Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
In my opinion at least , if you spearhead a movement , clearly in theology at odds with the rest of klal yisrael [no other part of klal yisrael champions mashiach from the dead like them , no one near-deifies their leader like them ] ,and at odds with what THEY THEMSELVES were proclaiming for years , its only fair to expect , anticipate and therefore accept , that you are opening yourself up to genuine and open examination of your shitot , their roots ,their essence and their consequences . That should all be part of the game .
And that as grownups, they should be able to hear any legitimate taanot and FORMULATE TO THE POINT RESPONSES head on ,without hiding behind changes of topic or other similar tactics .REPEAT – NO ANSWER GIVEN or even attempted yet ….
———————————————————————————–
@ menachem
We can’t agree that we need Moshiach since I hold that many tzaddikim have had nevuah after חגי זכריה מלאכי!?
————–
Please elaborate . Who else had Nevua after Chagai , Z and M ?
And source corroborating their nevua as valid ?
Was it widely accepted in Klal Yisrael ?
Thanks in advance for the forthcoming details .It seems futile to debate Habad hasidim on this site .
They do not seem to hear at all what you are getting at .
Or maybe they do hear, but intentionally divert the discussion to a different topic .
.
Bottom line is – criticism is not hate.
Criticism is legitimate .
Habad ‘s theology is controversial at best .
And if something they introduced is controversial , it is up to them to explain it in a satisfactory manner , which they have not done yet .
.
Nomesorah is alleging in response that gur hasidim changed ikarei emuna more than habad .
Ikarei emuna ? In what way ?
.@nomesorah
in order to have a proper debate we need some prerequisites
1] reality
2] honesty
3] straight logic and commonsense
4] torah logic
.
have not detected sufficient amount of the first 3 yet . but am happy if you would convince me of the opposite . re the fourth I can’t comment yet .Remember listening to the kenes of hachtarat Mashiach on the radio , heard the tfillat arvit straight after the kenes , remember thinking to myself – that ‘s what we waited for 2000 years ?
When Mashiach comes – that is the type of tfillah we are going to have ?
.
Maybe for 14 Adar he can be Mashiach .
After thinking it through , no even for that date not …
.@ menachem
We can’t agree that we need Moshiach since I hold that many tzaddikim have had nevuah after חגי זכריה מלאכי!?
————–
Please elaborate . Who else had Nevua after Chagai , Z and M ?
And source corroborating their nevua as valid ?
Was it widely accepted in Klal Yisrael ?
Thanks in advance for the forthcoming details .@ menachem
[I would just like to repeat an analogy that I used before: Someone reads antisemitic literature with some “shockingly hateful” statements from the Talmud. He approaches the Talmudic scholar and says, “I can’t believe you study this terrible book.” The scholar responds, “You have only read a few lines out of context……]
——————————————
The hater who hates the talmud, hated the talmud and the Jews before he found the relevant quote .
In my case , the ta’anot against modern habad started only with and because modern habads ‘innovations’.
But that s not the main point .
.
The main point is the following –
There is no context here re the question whether your rebbi meant his father in law only , or also alluded to himself . What RELEVANT context is there to add ?
.
The only relevant context I can see here is – THE CLEAR RESULTS of those pronouncements about his father inlaw as expressed in his hasidim in their own attitude towards him …
Which only pushes it further to the correct interpretation .
The attitude of habad hasidim toward their rebbe exceeds by far , the attitude of other talmidim towards their rebbe , and even the attitude of other hasidim towards their rebbe.
Is that happenstance ?
Considering the evidence , not .@menachem
“Okay, you’re right. I am a Lubavitcher so I am biased, so I have no right to defend Lubavitch. Only those who disagree with Lubavitch have the right to defend it. You are completely objective, as you only care about truth, so all your attacks on Lubavitch must be true, and my defenses are worthless.Your interpretations of what the Rebbe meant trump mine, despite the fact that you barely learned any of his teachings, while I learned thousands of pages of his teachings, and heard hundreds of hours of his talks. As a matter of fact, the more I study, the more biased I become, and the less of an ability I have to understand his teachings.”
—————————————————————-
What your rebbe meant or did not mean , i.e. as pshat in his words is NOT the issue here .
.
