RSo

Chossid addressing Neville and myself: “Have you learned the sicha yet?”

No, and I have no intention of it. In fact, it doesn’t make a difference to me what he says. The fact remains that ON PRINCIPLE no lubavichers sleep in the sukkah, and that is against Chazal and halocho. I don’t care what type of spin your rebbe put on it.

The crazy heter about being mitzta’er because, unlike the rebbe, one can fall asleep, is ridiculous and was dealt with at length in the “Geula” thread. Please read all 40+ pages and stop reiterating the old garbage.

Anyusername: “Before we continue we need to answer these questions”

And I say before you continue defending the warped views of the majority of today’s lubavich you have to explain the general theory of relativity in terms that a ben chomeish lemikra could understand.

What a ludicrous excuse for not facing up to the truth! You stand accused of distorting Torah so either you defend yourself or admit the truth (the latter being almost impossible for someone who has been brainwashed by modern lubavich). You don’t lay down ridiculous conditions… that is unless you think the rest of us are too stupid to realize that you can’t answer us.

Rebbetzin: ““the issue isn’t so much about SHAVING or Hoicha Kedusha at MINCHA as in saying that it is the best way of acting when the Gemoro and ALL poskim say otherwise. The same with eating Cholov Akum where it is permitted when needed, and not as a blanket minhag.”

A bit of a double standard, don’t you think?!”

No.
1. No one who I know that shaves says that it is a higher madreiga than growing a beard. No one who davens a hoicha kedusha says it is a higher madreiga than davening a full Mincha. No one who eats cholov stam (NO ONE is mattir cholov akum) says it is a higher madreiga than eating only cholov Yisroel.
2. There is no explicit Chazal against shaving in a permitted manner. There is an explicit Chazal that you have to sleep only in a sukkah. The same goes for there being no specific Chazal to say a full Mincha and not to eat cholov stam.

So the comparison is warped.

Furthermore, just out of interest, there are choshuve seforim that say that in the olden times people would shave davka and leave the payos in order to be mekayem the mitzva of leaving payos. See the second pshat in Rashi to Kerisus 5b d”h Mesaper. Later we forgot the exact location of the payos so we stopped shaving, and there are also reasons al pi kabboloh.

yehoshuaahron: “The Rebbe is ben achar ben from Dovid Hamelech through Shalom Shachna Altschuler (Tzemach Tzedek’s father) , an ainekel of the Metztudas Dovid (Dovid Altschuler), who in turn is ben achar ben from Dovid Hamelech.”

Wonderful claims, but other than that your rebbe was ben achar ben from the Tzemach Tzedek and that he was a son of Reb Shalom Shachna (possibly Altschuler – I don’t know any info about that) the rest is without any basis or proof.

In fact, I took a break and checked Hebrew Wikipedia for information on the Metzudas Dovid – you can find the page under דוד אלטשולר – and despite it explaining his family and ancestors at length there is absolutely no mention of him being a descendant of Dovid Hamelech.

So rather than saying that “the rest is without any basis or proof” I would prefer to say it is another instance of lubavich revisionist fiction. And who believes it? Anyone who cares more about “being on the winning side” than the truth.

At least S”T ym”sh was accepted as being descended from Dovid Hamelech…

SHY in response to my claim that the lubavicher rebbe had NONE of the Rambam’s criteria for being bechezkas mashiach: “he definitely had some.
Such as הוגה בתורה ועוסק במצות כדוד אביו.”

Are you really claiming that he was hogeh beTorah as much as Dovid. I can’t disprove you, but I can pity you that you think so lowly of Dovid.

But even aside from that, he still doesn’t fit the criteria because there is NO indication that Dovid was oviv.

Lubavich claims that the Baal Hatanya was a direct descendant of Dovid Hamelech, although the sources for this claim are only lubavich sources. Your rebbe was ben achar ben from the Tzemach Tzedek who was a son of R Sholom Shachna Altshuler, and he was not a descendant – ben achar ben or otherwise – of the Baal Hatanya. So the much-publicized claim that the lubavicher rebbe is a descendant of Dovid Hamelech is meaningless for two reasons.
1. Because we have no independent source saying that the Baal Hatanya was ben achar ben from Dovid.
2. Even if we did, to be a candidate for moshiach you have to ben achar ben from Dovid, and the lubavicher rebbe has no such even supposed yichus.
Although I suppose it is entirely possible that someone has proven the lubavicher rebbe’s yichus with a proof as strong as everything else that has been said about him.

yehoshuaahron are you CS in disguise? Most of us have been through all this tripe on the thread that she started months ago and which has lain dormant for a while.

