Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
sechel: Arso being mekarev yidden. See keser shem tov, see seforim hakdoahim – full of it.
Can you supply some quotes, please?
And according to you it’s new, so…. Internet it also new, shaitels are also new, yeshiva movement is also new, brisker derech halimud is also new
My problem was never that it’s new. Rather, my problem is your claim that this is the correct way of acting now, and that it’s based on Chazal, Poskim and Chassidus. So my question stands: if that is the case, why was it not done before the advent of mivtzoim?
now that you know that when you go to your relatives you may see something not tznius, did you stop going?
You don’t read carefully, and/or pay attention to what others say, do you? BH my Lubavich relatives are basically tzniusdik in dress, although they are lacking in other areas of tznius (e.g. gender mixing), and I never even insinuated that the terrible lack of tznius that I have witnessed be’oness was caused by them. It was other fully-committed sheitel wearing Lubavichers who caused shock when I inadvertently came across them.
Reb yeruchem from the mir wrote a letter in support [or mivtza tefillin].
I see now that the Lubavicher rebbe is not the only one who cheated the Mal’ach Hamoves! According to all known sources, Reb Yeruchem of Mir was niftar in 5696 (1936), but if he wrote a letter supporting mivtza tefillin, which began over 30 years later, then obviously he didn’t die either.
Somehow ponovitch and satmer had success thru their massive advertising campaigns to convince dumb people who are too stupid to research facts, that all the gedolim were always against chabad or at least since the rebbe or the frierdiker rebbe.
That’s fresh! The biggest advertiser and propagandist in the (so-called) frum world is Lubavich, and you’re blaming others for advertising. I don’t know about Satmar, but I have never heard of any advertising done by Ponevich.
Also, don’t fool yourself. Nearly all the gedolim were against Lubavich in their ‘push’ for Mashiach (started by the Rayatz) and many of Lubavich’s other aspects. Just that for a number of reasons they decided not to voice their opposition publicly outside their own circles.
Sechel: how you you know where the shmiras enayim is better or worse?
Shmiras einayim is ALWAYS better where women are tzniusdik as opposed to where they aren’t. There’s no way out of that, regardless of whatever you’ll answer about learning chassidus and davening.
And there’s another issue of tznius that, as far as I can recall, hasn’t been mentioned at all. In which other frum communities do you find teenage and adult men walking around wearing shorts and flip-flops? Of course, this is accompanied by full beards and tzitzis hanging loose. After all, we are Lubavichers, aren’t we? And I’m not talking about BTs or people going OTD. I’m talking about regular Lubavichers who don’t care about tznius as it applies to men. I remember seeing a clip of Rabbi Paltiel decrying the fact that Lubavichers don’t all wear suits, hats and jackets. Shorts and flip-flops?! Mahn dechar shmeihu?
And as mentioned before anyone who doesn’t keep all the “takanos” of the yeshivish rabbonim, is modern, so if you want, you can say the same thing in chabad. Anyone who doesn’t keep the letters of the badatz of crown heights or eretz yisroel (which includes strict guidelines on tznius) call them modern! Issue solved? Now your happy.
Not at all happy, and for at least two reasons:
1. Many/most of these families where the women don’t care about tznius consider themselves fully-committed Lubavichers, and no one says otherwise.
2. Some of these women are shluchos, and thus OFFICIALLY represent Lubavich.sechel: The Baal shem tov himself traveled to be mikarev Jews, and sent shluchim, so did all the rebbes. If anything how it’s only chabad, many yrs ago it was every rebbe going around himself and sending shluchim to be mikarev Jews. It was maybe a bit different cuz most Jews in those times were just simple and ignorent and needed chizuk, to be taught what to do, but even then they deal with people totally off as seen in all the seforim.
They most certainly did not travel to non-frum Yidden to be mekarev them because the concept of ‘non-frum Yidden’ had not really come about at the time. As you yourself say, they traveled in their areas to encourage people who were erlich and yirei Shomayim, but who needed chizuk. Yes, there is the occasional story of meeting meshumadim and the like – there is a famous story of the Besh”t and the bishop – but those incidents were to save Yidden, not merely to be mekarev the meshumad himself.
In truth, I don’t know the extent of kol Yisrael areivim, which is why I did not bring any argument to indicate that we are not responsible for all the Yidden who don’t put on tefillin. But the fact remains, that it was never done in the past in any community, so the rule of kol Yisrael areivim must not apply to that type of activity. I don’t know why, but it seems very clear to me that that is the case.
sechel: in alot of communitys chabad and I think litvaks too, shmiras enayim was not spoken about much in public. One of the reasons for this is and stated in Zohar and brought in likutai Torah, is that a person looks at women when he’s empty of a connection to hashem, so we focus on davening and that takes care of the issue.
“And that takes care of the issue”?! Really?! Had you said that it MIGHT take care of the issue, ok, but it doesn’t. The language and behavior of Lubavich men and bochurim in matters of tznius is on average far far worse than it is in other kreizen. Yes, I know, there are many fine Lubavicher who won’t foul their mouths and who try to keep a decent level of separation of the genders etc, but the average bochur and yungerman…?! So don’t mention shmiras einayim and just keep talkeing about davening. That takes care of it.
sechel, I never suggested that a non-tznius woman should be thrown out of the community. What I would like to see, however, is that there is a generally accepted attitude in Crown Heights, and other Lubavich communities, that non-tznius is TOTALLY unacceptable.
