- This topic has 281 replies, 38 voices, and was last updated 2 months, 1 week ago by .
-
Posts
-
anyPotato: “I forgot to add you clearly have also not seen the Yad Ramah to kegoin Doniel… Nor even the maharsha or the arugas haboisem or the maharsham”
You are right that I had not seen the Yad Ramah, but now I have, and as far as I can tell he says exactly the same thing that Rashi did. That is, that if Mashiach is someone who died it must have been Daniel because there was no one else to compare to him.
As to the Maharsha, I certainly had seen it. He doesn’t say anything that could disagree with anything I have written.
I am having trouble figuring out where you see proofs in either of the above. I get the feeling that it’s like the old European joke proving that one has to wear a head-covering. “Vayetzei Yaakov… Now, could you imagine Yaakov goind anywhere without a covering his head?” Your ‘proofs’ are only proof if you decided on what they are going to prove before you read them.
As to the Maharsham – no, I have not seen it, and I don’t think I’ll look it up. But I have a question for you? When was the last time you, or 99% of Lubavichers, looked up a Yad Ramah or a Maharsham when you weren’t trying to prove something that it doesn’t say in Rashi or Tosfos? Would I be right in saying, never?
And that is my major complaint. You want to prove something you WANT to be the case, so you search for a (usually non-existent) proof. You are not searching for the truth, which is the way Torah-Yidden are supposed to learn Torah.
In my opinion, that is THE major problem with Chabad today.
anyPotato: “@RSo clearly you have not read his book.”
I’ve already said that I have no intention of reading any book written with an agenda that I believe is dangerous to Yidden.
“Rashi says if it’s someone from the living NOW and if it’s someone who died ALREADY it’s Doniel. Ie in the future it can be anyone that lives or dies.”
Could you please explain the logic of your “that is” (I assume that’s what your Ie means)? Where did you get that it can be anyone who has died after Daniel?
“After rebbi died Rav would likely think Rebbi could still be Moshiach.”
Now you’re telling us what Rav WOULF LIKELY HAVE THOUGHT despite there being no indication of such in the gemoro! I thought that only the Lubavicher rebbe was a novi and knew what was in people’s hearts and minds. It seems at least one of his chassidim is too.
“Again you are showing your Am Aratzus and clearly have not read the book that you are trying to trash…. Not such an intelligent position to have….”
I didn’t trash the book. I am totalling ignoring it. And once again. thanks to the mods for letting anyPotato’s amusing post through without deleting it.
@anyPotatoKugelLeft You keep telling people “read the book, read the book”. I can also write a book using Gemaras and Rishonim to say whatever I want. Point is, that no Talmid Chacham worth his salt will approve my words.
That’s what’s happening here. Mr. Lieberman wrote a book that goes against what all Gedolim, Rabbonim, Rebbes, and Talmidei Chachamim say. I will take their word against his without even glancing at what he has to say.
And that, my friend, is the final word on the subject.
“And that, my friend, is the final word on the subject.”
Hurray! OK, so, moving on. What do you guys think about Zionism?
@NevilleChaimBerlin rabid foaming at the mouth screaming shouting sitra acher ikviseh d’meshichteh rav kook rav blau gimmel shavuous apikoros fool
The BIGGEST SOURCE – IN HABADS EYES – That Mashiach is only from the live people is HABAD ITSELF . Wall to wall , pre 1996.
Since when is Habad itself , not acceptable to Habad ????
Any Answers , anyone ?????This whole thread is a reflection of modern Habads influence and brainwash .
our Greatgrandfathers & mothers were not busy with “candidates” for Mashiach . And nor should we.
Rambam wasnt busy with it . Bet Yosef was not . Rama was not . Baal HaTanya was not . and Ben Ish Chai was not either .
.
Cf Tanya ,were he says [free translation ]
.
WHERE IS THAT NEW MINHAG COMING FROM – SOMETHING OUR FOREFATHERS NEVER KNEW – TO ASK A TSADIK WHERE ONES PARNASAH IS COMING FROM ? THE TSADIK DOESNT KNOW THAT ! LIKE HE DOES NOT KNOW WHO MASHIACH IS , HE ALSO DOES NOT KNOW WHERE A MANS PARNASAH WILL COME FROM AS BOTH OF THOSE THINGS ARE ONE OF THE SEVEN THING WHICH ARE MECHUSIN MIBNE ADAM ! THE ONLY TACHLIT OF GOING TO A TSADIK IS ONLY IN ORDER TO HEAR, WHERE AND HOW THE PETITIONER CAN IMPROVE IN HIS AVODAT HASHEM …..
.
Clear from Tanyas words that all of this is mere speculation , non productive and frowned upon .