In a nutshell:
1. There is no such thing as Nossi Hador nowadays, and there hasn’t been for thousands of years. Lubavich made up the term so they can apply it to their rebbe and since no one else applies it to their rebbe/gadol (again, because it doesn’t exist) lubavich gets to trump (small T) everyone else because they have the nossi. Well guess what, my rebbe is the Reish Galusa! That beats (I don’t want to use the word trump again) the nossi title – see Sanhedrin 5a – and since lubavich never thought of that one (and neither has anyone else for the same reason that no one has thought of nossi except for you) I win.

2. Find me a source where it says Shimshon was ever a nossi. (If you’re busy I’ll save you time. It doesn’t say it anywhere, except perhaps in lubavich fiction, and even there I haven’t actually seen it written about Shimshon.)

3. The lubavicher rebbe did not have ANY of the criteria for chezkas moshiach as outlined in the Rambam. Saying he does is distorting the words of the Rambam and leads us to wonder whether the person doing so is indeed an apikorus.

4. The Gemoro in Sanhedrin 98b DOES NOT say that the talmidim thought their rebbes were moshiach. Neither Rashi nor the Maharsho say so. Of course, you can interpret that that’s what the talmidim really meant (as a lubavicher you should be able to interpret anything to fit what you want it to mean, as that is what you are good at) but they don’t say that at all.

5. (Here is another example that leads me to think that those who use this “proof” are either card-carrying apikorsim, close to it, absolute amei ha’aretz or stam plain stupid.) The gemoro’s mention of Doniel in connection with moshiach DOES NOT allow for anyone to say that any other person who is not alive may be the moshiach. Rashi gives two explanations. The first is that if moshiach is someone who has already died “IT WAS DONIEL”. The second is that if you are looking for someone who has died “TO COMPARE MOSHIACH TO” it is Doniel. To take that gemoro and say that since the gemoro says that moshiach may be among those who have already died I can say it is Ploni is, as I wrote, either apikorsus or stupidity, just as it would be apikorsus or stupidity to say that since the gemoro says that you have to make kiddush on Friday night I’m allowed to say that you have to make kiddush on Monday night.

To summarise: you and your cohorts spout absolutely baseless garbage and R”L call it Torah even though it has nothing to do with the Torah. There is one person who is largely to blame for this, but he is no longer alive… according to some opinions.

zhavasdad: “Gezen Deh Heh”.

Did you see the dalet and vov as well?

Lechaim123, sorry that you were expecting a better answer, I can only answer what I believe to be the truth.

And I don’t know how you deduced that I was saying that there won’t be any frum people left. To be honest, there aren’t that many now either, compared to the Jewish world population and lehavdil the rest of the world.

samethenylic, I beg to differ. They have been taught (i.e. brainwashed) to believe whatever their rebbe told them and whatever they want to believe. To them propaganda and the truth are a blurry mix.

BBO, I see kum va’asei different to shev v’al taaseh. Maybe I’m wrong there, but it’s only relevant to that one post which I retracted.

And as to tefillin, if people wouldn’t wear tefillin because they don’t have a guf noki or because they can’t be meisiach daas, then not only would I not denigrate them but I would say they are doing what halachah says to do. Sleeping outside a sukkah if one is able to sleep in it is against halachah.

“I ask with respect and with the desire to be educated in the meaning of terms that seem to contradict each other, but are routinely used”

You came to the wrong forum if you want to be EDUCATED about the contradictions in Chabad. Here the non-lubavichers point them out while the lubavichers dissemble about how they are not contradictory.

BBO: “I take issue with that outlook on yiddishkeit. I may have a very holy and ancient minhag to not keep shabbos, but as long as i keep it in the realm of MINHAG and don’t bluff that it has a halachik and legal basis, then im alright?!”

There is a difference between shev v’al taaseh and kum va’asei. Not keeping Shabbos is kum va’asei and no minhag can allow actual chilul. But if there was, say, as minhag not to make eat cholent then that would be ok. Same here. If there is a minhag not to sleep in a sukkah I would find that ok.

However, having said that, I do understand your objection. It’s just that I don’t object in the same way.

Hi. Nice to be back.

Rockstar, firstly I don’t see how you can compare Rishonei Ashkenaz with something made up within the last 100 years.

