Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@sechel
@CS
@Lostspark
@menachem shmeiYou keep on claiming that habad critics are motsi shem ra ?
The following I saw with my own eyes:
a habad truck with
right beside a picture of their rebbiRebbe, Advisor ,Leader ,Prophet, Redeemer, God. [!!]
????
@damoshe
Good Idea.#sechel
lol
what makes berger a rabbi , you ask ??One hundred percent sure that , would dr berger state that MMS is mashiach , he would be lauded as one of the most influential rabbanim in the MOZ world …..
.
?
@sechel
I find it difficult to conduct a serious discussion with you because half of the time you don’t understand my point and the other half you do not explain what it is you are reacting about and even then, its hard to understand what you are attempting to say.re the gdolims stance re habad-
I did not read Dr bergers book itself , but I did see the haskama of Rav A Feldman Rosh Yeshiva of Baltimore Yeshiva and Member of Moetset of America dated 4 Tamuz 5764.
Where he writes about the fallacy of the habad mashiach charade.
And continues about the prevalence of praying to, instead of to God – to the late habad leader [a’l]
Whereafter he writes [in free translation]
‘It is befitting to whoever whose forefather stood at Har Sinai, to wallow in earth that such is occurring to our own brothers and sisters,
AND KOL SHEKEN that everyone should do whatever physically possible that those FALSEHOODS should not be spread and / or accepted by the temimim of Klal Yisrael.HaShem Imha Gibor HaHayil [addressing Dr Berger]
May your sincere words have an influence and let us all be zoche to meet the TRUE redeemer
[signature]
.@CS
Its time that you got off this ‘high horse’ about ‘asking’ habad people.Its overtime and we [klal israel] are waiting for answers which are not forthcoming .
Why should we be deemed responsible [since you count yourselves as part of us] for laughable and refuted theories which are self contradictory and change according to convenience ?And which are motsi shem ra on the emuna amitit which we received from sinai ?
Why did our forefathers keep to the emet with such obstinacy and such sacrifice in the face of the entire known world just to have our emuna tehora reduced to mere jokes ?These are the [painful] issues at stake here .
Not kosher meals in Mozambique.
And not whether habad people are nice people.
And not whether the hasidim were right 200 years ago in their defense against their detractors.Those issues are totally IRRELEVANT in the present discussion.
We would like answers and we will not be pacified with ‘apple orange’ answers.
Klal Yisrael deserves ‘apple apple’ [amiti] answers.If you would deign to supply REAL answers , we are ready to listen ….
@qwerty
I don’t know if you read Dr. Berger’s book but he spoke extensively about the refusal of Gedolim to do anything despite all the evidence. He said that one Godol told him that we’re waiting for them to do something really bad. My guess is that they’re afraid to act because it could lead to a lawsuit and Chabad would probably win in court and in the court of world opinion.
===
I am not privy to dr bergers discussions with rabanim. So it is hard to comment.
But what IS clearly in the public’s domain is the public statements of many rabanim about habad .
Whether it is from the litvish side or the satmar side or the sefaradi side.
Boy are they strong statements ….They are clear warnings that some really uncomfortable things are developing in habad.
The only step they have not taken [yet] and I seem to understand that’s what you are alluding to ….
is the fact that no one has paskened [yet] that their edut for gittin vakidushin is invalid , which would have MAJOR repercussions in regard to mamzerut and yichus.Which shows that , when push comes to shove , they did not classify them [at least as a group] as apikorsim and kofrim.
Its interesting that rav shach limited his public anti habad statements to the time when their leader was healthy and functioning. There are no public ststements on record from his last stroke and onwards , around pesach time in 1992.
That seems to indicate that rav shachs impetus for his anti habad statements were more based on future based concerns re where a healthy and functioning habad leader could potentially take us .Whereas now we are dealing with the fallout of the hasidims theological shenanigans .
Which could also mestasise and who knows where that would end ?Whenever you debate a xtian missionary the discussion goes, more or less :
Xtian : ‘proof1’ – our rebuttal1
‘proof2’ – rebuttal2
‘proof3’- rebuttal3After a few repetitions of the same pattern
the missionary exclaims
I won !
