sechel83

@avira no that’s not at all my point. My point is that writing and talking (and thinking) about people not keeping tznius or using smartphones is doing worse than those people your talking about. Even if it would be true. Very simple.

ALL the seforim – thats my point all you read was wikipedia. you sure leaened all the seofrim? if you learned tanya you would have the answer
avira – tanya explains different, see and of perek 25.
thats a big difference between a chasid chabad and (some) others. i come to torah without any pre conceptions. im open to whatever it says.
why is someone who lends with ribis have no chelek in olem haba?
see gemara in bava metzia they were making fun of david that he was over eshes ish, he said someone who was over ashes ish has a chelek in olem haba. hamalbim pnai chavoro brabim does not, see tosfos there. gotta go, good shabbos

@avira: “Get real. Chazal mean no such thing and you know it” well said you decide what chazal mean?! so i dont see how we can have a discussion, i believe in chazal!

@yankel
Question to be asked is the following : Do we all agree that habad came up with new stuff in the last 60-70 years ?
Yes or no ? yes, so? (every sect of jews came up with new stuff)
Did habad at anytime in its 250 years plus of existence at any time or location organize a gathering for hachtarat meleh hamashiach ?
Yes or no ? i heard there was meant to be one yud shvat 5753, is that an issue? Whats the problem? Its against halacha?
now in order to understand the reason for it, requires a lot of background, but its based on what i mentioned before that a melech can only become melech thru the nation accepting his malchus. See maamarim for rosh hashana in likutai torah, mitzvas minoi melech in derech mitzvosecha.
Did habad or any of its rebeim , including the other offshoots/branches [like niezin,liadi kapust etc] ever have their rabanim issue a public kol koreh for the public to accept their leader as mashiach ?
Yes or no? I understand your question is why did the rebbe? Simple cuz the time of moshiach came!
Those questions do not pertain to opinions.
They pertain to facts.
Facts are either true or untrue.
So to all of you , honest people , out there – Can we first get an unqualified and simple one word response to those questions ?

I have to say “interesting” thread
One attack one chabad, answered, another, answered another, shown that the attack doesn’t start, another, again ….
This is my message for all critics (of any Jew) Just focus on your shlamos and if you believe in spreading chassidus so spread it, don’t focus on other people’s issues as I mentioned before it’s a mirror, the only other reason why hashem allows you to see it is to rebuke him directly in the way it says in sh”u, not to gossip and speak lashon hara about him. Done.
Hamiskabed bikilyon chavairo… Besides lashon hara as mentioned before is kineged kulom even thinking bad about another Jew is included in this (Tanya igeres hakodesh) and even worse, it destroys the neshama more than speaking (and more than watching the worst stuff on the internet (cuz it’s kineged a”z giloy arroyos and shfichas damim all together)

Avaira: at the Citi field event there was a clear peak from rav vosner that it’s Asur to use internet other than for business, and even then not in the home. And more limitations. Seems like the visitors of the yeshiva world are following that psak very well??
Why do we need to go to a statium to hear a simple psak?
The bais din in chabad in crown heights and in eretz yisroel put out their psak. Which I amagine all follow (being Dan likaf zchus)
I have classmates who grew up on shlichus and we’re friends of non religious kids, bh they were mekarev many yidden, and those kids in my opinion became stronger in their yiddishkiet.
This idea that the shluchim and there kids are effected negativity, based on what I see (my classmates in school and yeshiva) is totally made up from beginning to end. I don’t read all the lashon hara and Motzi Shem Ra on the internet, but even if there are some stories, there are also many in frum closed off cumminities

In other words you’re saying that you “feel” it’s worse. Al pi Torah for you vlo sasuru there is no difference,
Yes most frum homes and stores to cover themselves but the employees where pants, don’t cover hair which is an erva .
Yes we are proud to accept baalai teshuvah who don’t yet keep every chumra or even halacha. Every mitzvah is a yichud nitzchi with hashem, doesn’t make a difference what the person did or will do later. If a person is 24/7 butal to Hashem – doing Mitzvos, learning Torah, his business Al pi Torah, taking care of himself and family lishem shamayim, and bchol drochecha daehu, he is a complete merkovah to Hashem, if not then at the times he’s not, he’s not. (Tanya perek 6-7, 22-23, 34) I don’t know what’s the makor of the word frum – especially the way people use it today like Talking lashon hara is still considered frum, but dressing not tznius is not frum.
And I made much more points.