Furthermore, the Gemoro itself says that tefillin need a guf noki and also that one may not be meisiach daas while wearing tefillin. It is for both of these reasons that we (at least the vast majority of us) wear tefillin only while davening Shachris even though the original mitzvah was to wear tefillin all day. When it comes to sukkah, however, there is no such caveat and Chazal explicitly say that sleeping is to be done in the sukkah.

Neville: “Why not compare? It’s an identical situation.”

Because if it was directly compared they would have yet another excuse to avoid the topic.

But in truth, it’s not identical. Sh”Tz encouraged being oiver chiyuvei krisus.

CS, I believe Syag’s question went totally over your head… and that is part of the problem.

Do the right thing, you’re heart is definitely in the right place, but what happens when a person believes that someone has gone beyond the boundaries of the Torah? Do we then say, well, he has lots and lots of followers so we should stay out of the discussion?

If that were true how would anyone have known which side to take when Sh”Tz came on the scene (again, I’m not comparing, just illustrating a point)?

Despite the greatness of Rav Avigdor Miller z”l, I think DaasYochid put it very nicely.

(coninuation 2)
Chossid: “And who is bechlal the “Torah world”, and who made up this concept?”
The truth is that I had originally used the term “chareidim” but because I have seen lubavichers recoil at that term being used to describe them (and, to be honest, there are many lubavichers that I know that I would hesitate to call chareidim) i changed it to “the Torah world”.
So who are they? All chareidim who believe that to do things against halocho without a valid halocho source, is perverting the Torah.
You may note that in general I haven’t attacked lubavich for davening past zman tefilla, and this is because there have been gedolei olam of past generations who have sanctioned this if the davening was preceded by hours of proper preparation, and I believe that that’s where it started in lubavich as well. (I HAVE said that it is a problem in lubavich, but this is because I continue to see how it is abused by many people who treat davening with a minyan and zman tefilla as a joke.) But what I strongly object to is statements like, “We don’t believe in zman tefilla.” Yes, I have been told that on more than one occasion. That is a perversion of the Torah.

“So before you do that [i.e. learn the lubavicher rebbe’s chassidus] you should be quiet.
Case closed.”
Does that mean that I’m not allowed to argue? That is really powerful!
But just in case there are others who don’t considered the case against me closed, what about Rav Shach’s Torah. How many lubavichers learn Avi Ezri with the idea that they might understand his ways and shitos? Do you? (Oh! I forgot that I can’t address you because the case is closed.)
Futhermore, it’s not like I initiated an attack on, say, Satmar, that you can say to me that I should learn Al Hageulah V’al Hatemurah before I argue with him. I am arguing against lubavich who have been forcing their rebbe’s chassidus and shitos down my own throat for decades. If lubavichers tell me their shitos/hashkofos without me asking them to, and I argue with them, they then can’t turn around and tell me that before I argue with them I should learn their rebbe’s words inside. Don’t start and you won’t be attacked!

I just realized that I had completely omitted replying to the earlier longer post of Chossid. The one that the mods censored because of “Kavod haTorah”, so here goes. (Btw how does one get to be a mod and read all the censored stuff?)

“There is no difference between the chassidus thought by earlier Rebbeim and the Rebbe it’s all one hemshech and based on each other.”
It’s easy to say that, but for those of us who have seen what we believe are perversions of chabad, and of hashkofo, in the chassidus of the most recent rebbe, it’s impossible to believe that it’s all one hemshech and based on each other.

“For some reason you always focus on the people that don’t agree with Lubavitch, do you know that so many of your neighbors don’t think like you.
Day by day there is only more people learn chassidus chabad, not less”
Yes, a lot of my neighbors, don’t agree with me. But a lot do. And “day by day” there are more people who learn Rav Shach’s Torah and who hold of his shitos, who learn the Satmarer Rebbe’s Torah and hold of his shitos, who hold of Rav Kook’s Torah and hold of his shitos, yet lubavich does not believe in any of the above-quoted shitos.
And btw, “day by day” there are more and more people who, lehavdil infinite havodolos, are mechalel Shabbos and are kofrim. Numbers don’t mean anything if the numbers are based on a distorted view of the Torah. Sh”Tz had thousands and thousands of followers in an era where there were no electronic communicaions, but he was wrong and extremely dangerous.
To prove a shito as acceptable you have to prove that it is based on the Torah and be able to refute any objections to it based on the Torah.