See, I brought ten proofs.Now dear reader : Is habad any different in this regard ?
lemaskanah
whats behind the guy with a truck openly stating
Rebbe, Advisor ,Leader ,Prophet, Redeemer, God. [!!]
This guy ‘s being literal . or not ?
Nu what s behind this ? Atsmut umehut betoch haguf , or not ?
The silence is deafening here.
….
@sechel
outcome of the meeting was the message that everyone should know – without making waves [that was in 1967] – that habad is going onto the wrong path.I did not make it up. dvarim kehavayatan .
Point to be taken : it did NOT start in 1988 .
Far from it.
—-You and most other habadi’s are a living anachronism . The only hasidim who still relive the mahloket of the gra and hasidim over 200 yrs ago.
This is done and dusted. Get over it .There is no connection between the two sides then and the 2 sides now.
The issue now centers on your leaders personality and the mad cult around it .
That wasn’t the issue then at all.
@lostspark
We have a klal in halacha – whenever there is a mahloket between a dentist and troops in armored vehicles , the Halacha follows the troops ,irrespective what the svara is and irrespective of whether there are re’ayot in any direction, for sure if there are flags on top of the vehicles .@lost spark
Lol.Maham Shilo [for the uninitiated -an acronym for melech hamashiach sheyihyeh la’olam va’ed]
claimed R’ Shachs tfillin is pasul.Habad ‘s pikachim use that as PROOF [?!] that Rav Shach were actually pasul . [actually heard this myself from a habad hasid]
Hence we have PROOF that Rav Shach was wrong for calling worldwide attention to habad’s deviations.
They call this “irrefutable logic which we have no answer to” …..
No more needs to be said.
.@Menachem Shmei
is being moche on the grounds of Bizuy Talmidei hahamim.Laudable.
At first glance.
But limited to the level Kvod Talmidei Hahamim displayed at the leader of Habad hasidims farbrengen on purim 1956.Ma’ase Rav. [leshitat menahem] .
Anything similar to the bizayon exhibited there is obviously permitted.
…..
.
My point was that it was not spoken about much, until it was released in newspaper articles filled with quotes and snippets taken out of context (or worse…) to make Lubavitch look bad to boost the political campaigns of the late 80s…
[shmei to yb]
—-
The so called ‘political campaigns of the late eighties’ you are referring to , probably allude to the establishment of Degel in the Israeli elections of 1988 or 1989.You have it upside down here .
Degel’s establishment was a REACTION to habads theologically losing its way , and the inability of those concerned to mount a public protest , due to the concentration of power in the hands of habads protectors.
THE CONCERN ABOUT HABADS WAYS PRECEDED THIS ELECTION CYCLE BY MANY YEARS , IF NOT DECADES.
And was a CAUSE of the split. Not the other way.Again , another indication of the failure of habad apologists of grasping the seriousness of the issue at hand.
I myself remember hearing [in the early eighties] , from a mekor ne’eman that R Salamon zatsal [mashgiah of BMG] , convened a closed meeting in 1967[!] about his concern about the utterances of the habad leader .
[yb to shmei]1) If this is even true, do we know for a fact that they discussed this sicha, which was said 17 years earlier? If yes, why did they only wake up about it now?
If it was 1967, it is more reasonable to assume that they were discussing the shocking and disturbing chiddush “שלא ראו אבותינו” of the Rebbe encouraging chassidim to put tefillin on non-frum Jews 😲 (which began that year in connection with the war).
[shmei to yb]
—–
Shmei’s flippant response here shows that he [nor did any of the other habad apologists] has not understood the nature of this discussion.
He and the other supporters still think that this is some version of teenage banter centered on support for competing sports teams.It is not.
This is a dead serious conversation and they have not grasped the seriousness of the substantial allegations .
R Salamon wasnt a little child and he voiced serious concerns about habad’s theology and the dangerous turns it was making ,travelling towards a personality cult direction, away from klal yisraels and its own tradition.Thats the substance of the issue .
Not newspapers and gimmicks. Not some supposed bemeizid falsifications .
Or alleged mean spirited misinterpretations of habad ,rooted in supposed personal vendettas.Serious concerns by serious people.
To be addressed in a serious and satisfactory manner.
@Shmei
I myself am witness to a habad truck adorned with a picture of their leader with the following inscription underneath
Rebbe, Advisor ,Leader ,Prophet, Redeemer, God.Now ,with all honesty , where did this guy get his inspiration from ?