If it would be the BTs who were the only ones who were not tzniusdik, I could understand, but don’t fool yourself, it isn’t! I have lived in areas with a large Lubavich presence – and as I have mentioned many times, I have close relatives who are Lubavich – and what I have literally seen b’oness with my own eyes has at times shocked me. And I’m referring to women who are makpid to wear sheitels in public because that’s what the LR wanted. (I don’t want to elaborate further, or even go there in my mind, because you’re not allowed to remember those sights!)
If these women weren’t stam ‘accepted’ the way they are, but they were repeatedly approached and told that their mode of dress is unconsionable, and that it would be better if they stayed at home, perhaps it would help. Ah, but in Lubavich we let everyone do as they want on their own level… and that’s why we have so much attrition (which we constantly deny, but which everyone else knows about).
sechel: Arso and avira, maybe you guys should write a Sefer about what’s alluring and what’s not
I don’t know about Avira, but I won’t write a sefer on it because, as you pointed out the other day, no one will accept any sefer written by me because of what I post here!
At any rate, there are two points to address, at least, as far as I am concerned:
1. There is a distinct lack of tznius in Lubavich (of course, not c”v everyone, but the younger the generation the worse it seems) in areas that are clearly delineated in Shulchan Aruch. So no other sefer is needed.
2. There are indeed seforim that deal with what is considered ‘alluring’, e.g. lace sheitels, and I BH don’t need to start investigating that topic.sechel, we’ve dealt with the 7 mitzvos topic at length in the past. The Rambam does NOT say that we have to teach goyim the 7 mitvos. He writes that Hashem told Moshe Rabbeinu to ‘force’ all of non-Jewish humanity to keep the mitvos that Bnei Noach were commanded, and that if they don’t they are to be executed! So all the meforshim agree that it doesn’t apply to times when the goyim are not under the control of Bnei Yisroel. Furthermore, there are criteria that must be met in order for the non-Jew to be considered adhering to the mitvos of Bnei Noach, and merely doing it out of morality is meaningless. As I wrote, we have discussed this at length in the past.
As Kol Yisrael areivim, if it means that we have to go out and get non-frum people to put on tefillin etc, why did not of the preceding Lubavicher Rebbes tell t cheir hassidim to do so? And why is tefillin more important than any other mitzvah? Why not informing people that they are not allowed to have tattoos, or any other of the many mitzvos that they unfortunately do not fulfill?
yb, there should be some prize for you posting post no. 770.
CS: The Rebbe never meant it doesn’t make sense period.
I believe that is indeed what he said. Can you please find the quote?
I meant that in lubavitch there is a systematic path of avoda one can take from the lowest point to an endless height with role models along the way. That’s what Chabad is about.
You are very blinkered. That is what the entire world is about, and Yidden have many paths to rise ‘to the Heavens’ by looking up to and emulating those who are on higher levels than they themselves are. But that doesn’t excuse a community not objecting to the many women who are publicly not tzniusdik, and who are thereby machshil others. I’m not talking about yelling at them or anything like that. But the objections should be strong enough that they feel uncomfortable dressing improperly in public.
CS, you asked how we can use the concept of “even if he tells you right is left etc.” in regards to our Rebbes even though it clearly refers only to the Sanhedrin. The answer is that it is used ‘haskafically’ in regards to trusting in our Tzaddikim and following what they say even if it goes against our own personal understanding. It cannot, however, be taken literally.
We are responsible for goyim too (as long as we don’t need to be moser Nefesh etc). That’s what our obligation of teaching the 7 mitzvos bnei noach is about. 1 of them is about belief in Hashem.
No we are NOT responsible for goyim! כל ישראל ערבים זה בזה applies ONLY to Yidden.
Look in my original post I said someone who is studying to be a giyores. She’s been on that path for a while. I wouldn’t call her a shikse- rather a potential giyores. And the fact she senses this, in addition to her commitment to this path so far- to me indicates a Jewish Neshama.
I would definitely call her a shikse (probably not to her face so as not to insult her) because she is! Would you let her touch your wine? Would you eat something she cooked? Is she allowed to keep Shabbos? The answer to each of the above, I’m sure you’d agree, is ‘no’. So she does not have a Jewish Neshama at all, and she is still a shikse until after giyur, albeit probably one of the chassidei (chassidos?) umos ha’olam.
And the fact that her father is Jewish makes no difference in halachah.
yb: I personally know many Orthodox Rabanim who would accept your sefer . After reading your comments on this thread.
Thanks for the compliment. I’ll make sure to send you an autographed complimentary copy.
the moon is a banana
A banana?! Don’t be ridiculous. Everyone knows it’s made out of green cheese.
And I don’t even understand what sechel was trying to prove. I could meet a hundred rabbonim and present them with my (as yet, and probably forever, unpublished) sefer. Would that show that they are interested in the sefer, or that I am interested in publicizing my sefer?
