בפסק דין שבו התחלנו דברינו אמרו שהאדמו"ר מליובאוויטש זצ"ל היה נביא ורמז שהוא המשיח. לפיכך חייב כל א' מישראל מדין של אליו תשמעון להאמין שהוא מלך המשיח ולקבלו. והנה נתבאר שאין נבואה בחוץ לארץ וכמאמר הספרי מקרבך ולא בחוץ לארץ ע"כ והאדמו"ר מליובאוויטש זצ"ל אף פעם לא היה בארץ ישראל. ועוד שנביא צריך לתת אות להבא או צריך נביא אחר להעיד עליו ולא מצאנו זה בהאדמו"ר מליובאוויטש זצ"ל. ואף גם זאת צריך כל זה להיות בפני הסנהדרין ואנו אין לנו ב"ד של סמוכים. ועוד שלפי הרמב"ם המצוה של אליו תשמעון שייך אך ורק לנבואה שנאמרה מאת ה' ולא למאמר הנביא מאת עצמו. והיכן ראינו שהאדמו"ר מליובאוויטש זצ"ל אמר נבואה בפירוש ולא דבר מדעת עצמו. וג"כ הלא כבר פסקה הנבואה בתחילת בית השני ואינה חוזרת עד שיבא אליהו. וא"כ מתוך שלדאבונינו עדיין אליהו לא בא א"א להאדמו"ר מליובאוויטש זצ"ל להיות נביא. וכמו שאמר הרשב"א בתשובה ח"א סי' תקמח וז"ל ואף בתלמידי הלל הזקן שהיו קדושי עליון גדולים בחכמה ובחסידות אמרו ראויים שתשרה עליהם שכינה כמשה אלא שאין הדור ראוי לכך. ואפשר דורו של הלל ותלמידיו החסידים לא היה ראוי ודורנו זה ראוי עכ"ל. ואם בדורו של הרשב"א שהם כמלאכים לא כל שכן בדורנו שאנו כבני אדם. אלא לצערינו איו לנו נביא עד שיבא אליהו בבא"ס.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Chabad - Rebbe & prophecy/R' Gil Student
Chabad - Psak that Rebbe is Navi & Moshiach
[translated by Chabbad chasidim]
In his public address of Shabbat Parshas Shoftim, 5751, the Lubavitcher Rebbe asserts that according to Torah law (Maimonides, Yesodei HaTorah, chapter 7), there is a prophet in our generation, and we are required to heed his directives. The Rebbe said:
"It must be publicized to all members of the generation that we have merited that G-d has chosen a person endowed with free choice, who is incomparably higher than the members of this generation, as the judge, counselor and prophet of the generation, to provide instruction and advice pertaining to the service of all Jews.... [His council extends] to the most fundamental prophecy - "Redemption is imminent" and immediately, literally, 'Behold he (Moshiach) comes."'
In light of Maimonides statement in Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah, 7:1, 9:2, 10:1, we the undersigned consider thet according to Torah law the Rebbe King Moshiach is a prophet. Moreover, in his public addresses the Rebbe clearly alludes to the fact that he is a prophet. Indeed, time and again, before the eyes of the Jewish people and the rest of the world, the Rebbe has accurately predicted the future. The Rebbe foresaw with incredible precision the unfolding and outcome of such events as the Six Day War,the Gulf War, and numerous other events. As such, there is an obligation to heed the Rebbe's every instruction, and to believe his every word.
On Shabbat Parsha Vayeira, 5752, the Rebbe said: "At the present time, all obstacles and hindrances have been nullified. As such, Moshiach (not only exists, but in fact), is also already revealed. All we have to do now is welcome Moshiach Tzidkeinu in actual reality."
On Shabbat Parshas Mishpatim, 5752; the Rebbe said the following: "...The ruling of the rabbanim and halachic authorities that the time of the Redemption has arrived - i.e. "A king will arise from the House of David... it is presumed that he is Moshiach," [- the Rebbe added to the halachic ruling :-] "until the state of "definitely Moshiach." In this public address, as well as numerous others, the Rebbe clearly hints at the fact that he is King Moshiach.
In light of these statements, and in light of the Rebbe's encouragement of the proclamation "Yechi Adoneinu", it is incumbent on every single Jew to heed the Rebbe's words and believe that he is indeed King Moshiach, who will be revealed imminently.