The issue is whether he had ANOTHER MOTIVE , as in the desired effect of his words on his followers ,all the while outwardly keeping to the literal meaning of the words , which is AXIOMATICALLY hard to accept for a devoted follower [hasid] . [that he would manipulate his hasidim ]
.
This is not an issue of the kesef mishna and the magid mishna sparring over the true intent of the rambam where one could use your yardstick .
Here the question is – did he mean his father in law ONLY , or did he also allude to himself ?
This is the question , and the only question .
.
Interestingly , the answer to this question , should come [but in a different way you intimated] from those who spent like you said ‘countless hours listening and learning his words ‘ i.e. his real hasidim .
BeZot Tibochenu : DID HIS HASIDIM TAKE IT AS PERTAINING ONLY TO HIS FATHER IN LAW ? OR DID THEY APPLY IT FULLY TO HIMSELF TOO ?
The answer is obvious , but to the willfully blind that is .
Clear as day , they fully applied it as pertaining to himself .
So the answer is provided not by me , not I am saying this .
The actions of the hasidim themselves speak volumes .
He WAS referring to himself .
.
This analysis you could not write . Not because it is beneath your intellect ,which I do not doubt.
But because of your bias . Which you are proud of , and rightfully so .
But which stops you from making an objective analysis of your own mentors words .
Like a son who cannot sit in judgement on his own father , even though he spends countless hours learning his fathers words .@ Menachem
I think that we need Mashiach now …. the REAL one .“This is one thing we both agree on.”
——————————–
Not at all sure we can agree on this one . For obvious reasons .
You have a so called ‘Nevua’ from the navi [which is included in the Shlosha Asar Minor Nevi’im] , regarding Biat HaMashiach.
. Whereas I do not .
For me [and 98% of Klal Yisrael] it still is the Trei Asar minor Nevi’im .
Which causes REAL DIFFERENCES re who the REAL MASHIACH could or could not be .
A real big issue ,
A big issue which is not going to disappear by good natured banter , nor by sidestepping this issue by referring to other points.
Hope this is not of the causes of the beginning of a real Schism in Klal Yisrael.
Thats the last thing we need now.
Question remains – Do we have 12 or 13 Minor Prophets ?
We have to hash it out and come to Klal Yisrael wide accepted Maskana.
A clear, level headed , unbiased , proof based discussion is urgently needed.@menachem
Thanks for offering your friends to write [without bias] .
You seem to be missing the point again . Did your friends change to habad BECAUSE and as A RESULT of these issues , or they changed because of ‘other good things’ they saw in habad ? Think its the latter .The former are not a catalyst to change towards habad.
So when it comes to those issues , they are biased . Biased by the other ‘good things’ they think they derive from habad .
1] To doubt the leader , axiomatically includes [in the mind of most people] also doubting his other lessons and hadracha. Which they are loath to accept . And which they are clearly programmed to reject [the real purpose of the near deification – or the deification of their leader , depending on the observer] , one of the clear purposes of the ‘whistling’ mentioned before.
2] Once you are part of a movement , you identify with it . Your personality gets enmeshed with the movement , its leader and its ideals .
Criticism of the movement is automatically perceived as criticism of the person himself .Which triggers an automated defense mechanism .
Hardly conducive to level headed thinking and analysis.
So when analyzing whether the ‘current’ rebbi of habad did or did not use references to his father in law [the original issue raised on these pages] as a means to hint to himself . It will be the unbiased people who are most qualified to reach a correct conclusion.
The biased people do not even seem to grasp the mere existence of the issue at all .
On all the main issues I raised here on this thread , I did not seem to get any to the point answers . Only sidestepping or their wholesale ignoring .@Qwerty
Th.
What is the Kiss Method ?
@menachem
-Is there anything still happening with the point I raised about ‘bias ‘ ?
-Do not think you thought for one minute That I took the phaiphing personal , they were not phaiphing at us as people , but they were phaiphing at any challenge to their derech , wherever that derech might still take them in the future ….
.
Btw – that other religion started of , totally Jewish , separated itself from Judaism and emerged as a totally separate one .
Now, that did not happen overnight . It is my understanding that the break was finalized some 300 years later . Maybe not 300 years but close to it . It was a slow process .
I don’t think habad is a repeat of that other one , but in my lifetime I saw the goalposts moving in a quite remarkable way.
Who can know what the end result is going to be ?
