Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@ARSo
j started the process by claiming to his followers that he is the messiah, they got it from him.
According to his followers’ claims, at least.
It is them who claim that he was the messiah.
And it is them who claim that they got this idea that he was the messiah from j himself.
They do not claim to have dreamed it up.
They claim that that they are acting according to his instructions and guidance.
And it is them who RAMBAN debated.
Whether their claims could be valid or are per force invalid.
Where RAMBAN stated in the absolute negative , because of lack of realization of the nevu’ot in j’s lifetime .
Stated publicly in a major high stakes debate in front of the absolute ruler of his country, in the presence of the Jews’ most implacable enemies.
And disseminated far and wide with the express intention that Jews all over should base their belief on this rock-solid argument and withstand the enormous pressures they were facing.
Which obviously could not be ‘open to further discussion’.
Possible discussion being- maybe gmara sanhedrin does lend its support for j’s possible candidacy.
[obviously not taking j ‘s personality into consideration]
This was clearly unthinkable.
Why ?@ARSo
According to you –
Why did RAMBAN consider the gmara of sanhedrin as a non challenge ?
————————————————————————————-We cannot fully grasp the ahrayut of being at the helm of a vulnerable Jewish population, not only vulnerable in physical manner at the whim of the above, but also vulnerable in a spiritual sense where huge chunks of this population were torn of it, converting to the overwhelmingly dominant religion of Xtianity .
It was under these circumstances that RAMBAN struggled to provide physical protection to his flock [losing a high profile disputation like this one , could result in exile deportation or worse] and spiritual protection for them , as they were constantly bombarded by zealous preachers whose threats, blandishments and bribes they were forced to listen to.
It goes without saying that RAMBAN fully realized the ultimate stakes of this debate and the impact it would have. And prepared accordingly.
This wasn’t just a flippant conversation over coffee and cake.
He for sure took into account any possible rejoinder from his opponent[s] and its possible repercussions.Nevertheless he stated , and publicly disseminated written records thereof , that a mashiach who died or disappeared without fulfilling the nevu’ot is unequivocally a mashiach sheker , exhorting all of Spanish Jewry TO BASE THEIR BELIEF on this.
Did he not expect or anticipate a challenge [by believing Jews or lehavdil learned apostates] from sanhedrin about Daniel , according to one pshat in Rashi ? What would he say if he would be challenged ?
——————————————————————-@ARSo
1] We cannot fully appreciate what it means to live under a medieval absolute monarchy. With a medieval populace.
We also cannot fully grasp the ahrayut of being at the helm of a vulnerable Jewish population, not only vulnerable in physical manner at the whim of the above, but also vulnerable in a spiritual sense where huge chunks of this population were torn of it, converting to the overwhelmingly dominant religion of Xtianity .It was under these circumstances that RAMBAN struggled to provide physical protection to his flock [losing a high profile disputation like this one , could result in exile deportation or worse] and spiritual protection for them , as they were constantly bombarded by zealous preachers whose threats, blandishments and bribes they were forced to listen to.
It goes without saying that RAMBAN fully realized the ultimate stakes of this debate and the impact it would have. And prepared accordingly.
This wasn’t just a flippant conversation over coffee and cake.
He for sure took into account any possible rejoinder from his opponent[s] and its possible repercussions.Nevertheless he stated , and publicly disseminated written records thereof , that a mashiach who died or disappeared without fulfilling the nevu’ot is unequivocally a mashiach sheker , exhorting all of Spanish Jewry TO BASE THEIR BELIEF on this.
Did he not expect or anticipate a challenge [by believing Jews or lehavdil learned apostates] from sanhedrin about Daniel , according to one pshat in Rashi ? What would he say if he would be challenged ?Saying : “I disagree with Rashi ? BASE YOUR BELIEF on my interpretation”, if there exist valid alternatives ?
The fanatical debating clergy would seize this like a hungry wolf would a fresh carcass.
All this per force went through his mind. And he nevertheless stated that a mashiach who died or disappeared without fulfilling the nevu’ot is unequivocally a mashiach sheker , exhorting all of Spanish Jewry TO BASE THEIR BELIEF on this.It is obvious , therefore, that RAMBAN considered the gmara of sanhedrin as a non challenge.
For the simple and logical reason I mentioned – Daniel never laid claim to Messiahship and did not start it. Therefore he did not fail and is unsullied .
As opposed to j who clearly started and claimed messiahship and failed .
