@Chabad Shluchah Please Explain Why Davening To/Betten a Rebbe is Okay

I see it. This is kind of overwhelming because there is so much that isn’t understood here that all these questions are based on. If I answer point by point, you won’t understand or I’ll need to write a whole megilla which will be repetitive in the end.

The way I can answer is by explaining concepts. Once those concepts are understood, the questions fall away as they are no longer questions. Does that sound like a plan? We are probably on different time zones and tomorrow is erev shabbos, but I’ll keep up until its answered (other people feel free to answer as well, it takes off the pressure and helps out.)

I’ve done this on other threads and kept up until there were no more questions or until the thread was closed 😜. Lmk if this sounds like a plan.

No reason to say elokist. When used in the context it is a shem avoda zara and therefore should be pronounced as chol. Elohist works just fine.

Where is the source in the Torah for hiskashrus,and where do we find it by Torah Jews before Chasidus

How many times do we have to go through this? Do people just want to push CS out of the CR this badly?

She’s already explained that what she’s does is OK according to her Rebbeim (same justification all of us tend to give). We’ve already explained that we have a problem with a lot of it anyway, including myself.

And, by the way, other Chassidim daven at graves of their past Rebbes, which is, I assume, what CS meant when she said this was a question about Chassidus in general.

As far as going to the ohel there is no davening to the Rebbe ch”v. When one writes a Pan (or kvittel) the minhag is to start off with the words אנא לעורר רחמים רבים . We ask that the Rebbe should intercede on our behalf and be מעורר רחמים from Hashem that’s how every kvittel starts.

As for the permissibility of this the מנחת אלעזר (who is not a lubatcher or biased according to some posts here) writes this is not only permissible it is a MITZVA. See שות מנחת אלעזר סימן סח look it up for yourself please.

@aww no one says Moshe Rabbeinu shlita. There’s a clear difference between what the Nefesh Hachaim writes and claiming that someone is alive to the point that they can/will be Moshiach. Using that quote it would make more sense to say Dovid Hamelech is moshiach, as he is still alive.

@aww I’m just giving a practical nafka minah between the ability to tack on the title shlita and what the Nefesh Hachaim is referring to.

These are not nafka Minas at all.

1) The expression shlita (what it stands for) only really makes sense for someone alive in a physical body. But it’s not really factually that wrong since the nefesh hachaim says clearly באמת* אינו מת* and עדיין* בחיים*. Direct quotes. Again I’m not advising it but if you have אמונה that what the nefesh hachaim is saying is actually true it’s not factually wrong that a צדיק is alive (without a physical body) just not an appropriate expression.

2) moshiach has nothing to do with it at all. Just because someone is alive doesn’t mean they are or can be moshiach. And just because someone is dead doesn’t mean they can’t be moshiach. The Rambam writes that techyas hameisim is one of the 13 ikkrim, so we all have to believe in it. The same Rambam writes in iggeres techiyas hameisim (which everyone agrees was written by the Rambam himself) that techiyas hameisim can happen either after or before moshiach. Now if techiyas hameisim happens before moshiach there is no source or svara to say that just because someone experienced techiyas hameisim that excludes them from being moshiach. So one of those who went through techiyas Maisim could be moshiach. Again being alive or dead or moshiach have nothing to do with each other.

Would anyone treat any other chassidic group the way chabad is treated here? and no I am not Chabad

Why is it OK to question Chabad on messanism , but not OK to question Satmar on Anti-Zionism?

ZD, because anti-Zionism is the correct Torah hashkafa according to the Torah world, both Litvish and Chasidish. Messianism is not.

@ Zahavas Dad

“Why is it OK to question Chabad on messanism , but not OK to question Satmar on Anti-Zionism?”