But who cares about tanya anymore …. We will cherry-pick only what suits us …..anyone who says that moshiach can not come from tthe dead, is a kofer in torah. (he’s arguing with a clear gemarah)
sechel you win the prize for Most Ridiculous Post to ever be posted in the Coffee Room!
@Rso
I take issue with what you say…
I’m not the biggest lamdan, unfortunately – I wasn’t in yeshiva long enough to reach the higher classes of limud, but quite a few of my friends, in this Lubavitch/Chabad yeshiva, are extremely well versed in Rishonim, Achronim, Ge’onim…Some of them, younger than I at the time, were well versed in several tractates, to the point that you can show them a Rashi/Tosfos and they’d instantly give you a lengthy pilpul (including chidushim by the Lubavitcher Rebbe) without so much as a minute to review the contents of the page (I have seen this several times with my own eyes, sometimes to questions I have posed to them myself). This is not to mention the ramim, whose classes would be your typical hour and a half of chakira into a Rashi, line of Gemara, Akiva Iger, or the likes.It is not very well known, I suppose, but the Lubavitcher Rebbe was adamant that Chabad yeshiva bochurim be well versed in Gemara, Halacha, etc., and that they should write chidushei Torah (to this day a booklet is printed in every Chabad yeshiva with chidushim from the students, some chidusim in Nigleh, and some in Chassidus).
So no, the issue isn’t that Chabad doesn’t learn these things. It’s that the “face of Chabad” is a bunch of simple minded children (whether adult children or physically young children is irrelevant) who give the rest of Chabad — that part of it which rarely browses the internet, like me, and which doesn’t take any interest in mindless debates regarding things which were never really emphasized by the Rebbe to the extent that these crazies make it seem — a bad name…
I give in to my curiosity once in a while and browse over these forums, with a mixture of entertainment and sadness playing a symphony within me as I read…and once in a while I make it a point to emphasize those of us who belong to a group within Chabad which does its best to stay true to the true path the Rebbe ztz”l left for us as our leader, living up to his example.
The Lubavitcher is a משיח שקר is because he doesn’t have any of the סימני משיח brought down in rambam in edition if someone who was בחזקת משיח dies he looses his חזקה and is definitely not משיח. This doesn’t have anything to do with דבי רב שילה or דניאל because no one said their בחזקת משיח all theגמ׳ said was that their ראוי להיות משיח בעתיד if theדור will be ראוי so it doesn’t matter if they have the סימנים of משיח or not and it doesn’t matter if they passed away because they were never משיח to begin with.
@5783 smart comment. Rav shach was against learning rambam for this reason, people read it, don’t learn the mekoros,and think they know everything , and can pasken
@sechel if you learned the מקורות than please explain to me how you came to the conclusion that your rebbe was בחזקת משיח which of the סימנים of the רמב״ם does he have. And if you want to say that the חזקה could continue after death then that means that theirs at least hondred of thousands of true צדיקים מזרע דוד for him to “compete” with how is he any closer than them להבדיל to being ״כופה כל ישראל לילך ״בה ולחזק בדקה and being״ לוחם מלחמות ה׳״and to being a ״מלך על ישראל״
The גמ׳ in סוכה דף נ״ב says בפירוש that once someone becomes בחזקת משיח he can’t die it’s not one אמורא it’s a תנו רבנן which means that that’s the הלכה. The רמבן in his ויכוחים brings this גמ׳ I’ll quote word for word תנו רבנן משיח בן דוד שעתיד להגלות במהרה בימינו אומר לו הקב״ה שאל ממני דבר ואתן לך אומר לפניו רבש״ע איני מבקש ממך אלא חיים אומר לו חיים עד שלא אמרת כבר התנבא עליך דויד אביך שנאמר חיים שאל ממך נתת לו וכו
Lets look at the history , the reality , the facts – The official Chabad line as publicized by their rebbe , their chozer , their rabbanim , their Mashpiim FROM THE START ,not any Harry who claims to be Chabad — Ok ?
Lets be honest without any obfuscation and changing the topic .
In the beginning , [1] the line was -Anyone who claims that Chabad claims to be messianic is a plain liar , against chasidus , mechalel shem lubavitsh etc , Only the Mitnagdim who tried to besmirch Lubavitsh said so , and it was an indication of their blind hate . Other Chasidim stuck up for Lubavitsh as the innocent victim of Hotsaat Shem Ra. All the evidence is there , in the archives of HaModia and Kfar Chabad and other newspapers of that era.