@Arso demanding moshiach – like we’re going to hashem and threatening him? Like the dor haflaga that’s the accusation? I don’t see how that even makes sense.
Basically everything chabad does, first is criticized, a few decades later is copied, and a little later others claim they started it. Not like I care or anyone in chabad cares, as long as everyone catches on is fine.

@arso
Lashon hara is worse than not keeping tznius. It’s kneged a”z giloy arayos and shfichus domin. Can you please stop talking bad about other Jews.
Disclaimer: I don’t think me or chabad are better than any other Jew. As I explained before we follow the Baal Shem tov to spread chasidus, because every Jew can gain from learning it for some it will help then keep basic Torah and Mitzvos – like the thousands of Jews who became from thru doing Mitzvos and learning chassidus. For B’nai Torah it will give them more chayus and help them learn Torah lishmah as explained in eitz chayus
Bh I had the privilege to be born into a chabad family and get a chabad chinuch, I try to share it just like any normal person tries to help others.
Also we know that is is tachlis hakavanah of Brias haolam.
Food for thought about tznius in chabad: 1) who exactly are you criticising? The fact that we don’t have a Rebbe cuz he would fix it, well in chabad we don’t tell the Rebbe what to do, it’s the other way around, this the obviously the kavanah (as hinted in the last maamarim and sichos)
2) the rabonim – they have their reasons why not to scream about it and kick kids out of school – one maybe because it may do worse. (Btw just because everything can seem good on the outside doesn’t say what’s doing in the inside(
3) the people – we have to see good in every Jew, the only reason hashem allows one to see bad is 1) to rebuke him directly – not to make fun of him or her on the internet 2) is bacause seeing bad in another in a mirror, it’s really refecting oneself, thru fixing oneself, it will help the other too

@arso we – chabad – have our derech to spread chassidus chabad to everyone, like the alter rebbe – baal hatanya – said that its for every jew. some of the other talmidim held of different ways of spreading chassidus, to focus on belief in the tzadik, coming to him, etc. but they all were involved in spreading the teachings of chassidus.
are you asking a question? i dont understand.
alot of comments, the rambam says in igeres taimon that nevuah will return before moshiach comes, he says a year (before 5000)
everyone always yeared for moshiach the way chabad does, thats why when chabad started saying “we want moshiach now” a litvish gadol said its kefira because it says im yismamea chake lo.
anyway i doubt the average person outside chabad knows why awaiting moshiach is so important, one of the 13 ikrim. and you you know please answer (aderaba teach your freinds too)

@arso – you cant say which chassidus If you continue to push someone for identifying info your posts will be deleted. 

All three stages of this process are openly expressed in our Torah reading. The First Tablets refer to the Torah as it transcends the world (and thus they begin with the letter alef). The descent into the context of worldliness is reflected by the sin of the Golden Calf.9 And the giving of the Second Tablets reflect the ultimate elevation that comes after this descent….
The advantage of the Second Tablets is also reflected in the contrast between the First and Second Tablets mentioned above: that the First Tablets were the “work of G‑d,” while the Second Tablets were hewn by Moshe. It is true that the First Tablets represented a higher level of revelation, but the advantage of the Second Tablets lay in that their holiness permeated the realm of worldly existence. Thus the First Tablets could be broken, for worldly existence represents a contrast and even a conflict with their holiness. The Second Tablets, by contrast, are eternal, for they represent the fusion of holiness with material existence.

This level is reflected in the ultimate fulfillment to be experienced by the Jewish people, the Redemption, which will follow the teshuvah of the Jewish people. And at that time, it will be revealed how the material dimensions of the world will have become fused with their ultimate spiritual purpose, how they all exist, “for the sake of the Torah.”
see at length ki sissa 5752

@ aviara and yankel berel: you didnt reply anything logival arguments or proofs just like i said “i heard, against mesorah”
its impossible for someone living in lakewood to know whats going on in yerushaliim unless its from the media, who can make up whatever they want, or by hearing from others – good stuff, great, if its not rechilus. negitive stuff is called lashon hara.
how do you know when moshiach will come he will be automaticlly accepted by everyone? unlike moshe rabeinu who was not – took time. the rambam writes the oppisite.
in general you guys have a major misconception on chabad. as if all we do is promote the rebbe.
chabads actions are very similar to most jews, we keep sh”u (obviously you’ll attack us for shalosh seudos, and i can attack you back for getting married past 20, or shaving), we learn in yeshiva etc. some things we do dif. we learn chassidus, kiruv, focus on davening, have a different way of learning than litvaks. etc

