- This topic has 40 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
According to the Mishpacha article, the Lev Tahor cult used to have its members focus exclusively on their rebbe’s writings, which stressed how amazing and wonderful their rebbe was. you were also never allowed to question him and you should just have emunas chachomim. When I read that, it struck me as something many other frum cults have- an overwhelming focus on one figure and the elevation of said figure to a godly status that can never be questioned. Thoughts?
You aren’t wrong, but you are a little misleading. I don’t know of any other frum system that learns their guru’s writings to the exclusion of others. OK, maybe Satmar and Vizhnitz won’t read Rav Kook, but there are Ponevezhers who learn Rav Hirsch, Briskers who learn B’nei Yisaschor, and Chassidim who learn P’nei Yehoshua.
“You aren’t wrong, but you are a little misleading. I don’t know of any other frum system that learns their guru’s writings to the exclusion of others.”
Please see the Lubavitch concept of being “bittul to the Rebbe.” It mandates exactly this.
Yes, thoughts.
We have a Torah, and that is the Supreme. Yes, there are Lomdei Torah, Talmidei Chachomim, Tzaddikim, etc. We are to revere them, and follow their direction and guidance. They are to be our role models. There are numerous places in Torah where we can find the halachos of this.
When we deviate from that, and make the individual, whether Talmid Chochom, Rov, Rebbe, etc. into a deity, we have a huge problem. It’s called Avodah Zarah. And this is not a small aveiroh that one might dismiss or overlook in a context of other nicer things. It’s one of the 3 cardinal sins. Our leaders do not grant us Divine forgiveness, and they do not limit our exposure to Torah. They do not demand allegiance, and they do not have supreme power. They do not punish, nor do they control our lives.
This Lev Tumah cult is not just a wacky group. They are ovdei avodah zarah, and they need to be addressed from that perspective. The leaders need to be apprehended and either eliminated or incarcerated. Their victims need to be rescued and deprogrammed. This cult needs to be eliminated, and Klal Yisroel should have zero tolerance for stuff like this. This is not a faction of Klal Yisroel, but a cancerous enemy of Torah Judaism. The role of authorities here is permissible because of the extremes of abuse that they commit. May we be zocheh to see this form of apikorsus expunged from Klal Yisroel.
“When I read that, it struck me as something many other frum cults have- an overwhelming focus on one figure and the elevation of said figure to a godly status that can never be questioned. Thoughts?”
How bout Sefer hamitzvos:
“Respecting the Sages“You shall stand up before an elderly person and give respect to a sage”—Leviticus 19:32.
We are commanded to accord respect to Torah scholars and respectfully rise for them. Although everyone is required to respect sages, even one Torah scholar must respect another of equal stature, this mitzvah is compounded with regards to the respect a student is expected to have for his teacher.
A student is required to respect and revere his teacher, he is forbidden to challenge his teachings, and always must give him the benefit of the doubt. Indeed, our Sages tell us,
******”Your reverence for your teacher must be akin to your reverence for G‑d.”*****
Oh here it spells it out more. Hilchos TT Perek 5
“There is no greater honor than that due a teacher, and no greater awe than that due a teacher. Our Sages declared: “Your fear of your teacher should be equivalent to your fear of Heaven.”
Therefore, they said: Whoever disputes the authority of his teacher is considered as if he revolts against the Divine Presence, as implied [by Numbers 26:9]: “…who led a revolt against God.”
Whoever engages in controversy with his teacher is considered as if he engaged in controversy with the Divine Presence, as implied [by Numbers 20:13]: “…where the Jews contested with God and where He was sanctified.”
Whoever complains against his teacher is considered as if he complains against the Divine Presence, as implied [by Exodus 16:8]: “Your complaints are not against us, but against God.”
Whoever thinks disparagingly of his teacher is considered as if he thought disparagingly of the Divine Presence, as implied [by Numbers 21:5]: “And the people spoke out against God and Moses.”
Agreed tlik. It’s one thing to prefer to study ones Rebbe’s Chassidus its another to be forbidden from studying any Torah but what the leader approves. Also as Torah yidden we are expected to follow our Rebbe without question, but the same Torah mandates the Rebbe to have sources for his Torah and not to make up whatever he wishes.most of all the hallmark of Yiddishkeit is the delving and questioning to understand better, and forbidding critical thinking (of course based on emuna etc) is anthema to Torah
The answer is that the shita is correct, but they picked the wrong rebbe. That’s all. How should they have known he was the wrong rebbe? Not from any one incident, but over time they could have realized that something is very wrong.
