yankel berel

Menachem craft fully sidestepped each and everyone of the Questions asked.

WHY ?
.

@menachem

1] “Standing out in does not necessarily guarantee that impostors or fakers are weeded out.
We do not have to go far back in history for an example.

Shabtai Tzvi was definitely “standing out in holiness and devotion to hashem”.
Otherwise he would not have been able to convince a whole array of first class rabbanim plus the majority of klal yisrael of his bonafides.

And yet notwithstanding all of the above, turned out to be a fraud.

2] Which , in turn, brings another unanswered question [yet] . Let’s say I would be a naive hasid/talmid/follower of Shabtai Tzvi, impressed by his devotion and holiness [plus any other title I could dream up] .

I would be convinced like Menachem stated before , of “kol hameharher achar rabo ke’ilu meharher achar hashechina”

I would be convinced or even better , I would FEEL , [like Menachem stated before], a blind trust in my rebbi who goes by the name of melech hamashiach shabtai tzvi.

Now, suddenly this rebbi of mine in whom I trust blindly, suddenly becomes a Muslim , but he explains everything al pi kabala .

At what point do I say, my previous trust was misplaced ?

Or do I still persist in my blind trust ?
After all doesnt it say Kol hameharher … ?
.

.

There is a clear video of R’ A. Gurewicz to vote for EH.
Matter clarified.

?

@menachem.

Historians are not the ones we should consult.

Its torah scholars who we should consult.

Is “kol hameharher achar rabo” being misused here ?
Misused to project infallibility.

The question should maybe be rephrased.
Or even better, an additional question should be asked.

Not only should we ask why the habad hasidim believe that that their rebbi is infallible.

The question should be – for us . The rest of klal yisrael , who are not his talmidim – hasidim.
Was he infallible ??

@menachem .
I learnt those prakim in tanya and I did not see any ‘other ways’ there.
That was a while ago.

Hope that this is not a copout. Hope that there are clear sources there for so called ‘other ways’ .

Some Hungarian Rabbanim in their zealousness to preserve yahadut , threw logic and fact based judgement out of the window. They thought that following this greatest of the greatest of Hungarian Jewry , the Hatam Sofer , necessitates to jettison fact based thinking ,rationality and proportionality.

And truth be said , it could very well be a matana from heaven , as our generation after the war, was so diminished in so many ways, that’s exactly what that generation needed. Otherwise they would all drown in the zionist tsunami which flooded every Jewish community.

But now when the zionist ideals are long hollowed out already, it is time to return to the shvil hazahav of logic and facts. Coupled with yir’at shamayim and based on torah.

So taking those rabanim literally will have a not so different result to taking ,lehavdil elef havdalot, every word of this big and fat basar vadam DJT literally ….
.

Why did official habad change course- after decades of denying that they are secretly aiming to crown their rebbi as mashiach – why did they make a uturn and actually crowned him as mashiach ?
And why was there no explanation about their uturn ?

Is there no explanation ? Or is there one , just that we are not meritorious enough to hear it ……

@damoshe

They base themselves on David hamelech who killed his yetser through fasts. So it is, in his case at least , due to his actions.
But the question remains – what does this have to do with INFALLIBILTY ?

Note that Menachem agreed that there is no source for INFALLIBILITY .

And – if the navi [!] Shmuel could be mistaken about Yishay’s sons – ha’adam yir’eh le’einayim , then why can we not be mistaken about someone who lives with us ?
.

@menachem
Thanks for your answer.

Is a Tsadiq of Tanya INFALLIBLE ?
Infallible as in a human mistake- not an avera – a mistake ?
Is there any clear source for this ?

Anyway , how do we define a tsadiq of tanya – as opposed to a beinoni of tanya , as both are totally clean of any averot – according to tanya ?

How can we know whether his yetser is dead [as a tsadiq] or his yetser is merely kept in check [as in beinoni] ?
Maybe this is impossible for us to know ?

Is there any clear source for this either ?
.

Rav Shlome Zalman did not have to ask Rav Kuk for haskama.

Rav Shmuel Auerbach could have kept quiet when they wanted to reprint me’orei ha’eish without rav kuks haskama.

The emrai emet was not scared of a “politically powerful” rav kuk.
Btw. it would be much more convenient for emrai emet politically if he would not take it up supporting rav kuk.
Nevertheless he did.
Because he held that’s the emet.

Brisker rav would not write any title to a rabbi for ‘j’ or for reform , lehavdil. No matter how ‘powerful’ they would be.

Facts are facts. Even katan cannot wish them away.
.

@AAQ
Rambam found ‘redeeming qualities’ in xtianity and islam.
They are ‘wrong’ nevertheless.

