Menachem Shmei

>>>a woman speaking to a group of men … is accepted by the vast majority

I’m not sure what you mean. If you’re referring to a crowd of non frum men and women, though it’s not so common, it is possible that some shluchos do this. It’s possible that it’s wrong, it’s possible that they have a heter from a rov.

If you’re talking about in front of a group of Lubavitcher men, I’ve never seen such a thing, so it’s definitely not something accepted by the mainstream.

For example, they would never ch”v have a woman speak at the kinnus, or at the children’s rallies, etc. Unless you include a young girl saying the pesukim (at rallies, children come up to lead the other children in saying pesukim and maamorei chazal. Sometimes a boy leads the posuk, and sometimes a girl. Children.)

Even if something like this happens, it comes from modernity. Yes there are modern orthodox Jews who call themselves Chabad because they generally follow the Chabad derech. Called Chabad lite.
Where i think your completely wrong is that this has anything to do with the geula or “the boss”. On the contrary, the ones who care more about “the boss” and talk more about Moshiach tend to be the more frum ones. Those who are more modern will admit that the Rebbe isn’t too happy about what they’re doing (let’s not get into a whole thing on this, just answering what you brought up) and that it’s distancing the geula.

>>>Unlike most other rebbes who spend a majority of their time dealing with askonim on inyonei tzibbur and and regular supplicants, the Lubavicher rebbe sat in his room by himself most of the day. It makes sense that he prepared his sichos.

I love this post. Usually people claim that the Rebbe isn’t a gadol because he spent too much time in askonus and no time learning. It’s refreshing to see someone who knows the truth, though I don’t know why you had to go to the opposite extreme.

מענין לענין, just last night I was watching a Chof Av farbrengen from 5731 (commemorating the Rebbe’s father’s yahrtzeit).
Four hours of pure bliss! It started with a hadran on Chagigah, and then the he built a lishitasayu of Shamai and Hillel. After explaining their general positions, he presented a machlokes between Hillel and Shamai from a each seder of shas, and showed how they all follow the same reasoning. Wrapped up with a lesson for how to look at another Yid based on the machlokes in Keitzad Merakdim.
This was followed by a pilpul explaining the opinions of Rashi and Maharsha in a Gemara in Taanis with about 10 powerful questions on the Gemara which were all answered with one point.
And much more. I thank Hashem for giving me access to this!

>>>R’ Chaim Kanievsky predicted…

On the topic of Reb Chaim Kanievsky, I found something very interesting in the sefer אשכתבא דרבי – בני ברק תשמ”ו about his father (the Steipler). It is about 5 pages long, so I will summarize:

The Rambam writes that it is a foundation of Torah that Hashem gives humans nevuah. He says that as soon as someone purifies himself etc. the ruach hakodesh rests upon him, and he is a novi. Hashem sends us these people to inform us the future, and even the physical needs of individuals, as we find with Shmuel and the donkeys of Shaul’s father.

Since this is one of the foundations of the Torah, it is even applicable nowadays, despite the fact that we are in a state of concealment.

In every single generation, Hashem planted great Jews who have this very power of nevua as the neviim of old.

We know of the great powers of the Chofetz Chayim (-he goes on to recount some stories) as well as the Chazon Ish.

And in our generation, we merited to have the Kehilos Yaakov who is way above the rest of the nation. In his perfection, he has served to be a רואה (-he explains earlier that this is another title used for neviim (ע”פ מצודות דוד), specifically when they are prophesying regarding physical matters).

Many people think that he would just give brochos, but this is not the case. Rather, he is one of the רואים just as in the days of old, since this is an eternal part of klal Yisroel.

ע”כ תוכן דבריו.

It’s quite ironic, because if you learn the sicha of the Rebbe that everyone keeps quoting (but no one actually read of course, for the fear of being “led astray” (i.e. getting convinced)) – you’ll see that this is almost exactly the same idea that the Rebbe is conveying. Including the way they learn the Rambam, etc.
(By the way, did you learn through Rambam hilchos yesodei Hatorah about the halachos of nevuah? If you didn’t, that’s a pretty good reason why you can’t seem to fathom the idea of current nevuah).