Surely you do know it is a matter of historical record that anti-zionism was / is a mainstream position among the Gedolim. The issue of contention is a matter of degree and tactics. (Before all the tzionim on here start listing names of Gedolim who where not anti-zionist or neutral on the issue notice I said mainstream to all.) Chabbad mashichistism (even mashichistism-lite) certainly was / is not mainstream. Lo matzinu lai chaver outside of Chabbad and even within Chabbad it is a matter of dispute (see posts by Sechel HaYashar on the relevant thread(s).

I am well aware that before World War 2 , the mainstream charedi position was anti-zionism, It was also the opinion of the mainstream gedolim not to go to the US (And this was the position of the Satmar Rebbe as well) too

However the war and the holocaust changed things dramatically and the mainstream position has been either zionist or non-zionist (like the Chazon Ish, not the anti-zionism of Muncatch or Satmar

Lol aww enjoy! As for me if anyone wants me to answer sources etc. I need a a starter that any Torah source is acceptable, not just the ones the questioner may be more familiar with. Also would need to clarify who the Rebbe was and is because judging people lchaf zechus, it seems some are unaware.

Since I have a halachic obligation afaik to protest the denigration of a talmid Chochom and kal vchomer my Rebbe, would need these points to be clarified before any serious answers can be posted. Lmk if you’re interested. Gutte voch.

I need a a starter that any Torah source is acceptable, not just the ones the questioner may be more familiar with. Also would need to clarify who the Rebbe was and is because judging people lchaf zechus, it seems some are unaware.

Since I have a halachic obligation afaik to protest the denigration of a talmid Chochom and kal vchomer my Rebbe, would need these points to be clarified before any serious answers can be posted. Lmk if you’re interested.

So basically, if the Rebbe said he was G-d, we have to accept it because of who he was.

But as Toi points out, if we’re questioning who the Rebbe was, it doesn’t make sense to accept your opinion on that as a given, and if we’re questioning Chabad philosophy, it doesn’t make sense to include Chabad sources, since we are questioning their validity as Torah sources. So making those conditions is a slick way of chickening out.

When you are not confident or confused with who you are and what you believe, you constantly feel the need to defend and attack. It is interesting that noone else feels a need to defend themselves or attack every other Jew on this planet or in the next world. And if you tell me that most Jewish groups dont get attacked by others, it isnt totally true and the reason chabad gets attacked the most is because they bring it upon themselves by proactively bashing other Yidden behind the scenes in their “pep” talk gatherings and telling other Yidden how chabad is right and they are wrong, and that all need to follow the lubavitch way.
If you would just keep to yourselves without opening up chabad centers in the most litvishe neighborhoods, complain about how there was resistance to it, and try to influence everyone to follow you, most likely your problem wouldnt exist. Its also funny how you complain about the fact that it was so hard to get a chabad center in lakewood which im totally not sure why thats necessary other than to try to inflitrate (didnt know lakewood to be such a lubavitch community). Its funny because im just imagining what kind of H— would be raised in crown heights if someone had the idea to build a Young Israel there which btw many would go to, seeing how the Carlebach Ahavas Yisroel on Albany Ave is overflowed with crown heights residents(which is totally looked down upon in crown heights and they dont have an easy time).
Also they forget in crown heights that around 50 years ago, the place was basically a flatbush/boro park with all types of YIdden and chabad was the total minority until most Yidden moved away.

So basically its ok for you to barge into everyone elses neighborhoods but CV”S if anyone enters yours it might be too much “competition”, “they will lower us down”, “why is everyone trying to destroy lubavitch!” Just accept that everyone follows their own and not everyone is trying to be convinced by your “inspiring” 5 words of chassidus when you meet them.

OK let me just clarify the situation. The Rebbe was not born yesterday and this comment was not made yesterday – it was made in 1950 before the Rebbe took on the nesius , when the Rebbe was farbrenging about the Frierdiker Rebbe’s greatness. Now I have never heard of any big shturem that erupted then in the jewish world – either they understood the comments as the chassidim did (which you don’t because you haven’t learned Chassidus and which I can clarify for you if wanted sincerely), or they realized the Rebbe is such a Torah giant that they must not have understood right.

