Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
CS I think that’s a wise move. You won’t convince me and many of the others that your logic isn’t flawed, and it seems quite clear to me that you won’t be convinced by us.
The only fault I find in your most recent post is that “moshiach has to come”. It’s true of course that he has to come because Hashem has promised as much, but he doesn’t “have” to come because people have decided that he does, which I believe is what you and other lubavitchers believe.
Duvidf wrote: “Until a REAL GADOL arises in Klal Yisroel ”
Once again I have to be mocheh, and I would expect others to be mocheh as well. There is more than one REAL GADOL in Klal Yisroel. There always has been and there always will be.
As “It is Time for Truth” wrote, more or less, just because the gadol doesn’t agree with you it does not mean that he is not a gadol.
CS, you asked if I am making a statement or want clarification. I would love clarification but I know I won’t get it from you. Every since a few months ago when you started that thread about Meshichists I could see that you espouse lubavitch propaganda without realizing that so much of it doesn’t make a word of sense to anyone who does not believe that everything your rebbe said is absolutely correct.
So, in a nutshell, if you can clarify without being based on sources which most of us find “questionable” (to say the least) then go ahead. Otherwise, why waste your time? We don’t believe in the distortion of the truth that you claim to be facts.
Correction to what I just posted: It isn’t more than 25 years since he died, but it IS more than 25 years since he last made any public statement, including that Mashiach will come NOW.
Zahavasdad quoting me and then adding to it:
“Over 25 years is a long time to wait for the “immediate redemption” as the Lubavitcher Rebbe used to say “now”! How much Yiddishe suffering has there been in those years?”
I really dont think people should use that argument, Jewish history has been frought with much dispare, from The crusades, to explulsions, to poverty, to discrimination to Gas Chambers. We dont live in anything like those times
Now me: That’s not the point I was making. The lubavitch rebbe said Mashiach is coming “NOW” and to keep believing that he was right more than 25 years after he died and saying that it is still “NOW” even though so many Yidden have suffered is ridiculous.
(Firstly I apologise for my double posts. Lately when I post there is nothing to indicate that it went through, and I have then been posting again using a different browser. It seems both browsers have been successful.)
CS writes: “All the above took place in 1991-1992, and the Rebbe pointed out all these as signs of the coming of the geula.”
Over 25 years is a long time to wait for the “immediate redemption” as the Lubavitcher Rebbe used to say “now”! How much Yiddishe suffering has there been in those years?
She continues: “Then the world seemed to be plunged into darkness. The darkness before dawn.From the euphoria of expecting the Geula at any moment, Chabad was greeted with gimmel Tammuz. It seems in general there is a lack of the kind of Torah leadership that existed all the years, although we have Rabbanim today, its not the same…”
That is not only poppycock but it is a terrible thing to say! Chazal tell us that HKBH “planted” tsaddikim in each generation. To make that generalisation because you are a lubavitcher and you haven’t been clever enough to appoint a successor insults the entire Torah world, its Rabbonim and its tsaddikim.
I am mocheh, and I would expect others to be mocheh too!
CS you can’t have it both ways. You can’t say that we can see from the good things in the world that Mashiach is nearly here and then say about the bad things that the night is always darkest before the dawn!
Maybe the bad things show Mashiach isn’t close by, and the good things show that we are not near the dawn c”v.
CS you can’t have it both ways. You say that the good things in the world show that Mashiach is nearly here and then you say that the night is darkest before the dawn and that therefore when things are worse it’s an indication Mashiach is nearly here!
While a lot of what CS points out is correct, it really has nothing to do with Mashiach’s times because the Rambam she quotes says explicitly that that’s the way the world will be AFTER Mashiach has arrived and the Jewish People will gather around him.
Nowhere does it indicate that even immediately prior to that stage will the world be a better place than it ever was as far as CS’s understanding is concerned.
Much of what Chabadshlucha says about our times is true, some of it not, but it is really all totally irrelevant.