I’m convinced that if you would actually read the sicha as well as the אשכבתא דרבי, you will switch your argument, and start attacking the Rebbe for just copying what was written about the Steipler 🙂.

You can find אשכתבא דרבי on Otzar Hachochma for free (tablet.otzar dot com). Page צח ואילך.

>>>I love it when gematrios are used as….”proofs” to things in chabad.

They are not used as such.

Saying that 770 is gematriya beis moshiach is not the same as proving something from the gematriya.

>>>Avira, doesn’t the Gemara also say that Ruach haKodesh ceased to exist after the last Neviim? I seem to remember learning that…

That is indeed the wording of the Gemara.
נסתלקה רוח הקודש מישראל

But of course, avira has no issue interpreting this. It is obvious that this isn’t literal.
It is only what the Rebbe said that is an issue.

Avira,

Every single rishon, acharon, and posek has said many things that don’t seem to fit with various gemaras. This is the bulk of pilpulim from theory down to halacha in Shach and Taz and shu”t.

They discuss certain ideas, ask that seemingly it doesn’t fit with certain pesukim, mishnayos, or Gemaros, and then they explain in a clear fashion how it all fits beautifully.
If you were to only learn the maskanos of every sugya, you will have many questions. “How did he reach this conclusion? There are so many gemaros that argue!” This would be ridiculous. Of course you have know idea how it all fits without reading the actual sugya.
The same is with the Rebbe. His seforim are no different than the rest of Torah shebaal peh.
If you read those sichos, you’ll see how according to the Rambam and others you understood the Gemara wrong, and there is another way to understand it.

Unfortunately, your hate blinds your derech halimud and you would rather assume that it is unfathomable for the Gemara to be explained any other way, and you are so “sure” of this, that you refuse to see his explanation. This is called burying your head in the sand.

Avira,

>>>It’s all over rishonim and achronim that we have no nevuah now. If the only way you can prove something is with kabalah

Where does the Rebbe prove this with kabbala? He explains it clearly al pi nigleh! Yet, you are too cowardly to open up the pilpulim where the Rebbe discusses this. Again, we will go in circles all day if we discuss pilpulim which you refuse to learn, but quote anyway.

>>>not studying it until the age of 40 after mastering shas and poskim, as proscribed by the poskim. His errors are largely due to premature exposure to kabalah

Would you say the same of the Vilna Gaon who was a master of kabbala before his bar mitzva?

>>>Quoting a gemara is not lime quoting one line of a sefer out of context; it’s a naamar chazal.
>>>nomesorah said that there is no such gemara. I said that there is and cited it – why do you take that as “quoting a random line”?

You completely misunderstood me. Read what I wrote again. The “random line” wasn’t referring to the Gemara, it was referring to the quote from the Rebbe.

The Rebbe said 2 pilpulim (which I referenced) where he discusses the idea of nevuah in our times, and you have the chutzpa to take one line from those sichos and say “This line goes against a Gemara” when the entire sicha is discussing how to understand that very Gemara according to mefarshim and Rambam!!!

And then, instead of admitting your wrong and opening up the source to see how the Rebbe supports his position, you continue to attack how the Rebbe “uses kabbala” to argue with the Gemara about nevuah, which is completely untrue.

Again, I repeat my taana on you: How dare you attack someone’s pilpul without even thinking of opening it up to see how he explains himself?

You make as if you “found a Gemara” that doesn’t fit with the Rebbe’s statement, when that is actually what his pilpul is about.

>>>MenachemShmei would never have quoted that because he would have realised that we would make a laughing-stock of him if he did.

It is correct that I wouldn’t bring this psak din. Not necessarily because I think the psak din is wrong, but mainly because I know that I wouldn’t care litvisher rabbanim paskened that the Rebbe isn’t Moshiach, so a psak din from one group of rabbanim isn’t much of a proof.

Regarding the rest of your problems with what the Rebbe said – I stand by what I wrote several times that it is improper to ask from excerpted quotes from long pilpulim. It takes many hours of learning a sefer and understanding the derech halimmud before asking “shturemdike kashyos.”

