to deal with them and that’s why they focus their attacks on me. But I won’t stop.
Once again I have to agree with Yasser-Shmei (I took the liberty of adding the firstname to pre-empt Saddam-qwerty) in regards to the Rif on Ein Yaakov.
Philosopher, in the edition I have on Ein Yaakov, the Rif makes absolutely no mention of Yaakov dying once he arrived in Eretz Yisrael. (The gemoro in Taanis 13a which says how he opened his eyes and smiled would clearly imply that he was alive, and that took place near the Me’aras Hamachpelah in Eretz Yisrael. Of course, it is possible to say that he had fully died by then, and that he resurrected for a very short time, but I feel that that is stretching it a bit.)
And one more point. Someone who is comatose breathes, and if Yaakov would have been comatose they would have know that he was alive from his breathing. If they mistakenly thought he was dead, he clearly was not comatose.
To the group
Shmei is surprised that the moderators print my posts in which I call him a liar and his mentor a Kofer. As I stated in an earlier post the reason they print it is because it’s true and they agree. The GRA said that the simplest answer is the truth. That’s the simplest answer. By printing what I write they’re telling Shmei that they’re not fooled by his tricks. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence and intellectual honesty, to exclude ARSo, saw through his refusal to address the Candace Owens question because it exposed the lie called Chabadianity. Checkmate.
I enjoy healthy debate but both sides must play by the rules. These are the rules, AFAIC, complete honesty and respecting the opposing viewpoint as well as the opponent are required.
Qwerty, thanks, I laughed so hard when I read this! 😄
They would consider anyone who believes Yaakov Avinu to be physically alive to be a nut job.
This doesn’t offend me, because I don’t have any personal belief on the matter. But Rashi does.
Just because your rabbis like the Rambam better, that’s not an excuse to speak this way about Rashi, Rif, etc.Menachem >> Also, the nicknames Alter/Mittlele rebbes have a hint of upcoming finality, not sure what exactly happened
> They got these titles during the leadership of the next rebbe. During their lifetime they were called “the Rebbe.”Peshita .. I did not think that a rebbe will call himself a “middle” – Just why the 3rd rebbe thought, or was thought of, as last? That is what oldest and middle imply. I had this question for a long time, curious to know
> Not sure if I would base my derech on Dennis Prager, but this has indeed been my mehalech here.
I am not bringing the name as an authority, just agree with his sevorah (and seems like you do too), and trying to quote b’shem omro.
As I concluded, though, the moment a person changes his behavior based on that belief towards unacceptable, then there is an issue. If, for example, if someone disregards learning other Torah sources because his rebbe is moschiach.
@arso
@shmeiRAMBAN is in Sefer havikuach . We know j is not mashiach because the promises of our nevi’im did not materialize during his lifetime.
RAMBAM is in hilch melachim . When a candidate for mashiach dies in war and did not bring about the promises of the nevi’im we know that he is not mashiach.For the umpteenth time, the gmara in sanhedrin is not a contradiction to this AT ALL.
Daniel did not start the ge’ula process, nor did he or his disciples [at his instigation] declare himself as mashiach. Therefore, he could still be considered as a potential candidate. [if there will be a private thiyat hameitim].Daniel never started. Therefore, he never failed. And therefore, he could still [at least according to one pshat in sanhedrin] be a candidate for mashiach.
But, As RAMBAN and RAMBAM point out, starting and then, dying & leaving unfinished business, equals failure.Failure equals sheker.
Thats how we know now that j is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know that bar kohba is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know now that shabtai tzvi is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know now that the last leader of habad is a mashiach sheker.Are these people equal to each other in other respects ? No, not at all.
But they are all -equally- meshichei sheker.
Yaakov avinu’s alive/dead status is totally irrelevant to this.
Neither is habad’s last leaders alive/dead status.And neither are other valid disqualifications relevant here.
For example the j personality and his actions, or shabtai tzvi’s conversion to islam, or other possible problems with the personality of habads leader.