The Rambam she is basing on is talking about when Moshiach has already been declared and all the Yidden have gathered to him, as he writes in Hilchos Melachim perel 12 …בימי המלך המשיח, כשתתיישב ממלכתו ויתקבצו אליו כל ישראל .
We are not at that stage, and from the Rambam there is absolutely no indication that even immediately prior to that stage the world will be a better place than it ever was.
1. Isn’t sinas chinom the purest and most upright form of hatred. I hate someone for absolutely no reason at all. No ulterior motives here. What could be better than that?
2. Surely we’re all allowed to hate those posters who have turned this thread into a serious discussion. But, according to my theory above, that’s not sinas chinom.
lesschumras, that happens to be a matter of dispute in Gemoro Sanhedrin 22a.
See Shulchan Oruch, Even Ho’ezer 126:1 where the Remo writes that Hebrew and Aramaic “were both given at Sinai, they were linguistically related, and they are like one language”.
rational jew wrote “the word “Kadosh” in general, it would seem like the a better approximate translation would be special, noble or dignified”.
How would you explain lo sihyeh kedaisha … velo yihyeh kadaish?
Takes2-2tango: Talking with a women is brought lehalochoh in the Rambam Hil. Deos 5:7
תלמיד חכם…לא יספר עם אשה בשוק ואפילו היא אשתו או אחותו או בתוEli Y: “I’m not sure we agree on some very basic foundational principles so I ask you:
1. Do you agree that a Tzaddik can operate in ways beyond what we perceive as natural laws?
2. Do you agree that the Rebbe was a Tzaddik?”
I take it you are asking me, so my answers are:
1. Yes, but this is totally irrelevant to the question of the validity of the Igros (which is what you were discussing) as who decided that it is the rebbe who is giving you the reply when you put a piece of paper with your request into the igros?
2. I would have liked to have answered yes but after reading some of the stuff quoted here in his name I’m no longer sure.
SHY: “Re, “asking Igros” I had a post about it on a previous thread, if someone can find it, thanks. In any case, many Lubavitchers are vehemently against it”
Now that is VERY interesting! I have been around Lubavitchers in business and at chabad houses for a long time and I have never heard even one of them speak against it. Could you perhaps give me some names of prominent chassidim who have opposed it vehemently?
Eli Y wrote: “According to my Rabbi, the Rebbe said at a farbregen that he cannot respond to all letters sent to him and that people should consult his letters “since he is answering them at the same time he is answering the original letter writer”. Hence, the followers of the Rebbe consider that amongst the letters he wrote are answers to their current issues.”
I can accept someone searching for the lubavitcher rebbe’s view on a question/topic, but that is nothing like writing a question, putting it in a page at random in the igros, and then getting the answer from that page.
CS: “1)I’m really not interested in how many people were for it not for it etc. because the Rebbe is known as a tzaddik gamur and never did anything against Hashem, so this must also be truth.”
This is what so many of us have been complaining about. Circular reasoning. “He said something, he must be right because he’s a tzadik gamur.”
But if it isn’t right, in this case it’s not just wrong it’s (close to) kefirah c”v, and then he isn’t a tzadik gamur.
So you can’t prove it right by saying that he said it. Lehavdil infinite havdolos (NO! I’m not comparing!) we could say that same thing about someone who claimed he was the son of … c”v. He said it and he must be right because he’s the son of … c”v.
CS: “Btw rso I find you quite ironic. First you ask me if I know of anyone else who is a tzadik gamur of Tanya, I respond no and I’d love to know of another, as there is no reason to be unique in that regard. You respond that feivel thinks his Rebbe is one, and then refuse to give his name. Do you get the irony here?”
I don’t recall asking you if you know of anyone else who is a tzaddik gamur, and if I did I certainly didn’t mean that I’d like your personal opinion on that matter. Can you show me where I asked it so that I can see what I meant by the question?