This distinction is so ironclad and obvious that RAMBAN was prepared to BASE Spanish Jewry’s TOTAL BELIEF on it.2] Re Ramban arguing on RASHI whenever he disagreed with him. I am unable give an ultimate absolute positive answer. But , go through his peirushim al shas and al hatorah , on halacha AND ON AGADETA , there are countless places where he argues and raises objections with RASHI explanations.
Why would he stay silent on this one ? A quite important one, if you ask me.
Again , this is not an argument for example, about makat dever whether Egyptian animals in their houses were subject to the maka or not ? Which happens to be an argument between RAMBAN and RASHI.
Remember ,we are talking here about something which people have to use as yesodot for their ikarei emuna.RAMBAN is not arguing with RASHI on this. There is no reason to assume so, aderaba , there is ample reason to take on the other way, as mentioned.
@qwerty
Wasn’t really serious.
Habad people ARE Jewish.@ARSo
Re RAMBAN agreeing to RASHI whether Daniel could be mashiach.1] I cannot imagine RAMBAN giving a public answer in front of the King and afterwards sending written accounts all over Spain , all the while knowing that RASHI , the foremost mefaresh on the gmara , is disagreeing with his pshat. If RAMBAN uses that as proof klapei huts and klapei pnim [for his coreligionists who were under constant pressures to convert] , It must have been in RAMBAN’s own opinion ,totally ironclad.
Not something which someone could come tomorrow and say – hey, this is against an offene RASHI in sanhedrin.
Per force that he agrees with RASHI.2] RAMBAN consistently brings , and argues with RASHI wherever he disagrees with his pshat , whether al hashas or al hatorah. If he would argue with RASHI in sanhedrin, why is he keeping quiet about it ?
Per force that he agrees with RASHI.3] So , if RAMBAN agrees with RASHI that Daniel is a fitting candidate even though he was niftar already , then why is he disqualifying j on the grounds that he died ? The answer is simple. There is no problem in dying in of itself. There is a problem ,however, in dying WITHOUT realization of nevu’ot hanevi’im.
Why is that a problem ? Because we cannot have a situation of a free for all vacancy, where first come first served, the mashiach job is open for all wannabe’s who happen to lay claim to throne.
So, to lay a claim and start the mashiach process and FAIL by dying [dissappearing/hiding/going on permanent sick leave] without realization of the nevu’ot , is a reliable filter to keep out all plastic mashiachs.Daniel, however, never started , never lay a claim to the throne, so why should he be any less qualified than a living person who would want to lay a claim and be equally subject to the reliable filter we mentioned before ?
So, there is ample reason to reject j ,according to all of RASHI’s explanations, on the sole grounds that he started and subsequently failed
Ditto with habads late leader .There is no point whatsoever going into whether Yaakov Avinu died or disappeared. This is totally irrelevant here.
.@philosopher
As continuation of my previous post, RAMBAM equally mandates a TEST for any wannabe mashiach. A test which he can either fail or pass.
If the ‘Lo Met Business’ guarantees a pass, then the test is worthless.
Per force, that RAMBAM and RAMBAN need a positive and tangible result , in the here and now.Otherwise, the mashiach claim is PROVEN to be a FALSE CLAIM.
.
So, we can safely state : the late habad leader/rebbi is a FALSE MASHIACH.
.@lostspark
It is RAV Shach.
Not because he is “my” godol, and am asking for common courtesy, but because there happen to be some halachot of kvod talmid haham which you happen to be bound to, as the bottom line stays … you are Jewish.
Even if qwerty seems to have a problem with that.@philosopher
Menachem Shmei will not answer on the Ramban’s and Rambam’s psak on a moshiach sheker not fullfilling the prophecies during their lifetimes and how it applies to their moshiach sheker because he’s afraid to tell you that he believes that his rebbe is still physically alive. He knows when he will “sound like a legitimate talmud chachum” and when he will come off looking stupid…This is a crucial part why Lubavitche NEED their rebbe to have been buried alive because if he is still physically alive his “nevuah” can still come true.
====================
It may be as you say that this their motivation [whole or in part]
but it is not going to help them , for the simple reason :
When RAMBAN and RAMBAM say that there is an objective test for a wannabe mashiach to assume the mantle, they mean what they say.Wannabe’s have to TESTED .
They have to PASS .
Passing means ACTUALLY building the B’H and gathering all Jews.
Not hiding behind some worthless ‘not dying claim’.This claim is worthless because this can be employed by any wannabe, from j to sh’ts to ….
It is clear that RAMBAN , using j’s failure as proof to disqualify him , considered realization of nevu’ot hanevi’im as a necessity PRIOR to any disappearance/ hiding/whatever/dying.