RZ is not at the same level , but still is wrong.
Our brothers .
Our misled brothers.

1] Rav Shmuel Auerbach z’l did not let the printers take out rav kuks haskama from his fathers sefer , Me’oreh ha’esh.
2] Rav shlome zalman z’l printed rav kuks haskama BEFORE rav yosef chaim zonnefelds haskama.

All this is mefursam .

If katan wants he can close his eyes and claim that the sun is not shining.
.

.

Katan is rewriting the Emrai Emets letters .
Read them in the original.
Osef mihtavim.

Hazon Ish is yadua lakol in bnei brak, that he was matir lehedya rav kuks halacha sfarim.
Not as a diyuk.

Katan lost his heskat ne’emanut.
He simply is not ne’eman when the topic is zionism.

Rav Shmuel Auerbach z’l did not let the printers take out rav kuks haskama from his fathers sefer , Me’oreh ha’esh.
Rav shlome zalman z’l printed rav kuks haskama BEFORE R yosef chaim zonnefelds haskama.

All this is mefursam . If katan wants he can close his eyes and claim that the sun is not shining.
.

The consensus amongst the majority of gdolei yisrael before and after the War , was clearly that Zionism is bad.

Bad , does not necessarily mean heresy.

So both sides on this thread are wrong.

Its not heresy, but it is bad.

It is not a choice between heresy on one side and “good / part of thora” on the other side.

It is a choice between

1] heresy
2] good and part of thora
3] not heresy but wrong and obviuosly no part of the thora.

There used to be a whole army of habad apologists out there.
They all went on a joint vacation ?
Not even one habadi left ?

Or is it a real and objective lack of answers ?
You cannot answer what you do not possess …….

In other words shtika ke ….. ?

This is clear
Zionism was/is/remains a sakana for yahadut.
Most Zionists were heretics.
Most Zionists were choteh umachti et harabim.

But this is equally clear
There is nothing in Zionism perse that is heretical.
There is no inherent forced contradiction to be found in Zionism against any of the 13 ikarei emuna.
Even if [!] one holds the 3 shavuot as binding lehalacha nowadays, [which is definitely debatable] even so, we can state with confidence that there is no inherent contradiction between Zionism and any of the 13 ikarim.

After so many years of speaking to satmar talmidei hahamim, I have not heard even one [!] clear proof that Zionism inherently has to be apikorsut.
.

Bottom line –
To say that 3 shevuot is kove’a lehalacha nowadays – is a canard , that is not heresy.
Not heresy at all
This happens to be the opinion of AVNEI NEZER , not any less of an authority in halacha than R yoel Tajtelbaum.

His words [end of helek yoreh dei’ah] are easily understood by any seasoned talmud scholar , provided that he reads his words a few times and tries to understand the avnei nezers intention.

Thanks menachem.
So – when are we back into the business of answering the unanswered questions ?

Looking forward.
.

Menachem was happy that that at least we have something we can agree on….

Menachem – got news for you.
We agree on 99% of the issues.
We agree that there is a bashefer. Torah misinai etc. etc. …. and the list can go on and on b’h.
No shortage there.

Reminding ourselves from time to time of the things we do agree on , will help us to view our disagreements in their proper perspective.

And enable us to not blow them up [any bigger than their real size] in our own minds.

Which in turn will not cause us to view straightforward questions as ‘raving attacks’ .
.

Is CS lucid ?

@CS

@Menachem
and all other habad people

I reread menachems posts and I see that he and other habad people perceive my posts as ‘raving attacks’ on habad.
It seems that they perceive those posts as offending.
They for sure were not written with the intent to offend , that much I can assure you of .
Therefore I would like ask for mehila from those who did feel offended.
Please accept my apologies .

But on the other hand …. let us find the balance where healthy and fact based debate will not be artificially stifled by misplaced claims of victimhood.
.

@DaMoshe

It was CS who tried portray modern habad as the main continuation of yahadut nowadays , and ran away when the questions became too hard to handle with honesty.

Btw.
I do not think that they are apikorsim.
I just point out that they deviate from the truth and yahadut.
And CS and friends are trying to pull the wool over unsuspecting people’s eyes.
Habad are masterful at PR . If you do not ask them the questions , they will succeed to influence the average persons thinking.

@somejew
Where is this raavad ? Do you have the exact address please ?
Which poskim don’t take RZ for kesuba ?
Is it because their not fully frum ? Or are they fully frum and just believe in athaltah d/g ?

What katan says – if without proof , is that an authority to rely on ?
He claims that someone who believes in kefirah is not a kofer .
But on the other hand , he compares athaltah d/g to reform and jews for ‘j’ where everyone agrees that their believers are kofrim.
So he can’t have it both ways ?