When the moving started ,I would not be able to predict that we would be standing where we are now . And yet here we are.
So how can we safely predict where the goalposts will be in 50 years from now ?
the only difference is that their rebbi is not here to move the posts further …. but who can predict what [some] hasidim are going to do ?
I think that we need Mashiach now …. the REAL one .Re
used socks
Please check the original post .
It was not referring to hasidic socks at all .It was referring to changing IKAREI EMUNA , things which are the ABSOLUTE FOUNDATIONS of our belief , like used socks .
Someone who is willing to discard and change IKAREI EMUNA for conveniences sake
1] is delivering a ringing slap right in the face of millions of maaminim through the generations who lived a life of mesirat nefesh mamash to uphold just those ikarei emuna .
2] Thats besides the immense chizuk a certain religion, bent on soul snatching , preferably Jewish soul snatching , is getting for the propagation of their false messiah and his second coming …
3] All That is besides losing ones Chezkat Kashrut when it comes to trusting them ever again in this field until and unless a thorough and complete overhaul is conducted, pinpointing how and why such aberrations occurred and what will be done to stop it from ever happening again .Changing Ikarei Emuna is much much more than , lehavdil, changing the Constitution of the United States . Imagine if some people would sneak in to the place where the original document is housed , change the text and then claim that their text is the correct one and that all US affairs are to be conducted according to the new text .
Can you imagine the chaos and turmoil this would engender ?To the Group
A careful read of the comments reveals that all the habad defenders have one thing in common . They are swept up in the benefits of their movement ,coupled with explicit lifelong conditioning from their rebbi to totally ignore any criticism of their movement .
That is leading them to ignore the crux of the issues raised, and instead focus on other tangent unrelated points which serve as a smokescreen enabling them to avoid the points raised.
.
Just a small question – when their rebbe told his hasidim to “phaiph” , who do you think they were phaiphing on ?
They were phaiphing on us , on our criticism of habad . On our questions .
.
So is it any wonder that they seem to be ,excuse the expression, “hard of hearing” , when it comes to criticism .
Their rebbe did a good job , they are well prepared.
Please habad hasidim , this is not meant to upset you , you are wonderful people and you are to be admired for the manifold qualities you embody .
But that does not make those issues disappear.@nomesorah
“Though I can’t place my finger on where we disagree. What is your point about Chabad?”
——————
Please read my posts . Hope it is clear enough ….
.To the group –
Read Nomesorahs arguments on this thread . It seems like their only purpose is to distract from the issues raised here ….
Sorry this is not personal . You might very well be a terrific individual in real life …@menachem
There is a HUGE DIFFERENCE between your bias and my [supposed] bias . Yours PREDATED the issue , whereas mine [in your eyes] is a RESULT of this issue .
We are discussing the issue. I am saying that your response to the issue is colored by your PREEXISTING bias , whereas my response has no pre existing bias .
The difference is so simple that it is mind boggling that an [ostensibly ] moderate habad supporter like you would ignore it .@ menachem
I used to be naive , but made a uturn on this .Why?
Because you studied and listened to so many of his talks that you realized what he really meant?
Or because you heard so many one-line excerpts of his statements?
Or because you heard so much anti-Chabad rhetoric?
—————-
None of the above .
It probably a result of my maturing and seeing the world as it is and not as I would like it to be , combined with the weight of the evidence ..
[btw Listening to his talks is irrelevant to this question]@menachem
‘Think that your being a hasid of his , precludes you of objectivity in this regardI can say the same about you being a misnaged.’
——
Wrong . I was not a misnaged. Far from it . I Was an Omed Min HaTsad. Did not understand what all those people wanted from habad . And had sympathy for the [apparent] victim of unwarranted accusations.
Nevertheless came to that conclusion.
So it seems that you agree that you are not qualified ?
as your only rejoinder is that I wasn’t any better ?
Suggest you study all the utterances [and their effects on the hasidim] FROM A NEUTRAL STANCE , [or even better – imagine satmar or rav shach would have said them] and tell us – honestly –
whether naivete in this case corresponds to the objective truth ….@ always ask
Habad claimed back in 1991 that their rebbi performed that feat by predicting that NO ONE in Israel would be harmed in the first gulf war .