Friday, August 15, 2008
Prophecy -Validation/Rambam
Rambam(Yesodei HaTorah Chapter 10):
This chapter discusses which signs a prophet has to perform before we believe him.
1) Any prophet who arises and says that God sent him does not have to perform a sign of the type that Moses, Elijah or Elishah did, which involved supernatural events. Instead, the sign that he has to perform is to predict the future, and we have to believe him, as it is written, "And if you say in your heart, `How shall we know the word which the Lord has not to spoken?'". Therefore, when a man suitable for prophecy comes in the Name of God, without wanting to add to or take away from, any of the commandments, but wants us to serve God properly, we do not ask him to split the sea, or to resurrect the dead, or to perform some other supernatural event, and then believe him, but we tell him to predict the future because he is a prophet, which he does, and we wait to see if what he says happens or not. Even if was wrong in only a small matter, he is a false prophet, but if all of what he said comes true, then he is believed.
2) A prophet has to be checked many times. If all his words are true then he is a prophet, as it says with respect to Samuel, "And all Israel, from Dan to Be'er-Sheva, knew that Samuel was accredited as a prophet of the Lord".
3) Enchanters and diviners also predict the future, so how do they differ from a prophet? Of what enchanters and diviners say some comes true and some does not, as it is written, "Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save you from these things shall come upon you" - it says, "from these things", and not, "from all these things", so it is possible that not all of what they said will come true, and that they were mistaken in everything, as it is written, "...that frustrates the omens of imposters, and makes diviners mad". With respect to a [true] prophet, all of what he says comes true, as it is written, "Know now that nothing shall fall to the earth of the word of the Lord", and it is also written, "The prophet that has a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that has My word, let him speak My word faithfully. What is the chaff of the wheat? says the Lord", that is to say that the words of diviners is like some chaff into which some wheat has been mixed, whereas the words of the Lord are completely true, with no falsehoods at all. This is backed up by Scripture, which says that prognosticators and diviners deceive the nations with their words, but a prophet makes known truthful matters, and we do not have to enchant or divine [to verify his words], for it is written, "There must not be found among you anyone that makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire...for these nations...The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet from amongst you". From here we see that a prophet makes known only earthly matters, such as famine or plenty, war or peace, and similar things. Prophets even answer the needs of the one, such as when Saul had lost an item and went to a prophet to help him find it. A prophet may say what he wants provided that he does not start another religion, add a mitzvah or take one away.
4) If a prophet predicts something bad, such as that so-and-so will die, or that this year will be one of war or famine, et cetera, and his prediction did not come true, then it is not a disproof of his prophecy and we do not label him as a false prophet, for the reason that God is exceedingly merciful and [often] revokes bad decrees, so it is possible that those on whom evil had been decreed had, like the citizens of Nineveh, repented, or had had their decree suspended, as with Hezekiah. But if, however, the prophet decreed good things and his prediction did not come true, then he is definitely a false prophet, for whenever God makes a good decree, even if it is conditional, He does not revoke it. From here we see that a prophet is tested only with respect to good matters. This is what Jeremiah said in his answer to Hananiah the son of Azur, when Jeremiah was prophecising bad things and Hananiah good things: `If what I say does not come true, it is not a sign that I am a false prophet, but if what you say does not come true, it shows that you are a false prophet', for it is written, "Nevertheless, hear now this word...As for the prophet who prophecies for peace, when the word of that prophet shall come to pass, then shall it be known that the Lord has truly sent the prophet".
5) If a prophet says about another prophet that he is [indeed] a prophet, then he is assumed to be a prophet, and the prophet who said it does not have to be cross-examined. Moses vouched for Joshua, and all of Israel believed in him before he performed a sign. Similarly in the following generations: it is forbidden to doubt or debate the prophecy of a prophet who has been found to be right time and time again, or the prophecy of a prophet who has been vouched for by another prophet, and it is [also] forbidden to test him excessively or for ever [for one who tests him is like one who tests God], for it is written, "Do not test the Lord your God as you tested Him in Massah", when we said, "Is the Lord among us, or not?". Once it has become known that he is a prophet, they will believe and know that God is amongst them, and they will nor debate or doubt his words, in accordance with what is written, "...yet they shall know that there has been a prophet amongst them".
Prophecy II - Validate by foretelling the future?