One warning should have been if the reports are true that they were discouraged from learning chumash, mishnayos, gemora, rishonim, shulchon oruch, etc. NO legitimate rebbe or system does that. And no, Neville Chamberlain, Lubavitch does not do that. Lubavitchers learn nigleh just like everyone else. Certain post-acharonim may be discouraged, but nobody before ca 1800. On the contrary, Lubavitch tradition is that all the commonly accepted seforim before the Shach and the Taz were written with ruach hakodesh.
Milhouse +1 but he could clearly see that from lubavitchers posts I would think so I didn’t bother with that.
As much as I would like to agree in terms of Lubavitch (entire sedorim dedicated to memorizing random letters a man wrote to someone 50 years ago is not Yiddishkeit), they do learn rishonim and acharonim and they do not have a single living “guru” who demands that they do nothing without his or her say so.
Lerntmittayra are you serious? (Ie worth addressing your points) Or just looking to bash? Like is that really what you see of lubavitch and how you take it? Or you’re just looking to rile up people? (Hard to know sometimes)
“they do learn rishonim and acharonim”
I don’t think rishonim were ever in question here. Even Lev Tahor probably learns Rashi.
But, which acharonim do you think Chabad learns from outside of Lubavitch? When they say they’re learning Shulchan Aruch, they actually mean Shulchan Aruch HaRav. If you read into Milhouse’s comment, you can see that they don’t learn the classic halachic meforshim, which were all written on the real Shulchan Aruch.
Simply go to the other threads and see how often they can bring proofs from non-Lubavich acharonim: a whopping 0.
Slavishly following the Rebbe is only one aspect, and indeed one that’s harder to distinguish from true chassidus so it’s a red herring (or a trollish attempt to bash Lubavitch).
Chassidus, even Lubavitch, does not ostracise those that leave it for another chareidi derech, and enforce entirely cutting off anyone that leaves even from their own family left behind.
That’s without mentioning ask the other cultish aspects, such as the way medication and punishment is built into their system with the pretence that it’s yahadus and halacha.
Milhouse,
“Not from any one incident, but over time they could have realized that something is very wrong.”
Agreed. Should those within the Chabad community be realizing that something is very wrong when the Lubavitcher Rebbe ZT”L is being increasingly deified?
For me one of the strongest indicators of a cult is whether or not members of the group are financially independent. Do they own their own homes or do they live in apartments/houses owned by the community? Are they required to give part or all of the money they earn to the leaders? How much control do they have over their personal lives? Lev Tahor checks off every single box that would indicate that it’s a cult.
“Lerntmittayra are you serious? (Ie worth addressing your points) ”
while I think the thread had potential for actual discussion, he seems more bent on the third grade approach of being dramatic and then plain biting. This, unfortunately destroys the credibility of the valid points that are presented and the discussion that could have been. Don’t waste your time.Neville Chamberlain, almost all Lubavicher bochurim study for smicha; how do you think they could do that without studying non-Lubavicher Achronim? As I wrote, Lubavitch tradition is that everything until the Shach & Taz, i.e. until Chmielnicki y”sh, is beruach hakodesh. As far as I know the earliest sefer that is “not held of” in Lubavitch is the Chayei Odom, who is a post-acharon.
OK thanks syag 😊
Obviously Lernt is serious, and I don’t see why he’s being dragged through the coals. There are legitimate, undeniable similarities, to say nothing of how programmed certain people seem to be from the groups mentioned.
If Lev Tahor gets big enough, will it become wrong to criticize them too? If they set up in towns and colleges across the country to convert people to Lev Tahor, will we have to call that “good?” A cult cannot be beyond criticism just because they convinced enough people to join them.
The only point I can see in being critical is that if we start making thread targeting Chabad instead of just replying to threads made by Lubavitchers, we start to look like the Litvish version of Chabad Forum sites that just bash on everyone. Still, I don’t think Lernt should be singled out just because we want to keep the moral high ground. He brought up specific practices and similarities, not just random, baseless insults.
There are organizations that have a lot in common with early-stage cults but are not cults. Late stage cults are hard to explain away as anything but a cult.