“are you aware that R’ Moshe Sternbuch has said that Kol Hator is a fraud, and was not actually written by the Gra?”
so i should beleive something you “heard” that rav shternbach “said” over a printed sefer that was around for over 60 yrs.
what about מבוא לחסידות ולדרכה של חב”ד around for over 80 yrs?
youre trying to accuse chabad of something they are doing as wrong and kfira, when we see in gemara (at least according to the simple meaning and many rishonim) it was done. now i brought you more evidance it was done. all you have to reply is rav shterbach said. 1) i dont beleive he said that just because you said so 2) he’s one person he cant create history.
so lets get this clear, i have a gemara, and printed books that it was done, you have “a shmua” that it was never done which still doesnt make it wrong of kefira.
similar to all the other arguments that chabad has evidence – documents, pictures, signed letters (menachem mashiv nafshi which i doubt you ever even bothered looking at) and you just have “i heard, i heard, i heard”!
if you want to argue about history, the only way is with printed and recorded evidence. other then that, people lived in many dif. communities and there is no way of knowing who held of who, and who considered who a gadol or not, besides from listening to the baalai lashon hara. which is an isur, (which answers your complaint about chabad propaganda even according to you that its not true, half truths? you want chabad to spread lashon hara, sinas chinam etc, aderaba, be like the students of aharon

We all claim what we do is the mesorah.
The gemarah says is sanhedrin the the talmidim all said their rebbe is THE moshiach (of all jews)
So clearly this is not a new thing, (maybe by the litvaks is wasn’t done for many generations, so the question is on them not us, and by chassidim it was done for many generations, in ruzin, tzenabel, chabad etc)
And litvaks do the same thing too. Rav chaim was THE gadol hador, or Rav shach etc.

There are many things that litvaks do that i think is not mesorah, like skipping chazaras hashatz in yeshiva. The way they learn “lumdos” before learning kol hatorah kulah biderech kitzara as it says in sh”u. Women going to work, whereas the posuk says kol kvoda bas melech penima, and many other things – davening so fast

@arso i dont know who you call a gadol. reb chaim zimmerman was a gaon olam. maybe cuz he wasnt a politician he didint get so much attention

as well as many other gedolim (for some reason in the books printed about those gedolim it dosent mention it but) in seforim menachem mashiv nafshi, chad bedorah, shemen sason machavarecha, there are hand written letters, pictures, testimony etc. ( in igros moshe there is a letter to the rebbe, he also backed the rebbe about the lag beomer parades after rav shach and the steipler came out against chabad. and he also supported the rebbes mivtzoim, all these you can find in sefer menachem maishiv nafshi)

@yankel berel im not arguing who was a bigger gadal and said bigger chidushim in niglah. i was just saying that in my opinion and many others including many (not all) other gedolim – the rebbe was the greatest talmid chacham since after the war. i go by what it says in tanya perek 2 what a rosh bnai yisroel is – a neshama diatzilus, his mission is to strengthen the emunah of yidden as it says in zohar brought in tanya perek 42, maamer viateh titzave 5741 at length.
btw i beleive based on the way the rebbe was midaek in the frierdiker rebbe’s maamarim and they way he was batul to him, that he considered him a even greater talmid chacham even though there is very little printer from him on niglah.

@yankel berel I learnt some of your rebbi’s hidushim , You get an understanding of his approach. thats bologna. there are many diffrent volumes on many different types of torah. its like learning kol ram of reb moshe and saying you get his approach on niglah. or deroshos chasam sofer and saying you get his approach on niglah or learning tanya and saying you get his approach on niglah. i.e. likutai sichos 1-4 is chassidus said very simple made for people outside chabad. 5- 14 are mostlr deep rashi sichos. then another 200 seforim. maamarim i guess you consider drush, and you made up some idea that ain meshivin al hadrush. the alter rebbe – who you agree is a great gadol in niglah – became a chasid of the magid to learn chassidus. after he printed the shulchan aruch in his 20’s he devoted most of his whole life to learn, teach, and spread chassidus