The point RAMBAM and RAMBAN are discussing is : unfinished business.Which is as clear as day disqualifying the late habad leader from being mashiach.
So clear is this , that [for the umpteenth time, again] habad itself [pre 94] considered this so axiomatic, that they were prepared to go so far, to the extent of building a new castles-in-the-sky theology , on this basis, proclaiming to all and sundry that their leader simply cannot die [!].So, to our question : is the late leader of habad a mashiach sheker ?
The answer can only be:a resounding ‘yes’.
All of klal yisrael, besides the majority of habad hasidim, know this answer.
They feel it in their bones.To the group
Shmei has protested my posts and perhaps he has a point. I’ve been calling him a liar but that’s unfair. As all can attest I’ve consistently stated that Schneersohn is his god and not Hashem and he has never contested that contention. Therefore he’s Modeh Al Haemes and not a liar. Congratulations Shmei you checkmated me.
qwerty in post #2313974 (on this page) I asked you a question which you have thus far ignored. Why? Are you any better than Shmei who, at least according to you, does not answer questions?
Arso, I believe you are a Lubavitche trying to prove Chabad theories because who else would defend Menachem Shmie’s with his own misinterpretations( im using a nice adjective here…)? After combing through Taanis 13a I saw there’s nothing about Yaacov opening his eyes and smiling.
Yaacov opening his eyes is in Sotah 13a. If you read Sotah 13a and you read there the meforshim on how it says Yosef was zoche to bury Yaacov and talking a lot about the topic, you see that Yaacov was actually buried. Yes, it says Yaacov opened his eyes and laughed when Eisov’s eyes fell out, and it’s something we can’t understand without the meforshim, but in no way does it prove that Yaacov was buried physically alive. If you decided that Yaacov was buried alive, with him being able to open and close his eyes and laugh…well, ahem … i have nothing to say accept what i wont say… The Gemorah says that even though their deaths (Yaacov and Eisov’s) were not on the same day same day, they were buried on the same day. If you read through Sotah 13a and reach a conclusion that Yaacov is alive in his kever, well, again, i can’t comment on that.
Qwerty, you are right about not arguing with Menachem shmei. If he wants believe that that his rebbe deity was buried alive I can’t change that. If he wants to believe that Yaacov is physically alive 3+ millenia after being buried, I can’t change his beliefs.
After doing much research on Yaacov lo mes I see that these words are very central to the Chabadianity ideology. They have many articles written on these three words. They want Yaacov to be buried alive so like this they believe they have a precedent to a tsaddik being buried but supposedly still physically alive to show that their rebbe was buried but is also alive… Like this they have an answer how he can be moshiach…
I posted a link on the other thread but the mods didnt publish it. The link was a video showing Lubavitche giving their dead rebbe an aliyeh, them writing a letter to the Chassidim, thirty years after the rebbe died, that he’s not feeling well so for the next few days he won’t be able to see the oilim, a random chossid giving out l’chaim to the Chassidim as if the rebbe is giving it out, praying to the rebbes chair, etc, etc. B’kitzur, ita cultist behavior revolving around their deity.
Qwerty, also, I forgot to mention in my previous post, I’m not a guy…I understand if people think I’m a male because I engage in these kinds of arguments, but I’m not.
So I’m looking for a link to the Rif’s commentary on Taanos 5b on the subject of Yaacov lo meis, if anyone has it and could lpost the link I’d appreciate it. Menachem shmei posted a link from a photocopied page, it is very unclear, I can’t read the Rif’s commentary on that page.
I have looked in the Gemarah and don’t see the Rif commentary on Yaacov lo meis. I looked on the Sefaria website and shas.alhatorah website and cannot find the Rif’s mefoiresh on Yaacov lo meis…if there is indeed such a mefoiresh.
Arso and menachem shmei quote the ayin yaacov on the rif on yaacov lo meis but I can’t find that anywhere either (I dont have an ayin yaacov sefer) except that it’s referenced in one Chabad article online quoting the the Ri”f on ayin yaacov…
What I have said about the Rif’s commentary on Yaacov lo mes I take back. I have written what I saw in other articles but I cannot find the actual sources.