Neville – i dont disagree with your points, which is why those were not my complaints against him.. in fact it’s exactly the opposite, those points are the reason that I was annoyed that he didn’t take a more legitimate and mature approach to the topic
Milhouse, you Lubavitchers have apparently created an entirely new construct of “post-acharon” to justify not learning acharonim. The rest of us don’t have this.
Excluding everything after (and presumably also) the Taz means you don’t learn Mogein Avraham, Sharei Teshuvah, Mishnah Berurah, Chasam Sofer, any musar, any other Chassidus, Aruch HaShulchan, Chayei Adam, Ben Ish Chai, or any other acharonim that us consider to be mainstream Yiddishkeit.
P.S. if you’re saying the the age of “acharonim” ends with the Taz, you’re talking about an “era” of at most 100 years. Do you realize how ridiculous that is, or are you just that brainwashed?
edited
@ SL
“I think the thread had potential for actual discussion…”
+1
“This, unfortunately destroys the credibility of the valid points that are presented and the discussion that could have been”
It still can be. Lets just (try) to tune out the static
This could get interesting…
So far CS brought a Chinuch and a Rambam.
Then
@ Millhouse
“The answer is that the shita is correct, but they picked the wrong rebbe. That’s all. How should they have known he was the wrong rebbe? Not from any one incident, but over time they could have realized that something is very wrong.”@ CS “Also as Torah yidden we are expected to follow our Rebbe without question, but the same Torah mandates the Rebbe to have sources for his Torah and not to make up whatever he wishes.”
Please unpack that a little more. How could they have realized that something is very wrong? Doesn’t following the Rebbe without question include emuna that he has sources for his Torah and isn’t making things up?
“But, which acharonim do you think Chabad learns from outside of Lubavitch? When they say they’re learning Shulchan Aruch, they actually mean Shulchan Aruch HaRav. If you read into Milhouse’s comment, you can see that they don’t learn the classic halachic meforshim, which were all written on the real Shulchan Aruch.”
Shows how little you know about Chabad… Obviously you don’t even know which parts are missing from Shulchan Aruch HoRav.
Would you like to test any Lubavitch Bochur after receiving Smicha on Yore Deah? At minimum, we learn Mechaber, Rema, Shach and Taz. I learned most Pri Megadims, many Reb Akiva Eigers, and lots of Gilyon Maharsha and Imrei Binah.
Neville, can you tell me what are the שבעה טעמי הדחה קמייתא?
Do we say אין בישול אחר בישול בבשר בחלב?
What are the two reasons from איסור דבוק?What absolute garbage and slander you talk without even knowing the facts. Do you know how much שיעורי רבי שמואל and חידושי רבי נחום we learned in Zal??
Now do you know why so many Lubavitchers are so wary (to put it mildly) of Litvaks??
Chabad is not a cult. It may be a new religion, but a cult it is not. Most Chabadniks are independant thinkers and the Rebbe does not control every aspect of their life (at least not by force.)
And the reason that Lubavitch (as well some other chassidim) do not learn Chayai Odom is because of the author’s role in the Misnaged movement. (Well, it’s a bit more complicated than that, but no need to speak of that now and here.) The Chassidus I belong to doesn’t learn it either, but we DO learn Chochmas Odom on Hilchos Availus and the like, where there is no other sefer that handles the Halachos as understandably. (I believe there is no Shulchan Aruch HaRav on that either.)
@Neville,
I’m waiting for an answer to my questions, and an apology. If you can answer the questions, perhaps I’ll consider giving you Semicha. (Yore Yore, Yadin Yadin will have to be more thorough:))What a dumb OP.
Lev Tahor members have noses. So do yeshiva bochurim.
Therefore, yeshivos are cults.
Makes sense? That’s basically the same logic pattern.
Those who take the OP as an anti Lubavich rant (which it obviously is, based on the title) seem to missing that it it’s actually a rant against all (perhaps just most) chassidus – “many other frum cults”.
Any legitimate taynas against the way Lubavich has mishandled the loss of their Rebbe, and even the way he was treated when he was alive, is lost in the over the top, ridiculous comparison to Lev Tahor, and the inclusion of “many other frum cults”.