Lack of tangible results , result in automatic eternal disqualification.
So the ‘Lo Met Business’ has , when considered carefully , no ‘fringe benefits’ whatsoever.Nu,
1] Am still waiting for any reaction re RAMBAN and RAMBAM’s psak that a wannabe mashiach who fails the test of realizing the relevant nevu’ot during his lifetime-
is a Mashiach sheker …..2] Am equally waiting for an explanation of habad post on a truck of a picture of their rebbi with the inscription god right next to it …
Lostspark?
Menachem ?
CS ?
Sechel ?It is eerily quiet …….
@Arso
You wroteDaniel never started. Therefore, he never failed. And therefore, he could still [at least according to one pshat in sanhedrin] be a candidate for mashiach.
As RAMBAN and RAMBAM point out, starting the ge’ula process and then, dying & leaving unfinished business, equals failureMy argument with the above is that you write that the Ramban and the Rambam reject a dead person being Mashiach ONLY IF that person started the process and died leaving it unfinished. Therefore, Daniel who died without having started the process of geulah could be resurrected and be Mashiach.
But you don’t cite a source for that!
It seems to me that you came to the conclusion that there is this difference because the Ramban and the Rambam reject a dead person’s candidacy, while the gemoro in Sanhedrin, according to one explanation of Rashi (Are we allowed to quote Rashi nowadays in this thread, or have certain fanatics ruled him persona non grata c”v?) allows the possibility that Daniel is Mashiach. But that gemoro is not something that is brought lehalocho by the Ramban or the Rambam, and we don’t even know how they interpreted that gemoro. Don’t forget that even Rashi has an alternative explanation which does not allow Daniel himself to be Mashiach.
Therefore, the simple pshat in the Ramban and the Rambam is that someone who has died cannot be Mashiach, regardless of what he achieved in his lifetime. This would then, apparently, include Daniel.
=================================================
You are right .
just due to the klal of afushei plugta lo mafshinan, I Wasn’t happy to force RAMBAN and RAMBAM against this apparently valid pshat in sanhedrin, which forces the obvious hiluk I made regarding the difference between someone who started and someone who did not….Nu …
Am still waiting for any reaction re RAMBAN and RAMBAM’s psak that a wannabe mashiach who fails the test of realizing the relevant nevu’ot during his lifetime-
is a Mashiach sheker …..Hello
Is there a problem with my post ?@lostspark
its childish to concentrate on the messenger.
Concentrate on the message.To make it clear – I do not care about j .
He is NOT THE ISSUE here. the issue here is the late leader of habad.
We are only using the candidacy of j to discuss the candidacy of habads leader.
If RAMBAN says that j is proven as mashiach sheker because of his failure to realise nevu’ot hanevi’im, the same applies to all other wannabe’s who fail to realise nevu’ot hanevi’m .
RAMBAM specifically addresses the wannabe’s . And how we should evaluate them . They have to pass a simple test.
Did they build the B’h , or not.
If they did not, they are out. They are not mashiach.So, according to both, RAMBAN and RAMBAM, your leader is not mashiach.
Period.[Thats besides other potential problems, not discussed here.]
@menachem
That’s strange – you have an opinion about everything under the sun , and on mashiach min hameitim , not ?I quote RAMBAN and RAMBAM .
RAMBAN is sefer havikuach [part of kitvei haramban mosad rav kuk helek 1, page 315-316], where he clearly states that j is proven not to be mashiach since he did not realize all the prophesies of tanach in his lifetime.
RAMBAM is hilch melachim perek 11 halaha 4 : “if mashiach succeeds, is victorious in battle over the nations and builds the beit hamikdash ,gathering all Jews to EY, then we know that he is mashiach . If, however he is not successful or he is killed , then we know for a fact that he is not the one which the torah was talking about.”
The late leader of habad was not successful in building the b’h nor in gathering the Jews to EY and did not realize the prophesies of tanach – hence we know that is not the one the torah was talking about.
[There are other reasons why the late leader of habad is disqualified, but the discussion here is about RAMBAM and RAMBAN.]
Daniel who according to one pshat in sanhedrin seems to be qualified as a candidate, never started the ge’ula process , never was proclaimed as mashiach, so never failed the test of kiyum nevu’ot hatanach.
If the rbsh’o will be mehayeh him and he will start the ge’ula and not fail the test of kiyum hanevu’ot hatanach, then he could fit the bill.
Simple.
@menachem
To recap
your changing of topics and [deliberately] ignoring the points the other side is making, serves as an indictment of your position.