Not from this atsmut umehut rubbish ?
And what is this guy’s kavana exactly ? Also non literal ?
Come On ….
You can pull the wool over my eyes once , twice , but not more.
I remember myself going along naively with habads reassurances that their leader ABSOLUTELY disavows being mashiach ,disavows promoting himself as mashiach etc.
Supposedly it was only a few BT ignorant meshuga’im who didn’t know any better, who promoted his messiahship.Now with the benefit of hindsight [and a few more maturing years] I have come to realisation who was really being “ignorant” .
It was me.Sorry , but habad lost their hezkat ne’emanut when it comes to those matters of theology.
Hi
are there still posts to be published ?@shmei
you quote Rashbi speaking about himself -from zohar.
It is clear that he is referring to the NON LITERAL MEANING of being davuk to God . Not as God Himself chvsh.The point I make is : you cannot compare texts dealing with connectedness to God with other texts which discuss God Himself .
So again – ALL those texts and quotes from R Bachay etc are totally IRRELEVANT .
As continuation
There was a decades long deliberate drip-fed, dual language brainwash going on during the last 8 decades ,leading untold unsuspecting temimim who were genuinely thirsty for dvar hashem to magnify and exaggerate the gadlut of their leader to unimaginable proportions.
It is clear that the rebbi of habad hasidim quenched his hasidim’s thirst .
But he did it with a mix of genuine and bogus torah teaching coupled with a slow but persistent indoctrination of his own supremacy over all other torah leaders over the generations. Leading to the unfortunate result of many many of OUR OWN BROTHERS AND SISTERS, misguided temimim, who, even while staying within the confines of Orthodoxy, are harboring a xtian like belief in their leader., AND ARE EDUCATING their future generations to a yahadut BASED on that belief.These are the stark facts , whether on likes them , or not.
Whether one is sufficiently removed from habad in order to be able to notice them ,or not.
[After all -kol hanega’im adam ro’e huts mi nig’ei atsmo]Just open the Chumash. Did you see chassidim complaining about the Rebbe the way Jews complained about Moshe? Caze clozed.
They were the misnagdim 😉
You had some Jews against Moshe and others extremely devoted.
Think about Yehoshua, Kalev, the Leviim, etc.
[shmei]
——————
No , the leader of habad is NOT the rebbi of the mitnagdim , whereas ALL JEWS in the midbar WERE talmidim of Moshe . They accepted the Torah from him , they learnt it by him.Another example of habad misinformation.
@Shmei
As introduction –this is NOT personal against you,
is NOT personal against Habad hasidim either.
This is NOT sin’at hinam , —– simply because there is no sin’a at all.I have NO preconceived notions against habad , nor do I have any grievances against habad.
Aderaba – I LIKE habad hasidim.
But – facts ARE facts , and evidence counts.
So :
A1] One cannot be naive . Otherwise you turn into a “useful idiot”.
It is clear [without fact checking your claim when this atsmut toch haguf rubbish was said] that the future leader of habad is [more than] interested in the success of his future endeavor of leading his hasidim. That goes without saying and is obvious to anyone.A2] Just to remember, there were 2 understandings [according to the habad defense here] ,
One: the LITERAL MEANING that God resides in a guf . This IS God.[a’l] our Creator . Who continues to be Manhig lehol HaBru’im
Two: The NON LITERAL MEANING that the tsadiq connects himself so strongly to God that legodel dibuko, we could stick a title to him AS IF he would be God.To Anyone learning those early sfarim It is clear that the No’am Elimelech, R Bachay ,Minhat El’azar are referring to the second NON LITERAL MEANING
Thats why no one went crazy when those sfarim wrote what they wrote.
With the [late] leader of the habad hasidim , however, it is a totally different story. I myself remember hearing [in the early eighties] , from a mekor ne’eman that R Salamon zatsal [mashgiah of BMG] , convened a closed meeting in 1967[!] about his concern about the utterances of the habad leader .