Which serves as ironclad proof that he is a Navi .
ounded
. They conveniently forgot that Jewish lawyer in Petah Tiqva who died from a direct missile hit , not to mention countless others who indirectly died as a result of the missiles , in addition to the many Jewish wounded.
Rambam – “ALL details of prediction have to come fruition . Even a small detail cant be omitted.”
.
If that would be a proof , then it should serve as qualification for the opposite of a navi emet and its results ….@nomesorah
‘We don’t do this with Gur, Satmar, or any other group, that has way less tradition and is even farther out there’
.
Come on … This is so ridiculous , its not even funny .
You not even getting it after 20 pages …
Gur and Satmar ? Have they changed Ikarei Emuna like used socks ?
.
Tradition ?
Come on….
What tradition is there in Neo habad ? Argument is NOT about the old parts of habad . Its about the NEW parts . There is no tradition on those whatsoever.
There is a tradition AGAINST them ….@menachem
“All those things you quoted were actually said about his father-in-law. His anivus was so great, that he never publicly called himself the Rebbe. He constantly said that the Rebbe and nossi was his father-in-law.”
.
Careful and objective perusal of ALL his referrals to his shver troughout his hanhaga , show that he DID use referral to his Shver as a convenient vehicle to hint to himself . I used to be naive , but made a uturn on this .
Think that your being a hasid of his , precludes you of objectivity in this regard …@nomesorah
Re public learning of nistar thru the generations …..
.
1] What does it say in Masechta Hagiga re being doresh be maaseh merkava ? In front of how many people ?
2] What does the Shach , on the foremost Leaders of Klal Yisrael, say about Limud HaKabala , in his Peirush on Hilchot Talmud Torah in YD ?
3] Is Midrash classified as Nistar ? Or as Nigleh ? Was my post regarding Nistar meant to include Midrash or exclude it ?
4] Was one of the reasons the early hasidim were put in herem bec of popularizing kabala to all, as opposed to the select few Talmidei Chachamim as until then ?
.
Think about the answers to those questions …..@nomesorah
“You left out 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 2f 2g and so on. Which is almost all the other Rebbes and other Gedolim putting their weight on the Lubavitcher Rebbe being moshiach…..”
.
Cryptic. What exactly are you referring to ?
.@lostspark
The issue is not “the plus or the minus of learning chasidut” .
The issue is habad theology , its acrobatics , its sources , its merit and its repercussions .
There is nothing to read which will undo those acrobatics .
It is a failed theology .Main point is not “yes kabala not kabala”
Widespread accessibility and delving into kabala is a fact anyway. .
Point to be taken now , is learning and delving into it with an ASSURANCE that one understands it properly , ask questions , come up with answers , bring proofs etc. in an absolute manner like in nigleh . That is mistaken and dangerous , in my view at least .
.
The Gaon says that of all talmidie ARI , only r chaim vital understood the nimshal . Being that the Ari when discoursing about kabala , only said what he wanted to convey , in the form of a mashal , not the nimshal itself .
.
Thats where habad is going haywire . They approach it with the full self assurance typically associated with their other activities .
.
Anything not within our clearly accepted mesorah from our great grandparents, “proven” by habad of the last 70 years , based on kabala , is suspicious.
Refer to my previous post where you can see habad theological acrobatics on display .
Each twist and each turn was at the time supported by myriad “proofs” , with footnotes and what have you . With beautiful convincing language.@CS
Re emuna in Moshe Rabenu –
Gaon from Vilna explains this very simply –
They had Emuna that Moshe’s actions and words were fully grounded in in his Avdut . In the fact that he is merely an Eved ,a servant . With no personal interests , no illusions of personal grandeur. As a result they could rest assured that his message which he brought to the Yidden was pure Dvar HaShem ,unadulterated.
The emuna was not in Moshe . The emuna was in his Avdut.@ nomesorah
…. classical pitfalls of learning Kabbalah apply here. Chabad ignores practical Kabbalah which was the downfall of Sabbtai Tzvi and others. They are not studying the intense devotions that risk ones mental state. It isn’t really much different than other groups hashkafos ……
.
You are either not getting it or ignoring on purpose . Would suggest you reread the relevant post slowly and carefully …..@ Nomesorah
The break over theology was first . Their breaking observance was a REACTION to our rejection of their theology .
Inform yourself.Vilna Gaon has an explanation on Emuna in Moshe.