I would have thought that if you would have a on the point rebuttal, you would not keep it a secret , right?
Seems like we can use the klal of shtika ke hoda’a ….THE LATE LEADER OF HABAD IS A MASHIACH SHEKER.!!
Or in qwerty ‘s parlance, a certain word starting with C…
.@Menachem
Daniel did not start the ge’ula process, Therefore, he could still be considered as a potential candidate. [if there will be a private thiyat hameitim].Daniel never started. Therefore, he never failed. And therefore, he could still [at least according to one pshat in sanhedrin] be a candidate for mashiach.
But, As RAMBAN and RAMBAM point out, starting the ge’ula process and then,
dying & leaving unfinished business, equals failure.Failure equals sheker.
Thats how we know now that j is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know that bar kohba is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know now that shabtai tzvi is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know now that the last leader of habad is a mashiach sheker.They are all -equally- meshichei sheker.
Are the other possible disqualifications ? Yes.
For example the j personality and his actions, or shabtai tzvi’s conversion to islam, [or other possible problems with the personality of habads leader.]The point RAMBAM and RAMBAN are discussing is : unfinished business.
Which is as clear as day disqualifying the late habad leader from being mashiach.
So clear is this , that [for the umpteenth time, again] habad itself [pre 94] considered this so axiomatic, that they were prepared to go so far, to the extent of building a new castles-in-the-sky theology , on this basis, proclaiming to all and sundry that their leader simply cannot die [!].So, to our question : is the late leader of habad a mashiach sheker ?
The answer can only be:a resounding ‘yes’.
All of klal yisrael, besides the majority of habad hasidim, know this answer.
They feel it in their bones.@ menachem
You claimed that according to the Rambam. The problem with Christianity is not מסית ומדיח, rather only that Yoshke was killed.
==========
Wrong .
Never claimed that.I will reiterate what I said –
RAMBAN is in Sefer havikuach . We know j is not mashiach because the promises of our nevi’im did not materialize during his lifetime.
RAMBAM is in hilch melachim . When a candidate for mashiach dies in war and did not bring about the promises of the nevi’im we know that he is not mashiach.Both do not say that’s xtianities’ ONLY problem . Pashut to any straight-thinking person that there are more problems.
They say clearly, however, that someone who dies without finishing the business , is proven not to be mashiach.Hence the logical and simple conclusion , not refuted by anyone on this thread:
THE LATE LEADER OF HABAD IS A MASHIACH SHEKER.
That is simple clear logic at work. Nothing more,
After we have already established the late leader of habad is a mashiach sheker , and everyone on this thread agrees to it , as there is only shtika which is rightfully interpreted as hoda’a.
Hoda’a that he is a mashiach sheker, as attested to by those two luminaries, RAMBAN and RAMBAM.
We have to, however, still examine the a’z complaint.Atsmut betoh haguf was meant only non literal, so they claim.
So, why did my eyes have to see a poster of their leader with the inscription god right next it ?
And I happened to see this, multiple times.
Are you going to tell me that this inscription was also non literal ???No, it definitely was literal. And it was habad people who put it up.
Inspired by exactly who ?
Inspired by the totally self educated leader of habad, who never learnt in a yeshiva and studied at the two top universities in Berlin and Paris….@arso
@shmeiRAMBAN is in Sefer havikuach . We know j is not mashiach because the promises of our nevi’im did not materialize during his lifetime.
RAMBAM is in hilch melachim . When a candidate for mashiach dies in war and did not bring about the promises of the nevi’im we know that he is not mashiach.For the umpteenth time, the gmara in sanhedrin is not a contradiction to this AT ALL.
Daniel did not start the ge’ula process, nor did he or his disciples [at his instigation] declare himself as mashiach. Therefore, he could still be considered as a potential candidate. [if there will be a private thiyat hameitim].Daniel never started. Therefore, he never failed. And therefore, he could still [at least according to one pshat in sanhedrin] be a candidate for mashiach.
But, As RAMBAN and RAMBAM point out, starting and then, dying & leaving unfinished business, equals failure.Failure equals sheker.
Thats how we know now that j is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know that bar kohba is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know now that shabtai tzvi is a mashiach sheker.
Thats how we know now that the last leader of habad is a mashiach sheker.Are these people equal to each other in other respects ? No, not at all.
But they are all -equally- meshichei sheker.
Yaakov avinu’s alive/dead status is totally irrelevant to this.
Neither is habad’s last leaders alive/dead status.And neither are other valid disqualifications relevant here.