Prophecy -Validate by foretelling future?
Rambam's 8th Principle - All Torah is from G-d
Devarim II - Did Moshe compose it?
Devarim composed by G-d
Chinuch(Introduction to Devarim before #414): The Ramban wrote in his introduction to Devarim that the nature of Devarim is well know – it is a restatement of the Torah. In it Moshe reviewed to the generation, that was about to enter Israel, most of the mitzvos that they would need to know to settle the Israel. He commands many mitzvos and threatens them strongly concerning the punishment for not keeping the commandments. Occasionally he adds explanations to some of these mitzvos. However he makes no mention of mitzvos which applied to the Cohanim. Furthermore he doesn’t add to the commandments of the Cohanim since they were highly motivated to keep their mitzvos (Shabbos 20a). Moshe also adds mitzvos in Devarim which have not been mentioned previously at all such as Yibum (levirate marriage), slandering one’s bride, divorce, scheming witnesses and others. There is no doubt that these were not new mitzvos but those which had already been told to Moshe at Sinai or in the Tent of Meeting (Ohel Mo’ed) in the first year. That is because on the Plains of Moav there were no new revelations of mitzvos except for the words of the Covenant as will be explained [Devarim 28:69]. Since there were no new mitzvos revealed by G‑d for the first time here – you don’t find in Devarim the expression “And G‑d spoke to Moshe saying, ‘Command the Jews’ or ‘Speak to the Jews and you say to them this mitzva’. These are the words of the Ramban. This that these mitzvos were not mentioned previously with the other mitzvos is not surprising. That is because our Sages say in many places [Pesachim 6b] the Torah is not presented in chronological order. The reason for this is that the Torah includes all wisdoms aside from the plain meaning of the verses of its sweet issues and the strong foundations of its mitzvos. Perhaps because of the concealed wisdom it had to be arranged in the pattern that we have. Thus all is precisely placed by the Master of Divine Wisdom and that is sufficient justification.
Devarm composed by Moshe
Ohr HaChaim(Devarim 1:1): These are the words that Moshe spoke to the entire nation… By saying “these are the words” it comes to exclude what was written previously in the Torah. In other words Devarim consists entirely of the words which Moshe spoke on his own initiative i.e., the chastisements and instructions to those who transgress G‑d words. Megila (31b) states the curses which are mentioned in Devarim were composed by Moshe. However even the laws which Moshe reviewed and explained, he did on his own initiative without a command from G‑d. Since Moshe composed the Book of Devarim, the Torah was concerned that we might mistakenly think that he might have also independently composed part of the previous four books of the Torah. That is why Devarim starts with “These are the words that Moshe spoke” - to tell you that only the words found in Devarim were Moshe’s own composition but not even a single letter of the Torah that preceded it. Those four books of the Torah were entirely from G‑d exactly as He commanded them without the slightest change – even a single extra letter added or subtracted.
Big Brother in Beit Shemesh II/ The true story
Bartley Kulp's comment to "Big Brother in Beit Shemesh":"Tombeck charges that it is the modern Orthodox who are escalating the war by holding demonstrations, using political muscle and speaking to the media."This statement from Rabbi Tombeck is pure unadulterated spin. Holding demonstrations and using political muscle is a time honored chareidi tradition. Especially in Beit Shemesh!
Now hear this! I am going to tell you all a story Years before the zeolots in Beit Shemesh broke into the national media spotlight things were already brewing there.
I do not know the exact year that people started moving into Ramat Beit Shemesh. Nor do I know which communities were promised what or who got there first in significant numbers.
What I do know is that by 2003 there were already two rapidly growing communities there that were competing to inherit the earth.
Just to make a note for background information, that was also a municipal election year. At stake was the question what kind of infrastructure the city was going to further invest in. The Chareidim wanted further housing developement for kollel families and the dati leumi wanted to invest in infrastructure that would facilitate businesses and possibly new factories in order to enhance employment prospects in Beit Shemesh. They were also on a better government anti corruption and efficiency platform. Both parties were fielding candidates for the city council. The chareidim also fielded their own candidate for mayor against the likud incumbent. In the end both sides took a beating to the Likud. Mayor vaknin kept his post and Shas who had a large presence in the city council lost many of their seats. They also subsequently lost their municipal posts. Another issue that was brewing was that all time favorite thing to fight about between secular dati leumi and chareidim, who will get what municipal resources for their schools. The fact that the unexpectedly rapid demographic increase in RBS out stripped the municipals ability to quickly facilitate school space for the various communities just aggravated the situation. In fighting and lawsuits just slowed down the situation fueling more aggravation and fights.