The Rebbe, already when he arrived in America knew the whole Shas in and out, and by Farbrengens, Rabbi Soliveitchik expressed amazement at the Rebbe’s ability to speak for hours on end, with no notes, quoting from kol HaTorah kula, both Nigleh and Chassidus.

So I’m definitely not here to exonerate the Rebbe to you, as it is a chutzpah to think you are in the position to even question the Rebbe.

For example, my Rebbeim did not endorse zionism, quite the opposite. However I would never tell a zionist that Rav Kook didn’t know what he is talking about cuz I know Torah better and he doesn’t make sense.

I would never do such a thing because I’m a Torah yid abs we don’t treat Daas Torah that way. If he asks me why I’m not a zionist, I would quote what my Rebbeim said as they have the ability to disagree because they’re on the same level. But I would never deign to place myself on the same level as HaRav Kook, and I would expect the same of every Torah he.

Now that doesn’t mean you can’t ask questions. But there is definitely a way to ask. Such as “I don’t understand how the Rebbe could have said this because I don’t see how that can fit with this Rambam….”

And in such a case I’ll be happy to clarify, of course I can use the Rebbe to clarify his own statements.

So if that’s what you want, great. If you are just looking to bash lubavitch and the Rebbe Chas vsholom, at your own risk, I will definitely not be party to such a discussion.

Joseph, you had a sincere question and I’ll be happy to answer. You always phrase things appropriately in my experience. Toi let me know where you stand.

The trick is to answer using non Lubavitch sources that no one can have an excuse not to accept,

I have done that for the two questions that started this forum.

I can do that similarly with EVERY other question on Lubavitch.

I have done that for was the two questions that started this forum.

Let’s see – the first question was betten the Rebbe. You agreed it’s wrong, and  your denial that it happens doesn’t ring true. The second was treating the Rebbe as alive, to which you responded that צדיקים במיתתם קרוים מתים, but you can’t explain why in history we never had the phenomenon of a צדיק who passed being referred to as alive the way many (most) Lubavichers do with the Rebbe.

If you can’t do any better with the other questions, you won’t have done much.

I thought respect for Daas Torah was a given.

Of course it is, but who determines who is a valid source of daas Torah?

Toi, if it sounds the way you think it does, by all means ask. Just saying that if you’d like me to answer, we need to have proper respect here. The first time you asked on the other thread, that respect was lacking. Ok happy to start answering with no further ado, as long as respect is adhered to.

Joseph, you had a sincere question and I’ll be happy to answer. You always phrase things appropriately in my experience.

My expounded questions are in the third post of this thread. If you care to answer it presumably I need not repeat it. Thanks.

DY yes I am very aware of the many readers. Just if every other post I need to protest the denigration of Torah, is not very productive. So that’s why I’m setting my terms now.

The argument that just because something supposedly ( with no proof offered) was not done in the past by itself is not an argument.

The institution of kollel as it exists in America or eretz Yisroel also has not existed in the history of klal Yisroel. I’m very pro kollel but my point is only to show that that argument IN ITSELF is useless

The argument that just because something supposedly ( with no proof offered) was not done in the past by itself is not an argument.

It’s not just that it wasn’t done in the past; it’s not even done in the present by practically anyone else but Chabad chassidim regarding the Rebbe, and no one else

Days yochid that’s even a worse argument.
Most Lubavitchers (all that I know and I know a lot since I’m in the system) do accept the Rebbe passed and his Yahrtzeit ג תמוז is market by thousands of people visiting his tziun. (You can even see pictures on Yeshiva world as photo evidence). What are all those people doing there on his yahrtzeit. At the same time they have אמונה, that a tzadik still lives on as is explained in Tanya. As I quoted above this concept is brought even in litvish Sefer nefesh hachaim were he says tzaddikim לא מת and עדיין בחיים . Why no one had אמונה in this concept or talks about it is a question on them not Lubavitch . Lubavitch in general has more emuna in Torah concept than others who are influenced by rationalistic goyish philosophies.