Runs opposite to what habad would want it to be .Lets look at the history , the reality , the facts – The official Chabad line as publicized by their rebbe , their chozer , their rabbanim , their Mashpiim FROM THE START ,not any Harry who claims to be Chabad — Ok ?
Lets be honest without any obfuscation and changing the topic .
In the beginning , [1] the line was -Anyone who claims that Chabad claims to be messianic is a plain liar , against chasidus , mechalel shem lubavitsh etc , Only the Mitnagdim who tried to besmirch Lubavitsh said so , and it was an indication of their blind hate . Other Chasidim stuck up for Lubavitsh as the innocent victim of Hotsaat Shem Ra. All the evidence is there , in the archives of HaModia and Kfar Chabad and other newspapers of that era.
Then [2] it changed , Chabad Chassidim made a u turn , openly proclaimed their rebbe as Mashiach , but the rebbe openly criticized it . He definitely is not Mashiach . Here too, the evidence is plainly there in all the newspapers of the era . Then [3] he too followed in their u turn , openly acknowledged his own messiahship , clearly evidenced by his periodic near weekly dvar malchus dating from approx 6 months preceding his stroke in the spring of 1992 , until the stroke , also available in the archives, as well the weekly issues of the kfar chabad newspaper the official chabad public organ. . In the meantime [3A] he also proclaimed himself a navi , like chagai zecharia and malachi . Nevua ,after a hiatus of thousands of years ,has finally come back to klal yisrael. b’h. Also clearly documented in dvar malcus [parshas shoftim] . Quite a big u turn , when you compare no 1 – with no 3A. It s not finished yet , because then [3B] as Nevua [!] he proclaimed that Mashiach is here already now kipshuto and will take us bekarov out of galus , and that we are in the first generation of the geula. So as a result there was a wall to wall coallition of all official chabad mashpiiim and Rabbanim saying that [4] it is one of ikarei emuna to believe and follow a navi plus their rebbi is a navi plus he prophesied on himself that he is mashiach plus it is one of the ikarei emuna that mashiach has to finish the geula before he dies . One plus one plus one plus one – equals four . Result – it is one of the ikarei emuna that their rebbi CANNOT die before the finish of the geula . Not me , not I am saying this , This was OFFICIAL Chabad theology. Evidence is there . Its all in the archives . Read kfar Chabad weekly , sichos of r yoel kahn . Sichos and articles of mendel wechter , of r ashkenazi rav of kfar chabad [the town], signed kol koreis of virtually all rabbanim of chabad kehillot.
Then [5] the unthinkable happened . He died. The minority, including yoel kahn , stayed with their previous belief that mashiach must finish the geula before he dies [the normative Jewish belief as clearly delineated by the RMBN , Rabenu Moshe ben NACHMAN in sefer havikuach] so they jettisoned the nevua parts . They admitted in being mistaken [!] in that . Here it is not sure where exactly [in their own eyes] they went wrong .. but never mind. The majority however [6] could not bring themselves to throw the navi part out of the window , so they jettisoned the dying part . No, they proclaimed loudly, mashiach can die before he finishes the job . What previously was considered part of the ikarei emuna, is now hevel havalim , or depending on a machloket , where everyone can choose what they like , whats convenient for them .
My question is – who needs to argue against Habad Theology any more , when Habad themselves are doing such a splendid work ?
Caveat – They are wonderful people ,just theologically mistaken .You misunderstood me . Am not taking issue with habad learning nistar , perse.
Am only trying to explain the tendency in Habad to advocate for all types of convenient [for them] but outlandish theological ideas.
Am only tracing the dots .@Qwerty
No delusions to get anyone to change –
This is a correct observation – Mentioned before that Habad Hassidim are explicitly instructed by their rebbe the following :
In every argument you should act with Ahavat yisrael , manners and respect . But in your own mind , in your own pnimiyut , you should give credence to your opponents arguments , LESS THAN KLIPAT HASHUM .
So the habad hassidim who would be swayed by any of your arguments are in direct contradiction to their own rebbi . Totally untenable.
Are they special people ? Meaning :good , sincere ,non judging, accepting, joyful , ready for mesirat nefsh ? Most definitely .
Is their theology sorely mistaken ? Most definitely .