The reason why I am writing about all of this is because it is the backdrop of many of the cultural campaigns that were to follow. However I am not suggesting that there is a sinister plot connection between the culture campaign that has been waged by the chareidim in RBS and the issues that I have mentioned above. However they do not help things and increase an already incendiary atmosphere. Those issues might be part of the cause of that atmosphere.
Already in 2003 there were zealots blocking the main road that passes through RBS Bet and throwing rocks at cars that were driving through on Shobbos. Also during that same year the municipality gave the local Bnei Akiva a property to use in RBS Aleph, on a street called Nachal Micha. At the time this was a mixed street. I believe it still is. Residents of both groups were dissatisfied with their situation. They were stuck paying mortgages for properties in neighborhoods that were not shaping up to how each side originally envisioned. When Bnei Akiva received usage of that property, the local chareidi residents responded. The fear was that there would be teenagers of both sexes hanging out on the street in mixed company. The neighborhood rabbanim responded by circulating a petition around the neighborhood to give to the municipality against Bnei Akiva opening on the street. I do not know whether it was the petition on its own merit or wrangling in the municipality but that Bnei Akiva chapter never managed to open on that street.
In 2005 a demonstration was led by Rav mordechai Goldstein (the mora d'asra of Kehillat Yaakov RBS Alef) at the main shopping center in RBS Alef. This was a protest against the eateries there that they felt were becoming teenage hangouts at night. They wanted that those businesses should close earlier.
In 2006 during a Lag B'Omer bonfire celebration Rav Shlomo Perlststein (mora d'asra of RBS Alef) led a demonstration against this group of celebrators (all of whom were religious) after hearing that men and women were mingling and socializing. I would like to note that most of these people were husbands and wives who were sitting out of the dancing or just resting. There was no coed dancing going on there. He brought many of his close followers and forcefully broke up the celebration. These are just the examples that I am aware of. Then the rest is media history. These are just a few examples that Rav Tombek would lead you to believe did not happen. After all he has stated that it was the Modern who introduced protesting and the usage of political muscle in Ramat Beit Shemesh, hence escalating things. Not the fact that they have been the victims of violent attacks for the past two years. This is what is called an LSD spin.
Utopian Hishtadlus inversely related to belief in G-d?
Garnel Ironheart said..."If there's no satisfactory solution, why tackle the problem?"Well, while it may not be possible to truly solve a problem, this does not mean that we can't do anything to alleviate the problem. (Thus we give tzedaka even though we know we can't eliminate poverty.)
However, I feel you are onto an important point.
I have long wondered why there is a correlation between political conservatism (antagonistic to big government) and religious conservatism. At the first glance there wouldn't appear to be any connection.
After all, why should belief in God result in opposition to the welfare state? Why should "Pro-Life" be connected to opposition to gun control? Obviously, their are relgious people on the politically liberal side as well, but we do see a broad correlation of these views in the population. (As Obama put it, "religion and guns.") Why are they connected?
I think part of the reason is the attitude towards the issue we are talking about: accepting that some problems are unsolvable.
The Western religions teach that, ultimately, God controls the world and that the primary reason for the world's troubles is God's displeasure with human sinful behavior. It follows, therefore, that the primary means of solving these problesm is spiritual.
In the meantime, however, we must deal with an imperfect world. This imperfect world is called, in Jewish terms, galus. (Christians similarly believe that humanity is in a "fallen" state. The theology is, of course, very different, but in this regard the implications are similar.) We therefore have to accept that there simply is no natural solution to many of the worlds problems (poverty, war, crime, etc.). We, of course, do the best we can, in our small human way, to alleviate the problem, but we recognize that we cannot eliminate the problem.
Secularists (and those who absorbed its world view) generally will not accept this view. Although logically it is possible to be a secularist and also accept that there are no true solutions to the world's problems, emotionally this is very difficult. Most secularists believe, emphatically, that all of the world's problems can be solved ("If only people would listen to our wisdom!").