So it is not true to say like shmei would have us believe
“no one went crazy until 1989.”They went crazy already in 1967 [and in Israel even earlier]
I am witness to habad truck adorned with a picture of their leader with the following inscription underneath
Rebbe, Advisor ,Leader ,Prophet, Redeemer, God.you cannot ignore the different language employed by their leader , different to ALL OTHER rebeim and rabbanim in this generation re his/shvers greatness
AND the different RESULTS engendered in his followers . Again – different to all other followers in other communities in our generation.
Both the language and the results are very different . This is a deliberate attempt at engendering a different result .
Think about this carefully .
@shmei @sechel and all other metaharei hasherets
Not zohar and not noam elimelech and not minhat el’azar and not the rebbi from ropshiytzA] none of them said anything about themselves, always about their rebbeim with no implication about themselves
B] there was no personal gain whatsoever to be had , for the proclaimant.
C] proof in the pudding – none of their followers interpreted what they said in any way different to the explanation offered
i.e. that they were davuk to havayehD] It had no impact whatsoever on their own followers re their followers veneration of themselves
whereas in habads case
A] it is clear that his remark about atsmut umehut had intended implications about himself
B] Equally clear that there was personal gain for the proclaimant
C] habad followers interpreted it NOT like the no’am elimeleh’s explanation of dvekut , rather like the pashtut
D] habad veneration of their leader excels by far any other veneration of hasidim/talmidim of their rebbi/leader
yb
@lostspark
quoting qwerty:“ The Chazakah is that all Lubavitchers are idolaters.”
“ I didn’t say that all Lubavichers are idolaters.”
———————–
lostspark attacking qwerty:
Which is it buddy? Is only Lubavitchers at your ChaBaD house that aren’t idol worshippers?
============================================================================
Why is the first part of your yr msg a necessary contradiction ?
Never heard of hazaka saying one thing and the metsius could be oppposite ?@lostspark
quoting qwerty:“ The Chazakah is that all Lubavitchers are idolaters.”
“ I didn’t say that all Lubavichers are idolaters.”
———————–
lostspark attacking qwerty:
Which is it buddy? Is only Lubavitchers at your ChaBaD house that aren’t idol worshippers?
============================================================================
Why is the first part of your yr msg a necessary contradiction ?
Never heard of hazaka saying one thing and the metsius could be oppposite ?@lostspark
If I am correct , then we will never hear about this debate having any connection to sin’at hinam any more
Not from you and not from any other habad apologizer.
No difference whether qwerty or anyone else answers or doesn’t answer sechels or any other habad apologists claims.This is not sin’at hinam . These are totally legit questions to put to anyone who attempts to
1] completely take over the mainstream Judaism all over the globe
2] change old age Judaism and to remake it chvsh in its own problematic image.
.
.@lostspark
Easiest is to say sin’at hinam .
That absolves you from answering to the point – seems like it’s a get out of jail card ….@lostspark
qwerty’s arguments with habad do not stem from sin’at hinam , nor from a place behind the sechel , nor from any other extraneous place.
Rather they stem from the evidence .
The evidence itself.
If you are not happy with his arguments you will have to answer them on the evidence and the evidence only .
No point to change topic and talk about nonexistent sin’at hinam.
.Meshichistim give xtianity a back handed hechsher.
Ramban writes very clearly in his sefer havikuach that we know “j” is not mashiach because he died.I had a xtian asking me – if ‘your rabbi’ is coming back to finish the job , why can’t mine come back to finish the job ?
Either you eat the cake or you keep it. You cannot have it both ways.
.A rebbe is mashiach by definition”. That is ludicrous on it’s face, and doesn’t really deserve a rebuttal.
===
Correct.Xtianity did not turn treif in one go .
Until it established trinity [a’l] as its doctrine , more than 300 years passed . They only went step by step . They kept on moving .. Over 300 years. Lets hope habad is not going to move any further , they moved enough already . Too much.@qwerty
I do not blame the habad hasidim .
I admire them .
They follow faithfully, and blindly.They are – in my opinion at least – not any less than ‘tinokot shenishbu’.
They swallow their leaders bait, hook line and sinker.
No wonder they do what they do, and think what they think.If they would start thinking [even for a mashehu] for themselves , instead of blindly regurgitating all the nonsense they are being force fed for the last 8 decades , then there would be some glimmers of hope for their future.
Sheker VeChazav
There were no complaints from the Leaders of the mitnagdim that the hasidim pray to their rebbi.