In reply to my objecting to the LR saying that it doesn’t make sense that Mashiach hasn’t come yet, CS wrote: I believe I answered this already. Shlomo hamelech couldn’t understand para adumah…
Please please please stop being medameh milsa lemilsa. I’ll be melamed zechus and say that as you do not have a background in Gemoro, you haven’t learned to be discerning in your comparisons.
There is NO comparison between אמרתי אחכמה והיא רחוקה ממני – I said I will understand, but it is too distant from me – which is what Shlomo Hamelech said about the Para Aduma, and saying, as the LR did, that there is NO sense to the fact that Mashiach hasn’t come. The former in admission of not understanding. The latter is saying that the RBS”O is wrong c”v as THERE IS NO SENSE to it.
within lubavitch there’s always who to look up to and where to grow ad ain sof
As there is in any community. But in other communities women who are machshil others are asked to fix themselves or leave. In Lubavich they become shluchim.
disclaimer: they are asked to fix themselves, not always to leave. But most definitely not to teach.
CS: My point was that Rashi isn’t necessarily sticking his point to just the Sanhedrin.
Rashi is explaining just the possuk, as he always does, and since the possuk is dealing only with the Sanhedrin, that is only what Rashi is referring to.
I know that chassidim – us included – use this statement in regards to our tzaddikim, but it is certainly not the simple pshat in the posuk.
I know it’sa Mitzvah for Goyim to believe in Hashem, and I’ve heard of a very respected person teaching Tanya to depressed celebrities (he asked them to start tznius clothing trends as a result.)
It’s a mitzvah for them, but not for us to teach them. And your ‘very respected person’ would not be respected by anyone who thinks straight and realises that you’re not allowed to teach Torah to goyim.
I wrote: “ You know you’re scraping the bottom of the barrel when you bring an anecdotal proof from a shikse!”
And CS replied: Aderabe- even she saw it.
There is definitely something very wrong with your hashkofos if you really mean that. I remember hearing from a Lubavicher many many years ago that if you’re not sure what to do, ask a misnaged and do the opposite. Now you’re bringing the opinion of a shikse and using it as a proof of the right hashkofo?! The opinion of a goy, regardless of how respectable and well-meaning they are, is WORTHLESS when it comes to deciding what is good in teaching or learning Torah. Can you get anyone to back you up in your view?
sechel: I argue that tznius was never a focus
I agree. Tznius was never a focus, just like breathing was never a focus. ALL Jewish women were automatically tzniusdig (as were many women in other cultures, lehavdil) so there was no need to focus on it. It was only once fashion became a focus, and when the world became more permissive Rachmono litzlon, that tznius among women started going downhill.
CS: I believe the context was how could The Rebbe say we should demand Moshiach? Point here was the chofetz chaim uses the same word- and he didn’t say ask nicely.
I don’t clearly remember what the content of the complaint was then, but my complaint was and is that the LR said that what the RBSO is doing doesn’t make any sense. The Chofetz Chaim would never have said something like that.
Many women who don’t dress tznius do it because they struggle with the image tznius clothing gives off, and feel non tznius clothing looks better on them etc. …
I am broadminded enough to accept that people struggle with any mitzvah. But I am not broadminded enough to accept that women who do not dress tzniusdik can be shluchos. Nor am I broadminded enough to accept that non-tznius is de rigueur (please add that expression to the list of those that I only use in the Coffee Room) in Lubavich circles without the Rabbonim expressly issuing statements ‘demanding’ (as strongly as demanding Mashiach) that women shouldn’t be machshil the men who are innocently walking down the same street.
Now of course, learning enough Chassidus on the topic, elevates one to a place where they feel disdainful towards non Jewish fashion, and feel that tznius is the look they are proud to wear, and the other clothing cheapens women and isn’t beautiful at all
Not from what I and others have seen from Lubavich women. Don’t forget, it’s not only areas of the body that have to be covered, it’s the mode of dress as well. This, unfortunately, is a problem in a lot of MO circles as well.
CS: My point was that the Alter Rebbe was referring to a small small sect of people, and even those don’t exist today, because the ones off, aren’t doing it because of their knowledge of Hashem and Yiddishkeit, but rather from their lack of it
Do you have a (non-Lubavich) source that makes this distinction? I know that the velt says in the name of R Chaim Brisker that nebech an apikorus is still an apikorus.
if you know aleph teach aleph
That’s a lovely concept… in theory. In practice, however, it is very dangerous! If someone only knows alef, when he/she tries to teach it to someone else, that person can very easily be influenced who has harmful hashkofos which the teacher does not necessarily know is harmful. That is clearly the reason for so many children of shluchim and other Lubavichers going OTD Rachmono litzlon. (You’re going to deny that the numbers are high, but they are certainly MUCH higher than the attrition in other groups of chareidim.)
Tznius is not its own Mitzvah doyraisa
??? Of course it is! Being machshil someone else is an issur d’Oiraisa!