Thus, LBJ's "War on Poverty" and the modern welfare state, the United Nations (to eliminate war), assorted liberal policies to eliminate racism (affirmative action), socialize medicine, etc. WHile most of these goals are laudable, they are, in essence, attempts to solve the unsolvable. As a result these grand plans tend to just create new problems while exacerbating the old ones.
Fundamentally, what has happened, in my opinion, is a secular substitution for the Messianic age. Religious believers tend to believe that the Messianic age can only be brought about through Divine action. Secularists, who don't believe in the Divine, have put themselves in the Messianic role. Interestingly, the U.N. has been, almost explicitly, described in Messianic terms. Thus the famous "Swords into Plowshares" statue at the U.N. based on a messianic prophecy from Yeshaya HaNavi. (Even more interesting, the statue was donated by the atheist Soviet Union!)
Religious groups that have absorbed the secularist perspective (which includes various Christian factions, such as the Methodist church that mentored Hillary Clinton, and many Jewish groups, such as Reform Judaism) and have completely adopted their agenda as their spiritual purpose.
(Incidentally, while I don't have enough background on Islam to be certain, it seems to me that a similar process has led to the modern "radical Islamists." Today's radical Islam is a modern development, which was heavily influenced by secular Arab nationalism. In radical Islam we also observe the attempt to bring about a Messianic age through direct human action.)
Well, I guess I've rambled for long enough. Sorry!
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Eternal Jewish Family Website - Returns
The EJF Website is fully functional including photos and video as well as application for potential converts to apply to their programs
Post Zionism II - Jews & Moslems
Garnel Ironheart said...> Please elaborate on the Torah's moral justification for persecuting monotheistic inhabitants of the Land of Israel.You mean: Persecuting monotheistic inhabitants who daily shout out loud for the destruction of Israel and use whatever means they can to bring it about. I don't think you'll find a functioning state on this planet that wouldn't "persecute" such a group.> This included/includes expelling civilians from their homes,Well at least you're sympathetic to the exiles from 'Aza.> seizing their landThat they in turn originally seized from us. Yes, please continue.> murdering 10,000 civiliansOnly in your dreams. You've been reading too much Al-Jazeera.> raping women and girls in order to incite enough terror that the majority of the native population would flee (Deir Yassin)You probably also believe that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is an authentic historical document. Well, as PT Barnum said, there's a sucker born every minute.> This is also very well documented from IDF achives by Meron Benvenisti former mayor of JerusalemWho was all for Israel and Yerushalayim until he lost his chance to become mayor of the Holy City and then, in what seems to be de rigeur for failed Israeli politicians, became a bitter enemy of the state willing to spread any and all lies about it. Sour grapes indeed.> Please explain your source for the Torah justification for taking the Land of Israel by force in light of the Three Oaths.The Torah tells us to stay away from false matters. By rejecting all the... oh he'll just censor the word... you've spewed, I'm doing just that!
Self-evident Belief vs. Reasonable Belief
Garnel Ironheart said..."One of the problems with Chabad and much of Chareidi philosophy nowadays is that at the core their view is the "right" view and must be defended with passion and aggressiveness."While I also agree that the problem exists in the Chareidi world as well (though not as pervasively), I do not think the essence of the problem is that they consider their view "right" (which is really to be expected) but that they believe their view is obviously and self-evidently correct. Thus, those who disagree are not simply wrong or misguided, but hateful and arrogant (as we see from the accusations that have been made).
Interestingly, a similar phenomon existed during the Middle Ages when Christians accused the Jews of ritual murder, host desecration, and of being of a demonic/Satanic nature. This was premised on the Christian belief that Jesus' status as Moshiach/prophet/Divine was clearly self-evident to all who knew him. As the Jews knew Jesus best, their denial of his status as Moshiach/prophet/Divine could only be explained by their wilfully evil/demonic nature.
As I noted this tendency also exists in some circles of the Chareidi world, and can cause a good bit of trouble.
Firstly, those who have such an attitude are less likely to consider the impression their actions make on outsiders. (After all, in their hearts, the secular Jews know we're right!)
Secondly, this is one of the reasons kiruv workers sometimes get in trouble. Although they (usually) believe exactly the same things, they are sometimes seen as weaker in their beliefs because they will acknoweldge that these beliefs are not obvious.
This attitude appears to be far more common in Israeli chareidi circles than in American.