LazerA's comment to "Chabad -The apologetics aren't satisfying":
Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver said...
"You say that these ideas concerning Tzaddikim are foreign to you. All this gets back to the original point of mine that your complaint is not against Chabad per se. Your complaint is against the idea of koching in the relationship with the Tzaddik, and that Hashem speaks through the Tzaddik, which is a core concept in the entire derech of Chasidus, as evidenced from countless stories of emunas Tzadikim from all Chasidishe groups."
Current Chabad's focus on it's rebbe goes far beyond that found in mainstream chassidic sources. In Chabad today we find a totally new phenomenon of people using their human leader as their primary spiritual focus and purpose. Mitzvos are done to give nachas to the rebbe; the rebbe sees all, knows all, and controls all.
Such an approach, transforming one's rebbe into one's primary spiritual focus, is not found in any sources outside of current Chabad.
"...your problem is not just with the derech of Chabad..., but with the Baal Shem Tov, the Maggid, the Chevraya Kadisha (inner circle of talmidei haMaggid), and so on. It's about Chasidim vs. misnagdim, not Chabad vs. everyone else."
I would be interested in learning of Chasidic sources that justify using one's rebbe as one's primary spiritual focus. It cerainly isn't in Tanya ch. 2 as you seem to imply.
This standard line that the current complaints on Chabad are actually expressions of the old Misnagdim is simply ridiculous.
First of all, many of the current critics of Chabad are from Chasidic (or Chasidic-influenced) backgrounds.
Secondly, few of the non-Chasidic opponents of Chabad have any antagonism against any other Chasidic groups.
It is simply a way of turning aside criticism without addressing the issues. It is another form of ad hominem response. Defenders of Chabad usually end up resorting to one of these. Either, "you are too ignorant of Chassidus/Kabbalah" or "You are a misnagid."
Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver said...
ReplyDelete".... Hashem speaks through the Tzaddik, which is a core concept in the entire derech of Chasidus, as evidenced from countless stories of emunas Tzadikim from all Chasidishe groups."
BALONEY!!
Maybe Chabad thinks Hashem speaks through their Rebbe, which would make him a Prophet. The other Chassidic groups do not think that their Rebbe is a Prophet.
Is Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver saying that Menachem Mendel Schneersohn was a Prophet? If not, then what exactly does he mean when you say that Hashem speaks through the Tzaddik?
"Current Chabad's focus on it's rebbe goes far beyond that found in mainstream chassidic sources. In Chabad today we find a totally new phenomenon of people using their human leader as their primary spiritual focus and purpose. Mitzvos are done to give nachas to the rebbe; the rebbe sees all, knows all, and controls all.
ReplyDeleteSuch an approach, transforming one's rebbe into one's primary spiritual focus, is not found in any sources outside of current Chabad."
I'm not sure whether your arrogance trumps your rather presumptuous ignorance, or vice versa.
"I would be interested in learning of Chasidic sources that justify using one's rebbe as one's primary spiritual focus. It cerainly isn't in Tanya ch. 2 as you seem to imply."
Before getting to Tanya (where you'd be better directed to Iggeres Hakodesh anyway), you might look at Tanchuma [kadum] bereishis:21 & vayeira :9, as well as the Midrash Lekach Tov, hak. l'p noach. Also see Reishis Chochma, shaar hakedusha 8, Tzavaas HaRivash par.50, and Midbar Kedemos s.v.tziyur, for starters...
"This standard line that the current complaints on Chabad are actually expressions of the old Misnagdim is simply ridiculous."
Ridiculous because you say so, of course... Mina hani milli d'omar kra ?!
"First of all, many of the current critics of Chabad are from Chasidic (or Chasidic-influenced) backgrounds."
Yes indeed - the old 'some of my best friends are Jewish' usually works, doesn't it ?
"Secondly, few of the non-Chasidic opponents of Chabad have any antagonism against any other Chasidic groups."
Ah, that's a very strong set of proofs ! You might want to take a look at Siach Sarfei Kodesh 1:p.4 (or was R' Aron Karliner part of Chabad's conspiracy too...lol)
"It is simply a way of turning aside criticism without addressing the issues. It is another form of ad hominem response. Defenders of Chabad usually end up resorting to one of these. Either, "you are too ignorant of Chassidus/Kabbalah" or "You are a misnagid."
It doesn't take much to turn aside criticism born (at best) of ignorance - and I'm being generous here.
Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver said...
ReplyDelete".... Hashem speaks through the Tzaddik, which is a core concept in the entire derech of Chasidus, as evidenced from countless stories of emunas Tzadikim from all Chasidishe groups."
BALONEY!!
Maybe Chabad thinks Hashem speaks through their Rebbe, which would make him a Prophet. The other Chassidic groups do not think that their Rebbe is a Prophet.
Is Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver saying that Menachem Mendel Schneersohn was a Prophet? If not, then what exactly does he mean when you say that Hashem speaks through the Tzaddik?
Bright Eyes, might be time for some new glasses. Rabbi Oliver is more likely aware of the many identical (if not stronger) expressions of this concept in such chassidic classics as the Noam Elimelech, Meor Einayim, etc. The focus on these ideas in Chabad seforim is relatively minimal in comparison.
Bright Eyes, can you read? I never said the word prophet. I said the idea that Hashem speaks through the Tzadik. Many stories of the great Rebbes of all groups contain this idea, as does their literature. You need to get an education.
ReplyDeleteRabbi Yehoishophot Oliver said...