For example the j personality and his actions, or shabtai tzvi’s conversion to islam, or other possible problems with the personality of habads leader.
The point RAMBAM and RAMBAN are discussing is : unfinished business.Which is as clear as day disqualifying the late habad leader from being mashiach.
So clear is this , that [for the umpteenth time, again] habad itself [pre 94] considered this so axiomatic, that they were prepared to go so far, to the extent of building a new castles-in-the-sky theology , on this basis, proclaiming to all and sundry that their leader simply cannot die [!].So, to our question : is the late leader of habad a mashiach sheker ?
The answer can only be:a resounding ‘yes’.
All of klal yisrael, besides the majority of habad hasidim, know this answer.
They feel it in their bones.When you study habad literature , you will see that after each and everyone of their rebeim’s expired name there is a navgam , an acronym for Nishmato Bginzei Meromim, translated to english ‘his soul is in the treasured heavens’
It seems to me that no habad faction – even those who ostensibly agree that he died – would use this about their deceased leader .
The most they would write , is ‘zhuto yagen aleinu’
Why is their recent leader any different to their previous rebei’m , who did deserve ‘navgam’ and their present one who somehow does not ?
And who decided to differentiate ?
.Gm
Hi
@arso
@shmei
Again, for those of you who struggle with comprehension
Never claimed that Ramban and Rambam were machshir j for mashiach if not his dying/disappearing.
That’s crystal clear to anyone who reads my posts carefully.
And that should be self evident to any straight thinking person.They do however state very clearly that WE KNOW that j is out because of the inadmissibility of a second coming
I repeat
They state very clearly that WE KNOW that j is out because of the inadmissibility of a second coming !!!!Whether yakov avinu is considered dead or not is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT here.
Again , when our gdolei harishonim mamash said their piece, the discussion should be over and done.
Besides for the fools who would want to argue against those cherished Rebei’im amiti’im of THE WHOLE KLAL YISRAEL DURING ALL THE GENERATIONS SINCE THEIR LIFETIME.
I rest my case.
@Arso
How can you ignore Ramban and Rambam ?The reason we know that j is not mashiach is because he did not effect the nevuot about yemot hamashiach IN HIS LIFETIME !
He doesn’t say because he was a meisit umadiah , [which he very well may have been]
I suggest we stick with our gdolei harishonim here , just like in any other area in the torah.
Discussion should be closed after they said their piece.
Heard from my rebbi – if you want to argue with the ramban , you might not be an apikorus, but a fool you most certainly are…..
.Hello ?
I am reading this thread and I am left scratching my head again and again .
Why is everyone ignoring a CLEAR RAMBAN who unambiguously states that j cannot be mashiach because the inadmissibility of a second coming ?
The language of the Rambam is nearly as clear , in hilch melahim . Why are people so happy to book a place on this merry go round and stay seated on this silly thing for such a long time ?
Time to get off , and look around …
I don’t know of any area of the torah, where we afford to ignore the combined voices of Rambam and Ramban and start speculating about the status of yakov avinu.THERE IS NO SECOND COMING IN JUDAISM . Period.
For the Gmara in sanhedrin , I can promise you that The two Rabeinu Moshe’s knew that gmara BETTER THAN ALL POSTERS COMBINED .
And yours truly suggested a pshat before on these pages .It seems to me that indeed ignorance is bliss but still , the ostrich should also get sick of the taste of sand after a while .
.@philosopher
you mention a link to R Avigdor Miller’s shmuess on voting in the Israeli elections .
Can you tell me where I can get that link ?
Ty.The answer to candace owens’ question is –
that …. she is right!
The question was if the reason you reject j is because of the inadmissibility of a second coming , then why is the habad leader afforded that possibility ?The logical habad answer is that j is not rejected because of the inadmissibility of a second coming.
Simple.He is rejected because of other reasons.
The only problem is that this goes straight against a clear Ramban , who states that j cannot be mashiach because of -exactly that- , the inadmissibility of a second coming.
Besides that, it also goes against an authority far greater than Ramban , [tongue in cheek] namely ….. habad itself with all its rabbanim and mashpi’im , pre 1994 ….
As far as I am concerned , the matter is closed, here and now.
—————————————————————————–
But I know that the innocent reader might question , what’s with the [one] pshat in the gmara in sanhedrin etc ? indicating that mashiach can come min hameitim ?The answer is pashut . Those who learn the gmara that way are chvsh NOT cholek on one of the greatest we possessed [apologies here to habad pre 94 .. ]
They are talking about those meitim who DID NOT START THE PROCESS OF GE’ULA.