On the topic of pork, do your research before attacking a tremendous talmid chacham and tzaddik as “going against Chazal” (ר”ל):

Likkutei Sichos vol. 12 pg. 75:

עתיד חזיר ליטהר

מרז”ל בלשון זה הובא: בשל”ה פ’ חיי שרה. מדרש תלפיות ענף חזיר בשם ר’ בחיי. ס’ הקנה (?) לקו”ת [ראה ל,ב] ד”ה וכל בניך ס”ג. קהלת יעקב מעמ’ חזיר. בס’ הברית ח”א מ”כ, דרך אמונה פל”א בשם מדרש תנחומא (כ”כ בס’ נפש חיים) – (וראה ג”כ עשרה מאמרות מאמר חקור דין ח”ד פי”ג. אור החיים פ’ שמיני). –

בלשון: שעתיד הקב”ה להחזירו לישראל (לנו) בחיי שמיני י”א ז’ (לנו). שו”ת הרדב”ז ח”ב תתכ”ח ומגן דוד להרדב”ז ט’ (לישראל), אור יקרות (לישראל להיתרו הראשון). ראש אמנה למהר”י אברבנאל פי”ג, ריטב”א קידושין מט,א. רקנטי פ’ שמיני, ישועות משיחו בשם בראשית רבה (כ”כ בשד”ח) תורת משה להחת”ס. מאו”א ח,ו (חזיר נק’ ק”נ ולכן במיתוקה עתידה לחזור ותהי’ קדושה).

כמה פי’ במרז”ל אלו נקבצו בשדי חמד: כללים אות ג’ עו’. פאת השדה ג’ ז’, ואות ה’ ח’, שיורי פאה ג’ ז’.

ואחרי שכל הנ”ל שקו”ט במאמר זה – תמוה דעת היפ”ת ויק”ר פי”ג ג’ – הובא בס’ ערכי הכינויין לבעהמ”ס סדר הדורות – שמאמר זה לא הי’ ולא נברא!

From the 1950s until 1989, no one went crazy about the Rebbe saying and publishing that a rebbe is עצמות ומהות אליין ווי ער האט זיך אריינגעשטעלט אין א גוף.

Just as no one went crazy that the Minchas Elazar wrote (דרכי חיים ושלום – מנהגי תענית):
מגודל נשמת הגה”ק הרמ”מ מרימנוב זי”ע כי הקב”ה לקח ד’ אותיות הוי’ כביכול וכרכן בלבוש זשיפיצ”ע ובלבוש ספאדי”ק ומזה נעשה הרבי ר’ מענדילי מרימאנוב
https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=4692&st=&pgnum=234&hilite=

No one went crazy when the Noam Elimelech wrote (about how a tzaddik has power to heal – ואתחנן ד):
אך זאת צריך להבין, מאין הוא להצדיק שיכול לרפאות לחולה ע”י תפילתו ולהמשיך לו חיות שיחי’ האדם, והלא חיותו של הצדיק איננו לעולם, הלא הוא כמקריות והאיך דבר מקרה יכול ליתן חיות לאדם, השי”ת ב”ה וב”ש שהוא חי וקים לעד ולעולמי עולמים וחיותו הוא עצמיות יכול ליתן חיות לאדם המקרי, אבל לא כן האדם שאין חיותו עצמיות. אמנם אין זה כי אם מחמת שהצדיק מדבק עצמו בהש”י ב”ה, ונמצא חיותו דבוק בהחיים הנצחיים העצמיות, והוי ליה חיותו של הצדיק ג”כ עצמיות ונצחיות, כי עצם אל עצם יחד ידובקו, ולכן יש כח ביד הצדיק להמשיך חיות אל החולה.

No one went crazy when Rabbeinu Bachya wrote (שמות לג, ז):
מכאן שנקרא משה בשם המיוחד, וכן מצינו שנקרא יעקב בשם אל שנאמר . . . וכן מצינו בשם הצדיק שנקרא בשם המיוחד . . וכן מצינו במלך המשיח שנקרא בשם המיוחד שנאמר וזה שמו אשר יקראו הוי’ צדקנו . . וטעם הדבר בכלם כי הדבק בדבר נקרא על שם הדבר שידבק בו.