Read all the haramim by the rabanim of those times against the hasidim .
Only a naive person will believe everything [especially if convenient] which happens to be printed.
The issues against hasidim then , and the issues against habad now , are totally different.
It is clear that the last leader of habad changed a lot of things ,both in practice and in theology.
And it is these innovations which are the issue.
[Mis]Using the authority of previous habad rebbeim for new self serving innovations , equals moral bankrupcy.sechel is spewing nothing more than classic habad misinformation and propaganda.
1] No one accused baal hatanya and early habad hassidim of praying to their rebbi.
2] The arguments against the current/previous rebbi of habad have nothing to do with the polemic about hassidism 200 – 250 years ago.
It is perfectly possible to fully side with the hasidim 200 years ago and still fully side with R Shach on this argument.
It can only be a sign of lack of adequate responses if sehel reverts back to the old canard that the issues are somehow related.
sechel is spewing nothing more than classic habad misinformation and propaganda.
1] No one accused baal hatanya and early habad hassidim of praying to their rebbi.
2] The arguments against the current/previous rebbi of habad have nothing to do with the polemic about hassidism 200 – 250 years ago.
It is perfectly possible to fully side with the hasidim 200 years ago and still fully side with R Shach on this argument.
can only be a sign of lack of adequate responses if sehel reverts back to the old canard that the issues are somehow related.
Anyone out there considering neo habad claims – BEWARE !!
Do not fall in to their trap.Do not fall for their friendliness, for their idealism.
Do not fall for their warmth and their assistance to yehudim all over the globe.
Carefully consider any of their claims against all the available evidence.
Consider it with a cool head and careful reasoning.Once you are crystal clear about their theology , you will not be tempted to follow them into their cult de sac anymore
@hakatan
The choice is NOT between “pro zionist nonsense” and satmar.The real choice is between satmar nonsense and a non zionist ,mainstream,level headed, common sense torah position, as supported by the overwhelming majority of gdolei yisrael from all types of communities across the board.
As evidenced by the many HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of erlihe yehudim who turn out en masse to vote in Israeli elections . Again and again.Ignoring these incontrovertible facts , is NOT going to make them disappear . But is giving your comments a clearly distasteful aftertaste.
The multitude of Gdolei Yisrael did not agree with satmar rav .
They ALL saw and read Vayoel Moshe and still disagreed with him .
.
That should settle the matter.
.@sechel
rambam where ?
prisha siman ?@prisha siman ?
@hakatan
And to me’arat hamahpelah ? Did the Jews have access to it ?@sechel
which poskim hold its not ?
Even after half an hour after hatsot, that is ….NO ONE !
After so many times asking
sechel has not been able to mention one clear posek who authorizes birhot kr
shm and Shm’E on Shabbat more than half an hour after hatsot.
@sechel
There is no reason whatsoever not to understand.
As simple as can be.Question for you – is tanya in perek 32 from its beginning, addressing Dovid Hamelech [and kings], or addressing us [common people] ?
What’s the answer ?.
@sechel
There is no reason whatsoever not to understand.
As simple as can be.Question for you – is tanya in perek 32 from its beginning, addressing Dovid Hamelech [and kings], or addressing us [common people] ?
What’s the answer ?@sechel
There is no reason whatsoever not to understand.
As simple as can be.Question for you – is tanya in perek 32 from its beginning, addressing Dovid Hamelech [and kings], or addressing us [common people] ?
What’s the answer ?@sechel
have not received an answer yet
what is the heter to say birhat kr’sh and shm’esre shabbat after hatsot ?
why is this not a braha levatala ?question is not whether one could / should daven before hatstot with less kavana
if he cannot daven before hatsot for whatever reason- he should not daven at allplease don’t just ‘drop’ marei mekomot .
pl . Explain yourself , with clear logic.Th.
.@CS and Sechel
“After he says that one is obligated to simultaneously love and hate someone who is a sinner , Tanya goes on to ask on himself if so whats pshat in tahlit sin’ah seneitim which is quoted in masehta shabbat as requiring unqualified hate ?
Whereupon Tanya answers that this pasuk and maamar hazal are talking about an apikores who one is required to hate unreservedly.”
[yb to CS]Complete distortion. He is explaining dovid hamelechs behavior, not giving guidance to people who can every jew who does something different than them an apikores or min.