“Al yemin shehu smol veal smol shehu yemin , the rashi you mentioned is speaking about sanhedrin hagadol in yerushalayim where it is indeed prohibited to argue against”
I don’t recall Rashi mentioning Sanhedrin, just quoting it in relation to our leaders. You’re welcome to correctThe passuk itself is talking about the Sanhedrin! Look it up in parshas Shoftim.
a soon to be giyores iyH who I had taught Chassidus on the basis of thinking she was Jewish, (I think I’ve heard Chassidus is ok to teach goyim too- they’re also obligated to believe in Hashem)
You THINK it’s ok? Is that mean to justify what you did, albeit unwittingly?
[the woman] told me that Chassidus had infected her so to speak- that when she is told about a mandatory class she needs to take for giyur and how it’s so amazing and deep, she’s found everything dry and basic (I’m talking hashkofa etc) after learning Chassidus
You know you’re scraping the bottom of the barrel when you bring an anecdotal proof from a shikse!
Being that that’s just #88 out of #200 complaints etc you’ll have, I don’t see the need [to provide a source]
Now that is certainly a winning reply to a challenge for you to back up some garbage you wrote!
For some reason a number of my posts – harmeless ones that would not have been edited – have been lost to the ether, and I don’t remember all I wrote. But one I do.
CS wrote: The Rebbe was quoting, in the very early years, at a small farbrengen, what a mashpia had said regarding the Chazon Ish, that even someone such as he, would be jealous in gan Eden of a little boy learning Chassidus…
This reminds me of another Chassidishe teaching that the loftiest Malach would give up everything for a single amen Yehei Shmei Rabba by a yid.(I have no idea whether or not the last statement is takke a chassidic teaching, but I’ll run with it anyway.) The two are not comparable. A Malach doesn’t have bechirah, and he is therefore perfect on his level. If he is (or in fact, can be) jealous of a Yid saying Yehei etc, it does not indicate any fault of his. The Chazon Ish, on the other hand, was a human, and if he would be jealous of something it would indicate that he did not do what he should have done, and therefore be a fault.
yankel berel, I think that we would all agree that the Baal Hatanya was great and accepted enough that if he says something, even if it seems strange to us, we can accept it as being a correct shitah, even if it is not the shitah of others.
sechel: Saying talmud torah kineged kulam dosent apply anymore is not changing any mitzvah, only talking about its level of importance. So its not a contradiction to nitzchiyus hatorah.
That is untrue! If it says in Chazal תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם then that is as everlasting as anything else. That is why I suggested that the level of talmud Torah that Chazal was talking about – which was and IS everlasting – is not today’s level. Btw it’s only a suggestion, and maybe there’s a better answer (but I have no intention of looking in a Lubavich source of less than 100 years old to find that answer).
As to the tznius issue, sorry sechel, but you are totally wrong. Tznius is one of the MOST important mitzvos for women, and everyone except for MO and Lubavich seems to agree with that. It is certainly far more important than going on mivtzoim or learning chassidus.
Thanks for the source, sechel. And that’s where he explains – at least the way I understand it – that the talmud Torah of the times of Chazal was on a completely different level because that was their main avodah. We, on the other hand, do not learn on that level, and therefore for us action – i.e. Tzedokoh – is more important.
I believe in Tanya it does indeed say that nowadays tzedokoh is more important than talmud Torah, and he explains his reasoning, but I can’t find it at the moment. Can someone please suppply an exact source?
I’m not sure why I’m going back to this. Maybe it is the connection to Purim that made me think about it last week.
CS: The Rebbe was quoting, in the very early years, at a small farbrengen, what a mashpia had said regarding the Chazon Ish, that even someone such as he, would be jealous in gan Eden of a little boy learning Chassidus (I hope I’m paraphrasing correctly.) the context was the greatness of Chassidus, not denigrating misnagdim.
. . .
This reminds me of another Chassidishe teaching that the loftiest Malach would give up everything for a single amen Yehei Shmei Rabba by a yid.(I don’t know whether that ‘teaching’ is factual, but I’ll run with it anyway.) The two are not comparable. A Malach has no bechira, so he is therefore perfect despite being willing to ‘give up everything…’. The Chazon Ish was human with a bechirah, and therefore saying that he is jealous in Gan Eden is indeed denigrating.
Now, if the Rebbe treated others outside lubavitch, disdainfully in general…
True he didn’t treat others outside Lubavich disdainfully, but he did treat other shitos disdainfully. I can’t be bothered now bringing proofs, but they are numerous.
Wow! This is a first! A Lubavicher quoting the Tifferes Yisroel! Since when do Lubavichers hold of him?
sechel: That’s called טמטום המוח
Of course it is. Anything that disagrees with your view on Lubavich is timtum hamo’ach, and mevazeh talmidei chachamim and anything else you decide. Regardless of the fact that you don’t (or can’t?) rebut logically or with Torah sources anything we say.
You are starting to get on my nerves. I’m only telling you that in case that’s what you want and I therefore want to make you happy.
sechel: A already mentioned that in Torah or it says Yaakov avinu finished avodas habirurim, that you don’t have an issue with?