Chabad bochurim learn all the same Achronim that everyone else does. Only yesterday I saw on a desk in a Chabad Yeshiva – Shiurei R’ Asher Arieli on Pesachim, and the owner a Chabad yungerman had gone through it and written notes on it. (As an aside Chayei Odom and Chosmas Adam is quoted many times by the Tzemach Tzedek .) The Likutei Sichos of the Rebbe ZY”A quotes from a very large range of Achronim including contemporary poskim .
Now when it comes to chassidus/hashkofo the typical Chabadnik simply has such a huge body of Chabad chassidus that it is natural for him to stick to that exclusively. The broader Chabadniks will have also looked at other sefrei chassidus , R’ Tzadok, Sefas Emes, etc. They usually have not looked at the seforim of the baalei mussar because they simply do not like their style.
In fact, as someone who has learned many years in Litvishe Yeshivos, I found that most of the bochurim or avreichim were much narrower than the typical Chabad bochur. This was especially so when it came to Hashkafa but even in regular learning only the Yeshivishe acharonim were used.Np:
“Please unpack that a little more. How could they have realized that something is very wrong?”
The rest of his post details that (aside from the mind control drugs etc)
“Doesn’t following the Rebbe without question include emuna that he has sources for his Torah and isn’t making things up?”
Nope that would make a sham of the system. Because every wanna be charasmatic leader could just demand alleigance and then make up whatever he wants and no one will be able to call boo. The way Torah has always been is that the Torah leader sources himself in Torah which in turn sources itself etc all the way back to Moshe Rabbeinu. He clarifies what his bases are and what his own chiddushim are based on those sources. But everything traces back. Now if every other Torah leader says his chiddushim are migale panim baTorah shelo kahalacha, then that clues his own followers in that something is wrong…
And yah I know you’re (as in the collective you) are
going to jump on that. Just remember there’s also shivim panim laTorah and there’s a difference between going against the letter or spirit of Torah (such as women reading from the Torah etc) and something that is merely an unconventional or unusual position to take, a Daas yochid.Another indicator is that when borderline chiddushim lead
to outright actions against Torah, as a natural progression of the whole, (as we have seen with the OO and now Lev Tahor in contemporary times) it shows that the questionable original chiddushim were wrong. The opposite is true as well. If the movement continues along the Torah path and grows, you see the truth of the chiddushim. Only the paths and Jews that have stayed true to Torah lasted…“Those who take the OP as an anti Lubavich rant (which it obviously is, based on the title) seem to missing that it it’s actually a rant against all (perhaps just most) chassidus”
No it’s not. He has specified on the other thread. It doesn’t seem to be against all Chassidim.
“over the top, ridiculous comparison to Lev Tahor”
How so? Because Chabad is big? Because they have a lot of people and we’ve been forced to be sensitive and pretend to hold of their legitimacy?
These people come across as programmed. You seemed to believe so yourself on other threads. Why suddenly the need to bash someone else who points it out? I don’t agree with this belittling of an ally in order to appear objective or something. Comparing Chabad’s programmed herd mentality to anti-vaxxers = good; comparing their programmed herd mentality to that of Lev Tahor = bad. It’s hypocrisy.Nice to see a substantive thread with varied posters saying sensible toichen things.
No it’s not. He has specified on the other thread. It doesn’t seem to be against all Chassidim.
“many other frum cults”
How so? Because Chabad is big?
No, because it’s not a cult.
we’ve been forced to be sensitive and pretend to hold of their legitimacy?Not I.
These people come across as programmed. You seemed to believe so yourself on other threads.
Illogical, yes. I don’t know if that’s the same as saying “programmed” but either way, being wrong or even illogical isn’t synonymous with being a cult.
It’s not hypocrisy to take the middle ground. Chabad meshichism is wrong, but not an evil cult.
Haga atzm’cha. If you agree with my Chabad meshichists/ anti vaxxers comparison, and the Chassidim (or Chabad if you insist on ignoring the obvious)/ Lev Tahor comparison, then are you equating anti-vaxxers with Lev Tahor?
It’s just too bad that all the real Lubavitchers aren’t here to defend themselves, since they don’t have smartphones (nor internet, the majority of them), and those that do certainly don’t use them to browse such nonsensical forums as this one…
The real Lubavitchers are busy discussing Tosfos and what the Maharsha is mechadesh in the sugiya etc etc…
So a few silly people who call themselves Lubavitcher are attempting to defend a movement they themselves hardly belong to, and the rest of you are using their fabricated nonsense as sort of ground for your spewing of hate against a movement you are hardly truly familiar with?!