Then [2] it changed , Chabad Chassidim made a u turn , openly proclaimed their rebbe as Mashiach , but the rebbe openly criticized it . He definitely is not Mashiach . Here too, the evidence is plainly there in all the newspapers of the era . Then [3] he too followed in their u turn , openly acknowledged his own messiahship , clearly evidenced by his periodic near weekly dvar malchus dating from approx 6 months preceding his stroke in the spring of 1992 , until the stroke , also available in the archives, as well the weekly issues of the kfar chabad newspaper the official chabad public organ. . In the meantime [3A] he also proclaimed himself a navi , like chagai zecharia and malachi . Nevua ,after a hiatus of thousands of years ,has finally come back to klal yisrael. b’h. Also clearly documented in dvar malcus [parshas shoftim] . Quite a big u turn , when you compare no 1 – with no 3A. It s not finished yet , because then [3B] as Nevua [!] he proclaimed that Mashiach is here already now kipshuto and will take us bekarov out of galus , and that we are in the first generation of the geula. So as a result there was a wall to wall coallition of all official chabad mashpiiim and Rabbanim saying that [4] it is one of ikarei emuna to believe and follow a navi plus their rebbi is a navi plus he prophesied on himself that he is mashiach plus it is one of the ikarei emuna that mashiach has to finish the geula before he dies . One plus one plus one plus one – equals four . Result – it is one of the ikarei emuna that their rebbi CANNOT die before the finish of the geula . Not me , not I am saying this , This was OFFICIAL Chabad theology. Evidence is there . Its all in the archives . Read kfar Chabad weekly , sichos of r yoel kahn . Sichos and articles of mendel wechter , of r ashkenazi rav of kfar chabad [the town], signed kol koreis of virtually all rabbanim of chabad kehillot.
Then [5] the unthinkable happened . He died. The minority, including yoel kahn , stayed with their previous belief that mashiach must finish the geula before he dies [the normative Jewish belief as clearly delineated by the RMBN , Rabenu Moshe ben NACHMAN in sefer havikuach] so they jettisoned the nevua parts . They admitted in being mistaken [!] in that . Here it is not sure where exactly [in their own eyes] they went wrong .. but never mind. The majority however [6] could not bring themselves to throw the navi part out of the window , so they jettisoned the dying part . No, they proclaimed loudly, mashiach can die before he finishes the job . What previously was considered part of the ikarei emuna, is now hevel havalim , or depending on a machloket , where everyone can choose what they like , whats convenient for them .
My question is – who needs to argue against Habad Theology any more , when Habad themselves are doing such a splendid work ?
—–
Am really looking forward to a point on point , honest discussion on each of the above ‘steps’ .
Can we safely assume that in case of no [adequate] response – the Klal of Shtika KeHoda’a would apply ?To Any
If you want to limit this discussion to the question of whether Moshiach can come from the dead then I would agree that it’s possible. I would add, however, that it’s quite unlikely since the Chofetz Chaim Paskened otherwise. This said there are a couple of problems to address. First, a significant percentage of Lubavichers say that the Rebbe is Moshiach. We therefore have an intrinsic contradiction. Second, if you’ll say that those who proclaim that the Rebbe is Moshiach are wrong then you must explain why Lubavichers, including yourself, are convinced that it’s the Rebbe who will have a second coming. If neither question is answered then this thread serves no purpose.
> The final word on Moshiach from the meisim (hopefully!)
Let’s “dissect” this title. It is ambiguous. It can have a weird meaning of The final word from the meisim on Moshiach. And does hopefully mean that Moshich is hopefully dead, or that messim will hopefully speak on Moschiach, or that messim will hopefully say the final word and leave us alone after that. Totally unclear.
Now, tell me – how could a peson not being able to dissect either a frog or a sentence, suddenly be able to explain to us which Menachem will be Moschiach.
@anypotatokugelleft That’s nice. Not one gadol b’Torah outside of Chabad agrees with Mr. Lieberman’s pshat on Moshiach min hameisim. I’ll take their word over his.
To Any
I didn’t actually see the Chafetz Chaim’s Psak but I know several Lubavichers who are aware of it, you can check it out with them. On the other hand, I’m still waiting for you to explain how your landsmen can say that the Rebbe has already been anointed. Finally, a dead Jew coming back to become god/Messiah is called a second coming.
who cares who moshiach is and if he can or will come from the dead?
rabbi akiva thought bar kochva was moshiach even though rabbi akiva was a bigger talmid chacham so we dont need to feel threatened if a rebbe is moshiach and not a godol hador@bentorah32 What made Rabi Akiva realize that Bar Kochba wasn’t Moshiach? He died.
To the Yserbius123
You should be ashamed of yourself for trying to inject logic into this thread. Just kidding. But logic doesn’t work on brainwashed minds.
I found a support for my position: Rava said: When they bring a person for judgment, they will ask: (
1: “Did you deal faithfully in business?
2: Did you set aside fixed times for Torah?
3: Did you try to have children?
4: Did you anticipate the redemption…”(Shabbat 31a)in THAT order. I already started at (3), then went to (2), still struggling with (1), don’t get me distracted with (4). (there is a rebuttal here though from the Rishonim that it is ok to predict Moschiach later in history)
Yserbius123, a good point, maybe start at the Gemora about it and learn from there?