No one went crazy when the Alter Rebbe wrote in Tanya (ch. 2) that every Jew is literally a part of G-d (quoting from Iyov (as mentioned by Sechel), but in Tanya he adds the word “mamash” – literally).

No one went crazy when Chazal said that the face of the Master Havayeh is R’ Shimon Bar Yochai. Or that “Havayeh in His holy chamber” refers to R’ Yitzchak in the beis midrash of Keisarin.

Of course, like anything in Torah, these statements need explanation and understanding. Go learn the ideas. There is an entire sefer – על הצדיקים (by Rabbi Pewsner) – that explains this topic at length. If you’re interested, go learn it. Don’t start calling thousands of people עובדי ע”ז (ch”v) because their Rebbe’s sefer says something that you don’t understand.

P.S. Again, this has nothing to do with ch”v davening to the Rebbe in shmone esrei, or the other nonsense which does not exist, as I wrote countless times.
This is a 1950s statement which some people decided to pull out in 1989 and misunderstand, in order to push the political agenda of the time.

DaMoshe, I don’t know if you are just trying to stir the flames or you actually agree with the rebbe who you quoted.

If the latter is correct, then here are some Rambams that you should be made aware of:

Regarding discussing with Lubavitchers about their ideology in the CR, the Rambam writes (הלכות עבודה זרה פ”ב ה”ה):
ישראל שעבד עבודת כוכבים הרי הוא כעובד כוכבים לכל דבריו . . וכן האפיקורסים מישראל אינן כישראל לדבר מן הדברים . . ואסור לספר עמהן ולהשיב עליהן תשובה כלל שנאמר “ואל תקרב אל פתח ביתה”.

Additionally, as n0mesora pointed out, it would be close to impossible to live a life in a normal community without some sort of Chabad influence, be it kashrus (who may be the mashgichim for exotic ingredients from far flung places?), yuchsin, etc.
You may have to follow this Rambam (הלכות דעות רפ”ו):
ואם היו רעים וחטאים שאין מניחים אותו לישב במדינה אלא אם כן נתערב עמהן ונוהג במנהגם הרע יצא למערות ולחוחים ולמדברות. ואל ינהיג עצמו בדרך חטאים כענין שנאמר “מי יתנני במדבר מלון ארחים”

Good luck!
(now you might have to go do teshuva for getting a blessing from me!)

The question of perfection is a very broad question that is not specifically about Moshiach or the Rebbe, rather deep sugya in hashkofa which I didn’t have the patience or interest to share my thoughts on.

However, since people keep asking, I’ll share some general points for thought.

There is definitely some idea of perfection in true tzaddikim, specially as the Alter Rebbe defines a tzadik in Tanya (as mentioned by Sechel) that he is someone who has succeeded in completely eradicating evil impulses from his heart, thus blocking the possibility of sin.

We see similarly in Gemara Chulin 7a where the Gemara first assumes that R’ Meir accidentally ate a leaf without taking teruma, but then refutes this since its impossible that Hashem would allow a tzaddik to fall in sin.
This implies a certain degree of perfection.

On the other hand, the very idea that tzaddikim are human comes with an intrinsic degree of imperfection. This can be manifest in very minute yeridos which would even be praiseworthy for a simple Yid, but for a tzaddik of that stature are considered imperfections on which he must do teshuva.
(As I think is implied from Rav Avigdor Miller that was brought before).

All of this has no relevance to questioning a tzaddik.
There is a difference between questioning and doubting. One must trust a tzaddik and obey his instructions even without understanding (ויאמינו בהשם ובמשה עבדו. אפילו אומר לך על ימין שהו שמאל ועל שמאל שהוא ימין ).

At the same time, of course there is no issue with asking questions and trying to understand. This is the derech of Torah, תורה היא וללמוד אני צריך.
But the Jewish way is naaseh v’nishma – first accepting, then respectfully trying to understand.

>>>Menachem, that was not the story as I heard it from Korf’s son…

According to my understanding of the Chabad sources printed at the time of the attack, he was teaching Tanya to two bochurim. I can look into the details.

>>>Usually Lubavitchers admit that other frum communities are off-limits for proselytizing

Very strange. Hafotzas hamaayonos (spreading chassidic teachings) was always a key element in Chabad.
The talmidei habaal shem tov went around disseminating his Torah, bringing many misnagdim into their fold.
Same was with talmidei hamaggid.