[sechel to yb]
————————————-
Correct .
Sechels ‘explanation’ [think its not his – rather its his leaders] is a COMPLETE DISTORTION .
Nowhere in this perek does Tanya talk about Dovid.
Simple pshat .
He starts of with any yehudi.
Any yehudi’s obligation re love [or hate] towards other yehudim .
Again – OUR obligation toward our fellow yehudim.
Tanya delineates OUR obligation towards sinners.
He says it should be a mixture of love and hate.
Tanya asks on said statement , which was re OUR obligation towards sinners – which consists of said mixture of love and hate : How come Dovid hamelech says tahlit sin’ah [and gm ms Shabbat uses this to OBLIGATE US] with hate and no love.
So we have a contradiction whether the correct approach FOR US is a] mixture or b] hate only.
A contradiction regarding which approach WE – US should be taking.
Whereupon Tanya answers – if he is an apikores then the approach FOR US is – hate only
if he is not an apikores , just a sinner , then the approach FOR US is a mixture of love and hate.Any neutral reader of the above . Please learn Tanya slowly for yourself , It is PLAIN and OBVIOUS.
Addition:
If sechel would be correct , why doesn’t Tanya answer simply ?
Hate only – thats for Dovid only
Mixture – thats for us.Why does he need to differntiate between apikorsim and other sinners ?
@CS
Also, I was learning kuntres Beis Rabbeinu Shebivavel, which I’ll assume you know how to find, and there was a sdei chemed in one of the footnotes saying that many yidden throughout history thought their Rebbi was Moshiach including the Arizals Talmidim. I thought you would find that interesting so I’m noting here.
[Cs to yb]
——————————————-
As usual this is nothing more than a diversionary answer.
NONE ,and I repeat none ,of the above PROMOTED their rebbi as mashiach .
PROMOTION of their leader as mashiach is a recent habad invention , never practiced by any group in Judaism, anywhere on the globe .
With the noted exception of Natan HaAzati and his despicable followers re the failed and discredited false mashiach shabtai tzvi .Thats exactly where the ‘fault lines’ between new habad and mainstream 3 thousand year old Judaism run .
We are happy to be mekabel pnei mashiach when HKBH deems it right to send him.
That was and still is the default position of klal yisraels rebeim and forefathers from time immemorial.
And klal yisrael across all its varied spiritual manhigim and various components does not seem to be inclined to give up on that time hallowed position so fast. Like they are not changing other parts of our holy mesorah.@CS
For YB: firstly, you said what I quoted in perek 32 Tanya about an apikores was incorrect. I wrote it in English, here’s the original:
וּמַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּגְּמָרָא, שֶׁמִּי שֶׁרוֹאֶה בַּחֲבֵירוֹ שֶׁחָטָא – מִצְוָה לִשְׂנֹאותוֹ, וְגַם לוֹמַר לְרַבּוֹ שֶׁיִּשְׂנָאֵהוּ.
הַיְינוּ – בַּחֲבֵירוֹ בְּתוֹרָה וּמִצְוֹת,
וּכְבָר קִיֵּים בּוֹ מִצְוַת “הוֹכֵחַ תּוֹכִיחַ אֶת עֲמִיתֶךָ” – עַם שֶׁאִתְּךָ בְּתוֹרָה וּבְמִצְוֹת, וְאַף־עַל־פִּי־כֵן לֹא שָׁב מֵחֶטְאוֹ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בְּסֵפֶר חֲרֵדִים.
[CS to YB]
———————————
You are omitting the crucial part of Tanya which I quoted-
After he says that one is obligated to simultaneously love and hate someone who is a sinner , Tanya goes on to ask on himself if so whats pshat in tahlit sin’ah seneitim which is quoted in masehta shabbat as requiring unqualified hate ?
Whereupon Tanya answers that this pasuk and maamar hazal are talking about an apikores who one is required to hate unreservedly.
—————————–Katan gives the impression of being blind and deaf.
He doesn’t see the obvious pikuach nefesh straight in front of his eyes – blind r’l
He does not hear the Arabb Cry – that the “descendants of the apes and the pigs [the Jews]” will have to choose between the suitcase and the coffin.
We have every reason to take their threats at face value .