Mesorah doesn’t mean quoting one line in Gemara
Mesorah doesn’t mean quoting one line in Chazal
Mesorah doesn’t mean quoting one line from a ReshonUnfortunately, many groups take words out of context or find one line that “works” with their agenda and use it to convince others to follow a path that does not follow our Mesorah.
Unfortunately, the results are the same every time- and history repeats itself.Mesorah does mean following what the vast majority of leaders held throughout many generations.
@any potato your משיח שקר did not say the same thing as דבי ר׳ שילה he said he is בחזקת משיח even though he doesn’t have the סימנים lדבי רבי שילה didn’t say ר׳ שילה was בחזקת משיח. lמשיח could come from the dead just that if someone with a חזקת משיח dies he loses his חזקה because he wasn’t socsesfull in bringing the גאולה. Your right that חזקת משיח doesn’t include bringing the גאולה but it dos include being anointed by Hashem as the גואל ישראל and if he fails to be the גואל ישראל then he loses that status and when someone was proclaimed בחזקת משיח and he announces that he will redeem the Yiddin and then he dies to say he will come back and accomplish it means to believe in a “second coming “ by the way yoshke also didn’t acomplish קיבוץ גלויות nor did he restore the מלכות ישראל to its former stature nor did he try to so “first coming” simply means to consider yourself משיח and anointed by Hashem for the job. דרך אגב the whole thing is irrelevant because your rebbe said that he already started קיבוץ גלויות in the sicah of כ״ד אדר תשנ״ב and there’s a recording of it he also said that 770 is the בית המקדש that משיח has to build or renevate in order to be משיח וודאי so even according to what you’re saying his soposed ״חזקה״ would be בטול because he did say he started the גאולה itself which even according to your resening that would be called a second coming
To any
The Gemara uses deductive reasoning to verify what it already knows. You’re using the same approach to prove that the Rebbe is Moshiach. The difference is that in the case of the Gemara the Tannaim and Amoraim started out with the truths that were passed down by Moshe from Hashem. In your case you’re accepting hints from some Rabbi. And yes, you guys are taking a page out of the Christian playbook by citing Rashis to prove your theories. The original Christians did the same with verses.
I really don’t get it. Chabadniks quote a Gemara which says “If Mashiach were to come from the dead, it would be Daniel.”
They ignore Rashi, who says that the Gemara meant that if someone dead would have been Mashiach while living, it would have been Daniel.
So let’s assume that they’re right, and Rashi was wrong ch”v. To me, that’s the biggest proof that the rebbe is NOT Mashiach! Because the Gemara says straight out that it will be Daniel! How can you take one part of the Gemara and ignore the rest?
In any case, you can’t disregard Rashi like that, so the whole thing is a moot point anyway.To any
You put out 8 consecutive posts, but did not, in any of them, answer my question, “Why do some Lubavichers like you, believe that the Rebbe will have a second coming and become Moshiach, while others declare that he was already anointed?” The simple answer is that two sects will emerge in Chabad as what happened when the original Chritianity split into Greek and Roman Orthodoxy.
@any in any case this whole topic wether when someone who was בחזקת משיח dies he loses his חזקה or not is irrelevant because you’re rebbe was never בחזקת משיח to begin with so before we discuss wether dieng is מבטל the חזקה first prove that your rebbe ever had a חזקה
Kugel, I think you should study the New Testament, along with commentaries on it, so you could come up with differences between your belief in the Rebbe’s second coming and their belief in Jesus’s second coming.
After all, you don’t really know anything about Christianity, so how can you claim it’s wrong?To DaMoshe and 5783
Great points. Lubavichers argue their positions very well as long as no one questions them. Then they resort to their typical defenses, Sinas Chinam, Chabad bashing. I spoke to a Chabad Rabbi last night and he told me that you can’t challenge Chabad with logical arguments because the Rebbe transcended logic and natural laws.
To any
I asked you, “If you’re confident that the Rebbe will come back to life and become Moshiach, why are there other Lubavichers who are convinced that the Rebbe is already wearing that crown?” I’m reasonably sure you’re intelligent enough to understand my question, so answer or admit that you can’t. Your diversionary tactics don’t work on me.
@potato
1] You are turning yourself into a pretsel to convince us into believing mashiach comes from the dead .
.
Do you realise that it was HABAD ITSELF ,proclaiming [in the same way as you do now] to all and sundry that mashiach comes only from the alive ?
.
Do you realize that the more you talk about this topic the more untrustworthy you appear ?
.
2] Criticism of habad theology is not hate ,nor sinat hinam . When will you realize that ?
Its just that.
Criticism .
Nothing more.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.