CS, I don’t want to insult you as you seem a very earnest person, but from all your posts about the greatness of your Rebbe and the mystical sense that could be felt, coupled with the fact that you were born after he passed away, I have come to the conclusion that you were educated in a way where lofty concepts that were above your intellectual age at the time were “explained” to you, you accepted them without understanding them but you thought you understood them, and that now you are repeating them here and elsewhere without realizing what they mean and what you are saying.
I think that it is not without reason that the rest of the world does not believe in the system of education where chassidus is taught to people too young to understand things on an abstract level. It is the same reason that they prohibited kabboloh being learnt by people under 40. The young mind can’t comprehend that these are concepts that are not gashmius. The result, in your case, is people feeling the spirituality of the lubavitcher rebbe, “knowing” he was a tzadik gamur of Tanya, and saying that there is nothing wrong with a human of flesh and blood being atzmus melubash.
You may not see the connection that I have made, but I do.
CS: “OK but there are also plenty of times where a yachid reveals a chiddush which is a valid path in Avodas Hashem. Shivim panim laTorah”
So why is the Torah of anyone who disagrees with Chabad, or is even not seen to be their biggest fan, e.g. the Chazon Ish, the Steipler, Rav Shach (and let’s not forget the Chofetz Chaim), rejected?
Eli Y: “The idea of a picture of the Rebbe under a pillow at the Bris does not trouble most of us at all although no-one believes that this act in itself will somehow affect the life of the child. Most would view the behavior in the same way one may put a picture of a deceased grandfather in the same position.”
I have never heard of anyone putting a picture of a relative – alive or dead – under a child’s head at a bris. And I would have the exact same objection if they did.
I believe that no one has answered my question as to where opening the igros at random originated and who said that it has any meaning at all. It certainly wasn’t the lubavitcher rebbe, so who had the authority to say that the following the answers/instructions one allegedly receives is correct according to Torah.
And please don’t compare this with stories of tzaddikim who recommended that questions be placed in seforim of earlier tzaddikim. I’ve heard all this before, and there is no comparison. In those cases there was no “reply” received from the page opened at random, and it was done as bringing the letter to a source of kedushah.
There is of course the famous Goral Hagra, but that was instituted by the Gra himself, not by someone who missed him greatly.
SHY: “connecting to a Tzadik is a way of connecting to Hashem. As Rashi says:
ולדבקה בו. אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמָר כֵּן? וַהֲלֹא אֵשׁ אוֹכְלָה הוּא? אֶלָּא הִדָּבֵק בְּתַלְמִידִים וּבַחֲכָמִים וּמַעֲלֶה אֲנִי עָלֶיךָ כְּאִלּוּ נִדְבַּקְתָּ בּוֹ”I’m pretty sure that Rashi there, as well as Chazal when they mention dibbuk chachomim, is talking about live chachomim.
samthenylic: “To make NACHAS RUACH FOR THE REBBE”. Malkizedek / Shem was blamed by Chaza”l for mentioning Avrohom Avinu’s blessing before Hashem’s, here you omit “Nachas Ruach for Hashem” completely. It is NOT the Rebbe who wants us to obey the Torah, it is the “Nosein Hatora”!”
SHY replied: “Do you ever try be a source of Nachas to your parents? I guess not.”
Parents get nachas from their children in numerous ways, and although Hashem certainly gets nachas from someone who is mechabed his parents, in line with the mitzvah of kibbud av va’eim, it is not the same type of nachas. E.g. Hashem doesn’t ever want a cup of coffee, but if I make a cup of coffee for my parents and thereby give them nachas, as a corollary I am giving nachas to Hashem for fulfilling his mitzvah.
But according to lubavitch the rebbe is atzmus melubash etc. and he has no outside desires or happiness. Therefore the only way he could possibly get nachas from someone would be if that person was simultaneously giving nachas to Hashem in the identical manner that Hashem wants it, through the fulfillment of Torah and mitzvos. So why mention nachas to the rebbe at all instead of mentioning nachas to Hashem?