Case in point: would the Lubavitchers here tell me the difference between Nacha yud daled and Nacha caf hei?
That one was easy… How about the vort of Pada Beshalom chaf vav?
Which is higher, David Avdi, or Yom Hasheini?
For the non Lubavitchers, I can personally meet you up with as many Lubavitchers as you have acquaintances who can teach you a thing or two on Torah learning, some of whom are baki in Gemara-Rashi-Tosfos by heart (literally you can give them a page number and they’ll explain the Tosfos in great depth as though they had just come out of a shiyur), Beis Yosef, Taz, Magen Avraham, Shulchan Aruch (again I emphasise, by heart), and THEN Shulchan Aruch HaRav.
Yes, some I know are baki in Mishna Brura as well, and I know of some who became rabbis of Sfardi shuls, so they began learning R’ Ovadya’s work as well.
And so on and so on…. Go look for those who represent Lubavitch/Chabad not by arguing childishly online, but who are so busy in either shlichus or Torah study that they have no time nor any good reason to do otherwise.
Neville C, as far as I know and was always taught, the era of acharonim ends somewhere around 1800. I’ve never heard 19th century authors referred to as acharonim.
I did not write or imply that nobody after Shach & Taz is studied in Lubav. I don’t know how you jumped to that conclusion. But Lubav tradition is that <i>all</i> the generally accepted seforim until Shach & Taz were written with ruach hakodesh; after that there started appearing seforim that were written without it and yet hashgocha protis did not prevent them from becoming popular.
I wrote that the earliest sefer “not held of” in Lubav is Chayei Odom; surely the obvious implication is that there are no earlier seforim which have that status. I don’t know whether the Mogen Avrohom or the Pri Megodim were written with ruach hakodesh, but I do know that both are standard fare in Lubavitch.
NP, you ask how one knows if one has picked the wrong rebbe. Let me ask you how you know when you have boarded the wrong plane, or taken the wrong road. At first you don’t know. It may take some time before you notice that you don’t seem to be where you thought you should be, and you start to wonder a little, to look around you, to try to pick out landmarks, and figure out what is wrong. Eventually you realize what is wrong and you get off at the next opportunity and figure out how to get from where you are to where you thought you were going. But one sign is that, at least according to reports, and contra Neville, they <i>didn’t</i> learn Rashi, or even chumash. That ought to have tipped people off.
Sechel – “Now do you know why so many Lubavitchers are so wary (to put it mildly) of Litvaks??”
with this stupid comment (all litvaks, huh?) you just proved that you are no better nor different.
separately from that, after your comments on this thread (as opposed to the one way back) I am willing to accept that there may be a whole different breed (not condescending, just can’t think of a different word) of chabadniks then those who fill our worlds (and I do mean fill). I still am far from impressed by the full-of-yourself attitude that keeps coming up as in your above comment, Yseigals post and so many others. Even the rude posters here are complaining about shittas that Chabad holds, not sitting and talking about how much better we are than you or anyone else. I do not believe that level of gaava can exist in anyone who is close to Hashem or behaving L’shem Shamayim.
No person is perfect, no family is perfect, no community is perfect.
Guessing and speaking is not perfect, it is lashon hara.
Some people need reminding that respect and civility are still valued and required midos.
Wholesale virulent unrelenting condemnation of the L T community by Jews shows that anti-antisemitism has infiltrated the”chosen”.“with this stupid comment (all litvaks, huh?) you just proved that you are no better nor different.”
I stand by that. I never said all Litvaks or all Lubavitchers, but you can definitely explain much of the animosity when you realize that many Litvaks truly believe we don’t learn any Torah besides for Chasidus and Shulchan Aruch HaRav. Neville didn’t even bother checking out the facts before saying something as crazy as that. Also, Neville (As of time of writing) still hasn’t answered my questions to show that he learns Shulchan Aruch as well.
Ready now, what would Lev Tahor have to do in order for it not to be lashon hara?
What else is new? Another ridiculous Anti Chabad thread..
The very comparison is just absurd. Lev Toah’s very foundation is just all based on one individuals ideology, one who had no status of anything, he was not a Talmud Chacham nor a baal madregah, Kabalist etc. one with zero credentials other than some charisma, an extremist and, the ability to brainwash the weak and ignorant..