Both of those statements are not contradictory. Not at all .Hello ….
1]Question remains – Baal Hatanya is not called Nosi Hador . Neither is the Mitteler . Nor the tsemach Tseddeq. Not the Rashab.
Not the Habad Rebbeim from the other dynasties . Niyezin and Liadi etc.
2] many people coming …. is not an answer to anything. I know many people following many things which not necessarily are right and/ or correct ….For thousands of years – since matan torah – we had one thing and one thing only- in our public domain. Nigleh . Even though Nistar is an integral part of the torah , it was not in the public domain . this started to change from the time of the publication of the Zohar , the earlier Mekubalim, the Ari and his disciples , but was mainly popularised since the advent of the Baal Shem and his talmidim .Now i want to posit a theory which may get some of you up in arms , but I think may be correct.
The reason why the Baal Shem [and disciples] popularised it ,was to rejuvenate the Avodat HaShem of its learners , to bring a fire , a life into them . Which was lacking previously . In which they succeeded.
So the purpose of that limud was not as a kiyum of mitsvat talmud torah and yediat hatorah, rather for its EFFECTS ON ITS LEARNERS
But not in order that they should become experts in the ‘Dak al Dak understanding’ of Nistar in the real , true and accurate sense , like klal yisrael was in limud nigleh for all the centuries since matan torah.
Habad was the only one which took it a step further . The early habad Rebeim advocated for their followers to delve into Nistar as close as possible to the real ‘dak al dak understanding ‘.
But that was , in my humble opinion at least, also only in order to further their Avodat Hashem .FOR ITS EFFECTS ON ITS LEARNERS, For exactly the same reason as the other talmidei baal shem .
What followed, when the generations passed, was , the emergence of an ‘illusion’ in habad that they do have a true and accurate dak al dak understanding of nistar , of its terminology , of what its words really mean , in the EXACT SAME WAY klal yisrael did for the last 3333 years in nigleh. Nigleh ,which was not only learned for its results on the learner , but for a clear absolute understanding of the torah
Therefore , considering this background , it is much easier in habad to use all types of nistar for ‘proofs’ for any outlandish new theory one would want to advance , convinced as they are that they are true conveyors of the accurate understanding of nistar .
They [and we] should remember that the true purpose of its limud was meant FOR THE EFFECTS ON ITS LEARNERS , not for a true and foolproof accuracy, which can afterwards be used to try and be medame milsa lemilsa , etc. because the true and accurate understanding remains elusive even if explained and packaged in the nicest and most appealing wrapping paper .
I think that this is a fault line between habad and the rest of klal yisrael.
Not the only one . One of the fault lines.@arso
Thanks .
Btw. When you think about it – the ‘double language’ employed [numerous times] when discussing the Shver [Frierdiker Rebbe] and their present Rebbe, serves the same purpose .
A hunch only , have no proof for it .
But there is a clear pattern .@qwerty
LOL.No one has explained the “constant glitching” of Habad theologically . Since the last rebbe took the mantle of leadership, that is . It seems like there was a constant ‘probing’ of the temperature , how far one can go , and still be accepted [by the chassidim and mainly] in the wider orthodox community. So what we ended up with was a sort of gradual ‘Climate Change’ .
slowly [and surely] the public was conditioned to accept one ‘chidddush’ , preparing the way for the acceptance of the next one.
Reminds me – lehavdil – of the gradual Judicial Revolution by the Israeli Supreme Court from 1992 onwards [, with apparent success].
If they would introduce their ‘end chidush’ at the beginning , they would be greeted by howls of outrage .
But over the years the public’s mind was conditioned , step by step.“….The hope that the people of the world will recognize that they’re under the reshus of the tzaddik.”
.
This is terrible . The Baal Hatanye was not Nosi HaDor . Nor was the Baal shem Tov . None of them were called by that title .
This is a RECENT Habad appellation to their leader , putting him above everyone else . They are trying to acclimatize all of us , our [gullible] minds into slowly accepting his so called “malchus” .
He is what he is . the leader of the habad chassidim .
That is an accurate reflection of reality.
The rest is hyperbole or propaganda .
Or Better said – both .@Querty
I am a proper black hatter but admire your courage and honesty.
Have a look at the Boston University School of Theology . Their website ,where they compare habad theology to lehavdil other religions in their beginners faze . Google it.