The Chabad Rebbes, beginning with the Baal Hatanya, sent Shadarim (the original shluchim) all across Europe to spread the teachings of chassidus.

Why would any Lubavitcher deny this?

>>>Lubavichers love to change the discussion from Meshichism to any other subject, especially one in which they look like the good guys and Satmar the crazies.

Who brought up the story of Satmar in this thread?

>>>there’s a NY Times story from 1984, available on their site, reporting on the acquittal of all charges of the Satmar guy who was charged.

He was acquitted because Reb Pinye refused to verify that he was the one who did it. He said his eyes were closed during the actual attack. Also, he wouldn’t confirm that he was a chossid (“I try to be a chossid”).
The fact that the attackers took advantage of Reb Pinye’s humility to go unpunished is all the more despicable.

>>>I know how to checkmate Lubavichers. I do it all the time in my neighborhood.

Are you 12 years old? Maybe 14?

>>>you claim that the American Lubavichers who “see” the Rebbe in 770 also visit the Ohel?
>>>what makes Israeli Lubavichers crazy

I didn’t claim that those who “see” go to the Ohel, nor that Israelis are crazy.

Let me know if I’m generally very unclear, because I feel like I’m often very repetitive.

The American Lubavitchers who say the Rebbe is alive don’t claim to see the Rebbe. They go to the Ohel. See above what they mean by alive.

The only people I know of who claim to “see” are some Israelis (although an overwhelming majority of Israelis are not in this group and go to the ohel).
Why, in my opinion, are these people crazy? Whatever.

>>>Do you agree with Neville CB’s response to my question to you about tznius?

No. It was simply a cruel accusation where he expressed his anger against Chabad.

There is indeed an issue in Crown Heights with tzniyus, and I honestly have no explanation, and there can be no justification.

It definitely has no basis in the Chabad ideology, as the Rebbe was a big fighter for tzniyus.
There are countless sichos and letters of the Rebbe where he states and explains how the true honor for a Jewish woman is tzniyus, and כל כבודה בת מלך פנימה, and how this is the צינור for all the brachos for the family.
There are sichos where the Rebbe praises new innovations and chumros in tzniyus that didn’t exist before.

The accusation that Chabad refuses to admonish their own due to their “elitism” is nonsense, and reminds me of antisemitic tropes. Look online, and you will find many strong מחאות by chabad rabbanim as well as נשי חב”ד organizations, and projects to publicize tzniyus policies in Crown Heights.

If the issue persists, the only reason I can think of is that different people, communities, and neighborhoods are given different yitzrei harah.
I cannot give you a theory as to why people in Crown Heights have this yetzer harah more than people in Williamsburg, as I’m not in the business of spiritual anthropology.

Neville,

>>>the tone still comes off as defensive when you say “so what?”

That’s why I clarified myself.

>>>What seems to be the mainstream approach would be to say “we believe moshiach can come from the dead, others believe the Rebbe is literally still alive in the flesh and can never die; both are legitimate shittos in Chabad.” Am I wrong about this?

It depends. This may be the approach of the more openminded and respectful-of-other-opinions guys. While the more hotblooded my-opinion-is-the-only-opinion guys will rant and rave about the stupidity of those with that opinion, and constantly call them out as crazies.
I think this is how it usually is in life and politics: Many people are just live-and-let-live, even if your opinion is ridiculous. Others like to fight for truth.
(Though it may sound like I’m putting down the second type, I’m not necessarily. There is a concept of standing up for the truth without being afraid. However, the line between not bending for truth and disrespecting differing opinions is very thin.)

>>>Maybe it’s not so much “denying” the beliefs so much as concealing.

Well said.
(If someone would deny the existence of the Moshiach-faction (quite prevalent) or alive-faction (less prevalent), that would make them either a liar (“מפני דרכי שלום”) or oblivious.)

>>>The simplest explanation is that they don’t hold it’s wrong and certainly don’t hold it’s avoda zara.

Mainly the latter.

>>>otherwise it sounded like he was accusing them of putting it davka on the eastern wall.

I think he was (which is a false accusation, כנ”ל).