CS wrote: the Rebbe made it very clear to me that both ways are acceptable””
I assume you mean via the igros as you were born after he passed away. So I have a question for you and for every lubavitch chossid on this thread: Who said that you can rely on the igros?
Obviously not the rebbe himself, so what gives whoever it was or they were to invent something so weird without any reliable source?
Neville’s response to someone criticizing me: “100% on point. I don’t think he’s being harsh at all.”
Are you sure you’re not just sticking up for me because I highly complimented your choice or name?
CS: “@rso can you give me the name of feivels Rebbe? Its good for my own knowledge to know who else is considered a tzadik gamur of the Tanya.”
It’s not a matter of who else is considered a tzadik gamur as you might very well dispute Feivel in that matter. The point is that you seem to think that only lubavitch believes as greatly in their rebbe as opposed to other chassidiim, and as anyone who hangs around with other chassidim knows that is patently untrue. And that despite that their rebbes have never said anything as outlandish as atzmus melubash, dor shvi’i etc.
“Chabad is also unique from other chassidim as we go into the reasons for this with Chabad, chochma bina and Daas, while their tzaddikim focus on the darchei HaChassidus, such as niggunim, tishen etc the emotions of Avodas Hashem. So that would make sense it could be completely out of place there.”
Can I hazard a guess that you were taught that in a lubavitcher school or heard it from a lubavicher mashpia? I have heard the above line in different formats many many times and it is just lubavitch propaganda pumping up their chassidim to believe they are better than anyone else. In simple English, the statement is absolute garbage!
Just one example: dancing around drinking vodka singing yechi is chochma bina and daas. Sitting at a tish and listening to the rebbe’s torah is just emotion.
Did you really believe absolutely everything they taught you?
CS: “He was also a tremendous gaon – in fact probably unparalleled.”
Did you learn that in school too? Sheesh! It just gets better and better!
5ish: “I don’t see the ultimate relevance of your point, but in the spirit of having passed Shabbos Mevarchim Chodesh Elul ”
Wow! Has this thread being going on that long?
Has anyone ever complimented NevilleChaimberlin for a brilliant play on words in his choice of name. Fantastic!
SHY: “I think that’s more humor than insult, but regardless, for anyone who considers me to be an Oved Avoda Zara, it’s well deserved.
כל הפוסל במומו פוסל.”So that means that if I call an idol-worshipper an oved a”z I am an oved a”z c”v?
This is addressed mainly to CS because I think she has a warped view of other chassidim, but it’s probably important for other lubavitch posters (who, according to SHY, I clearly hate):
I am not a litvishe by any stretch of the imagination, but I’d rather not talk about myself and my relationship with my Rebbe. Instead I’d rather talk about the relationship of some of my closest relatives and friends with whom I interact 365 days a (non-leap) year, and with whom I discuss many many deep topics to do with Torah and hashkofoh.
A typical exampls is, let’s call him Feivel, who is a staunch chossid of the Ploni Rebbe – no reason to mention any group in particular, and Feivel’s views are typical of his co-chassidim. I know this for a fact.
Feivel accepts every single utterance his rebbe makes as Heaven-sent and 100% correct, even if other non Ploni-chassidim may not think so. He follows what his rebbe says (as much as his yetzer horo lets him, so to speak) and he believes that his rebbe is a tzaddik gomur of Tanya. (Other chassidim, it may or may not surprise you, have also learnt Tanya, although they don’t exclusively base their views on that sefer.)
And, very importantly, his rebbe has NEVER made outlandish statements about HIS role in Hashem’s plan. The important thing in all of his rebbe’s torah is ALWAYS what Hashem wants and accepting it. He has NEVER demanded anything of Hashem – on the contrary, he ALWAYS wants to know what Hashem wants and to do just that. He has NEVER called himself a nossi – in all likelihood he has never even called himself a manhig – and he has NEVER had to justify a “remarkable” statement like being aztmus melubash etc.