“Can I ask you the question, how do you blame the problem of the litvish and chassidish have on the lack of tzius and daven after the zman, unfiltered internet??? Would you blame it on the Torah they learn all day???Just because the yeddin do aveiros, that is a rayeh that the Torah is wrong C’s”v? Would you say such?”
I’m not clear what you mean in that first sentence, but to address what I think you are saying later, no I wouldn’t blame it on the Torah they learn. But I would blame it on a movement, and the leader/s of a movement, who ignored breaches in the standards of old, and concentrated on other things. Just as, I believe, you would blame a lack of erlichkeit on a fictional group of people who concentrate on not eating chodosh but don’t care about making a chilul Hashem with shoddy business practices. (I am seriously not alluding to anyone here. I was just trying to come up with an example which I assume you would agree with.)

“And I just find it funny, when there is advertisement of kupas hoeir etc. That say that this godol or Rebbe will be davaning for only 150 names Al tenai that give a x amount of money. I don’t know if it’s the Rebbe or the gabboim, but it’s quite funny.”
I am not a fan of that either, but it seems obvious to me that they are doing it to help people in need. So it’s a lot like giving tzedoko at menas sheyichyeh bni. If the ends are worthy, and the means aren’t actually wrong, it’s ok. Do you remember that lubavich had a millionaire’s club whom the rebbe would address separately? Each person there had to commit to give a million dollars over a certain time frame. They were treated differently than the average chossid by your rebbe, but he obviously saw that it was necessary to raise the money for whatever purpose he used it for, and that justified the means.

“why does this pamphlet [Sichat Hashavua] bother you more than any other pamphlets and advertisements put on tables in shul”
It doesn’t. But it is just another example of how we are force-fed lubavich at every turn. If it was just Sichat Hashavua without all the other propaganda I wouldn’t care at all. Actually, there is one thing I don’t like about it, and that’s the way there’s a picture of your rebbe on each issue. None of the other pamphlets have pictures of their “gadol” on them. Why do you need this so much?

“I never heard a single Lubavitcher saying that [Shach yemach shmoi], I don’t where your hearing this from.”
I have heard it so many times that I have to conclude that you are not getting out enough in your own circles.

“and they are mechanech kids that way too, kids who don’t even know who Rav Shach was.”
Where do you even get such info from?”
From lubavicher kids. I have told you before that I have lubavicher family. I also have lubavicher neighbors, and lubavicher acquaintances.

Wow, Chossid, long post, but I read it all and am about to respond. I’m only pointing out how long it is in case I accidentally miss a question of yours that I should answer. If that happens it will only because it’s hard to keep track of everything. So here goes.

Re not having learnt the sicha about not sleeping in a sukkah: “Then that shows you are not interested in understanding, rather….. Any sincere person when he doesn’t understand a concept he goes and learns the einyen before he comes up with a opinion. Seriously.”
No. I was very interested, but before I even knew there was a sicha on the topic, when I was first mocked for sleeping in the sukkah (yes, it’s true), I was explained why one shouldn’t. And I have had it explained to me many times by many different lubavichers – some just wanting to justify their not sleeping in the sukkah, and others trying to convince me of the error of my ways – and I have also had it explained to me in this very forum, where it was discussed for a lenthy period of time. I have no need to learn the sicha, as I rely on lubavichers as to what it says.

” the Rebbe never tried proving who moshiach is from the rambam, it’s just some meshchistim, and CS, no one else on this group claimed it. And believing the Rebbe is moshiach is not at all kfirah.”
Maybe your rebbe didn’t try to prove from the Rambam who Mashiach is, but he certainly gave tacit approval to all those who did use the Rambam to “prove” that he was Mashiach. I think we have concluded that you are too young to remember pre-Gimmel Tammuz, but those of us who are old enough and, like myself, often mixed in lubavich circles (I still do, but to a far lesser extent), heard and saw lubavitch propaganda using the Rambam to prove that very point. To blame it on “some” meshichistim (and CS) is actually to blame their views on the rebbe himself, because although there were times when he voiced his disapproval, there were many times when he did not, and that led them to assuming that they were right. For example, what about that chassidishe woman who gave a tambourine with Yechi, or something like it, to the rebbe? Yes, the rebbe told her he would give it to Mashiach when he came, but the rebbe accepted it and didn’t tell her not to be stupid. It’s actions like this that led to Meshichism.
And to say that we all agree that it’s not kefira, is not so simple. For 2000 years the standard Jewish argument against you-know-who being the messiah is that he is dead. Now we say that that was just a made-up excuse. Furthermore, those who misuse the Rambam and the Gemoro in Sanhedrin to justify their right to claim that the rebbe is Mashiach, are distorting Chazal and a Rishonim. Does that not constitute apikorsus, which is a first cousin of kefira?