To announce to klal yisrael that you are mashiach and have come to redeem them , and then abdicate and die and so called finish the job , that’s impossible.That’s what j did and thats what habad did.
Both equally inadmissible, on the grounds of the ramban , the inadmissibility of a second coming.If HKBH will choose [according to this pshat in sanhedrin] a leader from the dead WHO HAS NOT STARTED THE GE’ULA PROCESS IN ANY WAY , and revive him and START AND FINISH the ge’ula in ONE LIFETIME, then that is also a possibility. [at least according to that pshat]
.
So , in short , ‘j’ is out and so is habad .Dear reader, think about this, as this is la’d the only emes’dig way to reconcile that pshat in sanhedrin with ramban.
.When we look at the theological mess habad has left us with, when you look at all the twists and turns they took in order to stay relevant, the internal contradictions they so blatantly ignore, the only reaction I can have is
Kama Gdolim Divrei Hahamim
and give credit where its due….
I never liked R shach and could not stand his fight against habad. But what can I do- as much as I would like to say I told you so, the evidence and the reality trump everything else.
His chashashot about habad came true and habad’s defenders’ teirutsim fell by the wayside, one after the other.
Mindboggling.Re the LITERAL interpretation og atsmut betoch haguf
I MYSELF saw the habad poster on a truck clearly proclaiming on the street to all passerby , under a picture of their a’z , Prophet Rebbi Leader King God Advisor Tsaddiq, Rabbi.
Clear mention of them calling him god in a literal sense ….
no answer given , nor has any been attempted ………Was away for a while.
A lot of catching up to do.Fact is and remains :
1] the statements of their leader re the Gulf War, promising no one will be hurt in EY :
I FOLLOWED IT MYSELF WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.
Anyone denying this , automatically disqualifies himself as either a plain liar or as someone who mentally suffers from selective amnesia when faced with the realistic option of dismantlement of a multidecade old house of cards .2] Official Habad claims at the time:
their leader is a LITERAL HALAHIC NAVI , like hagai zharya malahi [- not like the non literal ba’alei ruah hakodesh who were sometimes nick named navi’im a NON LITERAL SENSE.]
Based on the halahic requirement of testing a navi, by predicting the future in advance [- no one will be hurt] and all details happening exactly as predicted [- no one was actually hurt].
I FOLLOWED THIS MYSELF WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.3] Actual result of the missile barrage on EY : One person [incidentally a lawyer dedicated against religion] died due to a direct missile hit, many others were wounded.
Thats besides many who died indirectly due to panic related incidents.
I FOLLOWED THIS MYSELF WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.4] Official Habad claims at the time:
A halahic navi proclaims mashiach is here [and it is their rebbi] !
This is nevua letova and cannot be reversed halachically and HAS TO HAPPEN.
This is the end of galut and mashiach [their rebbi] CANNOT DIE without actualizing the ge’ula , building the BH , ingathering of exiles , bring all the mashiach era’s prophesies to fruition.
I FOLLOWED THIS MYSELF WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.5] The entirety of habad without fail, from the hozer r yoel kahn and all rabanim at the vanguard of this messianic movement till the latest fresh BT addition to this messianic movement, they all agreed to this dogma.
This was an essential AND LITERAL part of ikarei emuna.
He LITERALLY COULD NOT DIE.
I FOLLOWED THIS MYSELF WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.6] We all know that it DID happen . He died , disappeared, hid, or whatever …
I have not heard from anyone an HONEST answer, not from sehel , not from lostspark, and not from shmei ….
7] Candace Owens is right . Totally right. If their rebbi is afforded the luxury of a second coming , then why not the j-rebbi [?!] of Owens ?
Hu asher dibarnu from the first moment ….Bekitsur, habad with their ridiculous claims are putting all of us le’la’g ulekeles in front of the whole world .
Hilul haShem of the first order.
The Jews’ belief and their ikarei emuna are changed and discarded like used socks , based on nothing more than flimsy, wishful and imaginary feel good claims.It is high time that all their Shtuyot claims are exposed and called out for what they really are:
Plain Shtuyot , and
Not part of normative Judaism .@lostspark
Its RAV Shach , not Shach.
Please read the haskama of the Rav miBrisk.
[btw read all other haskamoth of rav mibrisk and compare the language]Clear as day – if R Shach would have approved of the late leader of habad , this very same R shach with all his exact same characteristics would have merited at least “harav hagaon’ by the habadi’s .
So much for emet ….
And shows the worth of habad issued titles …..