I have asked Feivel if he believes his rebbe is Moshiach, and he replied that he certainly believes that his rebbe is a great enough tzaddik to be Moshiach, but that he doesn’t care if he is or isn’t because that is Hashem’s business, not his.
So I think we can surmise from the above, and it’s all 100% true, that Feivel is as strong a chossid of the Ploni Rebbe as anyone in Lubavitch is of the Lubavitch rebbe. And as I have mentioned, Feivel is typical of his group of friends.
A few days ago, in light of the thread we are on, I asked him what would happen if his Rebbe said that was atzmus melubash etc. or that his predecessor was yachol hakol, or that he “runs the world” (to quote Cunin). He replied that the first thing he would do is to make 100% sure that his rebbe actually said it. But that if he did he would be forced to leave him because that is pure “meshigass and even worse” (his terminology).
If you should venture to ask: how can a person just leave his rebbe because of something the rebbe says? The answer is that there are limits, and certain things surpass those limits.
Hashgocho protis is a wonderful thing, isn’t it? Just Friday a large choshuve group of Breslav rabbonim, including such great chassidim as Rev Yaacov Meir Shechter, came out with an issur against Berland after investigating his actions. What is a chossid of Berland to do? Should he just say, “They are wrong”? I don’t believe so. There comes a time when you have to say that something is improper and I had better leave this group and some of it’s weird ways.
SHY: “And RSO gets the “hater of the year” award, for consistently spewing venomous hate filled rhetoric.”
Are you sure I don’t come in second to you:
“Oh right, I forgot that you are the ones who calls the shots on all A”Z and Apikorsus related issues. I think I saw your sefer in the Seforim store last week, the one called “הבנת הכסיל” with the attached Kuntres “היפוכם בגולם”.”
?I apologize if what I am about to write is obvious to many but I don’t believe that it is, and I am almost certain that it is not clear to the lubavitch posters.
We all know that it is very unlikely that a poster who has a particular viewpoint will be “turned around” by anything we write, regardless of which side of the argument we are coming from. True, people who don’t know any better or have unwittingly fallen for hype may be influenced one way or the other, but there aren’t too many of those among us.
That having been said, however, there is a major mission that those of us who have been critical of lubavitch practices etc are attempting to achieve in regards to the understanding of the lubavitch posters. We are trying to convey how you have not convinced us that we can accept YOU having these beliefs.
I am not a Satmar chossid and I (based on those I rely on for Torah and hashkofo) don’t agree with a majority of their views. But I can accept that they hold those views because they follow their rebbe’s view and I admit that his views are not antithetical to Torah. They are incorrect, in my “group’s” opinion, but they are not wrong. (And if you’re going to ask, “Who cares what you think? Since when are you a rebbe?” The answer is, “I care what I think because in the end I have to decide what to accept and what not to accept.” It is always up to the individual to decide what and in whom to believe. You lubavitch chassidim have also decided that you believe in your rebbe. No one can decide that for you.)
On the other hand we, apparently quite a number of us, believe that practices and views discussed here – e.g. nossi hador, dor shvi’i, atzmus melubash beguf, pictures used at a bris etc. – are not only wrong, but that they are antithetical to the Torah, and we just won’t accept that you have some higher or better or even lesser view that we have to accept as being your right. In other words, we don’t think YOU have the right to believe them.
Therefore, by telling us that the Lubavitcher rebbe said such-and-such doesn’t solve anything, as that is the source of the problem.
I’m not trying to offend anyone, and if I did it was just because I wanted to clarify what they don’t seem to get.
Did I get the feeling of many posters right?
CS: “I encountered something along these lines when I was in eighth grade. I was a counselor together with anther girl who was the granddaughter of a Rebbe in EY. She was boasting to me how her grandfather the Rebbe had a fancy car and house.