Eye opening .@nomesorah
Seems like there was an agenda .
Used to defend habad for many years , but made a u turn , in face of the developments over the years .
Still defend habad for all their qualities.
But they are definitely misguided .rav shach crticized habad already in the sixties , it went public in the eighties.
hello ?
in my mind this whole conversation is fruitless [bar one benefit]
Habad followers have been instructed by their rebbe that in all arguments about belief with non habad , to give credence to the other side ‘less than klipat hashum’. Understandably only bedarkei noam , with ahavat yisrael. I saw it printed in the name of their rebbe . In one of their publications . So why would you suspect a bona fide sincere follower to disregard his own rebbes directive ? Whatever you say to him is ….
Tthe only benefit is to balance the argument for the uninitiated .correction-
@sechel
Mitnaged ; let’s have an open no holds barred discussion about the personality , education , formative years , and end of life public pronouncements, including a step by step discussion of all the details of r shimon deutsh s book [and ashkavte drebi of r rivkin hyd
Chassid : No . These details are banned .
Better to concentrate on all the propaganda . About which our manhig said – chazaka al ta’amula she’ena chozeret rekam.
Mitnaged : but about the leaders of all the other groups of Jews you do encourage such an open no holds barred discussion ? What’s the difference ?
Chassid : This question only reveals your ignorance . Our manhig is TOTALLY different to all the other leaders of jews . He is Mashiach . He is greater than Moshe Rabenu . Atsmut umehut of HKBH is resting within his holy Guf [a’l] . How can you even compare ?
.
Which detail mentioned here is incorrect ?@sechel
Mitnaged ; let’s have an open no holds barred discussion about the personality , education , formative years , and end of life propagation of personal self aggrandizement of the founder of your personality cult , including a step by step discussion of all the details of r shimon deutsh s book [and ashkavte drebi of r rivkin hyd
Chassid : No . These details are banned .
Better to concentrate on all the propaganda . About which our manhig said – chazaka al ta’amula she’ena chozeret rekam.
Mitnaged : but about the leaders of all the other groups of Jews you do encourage such an open no holds barred discussion ? What’s the difference ?
Chassid : This question only reveals your ignorance . Our manhig is TOTALLY different to all the other leaders of jews . He is Mashiach . He is greater than Moshe Rabenu . Atsmut umeut of HKBH is resting within his holy Guf [a’l] . How can you even compare ?
.
Which detail mentioned here is incorrect ?Our Greatgrandfathers & mothers were not busy with “candidates” for Mashiach . And nor should we.
Rambam wasnt busy with it . Bet Yosef was not . Rama was not . Baal HaTanya was not . and Ben Ish Chai was not either .
.
Cf Tanya ,were he says [free translation ]
.
WHERE IS THAT NEW MINHAG COMING FROM – SOMETHING OUR FOREFATHERS NEVER KNEW – TO ASK A TSADIK WHERE ONES PARNASAH IS COMING FROM ? THE TSADIK DOESNT KNOW THAT ! LIKE HE DOES NOT KNOW WHO MASHIACH IS , HE ALSO DOES NOT KNOW WHERE A MANS PARNASAH WILL COME FROM AS BOTH OF THOSE THINGS ARE ONE OF THE SEVEN THING WHICH ARE MECHUSIN MIBNE ADAM ! THE ONLY TACHLIT OF GOING TO A TSADIK IS ONLY IN ORDER TO HEAR, WHERE AND HOW THE PETITIONER CAN IMPROVE IN HIS AVODAT HASHEM …..
.
Clear from Tanyas words that all of this is mere speculation , non productive and frowned upon .
.
Again – this thread is another ploy in furthering the ‘candidacy’ of someone whose followers have a vested interest of promoting .This thread is a fig leaf intended to cover
1] for close to neo notsri belief systems
2] for close to neo notsri personal veneration
3] for treating ikarei emuna like socks – to be changed and discarded when convenient .
.
None of the minhagim or kulot of the yeshiva world , irrespective whether they do have merit, or are lacking merit , are touching any of the above issues .
.
So let the objective reader judge for himself – is the intended cover – a cover ?
Or only a “see through cover” , essentially uncovering those 3 problematic issues ?@avira
which sefer – what page ?
it does not negate what I quoted re name of mashiach