“They wrote on areas where there is clear responsibility , areas where you cannot say hidushim which merely SOUND nice .
In those areas you can be confronted with clear proofs against you , which you will have to answer to , which will hold you to account .
This is the stuff real Gdolei Yisrael are made of”

amazing idea, i would say the oppisite. the rebbe’s way of learning was to answer many questions (some times 5 some times 15) with a deeper explanation of the sugya, that prooves the truth to the answer whereas when you have one question and one answer you can always ask another question. the rebbes derech was also to explain the lishitasahu of taanayim, amoraim, rishonim, and show how thru shas they follow that way of looking at the sugyos. (see Otsar Likkutei Sichos – Leshitasayhu)

seems like you really learned alot of sichos of the rebbe?

This was not even postable. If someone taught you that, than shame on you both.

arso “And I have a question. If the Lubavicher rebbe was atzmus melubash beguf, and thus all-powerful, why wasn’t he able to avoid having a stroke, and avoid dying?”
great question so instead of the possibility of whoever told you that chabad said this misquoted something, you ask chabad why…?
see igeres hakodesh (in tanya) chapter 25. also likutai amarim perek 2

In reply to sechel’s question as to who can be considered a gadol if the Lubavicher rebbe isn’t, coffee addict replied: Rav Shach.
rav shach was a gadol i agree he gave many shiurim and has around 10-15 seforim printed of his torah on talmud bavli and specificly the yeshiva mesechtos. the rebbe has about 200 sefrim on bavli yerushalmi, kabalah zohar and everything else so thats my point, if the rebbe isint than who is
btw how many people can tell you a torah of rav shach?