Clearly your rebbe had an issue with it because he said that it makes no sense that Mashiach hasn’t come after the end of avodas habirurim. (Btw I wouldn’t mind seeing that quote from Torah Or.)
When did the rebbe prophesize about moshiach ? About what ?
You’re kidding, right? The entire time we have been told by all the Lubavichers on this thread that the LR is a novi and that he said that he is Mashiach so we HAVE to believe him. And now you’re asking where he prophesied?! Just google נבואת הרבי שהוא משיח or something similar, like I did, and you’ll find quite a bit of stuff.
What about what the rambam writes at the end of hilchos tumas tzarass about someone who talks against a Talmud chacham? Oh so you claim the rebbe wasn’t a real Talmud chacham but you are?
Was Shabsi Tzvi a talmid chochom? Do we have to know as much Torah as he does to reject him? And don’t forget that Rav Shach, lehavdil, was a talmid chochom, but that didn’t stop any Lubavicher denigrating him when he was alive. And don’t deny it because I was around then, and he was talked about as if he was the lowest of the low.
No, I am not a talmid chochom, but I am qualified to reject someone whose agenda was to aggrandize himself as a novi, Mashiach and Nassi Hador. Someone like that, regardless of how much he knows, is by definition not a talmid chochom.
I bet even you agree that no one alive today comes close to the rebbes yedias hatorah. And if you don’t agree, then Listen to more sichos.
You really are brainwashed, aren’t you? I know a number of people who are BH alive today and have more yedias Hatorah than the LR had. Furthermore, their yedias Hatorah is not crooked. For example, they know that the LR’s crazy heter of mitztaer that you can fall asleep is a reason to exempt you from sleeping in the sukkah. And that is just one example.
Finally, I WON’T beshum oifen listen to his sichos, as I find them crooked, misleading and self-aggrandizing.
sechel: I don’t know what to tell you.
Never stopped you before 😉
CS: This is where you yourself show me you have no idea of what a real Rebbe is- not something I grew up with. The Rebbe spoke with ruach hakodesh on a constant basis, and the many people impacted on a personal level can and do testify to this- and not only Lubavitchers.
So your answer to my claim that the LR was wrong and that he said something that if anyone else had said it you would call it apikorsus, is that the LR is right because he always is. You do realize, I hope, that that is not an acceptable reply to someone who doesn’t believe that the LR was a Nasi-Hador/Mashiach/Navi/infallible or a baal ruach hakodesh. It is merely saying, as you so often do, the LR is right, so there!
Btw, of course I have no idea what a real Rebbe is. If I did, I would probably be a real Rebbe. But I believe I do know WHO a real Rebbe is… and who is not.
the general context was that we need to finish up Avodas Habirurim during golus. I never saw it promise that the minute it’s finished, we enter Geula Shleima. Again I could be wrong, so I asked you to support your premise which you didn’t.
So I googled it and it came up easily… from a Lubavicher site. And there are more than just this one. (I am loath to quote a sichah, but here it is: )
וזלה”ק (בשיחת ש״פ נח, ד’ מר ־ חשון תשנ״ב – ספר השיחות תשנ״ב ע’ 65 ואילך): והדגשה יתירה בכהנ״ל – בנוגע לחשבון ־ צדק בשבת פרשת נח בשנה זו: ובהקדמה – שכיון שהעיד כ״ק מו”ח אדמו״ר נשיא דורנו שכבר סיימו כל עניני העבודה, כולל גם צחצוח הכפתורים, ועומדים מוכנים יעמדו הכן כולכם׳׳) לקבל פני משיח צדקנו, הרי, מסקנת החשבון – צדק (חשבון ־ צדק דייקא, חשבון אמיתי) שעושים בימינו אלו, היא, שתיכף ומיד ממש צריכה לבוא הגאולה האמיתית והשלמה בפועל ממש!
(My apologies if it comes out a bit garbled, but that often happens when copying from a Hebrew website into an English text. At any rate, the site is called merkazato and all you have to do is google נסתיימה עבודת הבירורים.)I’m sure he later explains it all to HIS satisfaction, but I’m not interested in his rationalizations. I’m just responding to your request for a source.
CS, in reply to two of your questions:
1. A worker does not have to DEMAND his wages in order for the employer to be over bal talin. It is enough if he asks to be paid.
2. Blatant lack of tznius is worse than many other aveiros for a number of reasons. Firstly, as I have written, it is machshil many men many times a day.
Secondly, as it is a public lack of tznius, it is befarhesia, and thus worse than an aveira done privately.
Thirdly, when a woman who knows the halachos decides to go out in public in a non-tznius manner, she is announcing that she doesn’t care about the halacha. Someone who, for example, speaks lashon hara because he is ‘attacked’ by his yetzer hara, has not planned on doing so. I would agree that if someone stands on a street corner and attempts to stop passersby and tell them lashon hara, he would be just as bad. But that is something that generally doesn’t happen.CS in reply to my challenge to present a source that other chassidim explain the passuk צדיק באמונתו יחיה to mean that they rely TOTALLY on their Rebbe without putting in their own effort:
No, its pretty well known, but I haven’t yet managed to learn all the chassidus outside of Chabad so I’d have no idea where to lookIt’s pretty well known… in Lubavich circles, because that is one of the straw men that they have created. Surely, if it’s pretty well-known you would be able to ask someone for a source.