‘New Habad’ is same gematria as ‘One Big Bloff’
@shmei
Very important to remember
Philosopher is not attacking Habad PEOPLE .
He is questioning habad PRETSEL THEOLOGY.Antisemites attack the JEWISH PEOPLE.
Huge difference.
.Logic is struggling to find its way to lostsparks mind .
He attributes his ‘hutspadig’ so called crusade against habad to …. limudei chol in MO circles.
Without which there would not be habad criticism ….
—
Got some news for lostspark.98% of Orthodox Jews view habads ever changing and developing theology re mashiach and rebbe cult with a ‘left eye’ .
That ranges and is equal in all different colors – from those espousing a total ban on chol [like satmar] to those who totally embrace chol [like MO].The approach generally is one of indulgent tolerance for harmless folly.
But folly it most definitely is , in everyone’s eyes.
Everyone, besides the blind, the deaf and the brainwashed [in short, habad people], that is.We can all rest assured when we hear the uncensored real reaction of non habad people [behind habads back] re habad theology:
there is no connection whatsoever between criticism of habad “pretsel theology” and limudei hol.
.@lostspark
A] your empty accusation/slander against berger is as verifiable as the empty accusation/slander of your leader against rav shachs tfillin.
As verifiable and as worthless.Potato conveniently ignores the well documented habad ikarei emuna stand which loudly proclaimed that their mashiach [sheker] COULD NOT die because it was promised by [false] nevua that their “leader/navi/god/yoets/university graduate/ge’an hage’onim/tsadiq yesod olam/nasi hador” is mashiach.
That [supposedly] was a nevua amitit which CANNOT be changed.
That [supposedly] was part ikarei emuna which renders the non believer into a kofer.No second coming, that was heresy.
No mashiach min hameitim , that was heresy.To top it all of – just to remind the world of what my very own eyes have seen and what my very own ears have heard, is now being classified by a totally brainwashed and blind follower of this purim charade as nothing less than SIN’AT HINAM !!!
Could not make it up even if I wanted …
Beit shammai argued severely against beit hillel and it was never considered sin’at hinam.
Criticism without hate, by definition CANNOT be Sin’at hinam.
It cannot be that the lame excuse of sin’at hinam should be employed as an answer to legitimate questions, and obvious contradictions.Legitimate questions and obvious contradictions deserve serious and to the point answers and explanations, and not flippant responses which many times totally ignore the actual points raised.
To top off the inadequate answers with bogus claims of sin’at hinam, is in itself an incriminating indictment regarding the qualitative poverty of said answers.I myself , a former supporter and naive victim of its propaganda, harbor no hate whatsoever against habad , nor against the hasidim of habad.
Nevertheless I do criticize their ideology and theology. Without hate.If something is wrong, it is not hate to say that it is wrong.
Judaism is full of criticism.
Beit Shamai criticized Beit Hillel severely and are nowhere accused of sin’at hinam as a result.
And the list of similar examples across history can go on and on.Aderaba, it is incumbent on the criticized to supply adequate answers and explanations lekayem ‘vihiyitem neki’im mehashem umiyisrael’.
@potato
potato should stop injecting the false argument of sin’at hinam.
Arguments about mashiach min hameitim is totally legitimate and have NOTHING to do with sin’at hinam.
Misusing the idea of sin’at hinam is a lame attempt at influencing a debate to be had on its own merits.@gobrit
Its not such a nonchalant affair.
This is ikarei emuna.
At least thats what all of habad clearly said for quite a number of years . [pre 1994]
He CANNOT die because this is ikarei emuna.Ikarei emuna is heavy stuff .
Its the stuff, countless of our forefatehers were burnt alive for.
Lost their houses , their parnassah and their children.You don’t play around with ikarei emuna.
They are not mere socks, to be changed the next day.
Firstly ,This has nothing to do with smiha . R chaim kanievsky did not have smiha and certainly [over]qualified as a talmid haham al pi hahalaha.
Secondly , the principle of Muflag behohma bedoro is found in shulhan aruch hilch kvod rabo in YD .
Not my invention.
RCV is not gadol meraban shmo .
like the all the other rabanim stretching back to the time of the gmara [cant think of any exception right now] who were not and are appropriately named as r or rav or by any other nickname eg the berdichever or by their sefer , the ktsos, or the goan .
Main point is whether its solely by their name or not.
This is not a matter of ‘sensitivity’ rather a matter of halacha.
in any case thanks for your consideration.Mashiach cannot be min hameitim because of the following simple reason.
1] habad is never wrong & whenever there is a source contradicting what they say , there is a way out. There HAS to be one.