…
She answered “it used to be like that, but now there’s been yeridas Hadoros…”At that point I understood that when I say tzadik or Rebbe, and someone else does, were not speaking the same language.”
Sad story, but your conclusion is quite radical. There have always been charlatans and semi-charlatans. To decide because of one incident that you are speaking a different language to the rest of the world is ludicrous.
I have written in the past that I travel extensively, well a lot of that travel is to E”Y and there I have come in contact with many chassidic (non-chassidic too, but that’s not relevant here) groups and even a number of rebbes. Some, in my humble (!) opinion seem to be into it for the money/kovod/numbers, but there are others who are as far away from that as I am from becoming a rebbe.
Don’t fall into the trap of assuming that you are better because of the occasional statement or action of someone who is not as cluey or straight as you. It’s a well-known trick of the yetzer horo.
“It does not seem to have been rejected. Maybe your internet connection was interrupted.”
Thanks Mods. Quite possible.
Dear Mods, any reason the following post was rejected?
CS: “BTW thanks @rso for the source of the Rebbe picture at the bris. Looks like that invites the Rebbe to attend.”
Hey! That was meant to show you that it is indeed a lubavitcher minhog and to reinforce the question as to why it is not quasi-a”z. Not to please you that I found a source! And then in your next post you write this:
“Now if the other stuff is pretty clear I’ll be happy to share some of my personal experiences with the Rebbe.”
All of us critical non-lubavitchers have been claiming the entire time that not one question has been answered in a logical non-circularly-reasoned way, and you blithely say that “the other stuff is pretty clear”!
With all respect to you who seems to actually believes all the stuff you write and quote, and who tries very hard to do so respectfully, you are presenting the problem clearer than any of us could. The brainwashing to believe the unbelievable and the unacceptable is so successful that you think that everything has been answered.
(I’m going now to second-guess CS’s or SHY’s reply: “We HAVE made everything clear, You just hate lubavitch and don’t want to accept it.” So before replying along those lines, think about it, as I would be sorely tempted to take a vote to see if anyone thinks matters have been cleared up.)
It does not seem to have been rejected. Maybe your internet connection was interrupted.
SHY on the picture at the bris: “A mashpia I asked told me that the Rebbe in fact addressed this Minhag, and said it originated after Chassidim wanted the Frierdiker Rebbe to be Sandek, but he couldn’t be present, so they placed a picture of him under the pillow.”
That perhaps explains where it comes from but not how it is acceptable. (It also seems extremely childish.)
SHY: “A prominent Lubavitcher Rov … said he wasn’t makpid on placing a picture under the pillow.”
Very Jewish of him to avoid being makpid on doing something so akin to a”z c”v.
SHY: “Regardless, I don’t know why anyone would consider it A”Z of any kind.”
How many times do we have to say this without it being rebutted?
Tashmishei kedushah are holy in and of themselves. Tashmishei mitzvah, e.g. tzitzis, are not, but they should be treated respectfully. Shirayim, a coin given out by a tzaddik (many rebbes do just that) and, to use an example Lubavitchers will surely understand, kos shel brochoh are not holy, but as they were given by a very holy Yid they can, according to the chassidic understanding (based on “nigleh” sources as well) imbue a person with holiness and yiras shomaim. One could then very well understand that the possessor of these last items would not want to mistreat them in any way.
Now… here it comes… a piece of paper that contains an image of a person is NOT holy simply because it contains his image, just as the sun is not holy even though it is a servant of Hashem. Treating an image as holy, or kissing it out of respect (I’m obviously not talking about a Yiddishe grandmother who kisses pictures of her grandchildren out of love) is close to worshipping it which would be an act of a”z c”v.
Is my/our objection clear yet?
SHY, no I didn’t read it all, but I did note that it says ראשי אלפי ישראל and תלמידי חכמים in the plural. So where does the idea of one נשיא הדור come from?