Chabad, whether you agree or not, is based on a Mesorah from the Ba’al haTanya, including the concept of deveykus and ‘bitul’ to the Rebbe..
Yseig,
“of whom are baki in Gemara-Rashi-Tosfos by heart (literally you can give them a page number and they’ll explain the Tosfos in great depth as though they had just come out of a shiyur),
Please do not over rate it.
While you might have met one that had known the few places that you had asked him. . There are only a few in the entire torah world that truly fit the description. Rav Hirshprung ZL was one that comes to mind..@ CS
“Now if every other Torah leader says his chiddushim are migale panim baTorah shelo kahalacha, then that clues his own followers in that something is wrong…And yah I know you’re (as in the collective you) are going to jump on that.”
On the contrary, I for one, think that is an excellent answer. Definitely in the right ballpark.
It’s just that you put in two qualifications that sorta leave an eye of the needle opening big enough for an elephant to fit through
Qualification 1: “EVERY other Torah leader”
1) Avi Weiss is still a card carrying member of the RCA
2) Even with Lev Tahor, its not like the Gedolim all got together and issued a public joint statement regarding them. Worse then that, there was a frum publication with a Rabbinical Advisory Board that ran an article supporting them.Qualification 2:
“there’s also shivim panim laTorah and there’s a difference between going against the letter or spirit of Torah (such as women reading from the Torah etc) and something that is merely an unconventional or unusual position to take.Next
“Another indicator is that when borderline chiddushim lead to outright actions against Torah, as a natural progression of the whole, (as we have seen with the OO and now Lev Tahor in contemporary times) it shows that the questionable original chiddushim were wrong.
This would not work as an indicator because the people in the group won’t see it as being against the Torah. That is also the problem with the 2nd qualification above.
I would also suggest that it is appropriate to ask how the Gedolim regard the leader and his followers. I think one would be hard pressed to find Gedolim who would give the above individuals the time of day.
I’ve never heard a Rabbi tell someone to abuse their children, marry people who are not old enough to really consent to marriage, not talk to their spouse for 30 days, and if they made a mistake, to start the 30 days all over again…
Hmmm, shall I point out more differences?
Any Rabbi who tells them to put their life or others in endanger or do something terribly assur is not a Rabbi.I don’t know who you follow but I don’t follow “blindly”. My Rabbi explains a lot of his decisions to me and a lot of the psakim he comes about to is only after we have had a discussion and he has heard my thought and feelings and the situation. If afterwards I still feel something was misunderstood or not right, I always feel comfortable to call him back to re-discuss something or clarify.
@ Gaon
“The very comparison is just absurd…Chabad, whether you agree or not, is based on a Mesorah from the Ba’al haTanya”
Maybe the Chabbad that SH is referring to. But it seems to me that the chabbad (or lack thereof) of TamimTihiyu has more in common with neo christianity. The fact that it claims a basis in Mesorah / Chassidus doesn’t make it so any more the Helbrans making the same claim. Would you also claim that NK is based on Mesorah from the Satmar Rebbe? Shall Gehazi claim Mesorah from Elisha and Yashka Mesorah from Shimon HaPikuli?
“Then are you equating anti-vaxxers with Lev Tahor?”
I wouldn’t have a problem making that comparison, yes. I’ve already called the anti-vaxxers a cult on another thread, so I’m way ahead of you on that. The main difference here is that the anti-vaxxers don’t seem to have a central authority like Lev Tahor and Chabad. It’s not like you were saying Chabad was identical to anti-vaxxers on the other thread, you were just pointing out a striking similarity, same thing here. He’s pointing out that they’re both personality cults, not evaluating/comparing levels of “evil.”
On the other thread he mentions Rabbi Berland’s followers as another example. There is no weight to the claim that he’s speaking of all Chassidim. The fact that he worded in the plural instead of just making a direct analogy to Chabad, I believe, had more to do with being tactful/getting through moderation than with making a blanket accusation.
“Neville C, as far as I know and was always taught, the era of acharonim ends somewhere around 1800. I’ve never heard 19th century authors referred to as acharonim.”
This is not a universal shittah by any means. I’m not sure if any non-Lubavitchers hold of it, but I have never heard of anyone (until you right now) having such a thing as “post-acharonim.” The date cut-off I guess I misunderstood.