On my end, I’ve been careful not to label specific groups or individuals, and made the examples generic.
Which, in a way, is worse, because your implication was that all other chassidim do these wrong things, which Lubavich allegedly does not do. Had you written about, say, Satmar, then it would have been lashon hara (actually motzi shem ra) just against them. The way you wrote it, however, it is against all other chassidim.
Surely you would agree that when early misnagdim talked against the ‘kass’, and they referred to all chassidim, it was worse than had they talked against only one Rebbe.
Sechel: מתנבא על משיח means saying prophesy about moshiach , does not say anything about claiming a candidate, I’m saying the same way we say a candidate, you say no. Neither are prophesy.
Are you now claiming that your rebbe did NOT claim to be misnabe about Mashiach?! Just to be clear, I didn’t quote the Sefer Chassidim in reference to you or me. I quoted it in reference to your rebbe!
I should just say “look who’s talking about shluchim am haratzim” at least those shluchim learned semicha and rambam – kol hatorah kulah.
1. Many, many, many of those who ‘learned’ semicha in Lubavich do NOT know what they officially learned, and have remained am haratzim. You can claim otherwise as many times as you want, but I grew up with Lubavichers in that category, and I have met tons of others. Nice people, usually, but am haratzim who call themselves rabbi because someone gave them semicha because they had to, as the LR said that everyone has to get semicha.
2. “Kol hatorah kulah” – really?! So why did the Baal Hatanya write a new Shulchan Aruch? I know the Rambam wrote that expression about his sefer, but clearly others – Rishonim and Acharonim – did not agree with that. Clearly even the Raavad didn’t agree, or else he wouldn’t have argued with the Rambam.I need to be careful for myself to get from a shochet a yiras shamayim
Typical Lubavich garbage. I know a number of Lubavicher shochtim very well. Some are takke yirei Shomayim, but others have less yiras Shomayim than I do… and that’s saying something! I won’t elaborate on how I know about their lack of yiras Shomayim, but suffice it to say that even Lubavichers in the community have agreed with me. Yet they still insist on eating only Lubavicher shechita despite their being different shechitos with shochtim whom even the Lubavichers consider yirei Shomayim.
I have always marveled at the way Lubavichers say, as sechel has, that all Jews are equal, and that there is no difference between a mechalel Shabbos and someone who keeps Shabbos, and the like.
And despite that, on Shabbos in Chabad houses they either use mevushal wine, or they cover the bottle in case someone who doesn’t keep Shabbos looks at it. Still, no difference between someone who keeps Shabbos or someone who doesn’t, is there?
And lets not forget how the shechita of many mumarim is kosher, yet Lubavichers only eat the shechita of other Lubavichers. (Actually, according to what we have been saying for the past months, in some cases that may indeed be shechitas mumar.)
yankel berel, I am REALLY angry at you! If you knew this quote from Sefer Chassidim why didn’t you let us know about it? 🙂
Please don’t tell me you’ve got more ammunition that you’re keeping hidden!
Avirah: My assertion that shluchim say tznius isn’t so important is based on this thread and your statements that it’s not an ikkar…
Sorry, but I don’t know why you are dealing with the assertions of shluchim. We have already learnt from CS that there is no vetting of shluchim, and they can therefore basically be am haratzim (I know a few – albeit not many – of those) and menuvalim (I know more than a few of those – seriously). So why is it surprising that they say things that we may consider apikorsus?
sechel: Don’t ask kashas on anything before you learn the whole sugya!!!
Right. And your rebbe did learn the whole sugya, and understood it all based on Torah Or and Toras Chaim. Which explains fully why he said that avodas habirurim is finished and it makes no sense that Mashiach hasn’t come.
You can’t have it both ways! Either it makes sense, and the LR simply couldn’t understand it… resulting in him being mistaken. Or it doesn’t make sense, so don’t quote me Torah Or or Toras Chaim who say, according to you, that it does.
sechel: amazing can you translate it into English or you just say mashiach and decided it refers to chabad?
All of a sudden you can’t read Hebrew?! It says that if someone is misnabe about Mashiach it shows he was dealing with kishuf, shaidim or the Shem Hameforash (when he shouldn’t have, as we see from the end of the piece) etc. Does it explicity refer to Chabad? No. Does it clearly include Chabad? Well, was not the LR “misnabe” about Mashiach.
You are misnabe about moshiach the same way we are you say he’s not the rebbe.
(And he calls himself sechel 🙁 ) Are you for real?! Someone claims nevuah to say he’s Mashiach, and others reject him, so we are all the same?!
Do you Lubavichers go through a course which teaches you how to think crookedly? And if yes, did you end up summa cum laude?