Why Our Sanctuaries Remain Pure

The conclusion of the tractate of Chagigah and the entire Order of Mo’ed (Festivals) records a difference of opinion between Rabbi Eliezer and the Sages as to why the Golden Altar and the Copper Altar of the Sanctuary1 were not susceptible to ritual impurity.
Rabbi Eliezer explains that the altars are considered as earth.2 Just as earth cannot contract ritual impurity, so too, these altars. Our Sages, by contrast, state that the reason is that the gold or copper coverings were merely an overlay. As such, they were subordinate to (and considered an extension of) the altars’ inner material, which was not susceptible to ritual impurity.3
The Torah, which was given by an infinite G‑d, is itself infinite. Its lessons are equally relevant at all times and in all places. It has the same strength now, in the darkness of exile, as when it was given to Moshe on Mount Sinai.
One hallmark of the Torah’s infinity is that every concept in it has endless interpretations. In general, these are divided into four categories: pshat the simple meaning, remez an extended meaning or allusion, derush a homily, and sod the underlying mystic concept.4
An allusion derived from the teaching mentioned above provides us with lessons relevant to our daily lives, for in his own place, every person serves as a “sanctuary in microcosm” in which the Divine Presence rests.
There were several sacred articles in the Sanctuary and the Beis HaMikdash. Similarly, within our individual “sanctuaries” there are “sacred articles”: our intellect, our feelings, and the like. In these matters, there is the possibility for “ritual impurity;” selfish intent, secular influence, or an unholy thought may creep in. There is even the possibility of sin, doing the opposite of G‑d’s will, and acting in conflict with the directives of the Torah and its mitzvos.
Continuing the analogy, sin makes a person’s “sacred articles” his thoughts or feelings impure. It thus becomes necessary to devise a means whereby that “sacred article” can be returned to G‑d’s sanctuary. For G‑d’s sanctuary every Jewish man, woman, and child must be pure.
With regard to material matters, and similarly with regard to spiritual potential, mankind is divided into the rich and the poor. Gold serves as an analogy for the rich,5 while the poor are associated with copper.6
The core of every Jew’s Jewishness, the pintele Yid, remains intact, regardless of the inner or outer dimensions of his personality. And this aspect of his being has one desire: to fulfill G‑d’s will. As my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe, would say:7 “No Jew desires to nor can he sever his bond with G‑d.”
Accordingly, every Jew can be considered an altar for G‑d. For what is an altar? A place where one slaughters one’s yetzer hora and brings a sacrifice for G‑d.
This concept is relevant to all Jews: both the rich (who can be compared to the Golden Altar), and the poor (who are likened to the Copper Altar). The true desire of every one is to slaughter the yetzer hora and fulfill G‑d’s will.
As mentioned, the altars are not susceptible to ritual impurity. The two rationales given can also be interpreted in the context of our Divine service. The first rationale holds that the altars are considered like the earth. This refers to the quality of humility, as we say in our prayers:8 “May my soul be as dust to all.” Just as everyone treads on the earth, so too a humble person has no self-concern, and no desire other than to fulfill G‑d’s will as expressed in the Torah and its mitzvos.
This is the rationale taught by Rabbi Eliezer ben Horkenus. Rabbi Eliezer was referred to as “Rabbi Eliezer the Great,” and was considered “equivalent to all the other Sages of Israel.”9 Nevertheless, he remained so humble that he “never mentioned a teaching that [he] had not heard from [his] teachers.”10
This approach enabled him to see the inner dimension of every Jew’s character, appreciating the level of which it is said:11 “Israel, the Torah, and the Holy One, blessed be He, are all one,” i.e., a Jew’s entire life consists of the observance of Torah and mitzvos. Rabbi Eliezer taught his students that intellect and bittul (self-transcendence) are not opposites, and indeed complement each other, as reflected in his own Divine service: “never mention[ing] a teaching that [he] had not heard from [his] teachers.”
The Sages offer a second rationale, for they feel that Rabbi Eliezer’s approach is too difficult for the general public. They instead thought about a Jew’s external dimension. For it may happen that a person will stumble within his path of Divine service. This is particularly true with regard to a Jew who can be compared to a Golden Altar. Since he is involved with matters concerning gold, he may be distracted, and for a brief time may ignore the fulfillment of G‑d’s will. Similarly, a Jew who can be compared to a Copper Altar may be confronted by financial straits that cause him to violate G‑d’s will. Nevertheless, our Sages maintain that these occasional transgressions cause neither the rich Jew nor the poor Jew to become impure.
The reasoning is that both the gold and the copper are superficial coverings. The inner dimension of every Jew remains immune to impurity. Moreover, this inner dimension is so powerful that the external dimension becomes subordinate to it. In other words: every person will ultimately turn to G‑d in teshuvah and appreciate the Truth. He will grasp that a Jew’s life is solely G‑dliness, and that this G‑dliness can be tapped only through the study of the Torah, and observance of the mitzvos.
Moreover, such conduct is the medium which enables us to receive the blessings which G‑d promises, as it is written:12 “And if you walk in My statutes and observe My commandments… the land will provide its yield, and the trees of the field will give their fruit.”
In contrast, the Altars are associated with the middle vector (see also Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 51a and 60a), and the middle vector “ascends to the inner dimensions of Kesser. ”
This also relates to the Ark, located in the Holy of Holies, which contained the Tablets of the Ten Commandments. The ark was entombed because it is not possible that gentiles would attain power over it.
Nevertheless, a reason must be given why the altars cannot contract impurity. For although they are represented by the middle vector, they are represented by attributes which are limited in nature.
The reason given by Rabbi Eliezer is that they are considered like earth, i.e., they reflect the utter selflessness that characterizes the quality of Kesser (Hosafos l’Torah Or, the beginning of Megillas Esther). There is indeed an explicit verse which identifies the external altar with earth, as it is written: “You shall make an altar of earth for Me.” This is stated explicitly only with regard to the external altar, the level of Malchus, because “the end is rooted at the beginning, and the beginning at the end (Sefer Yetzirah 1:7).” Therefore, in the destruction of the vessels of the World of Tohu, “the earth (alone) became nullified.”
With regard to the altars themselves, the inner altar is identified with Tiferes d’Zaer Anpin, and is thus considered “rich” when compared to the external altar identified with Malchus, of which it is said (Zohar I, 33b): “It has nothing of its own.”
The reason that the altars did not require tevilah (טבילה), which is identified [Siddur Im Dach, p. 159d] with bittul (הביטול), is because they themselves are expressions of bittul. Two reasons are given for this: they are considered like earth, and their surface is subordinate to their inner substance.
Rabbi Eliezer refers to the essence of G‑d, as reflected by the association (Bamidbar Rabbah 19:7) of his name with the verse (Shmos 18:4): אלה-י אבי בעזרי “The G‑d of my father provided assistance for me.” He is called “the Great,” and it is said (Megillah 31a): “In the place of His greatness, there you find His humility.” While looking at the external dimensions of existence, he was able to perceive the inner dimension. Thus the fact that the external substance of the altar was subservient to its inner substance was not significant for him, so he gave another rationale. For according to his conception, the external substance was always batel, for “There is nothing, [but Him] (Devarim 4:39, see the explanation in Tanya, Shaar HaYichud, ch. 6).”
The Sages differ, and the halachah follows their opinion, for “[Torah law] is not in the heavens (cf. Devarim 30:12),” but rather is determined according to the principles which prevail within the spiritual cosmos (Seder HaHishtalshelus). On this level, the external surface of the altar could be susceptible to ritual impurity, except that since it is batel to its inner substance, it is not. This is not the place for further elaboration concerning this matter.
“And if you walk in My statutes and observe My commandments… the land will provide its yield, and the trees of the field will give their fruit.”
https://www.chabad .org/therebbe/article_cdo/aid/70531/jewish/Likkutei-Sichot-Tetzaveh.htm
1 The connection of this concept to the weekly portion is reflected in the fact that the conclusion of Parshas Tetzaveh speaks about the Golden Altar, while the conclusion of the previous Torah reading, Parshas Terumah, speaks about the Copper Altar. The sichah to follow is adapted from a letter from the Rebbe to a Society [for the Study] of Mishnayos whose members had concluded their study of the Order of Mo’ed. [The final mishnah of that Order deals with these subjects.] In the letter, the Rebbe emphasizes the spiritual contrasts between these two altars.
2 It is written (Shmos 20:21): “You shall make an altar of earth for Me.” On this basis, Rabbi Eliezer establishes a comparison between the altar and earth. And on the basis of another verse (Bamidbar 3:31), an equivalence is established between both altars (Chagigah 27a).
3 For the inner substance of the altars was wood, and an oversized wooden vessel is not susceptible to ritual impurity (Rashi, Chagigah, ibid.).
4 See Shaar HaGilgulim, preface 17.
5 See Bava Basra 25b, which cites Iyov 37:22 “Gold will be brought from the north,” and which says that a person who wants to become rich should face north (the direction of the Golden Table) when he prays.
6 See the interpretation of the Mishnah (Bava Metzia 4:1).
7 Igros Kodesh of the Rebbe Rayatz, Vol. IV, p. 547; HaYom Yom entry 21 Sivan, 25 Tammuz.
8 The passage E-lohai Netzor, recited at the conclusion of the Shemoneh Esreh, Siddur Tehillat HaShem, p. 61.
9 Avos 2:9.
10 Sukkah 27b, 28a.
11 See Zohar, Vol. III, p. 73a.
12 Vayikra 26:3-4.
To briefly explain the above on a deeper level: As stated in the Tzemach Tzedek’s, Sefer HaMitzvos, Mitzvas Binyan HaMikdash, ch. 2, there were four sacred articles of fundamental importance in the Beis HaMikdash : the Menorah, the Golden Table, and the two Altars. These articles correspond to the attributes Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferes, and Malchus. The Menorah and the Golden Table, corresponding to Chesed and Gevurah, were susceptible to ritual impurity, as stated in the first clause of the mishnah.