ReplyDelete"I never said the word prophet. I said the idea that Hashem speaks through the Tzadik."
No, here you did not say prophet. But in a different, recent discussion you succesfully proved that the late LR considered himself a prophet and that this is the belief of his followers.
Will you, at least, acknowledge that such a belief is clearly unprecedented in chasidus?
Please be nice! I can read! I post here because I am eager to learn new ideas and am happy to be corrected when I am wrong.
ReplyDeleteI just don't understand how the person Hashem "speaks" through isn't prophesying. Are there examples of other people that Hashem speaks through who are not prophesying?
With all due respect, Mr. Oliver, you have demonstrated repeatedly YOUR inability to read clearly. SO DON'T INSULT OTHER PEOPLE ABOUT THAT.
ReplyDeleteLazerA, in Bright Eyes of my words concerning the derech of Chasidus in general, I didn't use the word prophet. That is what I was objecting to above. However, it is indeed true that based on a clear sicha of the Rebbe, I believe him to have the status of a prophet. Indeed, someone who learns that sicha inside (Shoftim 5750) will see that the Rebbe says that all the Rebbeim of Chabad had that status (I don't see why the same wouldn't apply to others too), because they gave advice in matters of gashmiyus, as based on the Rebbe's explanation of Tanya p. 267.
ReplyDeleteHowever (to address your question, Bright Eyes), the general idea of Hashem speaking through a Tzadik, and the specific focus on this emunah found in traditional Chasidic groups, is not related to nevuah per se. Even without nevuah, there could be ruach ha'kodesh.
Bright Eyes, I'm sorry; I'll try to be nice. When you write "baloney" in capital letters and misquote what I wrote, it's not so easy.
Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver said...
ReplyDelete"...it is indeed true that based on a clear sicha of the Rebbe, I believe him to have the status of a prophet. Indeed, someone who learns that sicha inside (Shoftim 5750) will see that the Rebbe says that all the Rebbeim of Chabad had that status (I don't see why the same wouldn't apply to others too), because they gave advice in matters of gashmiyus, as based on the Rebbe's explanation of Tanya p. 267."
Actually, the LLR goes a bit further in the sicha (which can be found at ).
He refers to himself as "the leader of our generation -- the judge, adviser and prophet of our generation" and "G-d has chosen and appointed a person who of himself is far greater than the people of his generation, to serve as a judge, adviser, and prophet to the generation."
And, for clarification, he wasn't engaging in hyperbole, he was explicitly claiming the full halachic status of a navi whose word is binding on all Jews.
As I explained in a previous comment, his halachic justification [seems problematic].
To repeat the essence of my previous comment:
The LLR's claim is based on the halacha that if an established prophet testifies that another individual is a prophet, that second individual is immediately muchzak as a navi and requires no testing.
The assumption in the LLR's sicha is that, at some point in time, an established navi testified that the previous rebbe was a navi, and then the previous rebbe testified that "his disciples" were neviim.
Ok, so what are we left with? An individual claims to be a prophet. Now, normally, a prophet needs to be tested. Nope! Because, he tells us, another individual, who never publicly claimed to be a prophet, testified (in front of whom?) that he is a prophet! Did anyone hear this testimony? In fact, did anyone know that the first one was a prophet? Who established him?
All of the sudden we have a whole history of "hidden prophets" (an oxymoron - people with the halachic status of prophets are, by definition, publicly known) that we must accept because this person tells us to.
Ultimately, we have nothing to support any of this except [his assertion][...]
R' Oliver states additionally that the LLR's claim was "because they gave advice in matters of gashmiyus, as based on the Rebbe's explanation of Tanya p. 267." I don't see anything on this matter in the sicha. Perhaps the LLR said it elsewhere.
In any event, the claim is based on a statement by the Baal HaTanya (Igeres Hakodesh ch. 22) to the effect that it has never been the practice to ask for advice on material matters, for only prophets can give such advice. Even Torah scholars can only advise on matters of Torah. (Some Modern Orthodox have used this passage to claim that the Baal Hatanya rejected the concept of Daas Torah. This is incorrect, but not for now.)
It is clearly a difficult passage (apparently ruling out getting financial advice from your accountant among other things), and one is tempted to argue that it was stated somewhat hyperbolicly, in that it was clearly intended as an expression of humility before the Baal HaTanya proceeds to give mussar to his followers on matters associated with material affairs.
In any event, the Baal HaTanya is clearly not claiming in this passage to be a prophet. It is clear that he is giving his advice despite the fact that he is not a prophet, as evidenced by his following statement:
אך האמת אגיד לשומעים לי כי האהבה מקלקת השורה
"However, I shall tell the truth to those who listen to me for love destroys the measure"
In other words, "Even though, according to what I just said, I have no place giving such advice, I shall anyways because I love you so much."
To use this passage as a basis for a halachic claim of prophecy is [very problematic].
I also want to reiterate what I said previously on this topic. When R' Oliver first mentioned this sicha, I went to look it up. I did not expect to find anything as shocking as I found. I thought I would find something that had been distorted by over-eager talmidim. Sadly, this sicha has convinced me that the late Lubavitcher rebbe was personally engaged in a deliberate campaign [...]
The Rebbe's footnote concerning the quote from Tanya and how it demonstrates that the Rebbeim of Chabad were nevi'im is in Hisva’aduyos 5751, Vol. 4, p. 200, fn. 101. The arrogance of those who can make such nasty comments about such a great Tzadik--and without even having read his words--is simply astounding.
ReplyDelete