ויחי קאפיטל נ פסוק ט”ו: וַיִּרְא֤וּ אֲחֵֽי־יוֹסֵף֙ כִּי־מֵ֣ת אֲבִיהֶ֔ם וַיֹּ֣אמְר֔וּ ל֥וּ יִשְׂטְמֵ֖נוּ יוֹסֵ֑ף וְהָשֵׁ֤ב יָשִׁיב֙ לָ֔נוּ אֵ֚ת כׇּל־הָ֣רָעָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר גָּמַ֖לְנוּ אֹתֽוֹ׃
It’s a mefureshe pasuk in the Torah that Yaakov Avinu meis. You cannot argue on a pasuk in the Torah. The Gemara is an agadata.First, even though it’s not necessarily in the correct order of the posters, I admit that I made a typo when I wrote Taanis 13 instead of Sotah 13. I have quoted that gemoro in an earlier post and there I wrote Sotah 13.
Now, legufo she inyan. Qwerty and philosopher you are so anti the Lubavicher posters online – and lately that’s mainly Menachem – that you are blinded to the points of the conversation, you veer dangerously close to apikorsus!
1. Because I am not the least bit interested in what that shiksa CO ym”sh says (and I’m not really interested in Shmuley Boteach either) does not mean that I take either side in the argument. I simply don’t care about what she says and hope that the epithet ym”sh indeed happens soon.
2. The fact that Rashi, and the Rif on Ein Yaakov (and, I believe others) explain that Yaakov Avinu was literally buried alive, has nothing whatsoever to do with the Lubavicher rebbe, who was buried after he died. But because you assume (and you may be correct in assuming so) that Menachem and the others want to make that connection, you refuse to accept that there is a VALID opinion that Yaakov did not die and that he is still alive, despite being buried. There isn’t much difference between that approach to that of the Lubavichers who refuse to accept anything which could fly in the face of their claim that the LR is Mashiach.
3. qwerty, your views on ‘rational’ Judaism scare me. I don’t know the Rabbis you keep quoting, but if they say that one cannot accept ‘irrational’ explanations to ‘strange’ statements of Chazal – as Rashi and others clearly do – and that anybody who does is a nutcase, then they are also veering close to apikorsus. I am therefore inclined to be melamed zechus and to believe that in your frenzy you are misquoting them.
4. philospher: It’s a mefureshe pasuk in the Torah that Yaakov Avinu meis. You cannot argue on a pasuk in the Torah. The Gemara is an agadata.
Are you suggesting that Rebbi Yochanan, who said יעקב אבינו לא מת, didn’t know the passuk? Of course he did, but he said his statement anyway. Saying it’s an aggadata does not help. Can you find me any aggadata that directly contradicts a passuk and that is not therefore refuted?
5. I’m still waiting on qwerty to answer the questions I asked…
RAMBAM is in hilch melachim . When a candidate for mashiach dies in war and did not bring about the promises of the nevi’im we know that he is not mashiach.
Yankel, how disingenuous!
I clearly said that I’m not getting into the משיח מן המתים debate.
I was responding to a question of why would someone who believes that משיח מן המתים is possible reject Christianity.
My point was that Christianity has much more fundamental issues than משיח מן המתים.
I even proved this from the Rambam.
You claimed that according to the Rambam. The problem with Christianity is not מסית ומדיח, rather only that Yoshke was killed.
I said this is ridiculous, because according to the Rambam Yoshke was killed BY BEIS DIN! Was he killed for claiming to be Moshiach AFTER death!?!?
You responded with an irrelevant Rambam about בן כוזיבא which has nothing to do with why we reject Christianity according to the Rambam.I am aware of the Ramban, and there is much to discuss about that, which I’m not getting into. This is why I asked you for your source in the Rambam, and you proved that you don’t have one.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.