Purim was BH great! Here’s what someone showed me (as far as I know Lubavich believes in Rebbi Yehudah Hachassid):
ספר חסידים (מרגליות) סימן רו
אם תראה שמתנבא אדם על משיח דע כי היו עסקיו במעשה כשפים או במעשה שדים או במעשה שם המפורש ובשביל שהם מטריחים את המלאכים אומרים לו על משיח כדי שיתגלה לעולם (על שהטריחו את המלאכים) ולבסוף יהיה לבושת ולחרפה לכל העולם על שהטריחו המלאכים, או השדים באים ולומדים לו חשבונות וסודות לבושתו ולבושת המאמינים בדבריו.CS (to Avira but it should have been to me): Shlichus, as I’ve said, encompasses a vast number of people holding at different standards. It is not the top 10% of lubavitch. There is no background checks on someone’s standards before they are assigned, if they signed up.
If that’s true that’s absolutely terrible! No background check on standards, so a shliach can be a total am haaretz, or a menuval, and he is officially recognized by the Lubavich powers-that-be as a shaliach.
I’d never heard that before, but now I have yet another reason to think that Lubavich is rotten at the core.
Again which sefarim all discuss this? Chabad? Other? Names?
ALL seforim that deal with Avodas Habirurim explain that once it is finished Mashiach comes immediately. Even Lubavich seforim say the same. Please enlighten us by quoting a sefer that explains that there can be a delay between the two. I admit I haven’t learnt everything, but everything I have learnt points to what I wrote, and I would like to see another viewpoint… if there is one.
The Rebbe said that Avodas haBirurim is finished because he knew what he was talking about. He said at the same time that it should not make sense, that it must be that what Hashem wants of us now is to switch to the avoda of Welcoming Moshiach.
I think I get it. The LR changed the playing field because it didn’t fit in with what he – and he alone – knew. If anyone else did something like that he would be called an apikorus, but not the LR because, according to the LR himself, he knew what he was talking about. And therefore what the RBSO has done simply makes no sense. So it’s LR -1, RBSO – 0.
Do you even realize what you are saying and what you expect us to believe?
sechel: Now before attacking chabad think of these 6 things. Very simple!
I find it interesting that you were never upset about the lashon hara when CS wrote a number of times how others look at their Rebbes, how others tznius is only for show and the like. Or is that why you wrote “before attacking chabad…?
And to address the point directly, it is a mitzvah to forewarn people about individuals and movements that lead others astray, and Lubavich with their messianism, claims to prophecy and nesius are doing just that. What it says in Kesser Shem Tov is not referring to misleading people or movements. If it was Lubavich would not have been able to publish a booklet about the Tzemach Tzedek’s fight with Haskalah, as well as a lot of the stories in the Rayatz’s Memoirs.
sechel to me: its so important to keep people way from chabad, where is the MESORA for that?
Just for the record, I have never cited mesora as the reason that Lubavich is off the path. So use that argument with others, not with me.
At any rate, you don’t need a mesora to tell people to keep away from something dangerous, and if you takke learn Chofetz Chaim you’ll see that it is indeed a mitzvah to keep people away from something dangerous. For all the multitude of reasons mentioned in this and earlier threads, I believe – and others do as well – that Lubavich is dangerous when they spread their hashkafos, including Messianism, prophecy and nesius. So it is a mitzvah for me to forewarn other. There is no need for me to try to have a kol korei issued, I have a chiyuv on my own. Anyhow, most kol koreis are just ignored.
It’s not lashon hara if there is a to’eles, and there is certainly a big to’eles if it said with the intention of keeping people away from a movement that is dangerous to Torah and mitzvos. In fact, not only is it not lashon hara, it’s a mitzvah!
Of course, if we are wrong about our claims, then it’s motzi shem ra… but we’re not.
sechel: hachtarat meleh hamashiach…?
i heard there was meant to be one yud shvat 5753, is that an issue? Whats the problem? Its against halacha?One issue at least is that it would have been only one group of Yidden – let’s even exaggerate wildly and say a million strong – crowning someone Mashiach without the consent of any other group of erliche Yidden. Not Ashkenazim, not Sefardim, not Chassidim, not Litvaks.
Add to that the fact that in Shvat 5753 the LR was incapable of much movement or any speech. If you don’t think that’s an issue then I don’t know what your definition of issue is.
I wrote: In ALL the seforim avodas habirurim is what is required since sheviras hakeilim, and when that is finished Mashiach arrives IMMEDIATELY. (Surprise, surprise! You can find all this on our erstwhile friend chabadpedia.)
sechel replied: big mekubal! you see one line (not even in the source as you say from Wikipedia) and ask kashos
I don’t mind ad hominem attacks, but you missed the mark by miles here. I wrote “ALL the seforim…” and you replied that I saw one line from Wikipedia.
Suggestion: try to curb your anger when you don’t like something, and pay attention to what was said, not to what you would have liked to have been said.
And what a pity that the mods didn’t allow your Litvak jokes 🙁
Menachem quoting the Chofetz Chaim: שאם אינו תובע אין חיוב לתת את שכרו בו ביום
So I ask again. If a worker “asks” for his wages without making a fuss, is the employer not chayav to pay that day?
I still say that תבע does not mean demand in the sense the LR said it, which was – and I mentioned this problem the other day – that we have to say that it makes no sense (c”v) that Hashem has not brought Mashiach.