“At first you don’t know. It may take some time before you notice that you don’t seem to be where you thought you should be, and you start to wonder a little, to look around you, to try to pick out landmarks, and figure out what is wrong.”
This can be prevented by redefining the entire surrounding world for followers such that it fits the agenda. For examples:
Everyone who kept the old mesora and didn’t change to our’s is the opposition (misnagdim), not sleeping in the sukkah isn’t a heter it’s a chumrah, missing zman hatefilla isn’t a heter it’s a chumrah, everything written after 1800 other than our Rebbe’s works aren’t held of, eating before davening isn’t assur it’s a chumrah, etc.If somebody had never been to LA before, and they landed in Denver, they might be convinced that it’s LA if everyone told them so. How would they know better? Same here. Baalei Teshuvah have no way of knowing that what they’re being indoctrinated into isn’t yiddishkeit. That’s how the system is so frighteningly successful.
Np
“Maybe the Chabbad that SH is referring to. But it seems to me that the chabbad (or lack thereof) of TamimTihiyu has more in common with neo christianity. The fact that it claims a basis in Mesorah / Chassidus doesn’t make it so any more the Helbrans making the same claim. Would you also claim that NK is based on Mesorah from the Satmar Rebbe?”I don’t know what you mean by the Chabad of TT as he does seem to be a troll coming on to rile people up. But if you also meant mainstream Chabad ie quiet meshichists, that would be incorrect.
I guess some people have the impression that the meshichist thing is something some crazy chassidim have run off with and the Rabbonim etc just turn a blind eye to it for whatever reason. And I may have contributed to that assumption unwittingly. So I want to correct it.
I have a relative who wasn’t sure where he should stand on the whole “do we still consider the Rebbe to be moshiach after gimmel tammuz etc ” thing. He personally leaned more to the no side.
So like everything else in life he decided to ask his Rav. He specifically chose a Rav and Dayan who is known to be very mainstream and non extreme at all, very balanced, very knowledgeable and highly respected. He asked him what he should hold for himself and his family..the Rav told him we hold that the Rebbe is moshiach. (He also advised him not to say yechi.)
Just an anecdote of what goes on all the time. Mainstream Chabad are that way because of their Daas Torah who know a lot more of the sources involved than me and you. It’s not like they do it without Daas Torah. And yes there are Rabbonim who hold the other way, like sechels. And that’s why unlike NK quiet meshichists are not condemned by Chabad unlike NK is by the Satmar Rebbeim.
Np
“It’s just that you put in two qualifications that sorta leave an eye of the needle opening big enough for an elephant to fit throughQualification 1: “EVERY other Torah leader”
1) Avi Weiss is still a card carrying member of the RCA
2) Even with Lev Tahor, its not like the Gedolim all got together and issued a public joint statement regarding them. Worse then that, there was a frum publication with a Rabbinical Advisory Board that ran an article supporting them.Qualification 2:
“there’s also shivim panim laTorah and there’s a difference between going against the letter or spirit of Torah (such as women reading from the Torah etc) and something that is merely an unconventional or unusual position to take.Next
“Another indicator is that when borderline chiddushim lead to outright actions against Torah, as a natural progression of the whole, (as we have seen with the OO and now Lev Tahor in contemporary times) it shows that the questionable original chiddushim were wrong.
This would not work as an indicator because the people in the group won’t see it as being against the Torah. That is also the problem with the 2nd qualification above.
I would also suggest that it is appropriate to ask how the Gedolim regard the leader and his followers. I think one would be hard pressed to find Gedolim who would give the above individuals the time of day.”
Np its an overall picture like milhouse said. I was giving some examples. Btw this is the same concept as smicha where you have a mesora all the way back.
As far as the followers seeing no problem with anything against halacha because they think it’s fine, no I think any normal non drugged Torah Jew would fast realize. Because what it could down to is is there a one exception to the norm? Or is it an overall pattern?
For example: a friend of mine told me how in Satmar (where she grew up) they’re disencouraged from asking any questions. Now normally that would be cause for concern, but since in every other way they are frum yidden etc, its just their thing.
Vs the OO where if it would have stopped at having separate women minyanim where they read from the Torah, it could have been just their thing maybe, but now we see there’s a push against mesora in general, like siding with toeva etc and its looking more and more like conservative.
So bottom line whose worse the lev tumah cult or the naturei Karta cult? What is your opinion?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.