• This reply was modified 9 months, 4 weeks ago by YW Moderator-29 👨‍💻.
• This reply was modified 8 months ago by YW Moderator-29 👨‍💻.

finally another topic, good point differnent opinions if women can learn gemarah. so too there are differnt opinions if moshiach can be from the dead. and differnt opinions if you can shave your beard and if you need to sleep in the suckah if its too big of a shlep to bring your bed there. and if one can be yotze shalosh seudos with fruits or you need to wash. or if you can eat before davening. all have diffeerent opinions, for some reason some call others kofrim if they hold like the other opinion?!

@arso i forgot to mention, how many sichos did you learn? how many maamarim? of the rebbe

i think arso and da moshe should become a rebbe. they seem to claim to know more than the baal shem tov, and every other gadol

i think instead of finding issues with chassidus, you guys should start learning it. i guarantee you the gra would rather you learn tanya then spend time on yw coffee room, especially writing ridiculous comments.
the baal shem tov being a talmid chacham is almost like the people who say the rebbe wasn’t and dont bother opening any of his 200+ seforim or listening to any of his thousends of hours of sichos speaking for hours straight with no notes etc.
(i say almost cuz there are not many seforim and recordings of the baal shem tov, but even open keser shem tov, its beyond any sefer printed the last 50 yrs.)