Avirah: We should take a vote on which of these egregious statements fits into the categories of “most dangerous,” “most out of touch ” and “most deviant from mesorah”
That would be way too hard for me to decide. I read one statement, and I think that’s disgustingly dangerous. Then I read another and I think the former is nothing compared to this. Then I reread the first…
CS: Apparently you’re ignorant of the very early disagreement between the Alter Rebbe and his peers on the meaning of צדיק באמונתו יחי׳ה.
He held that every chossid could do the work applying the tools given by The Rebbe, and they held that you had to keep up your inspiration by regular visits to the Rebbe to sustain it- ie the life comes from the Rebbe in a makkif way.<em/>
(I know I shouldn’t be so proud, but I am because I knew צדיק באמונתו יהיה was coming.)
Pray tell, what did his peers (I’m astounded that you consider any of the other talmidei Hamaggid his ‘peers’!) believe? Could it possibly be that a person can do what they want, not daven, not learn, not do anything else you have to do, and still find salvation? Isn’t that a new testament piece of garbage?
I know that Lubavich has always claimed that this was a key difference, but I have never heard any non-Lubavich source mention this. (I should be used to that by now.)
Can you give me a non-Lubavich source that tells us exactly in what way the Baal Hatanya’s colleagues differed to him regarding this passuk?
CS: You’re quoting what you don’t do. That’s not called experience.
I get the feeling that you’re not really paying attention. I’m quoting from what I and others on my side do, coupled with the results we have seen, as opposed to what others do and the unfortunate results they have to contend with.
Yes if you say it’s fine not to dress tznius because you do Chessed, you won’t get good results. But we have an entire growing community who are trained to see ourselves honestly
Honestly?! Lovely that you judge yourselves favorably. That way you will always consider your way successful no matter how many children of shluchim and others go off.
Am I the only one here who finds it frustrating to be arguing with someone who seems to be living in a virtual (un)reality?
CS: There are plenty of frum people who aren’t honest in business for example
(Where’s sechel who should be complaining that this is lashon hara?)If they have a yetzer hara, and would like to be rid of it, then they have not abandoned any mitzva, which is the terminology you used.
CS in regards to the clip of RAL Steinman getting annoyed at someone not wanting to admit certain children into their cheder: AFAIK, he said that there was one cheder for everyone in town. And this whole business of only perfect families allowing their kids to have contact was never a thing.
Right. And in Europe someone who wasn’t tzniusdik didn’t even want to send their kids to cheder. So he wasn’t talking about those types of families. He was talking about families that weren’t on a level of the “upper families”.
Just btw tznius is not an ikkar hadaas. It’s one Mitzvah, like lashon hara and all the others..
No! It’s avizraihu de’aroyos.
[The Chofetz Chaim] .. wrote that the Mitzvah of the worker getting paid on time doesn’t apply if the worker didn’t demand his wages. So we must also demand Moshiach or Hashem isn’t obligated either.
Does the worker have to DEMAND his wages, or does it suffice if he merely asks (nicely) for them?
CS: I find this funny. Where in nigle/ other kreizen do you find Avodas habirurim discussed at length that you repudiate the source it comes from?
You find it funny, but it find the above very sad. In ALL the seforim avodas habirurim is what is required since sheviras hakeilim, and when that is finished Mashiach arrives IMMEDIATELY. (Surprise, surprise! You can find all this on our erstwhile friend chabadpedia.) Yet your source – the LR, right? – says that we’ve finished avodas habirurim, and the fact that Mashiach hasn’t come yet means that Hashem is (c”v) doing something that doesn’t make sense. I suggest that it’s not c”v Hashem who doesn’t make sense. Rather it’s the one who purported that we have finished avodas habirurim!
Is it any wonder that we look at some of the statements made by the LR and are unsure whether they border on apikorsus?
CS: Ah that makes more sense. You have all kinds of rough characters in all kreizen. Just because someone is a Lubavitcher, doesn’t mean they’re Chassidish (within lubavitch) and doesn’t mean they’re living past their comfort zone. We all have bechira chofshis- lubavitch or not.
Are you intentionally missing the point? They are official shluchim, and they post pictures which, at times, have shown then doing things that are clearly against Shulchan Aruch (I’m talking about the area of tznius). What does bechira chofshis have to do with it? They should be told to stop or ‘dregistered” from Shlichus. Would you be ok with official shluchim posting pictures of themselves driving on Shabbos? Why is this any different?
<emRegarding the Nevuah point, I’ve never heard misa video shomayim or otherwise discussed by anyone in lubavitch- in either direction. I know there’s a whole section in Rambam discussing Nevuah, but I haven’t learned it in depth, nor do I know if that’s the accepted Halacha lmaase. As I’ve never heard it mentioned within lubavitch, I’m going to leave it at that.
It’s halacha lemaaseh because the Rambam writes it in Mishne Torah, just as the rules for Mashiach are halacha lemaaseh because the Rambam writes them in Mishne Torah. That was always the official Lubavich line. Oh, I forgot. We pick and choose…
Btw, I especially liked “I’m going to leave it at that.” How nice of you.