yankel berel

@ menachem
————————–
qwerty to menachem
We’ve kept our end of the deal, but you’ve bowed out. I agree with Yankel Berel Shtikah Kihoda, If you can’t defend your position, you have no position.
———-
menachem to qwerty

Qwerty, you haven’t answered the question that I directed at you SEVEN times.
========================
yankel to menachem

1] You also did not answer any [of the many] questions raised by me ……

2] If the only answer is
moche , moche , moche
and nothing substantial ….. that is also shtikah …….

@nomesorah
original post
D] Habad , under clear direction of their Rebbe , their rabbanim and their mashpi’im , flip flopped regarding ikarei emuna.
———————————
response by nomesorah
D] I don’t really understand why you could think that Ikkarei Emunah are in play here. If you think that everybody starts off being born with them and has to mess them up, then your position would seem tenable. It doesn’t work that way. Every chareidi propaganda publication, messes up on Ikkarei Emunah. How would they not ?
=================================
D response] you ask ‘why I could think ikarei emuna are at play here’ . Simple because thats what all habad rabbanim invoked when they issued their unanimous psak that their rebbi COULD NOT DIE. They and the Chief Chozer of Habad . R yoel Kahn .
[This response of yours creates a niggling doubt that your responses might just be nothing more than a diversion tactic] .This was not merely ‘some propaganda publication’ . This is serious stuff. This was signed by all habad rabbanim and the chozer , clearly based on their rebbi . The OFFICIAL HABAD POSITION . Then the position split . But according to both sides , this psak , based on ikarei emuna , changed .
So , did they flip flop ?
CLEARLY SO .
.
Now- R Menachem Shmei , nomesorah , sechel , and whoever else – should we apply the klal of Shtika KeHoda’a here or not ?

@ nomesorah
original post
B] habad hasidim [near]deify their rebbi , more so than any other group or sect in klal Yisrael ever.
—-
nomesorah
B] This is debatable. But if you change “deify their rebbe” to ‘associate their rebbe with the divine’, Then I agree. This slight wordplay, is a big difference in theology and philosophy.
.
B response] The main point you left out – “MORE SO THAN ANY OTHER GROUP IN KLAL YISRAEL”
.
-whether the ‘heter’ to pray to their rebbi [given by the rebbi himself],
-whether the rebbi is defined by atsmus umehus [i.e. the essence of God] clothed in a human body [again, defined by their rebbi himself] ,
-whether the rebbi is the joyful bearer of nevua mamash [again – news delivered their rebbi himself]
-whether rebbi is the ‘head’ of the klal ,as spelt in Rosh Bnei Yisrael [RBY], where the whole chiyut and life of every yehudi [not only his hasidim] is totally dependent on the habad rebbi , and if this would stop for one second their life would immediately stop. [again , told to us by their rebbi]
.
Whether all of the above [and more] should be categorised as , [1] “deify their rebbe” OR as, [2] ‘associate their rebbe with the divine’, is not that important . As long as we agree on what’s IN the jar , even if we do not agree on the label.
.
We can agree then – That The above is COMPLETE ANATHEMA in any other sect or group in klal yisrael .

@sechel
When will you realize that criticism on habad theology is NOT at all the same as “finding fault in others” which is “spoken out against in almost every perek in shas,and you say it countless times in davening” .
Far from it .
.
You do not want to follow a lie , or believe in a lie . For that you have to shed your naivete , and examine the issues . After that’s done and you arrived at a satisfactory conclusion , you can be naive again [a wonderful ma’ala] learn hasidut and aspire to something higher [a wonderful way of life].
.
THERE IS NO CONNECTION AT ALL BTWEEN SO CALLED “HATE” AND EXAMINING MODERN HABADS CLAIMS TO MESSIAHSHIP , DIVINITY AND NEVIUT.

Dear Yankel,

“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.”
——————————————————–
Completely untrue. Maybe you were born yesterday. Maybe you will be born again tomorrow.

That is the proper attitude of a talmid for a rebbe. Everything the rebbe says is unequivocally the Word of the Torah. (A wise student knows not to retain everything as is.)
AND IT IS ONLY HALF OF WHAT R BORUCH BER WAS TO HIS REBBE …..
==========================================================
1] Even R Boruch Ber did not deify his Rebbe .
2] His Rebbe R Chaim had NO PART WHATSOEVER in r BB ‘s respect toward him . It was TOTALLY on r BB’s part .
3] R BB ‘s respect toward his Rebbe was an outgrowth of his immense Tsidkut in ALL OTHER AREAS of yahadut . Likewise he was IMMENSELY scared of chet . He was IMMENSELY absorbed in his learning , in his kibbud av , in his chesed etc. etc. — His respect was merely a REFLECTION of his inner stature , not the result of some targeted brainwash.
4] R BB was a yachid . There is NO other sector in klal yisrael , as a klal ,comparable to habad . To reject that, is like rejecting the existence of the sun .

@nomesorah
Dear Yankel,
————————
“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 ”
—————————————–
I take exception to your posts having anything to do with Ikarei Emunah.
===========================================================
Dear NOm
Please check the following post [the above post was referring to the following post]. There is a clear reference to ikarei emuna there ….
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
…… 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 .

the bris thing was directed by The Rebbe. [CS]
——————-
There you are. The personality and picture ‘deification’ WAS directed by their rebbe.
Not by any of the previous rebbes .
Not by any of the other habad dynasties – kapust liadi etc .
Not by the Malachim .
Not by the Rashag , had he not capitulated , and had he continued with his leadership as his mother in law , the rabbanit Shneerson [the wife of the Rayats] wanted him to .
.
All the others did not have any messianic aspirations .
That is the difference .
.
As simple as can be .

@nomesorah
You are an EXPERT in changing topics and leaving real unanswered questions with the illusion of an answer.
Should compile all question raised in this thread , match them one by one with answers .
Read them carefully.
The result might resemble … a comedy .

This discussion seems to be going around and around , without ‘to the point’ answers .
Just A quick repeat of a previous post – and a short question – which one of the details below are incorrect ?
1] Please post the incorrect details [if there are]
2] If on the other hand they are correct – please can we have an answer why this is not a Reiuta in habad s Chazaka ?
——————————————
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 ?
—–
Am really looking forward to a point on point , honest discussion on each of the above ‘steps’ .
Can we safely assume that in case of no [adequate] response – the Klal of Shtika KeHoda’a would apply ?

@menachem
Please elaborate . Who else had Nevua after Chagai , Z and M ?

#2214125
————————–
Cant find it . Suppose it exists .
If Menachem would be so kind to paste his response in full ….

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 .

@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 .

@ 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
“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
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 .

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 ?

@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 ….
.

@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]

@ 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 ….

@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
“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 ?
.

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.

@ 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 …..

Vilna Gaon has an explanation on Emuna in Moshe.
Runs opposite to what habad would want it to be .