2] habad with all its mashpi’im , rabanim, thinkers, ovdim, maskilim, rashei yeshiva, mothers , temimim,mekuravim, mekarvim , shluhim, adherents and hasidim ALL OF THEM , without fail, were saying pre 3 tamuz that their rebbi cannot die because there is a nevua that their rebbi is mashiach.
3] nevua letovah cant be batel.So how could habad entertain the thought that mashiach comes from the meitim?
Sin’at hinam is being used as a get out of jail card. Whenever you are confronted with something you do not have a common sense answer, you scream sin’at hinam …
and voila , all is clear.Just a reminder what sechel is –
Someone who doesn’t [want to] understand the point you are making
And then sets himself up as having answered your point by writing something totally incoherent@sehel
Don’t tell me what your leader said or did not say at the time .
I was following every utterance of his at the time he made them . They were quoted in kfar habad magazine at the time and were disseminated all over the jewish world like only habad knows how to.I myself remember how he said that EY is the safest place on the globe and that no one will be hurt there.
And I also remember this being used as proof [by habad propaganda] for his so called [literal!] nevua status.Literal Nevua which we lost since Hagai Zharya and Malahi , and which [supposedly] returned now.
Here all habadi’s agree that his supposed Navi status is meant literally , right ?That’s how it was stated in the sicha [if not mistaken shoftim 5751] and that’s how it was taken by the hundreds of habad “yes men” [masquerading as neutral rabbis issuing an innocent psak] and subsequently by all stripes of habad hasidim .
Stated literally and taken literally.The sicha about God clothed in human form was also similar- both stated and taken literally.
In habad – everything the leader says is taken literally . Otherwise you are not a Chossid.And their leader knows that very well. Thats how he can say the most outrageous things , claim to the outside world that its was meant non literal, while he can rest assured that his hasidim will get the message, good and proper.
Bezot tibachenu , proof is, how did his hasidim take it ?
That is THE question. Not whether rebbi from ropshits or r bachyai or whoever else said something similar or not.
That’s totally irrelevant.What is relevant, is how was the message taken and therefore —– what was the intended message from that master communicator , their leader. Who clearly knew in advance how it would be taken. And still issued that message. Fully intended the outcome of that message.
The literal outcome of the navi message . and the literal outcome of the ‘clothed in human form’ message.
@always ask
Koreh lerabo bishmo is an issur lefi shulhan aruch hilch kvod rabbo.
No connection to smicha, which itself is only a newish institution, only a few hundred years old, whereas the issur of koreh et rabbo bishmo is mentioned in the gemara.Muflag be hochma bedoro is considered like rabo , hence the issur of koreh et rabo bishmo toward gdolei hador.
berdichever or rogotshever does not classify as kore rabo bishmo .
In the case of Hillel and Shamai the principle of gadol merabban shmo , is used. But this is only valid for someone whose gadlut was so pervasively recognized that it was pashut that gadol merabban shmo. As opposed to RCH’V who, while exceedingly great ,still did not factually fit this specific criteria.The issur of koreh et rabo bishmo is not made any more lenient because that person happens to belong to a criticized group , to people with your hashkafa
So please acknowledge the truth
one should not say chaim volozhiner, rather say R Chaim volozhiner.
….if …. actually cared about Jewish lives, then …. could go to the UN (yes, that UN) and tell them that they want out, and that the UN should figure out a way to keep all the Jews safe there while ending the Zionist nightmare (for Jews). But even if that UN option were no longer true – and nobody can prove that ….
{hakatan]
———————–
1] If the UN option was no longer true . If ….
What’s the question at all .
Can the UN be trusted to protect the people it was sent to protect ?
It was sent to Bosnia to protect the local Muslim population from the Bosnian Serbs.
How many THOUSANDS of innocent civilians were directly murdered within a small distance of those very UN soldiers sent to protect them ?The thousands of trained soldiers from the UN stationed in South Lebanon cannot implement their own resolution 1701, out of fear of Hizbullah.
The Yazidi’s also were supported by the UN in the face of IS attacks on them .
Result ? Ask the yazidi’s how many survived , and ask those who did survive , in what state they survived….2] The UN should figure out a way ….
Besides brazen appeasement to those barbarians , I have not [neither has anyone else] seen a way to deal them.
The UN could not even protect ITS OWN PEOPLE stationed in those lands of the likes of Iraq or Afghanistan from the bloodthirsty savages.
And you still suggest to willingly entrust millions of yehudim to their “protection” ????Where is your ahrayut for the safekeep of yehudim ?