I can see that if I address every point in one post it will be far too long, so I’ll stop this post here and continue in a new post.

Just to clarify my last post. I have said in the past numerous times that if Lubavich stuck to doing their good acts such as their chabad houses in places where they are needed, and, now that you’ve mentioned it, their services to prisoners etc, we would all be saying how fantastic they are.

But it’s your hashkofos that get us very worried, and just as your actions don’t justify questionable (to say the least) hashkofos, your talking about your actions doesn’t answer the serious concerns that we have.

SHY: “Clearly you don’t know me. Even when I was a Lubavitcher, I was always tucked in.”

Clearly you were never a real lubaicher!

It seems that we’er all enjoying SHY’s posts, but it’s still telling that nothing is getting answered in a way that any chareidi non-lubavicher will accept the answer. All the answers are based, in the long run, on that’s what the rebbe said. Fine with me for you to accept that, just don’t expect us to.

SHY: “Yogayta Umatzasa Taamin”

Sorry, but you’re not there yet. You still have lubavich pronunciation. I believe most of would say yogaato without the y.

Do the lubavichers on this forum finally realize that they have no acceptable responses to our problems with their views? Is that why there is no activity here?

My last post got me thinking so much that I can’t sleep. My fault for causing it myself.

Anyhow, after what I wrote in reply to chossid (and it doesn’t seem to have shown up in the thread yet) I was thinking again about what he wrote that we search for things to find wrong with Lubavcih, and how I replied that its actually that their propaganda machine rams it down our throats. A whole lot of other examples that rile me came to mind, so if I can’t sleep I may as well tell you about them and allow chossid, username, CS et al to respond.

As I’ve said so many times, I have nothing against you being different to others – each group is different in its own way – but why is it that you always have to show how different you are?

1. Why do I, an obvious non-lubavicher to anyone who just looks at me, have to be told every time I see a lubavicher on 19 Kislev “Leshono toivo bedarkei hachassidus” or whatever the exact lashon is? I don’t believe it is Rosh Hashono, no one outside of lubavich does, so why do I have to be “accosted” with that greeting by people who never even nod their heads to me when they pass me at any other time of the year, and who never say Gut Shabbos or Gut Yom Tov? (I have to mention in passing that I consider this R”H another meaningless lubavich meshigass made up relatively recently, but that’s not the point of what I’m posting now.)

2. Why does every lubavicher who passes me on Shavuos (again those who just walk right past me any other time of the year) have to make a point of saying to me “Kabbolas Hatorah bepnimiyus”? If it’s not just to show me how different/better they are, then what’s the point? I sometimes wonder whether the rule is to only say it to non-lubavichers, and that in the local chabad shules they just say “Gut Yom Tov” to each other like everyone else.

3. Why does it so often happen (not all the time, but far too often) that when saying kaddish in an Ashkenaz minyan a lubavicher will insist on saying Veyatzmach etc, and when people get upset about it the lubavicher just laughs it off? I also say Veyatzmach etc in kaddish, but when I’m davening in an Ashkenaz minyan I omit it because of minhag hamokom. I have seen many people who daven Ashkenaz say Veyatzmach etc when davening in our shul or in the local chabad shul, but ask a lubavicher to omit it and you will so often get nowhere.

4. Why can’t lubavichers accept that in many places, and our shule is just one such place, we finish davening with kaddish after Aleinu, with no further kaddish? Do they absolutely have to make an issue of saying Tehillim and then Kaddish Yasom and Kaddish Derabbonon? And again, if it upsets people, all the better.

5. Why can’t lubavichers davening elsewhere either do hagbah the way it is done in that place, or at the very least kindly explain that they would rather not do hagbah at all as they do it differently to the minhag hamokom? Is it really important for them to somehow maneuver past the person standing there waiting to do gelilah so that they can davka put the sefer back down on the bimah despite it upsetting the regular mispalelim?

And you want to know why we SEARCH for things to badmouth lubavich about! Again, the above examples are not the case with every lubavicher, but I am not the only one who has seen these cases happen more than once. And I didn’t even mention the times when people announce Yechi etc loudly after davening in other shuls. That is much less frequent, but it happens.

Hopefully going to sleep now, but I look forward to some reasoned responses.