CS: “So when I was walking to school I realized why people are squirming with how we treat our Rebbe.”
Sorry but you got it totally wrong. I have no problem with chassidim being in absolute awe of their Rebbes and treating them as extremely holy men who are close to Hashem.
What I squirm about, and I believe I speak here for others as well, is that the lubavicer rebbe said fantastic (the word comes from the same root as fantasy) things about himself and his predecessor(s), with no source other than the fact that he said them, and therefore you believe it’s all true and expect us to accept that belief.
Some examples: nassi hador (which I have already noted is not used by anyone else in the Torah world and never has been in the more than the past 1000 years), seventh generation of nesi’im (that word again) of chabad having to be the generation of geulah, demanding – not requesting – the geulah, atzmus melubash beguf. And there are more.
I would have the same problem if, say, the Viznitzer rebbe came up with chiddushim like this… but he hasn’t, and no one in the frum world over the last hundreds of years has.
Sorry for rehashing something old, but CS posted a while back one proof of the lubavitcher rebbe is how all the Gedolei Yisroel from all over the world came to visit him.
This statement itself shows the extent of how things can be distorted to the extent of becoming brainwashing.
Here in the States and in E”Y it is a common occurrence for gedolim to visit each other e.g. for simchos. When American gedolim visit E”Y they visit the local gedolim as a matter of course. And the reverse is also true.
The Lubavitcher rebbe, however, never left his enclave in Brooklyn and didn’t go to anyone else. Maybe he had good reason for not going elsewhere, not my business and I don’t care. Others, on the other hand, didn’t reciprocate in kind and when they visited US gedolim they visited the lubavitcher rebbe too e.g. the Belzer Rebbe went to Skver, Bobov, Lubavitch etc.
And because of this we have some sort of proof that the lubavitcher rebbe was acknowledged as so great because all the others went to visit him!
“I have to say, even being on the evil, misnagdish, hater side myself, I don’t see why we say putting pictures in a stroller, Sphardim kissing pictures of the Baba Sali is all fine, but when you put the picture under a pillow it’s full blown avoida zara.”
I see two very different things here. Putting pictures in a stroller gives the kid something Jewish and good to look at, and it can hopefully make a good impression on him in later life.
Kissing pictures of Baba Sali sounds just as bad as putting pictures of the Lubavitcher rebbe under the baby’s head where it can’t be seen. I’ve never seen sfardim kissing pictures of the Baba Sali and I hope that they actually don’t, but I have seen pictures of the lubavitcher rebbe being put under babies’ heads at a bris.
And for your information Sechel HaYashar, I don’t know how old you are but I’m old enough to have been at many lubavitcher brissos before anybody ever thought of being a meshichist, throughout all the 80s and early 90s, and they were ALL putting pictures of the lubavitcher rebbe under the babies’ heads with the explicit claim that it is a lubavicher minhog.
“yoshev karnaim” = someone who sits among horns?!
CS thanks for all the sources you brought from the lubavitcher rebbe about the chizuk gained from pictures.
If anything you have reinforced my point. Pictures are useful for looking at, thinking about the person portrayed, and thereby becoming uplifted. This is not at all similar in any way to putting a picture somewhere where it can’t be seen and using it as something “holy” c”v.
And I find it frightening that pictures are treated like sheimos!
Sechel Hayashar: ““I’ve already said that using an image as kedushah or a segulah is bodering on a”z c”v.”
Oh right, I forgot that you are the ones who calls the shots on all A”Z and Apikorsus related issues. I think I saw your sefer in the Seforim store last week, the one called “הבנת הכסיל” with the attached Kuntres “היפוכם בגולם”.And then you wonder why we find chabad so unacceptable in so many ways! Note that NOT ONE of the objections raised so far in this thread have been answered without circular reasoning, ad hominem attacks, or are simply ignored. It’s close to a”z because it imbues a picture (aka image, תמונה, פסל, whatever) with supernatural power. But you just don’t want to get it. Everybody else here seems to understand my point. Maybe they have a counter-argument but they all understand it. You just can’t.
“You asked what his/her problem was with it and he/she is answering your question.”
Thanks for defending me, mods, but I actually enjoyed the viciousness of the attack. And btw I am definitely a “he”.
Sechel Hayashar, perhaps you haven’t heard of Chabadpedia (ברית מילה)
על יסוד הוראת הרבי באופן פרטי למספר חסידים[4], נוהגים רבים מחסידי חב”ד להניח תמונה של הרבי תחת ראש התינוק על ברכי הסנדק בשעת הברית.
And here’s footnote 4:
↑ כאשר נולד הרב יוסף יצחק ריבקין (כיום שליח הרבי לכרמיאל), ביקש אביו הרב מרדכי ריבקין מהרבי שיהיה סנדק בברית, והרבי לא נענה להזמנה אך
הורה לו לשים על ברכי הסנדק תמונה של אדמו”ר הריי”צ. ועל דרך זה אירע גם עם הרב יהושע דוברבסקי (עדותו נדפסה בשבועון בית משיח פרשת נח תשע”ב).One point which I’m not sure has been clearly addressed. My apologies if it has.
CS keeps telling us how it is a chutzpah to think of arguing with the lubavitch rebbe as he was a huge talmid chochom, as was his father in law etc.
No, I am not comparing anyone to anyone, but Shabetai Tzvi was also a “huge talmid chochom”, and Oso Ho’ish was a talmid of Rebbi Yehoshua ben Perachiah. Furthemore, Yochanon Kohein Godol eneterd the Kodesh Hakodoshim for 80 years and then became a tzedoki. Note once again, I am not comparing anyone to anyone, just making a point.
Knowing how to learn does not save someone from being slightly or even very wrong.
And I’d alos just like to point out that Rav Shach zt”l was a “huge talmid chochom” yet lubavitch and their rebbe denigrate(d) him all the time. So why is the Shneerson family the only ones who are beyond even the slightest criticism?
Re mentsh1 praising what Lubavitch does in Chabad houses worldwide –
Yes. Fantastic! To be applauded loudly, and I do. But, as DaasYochid (I don’t really think you’re just a daas yochid here) points out, that has nothing to do with the discussion.
It was the last Lubavitcher rebbe who started the Chabad house movement and he deserves schar for every Yid who is helped in any way, whether in gashmiyus or ruchniyus. But perhaps he also gets some blame for all the strange statements and actions that are based on things he said and did.
SHY: “I’m not sure if people place a picture of the Rebbe under the baby’s head by a bris, it’s certainly possible, I’ve never seen it”
I find this TOTALLY strange! It is done and has been done at EVERY lubavitcher bris I’ve been to – in a different thread I have mentioned how I have come in contact with hundreds of lubavitchers and have lubavitcher relatives – and I have heard it talked about. Yet you, an apparent lubavitcher, haven’t seen it.
“but I don’t have a problem with it if it is done. How exactly does it bother you?”
And you accuse me of not reading what YOU write?! I’ve already said that using an image as kedushah or a segulah is bodering on a”z c”v. As I wrote just yesterday, I can understand a picture being placed in a position where it can be seen so that people who look at it have a chizuk, but putting it INSIDE the pillowcase under the baby at a bris where it can’t be seen is attributing special powers to a picture. You don’t have a problem with that?!
“If it’s not a legitimate Minhag, I wouldn’t do it”
This is the crux of the problem! What makes something a “legitimate Minhag”? Because it is done in Lubavitch (I am currently shaking my head in disbelief wondering how it is possible that you don’t know about it) it is probably a “legitimate Minhag” and therefore not problematic. The entire discussion is based on things that are currently considered a “legitimate Minhag” in lubavitch which the rest of the world finds close to apikorsus.
edited